billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,660
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 9, 2022 17:48:01 GMT -5
And stupid people undertake knee-jerk emotional actions that make situations worse. Intelligent people don't do "everything possible". They do risk/benefit analysis. You know what is really sad here? I went back and edited the post (inserting the word "reasonably") because re-reading it I was about 98% sure that you would nit-pick that part of it and not take it for granted that was what was meant. That fact that you actually did exactly that is disappointing. It is always good to reread posts and make them more accurate to one's actual meaning. Glad I motivated you to do that. ![](https://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff155/JiminiChristmas/ymamsmiles/thumbsup.png)
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,583
|
Post by NastyWoman on Oct 9, 2022 17:53:36 GMT -5
Texas is the best candidate. they never thought of themselves as a member of the union, they consistently LEAD the anti-democratic debate, and they have their own power grid. let them ROT. I was going to be generous and throw in a little extra land in south- and east-New Mexico, but no, we need to keep Carlsbad. That's a cool place. West Texas should absolutely fit for the purpose though. Question: Would we have more or less of a border crisis trying to keep ReTrumplicans from crossing back into the U.S. from their "reservation" we have keeping others from coming in through Mexico? ReTrumplicans are more dangerous, certainly.... walls. Allwe need to do is build walls around their territory as the trumpies somehow are incapable of grasping the concept of ladders and how they work. And of course THEY will pay for those walls right?
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,277
|
Post by tallguy on Oct 9, 2022 17:55:47 GMT -5
You know what is really sad here? I went back and edited the post (inserting the word "reasonably") because re-reading it I was about 98% sure that you would nit-pick that part of it and not take it for granted that was what was meant. That fact that you actually did exactly that is disappointing. It is always good to reread posts and make them more accurate to one's actual meaning. Glad I motivated you to do that. ![](https://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff155/JiminiChristmas/ymamsmiles/thumbsup.png) Yeah, except that my edit was 32 minutes BEFORE your post. The charitable interpretation is that you began by quoting me and then, for some reason, took more than 32 minutes to come up with your two-line response. I'm hoping it was that, since the alternative is worse. Still, the fact that I knew you would do it is not a good look for you. Really.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,852
|
Post by Tennesseer on Oct 9, 2022 17:58:55 GMT -5
How did that work out in the 2020 election? The Big Lie and an attack on the Capitol by trump supporters. All from the mouth of the 2020 presidential election loser. And it is continuing almost two years after the election. Well, Biden won the election so that part worked well. The Big Lie didn't lead to any change in results so that was good. The insurrection petered out quickly. Prosecution of offenders is proceeding nicely. Nothing big has happened over the two years. So i see no real issues. The Big Lie continues and trump's supporters continue believing him that the 2020 election was rigged. Let's say Trump actually runs for president in 2024 and is the Republican nominee. If that happens and he loses again, you don't think trump and his supporters will claim the election was rigged again? You and I both know trump and his supporters will make that claim. Repeat a lie often enough and some are fooled into believing its true. The post-2020 election griping has taught us that. trump and the election deniers are destroying the confidence in American elections. Look what is happening in red states with all their new election laws. New solutions looking for non-existant problems.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,660
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 9, 2022 18:04:13 GMT -5
It is always good to reread posts and make them more accurate to one's actual meaning. Glad I motivated you to do that. ![](https://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff155/JiminiChristmas/ymamsmiles/thumbsup.png) Yeah, except that my edit was 32 minutes BEFORE your post. The charitable interpretation is that you began by quoting me and then, for some reason, took more than 32 minutes to come up with your two-line response. I'm hoping it was that, since the alternative is worse. Still, the fact that I knew you would do it is not a good look for you. Really. Thank you for your concern on how I look.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,277
|
Post by tallguy on Oct 9, 2022 18:09:04 GMT -5
Not really a concern. Just an observation.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,660
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 9, 2022 18:17:07 GMT -5
Well, Biden won the election so that part worked well. The Big Lie didn't lead to any change in results so that was good. The insurrection petered out quickly. Prosecution of offenders is proceeding nicely. Nothing big has happened over the two years. So i see no real issues. The Big Lie continues and trump's supporters continue believing him that the 2020 election was rigged. Let's say Trump actually runs for president in 2024 and is the Republican nominee. If that happens and he loses again, you don't think trump and his supporters will claim the election was rigged again? You and I both know trump and his supporters will make that claim. Repeat a lie often enough and some are fooled into believing its true. The post-2020 election griping has taught us that. trump and the election deniers are destroying the confidence in American elections. Look what is happening in red states with all their new election laws. New solutions looking for non-existant problems. Big Lie 2024 - banned version: The 2020 election was stolen from Trump and with all the steps that are being taken to prevent it from happening again, the only thing that can be done to keep him from winning bigly in 2024 is to prevent him from running at all.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,660
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 9, 2022 18:19:59 GMT -5
Not really a concern. Just an observation. I stand corrected - thank you for your observation of me. ![](https://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff155/JiminiChristmas/ymamsmiles/charmed.png)
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,277
|
Post by tallguy on Oct 9, 2022 18:30:46 GMT -5
Not really a concern. Just an observation. I stand corrected - thank you for your observation of me. ![](https://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff155/JiminiChristmas/ymamsmiles/charmed.png) No, thank you for not making me change my opinion of eastern Washington.
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,475
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Oct 9, 2022 18:50:51 GMT -5
And I'm sure there are a number of hurricane victims who weren't worried at all...until the storm shifted and the water actually entered their homes. Or, more to the point for you, I'm sure that nobody who ever died in a skydiving accident was worried, until they pulled the cord and nothing happened. Just because we have not hit the tipping point yet does not mean that the danger is not there. Intelligent people do not simply respond to the worst-case disaster after it happens. They plan and do everything possible to prevent it from happening in the first place. And stupid people undertake knee-jerk emotional actions that make situations worse. Intelligent people don't do "everything possible". They do risk/benefit analysis. Interesting that you would say this. As a physician, we deal with this all the time. People make poor decisions, but they get away with it, and think physicians don’t know what we are talking about. Despite the fact that the risks they were taking could lead to negative consequences. You are acting just like that. Because things turned out “ok”, you think everything is fine. Where in reality, if a few things went the other way, a significant disaster would have occurred. Hoping for dumb luck is a poor plan You refuse to accept the serious risk to our country trump and his followers present to us. Acting like everything will be fine and sticking your head in the sand doesn’t work
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,660
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 9, 2022 18:55:01 GMT -5
And stupid people undertake knee-jerk emotional actions that make situations worse. Intelligent people don't do "everything possible". They do risk/benefit analysis. Interesting that you would say this. As a physician, we deal with this all the time. People make poor decisions, but they get away with it, and think physicians don’t know what we are talking about. Despite the fact that the risks they were taking could lead to negative consequences. You are acting just like that. Because things turned out “ok”, you think everything is fine. Where in reality, if a few things went the other way, a significant disaster would have occurred. Hoping for dumb luck is a poor plan You refuse to accept the serious risk to our country trump and his followers present to us. Acting like everything will be fine and sticking your head in the sand doesn’t work Please read what I have posted. You are off-base in your view of my position.
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,475
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Oct 9, 2022 19:02:11 GMT -5
Interesting that you would say this. As a physician, we deal with this all the time. People make poor decisions, but they get away with it, and think physicians don’t know what we are talking about. Despite the fact that the risks they were taking could lead to negative consequences. You are acting just like that. Because things turned out “ok”, you think everything is fine. Where in reality, if a few things went the other way, a significant disaster would have occurred. Hoping for dumb luck is a poor plan You refuse to accept the serious risk to our country trump and his followers present to us. Acting like everything will be fine and sticking your head in the sand doesn’t work Please read what I have posted. You are off-base in your view of my position. You think continuing along the way we are is sufficient, because things worked out ok with the last election. Is that misrepresenting your position?
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,660
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 9, 2022 20:06:53 GMT -5
Please read what I have posted. You are off-base in your view of my position. You think continuing along the way we are is sufficient, because things worked out ok with the last election. Is that misrepresenting your position? Here is what you offered as my position: ... As a physician, we deal with this all the time. People make poor decisions, but they get away with it, and think physicians don’t know what we are talking about. Despite the fact that the risks they were taking could lead to negative consequences. You are acting just like that. Because things turned out “ok”, you think everything is fine. Where in reality, if a few things went the other way, a significant disaster would have occurred. Hoping for dumb luck is a poor plan You refuse to accept the serious risk to our country trump and his followers present to us. Acting like everything will be fine and sticking your head in the sand doesn’t work I fully acknowledge we are on a dangerous path. I fully accept that we face a serious risk. Things are not fine. So what should we do about it? I have offered the opinion we need to let the patient decide. You?
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,277
|
Post by tallguy on Oct 9, 2022 20:22:41 GMT -5
I fully acknowledge we are on a dangerous path. I fully accept that we face a serious risk. Things are not fine. So what should we do about it? I have offered the opinion we need to let the patient decide. You? Patients are generally the ones who got themselves into the mess in the first place, so may not be the best judge of how to fix the problem. So, if it is in fact true that, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”, I guess we can be assured that you will be one of the ones doing nothing.
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,475
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Oct 9, 2022 20:24:30 GMT -5
You think continuing along the way we are is sufficient, because things worked out ok with the last election. Is that misrepresenting your position? Here is what you offered as my position: ... As a physician, we deal with this all the time. People make poor decisions, but they get away with it, and think physicians don’t know what we are talking about. Despite the fact that the risks they were taking could lead to negative consequences. You are acting just like that. Because things turned out “ok”, you think everything is fine. Where in reality, if a few things went the other way, a significant disaster would have occurred. Hoping for dumb luck is a poor plan You refuse to accept the serious risk to our country trump and his followers present to us. Acting like everything will be fine and sticking your head in the sand doesn’t work I fully acknowledge we are on a dangerous path. I fully accept that we face a serious risk. Things are not fine. So what should we do about it? I have offered the opinion we need to let the patient decide. You? When the only person affected is the patient, they get yo decide. In this instance, there are significant consequences to both our society as well as the world, so allowing the patient to decide is criminal. As long as you are the only one affected, make any foolish decision you wish. Once the consequences affect others, you jo longer have that freedom. Just like we have vaccine mandates and we can incarcerate people who violate public health laws.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,277
|
Post by tallguy on Oct 9, 2022 20:26:34 GMT -5
That too.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,660
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 9, 2022 20:36:30 GMT -5
I fully acknowledge we are on a dangerous path. I fully accept that we face a serious risk. Things are not fine. So what should we do about it? I have offered the opinion we need to let the patient decide. You? Patients are generally the ones who got themselves into the mess in the first place, so may not be the best judge of how to fix the problem. So, if it is in fact true that, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”, I guess we can be assured that you will be one of the ones doing nothing. Sure. How about you?
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,660
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 9, 2022 20:40:37 GMT -5
Here is what you offered as my position: I fully acknowledge we are on a dangerous path. I fully accept that we face a serious risk. Things are not fine. So what should we do about it? I have offered the opinion we need to let the patient decide. You? When the only person affected is the patient, they get yo decide. In this instance, there are significant consequences to both our society as well as the world, so allowing the patient to decide is criminal. As long as you are the only one affected, make any foolish decision you wish. Once the consequences affect others, you jo longer have that freedom. Just like we have vaccine mandates and we can incarcerate people who violate public health laws. "We" can because the process to do so is in place. I support following process we have in place.
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,475
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Oct 9, 2022 20:45:05 GMT -5
When the only person affected is the patient, they get yo decide. In this instance, there are significant consequences to both our society as well as the world, so allowing the patient to decide is criminal. As long as you are the only one affected, make any foolish decision you wish. Once the consequences affect others, you jo longer have that freedom. Just like we have vaccine mandates and we can incarcerate people who violate public health laws. "We" can because the process to do so is in place. I support following process we have in place. The process is broken. One party no longer agrees on the rules. They are lead by an amoral narcissist who is willing to destroy everything to stroke his wounded ego, and few in his party are willing to call him out on this and tell the truth. That is what you refuse to accept. You also want yo give trump a pass even though he committed a crime because you fear the consequences. He needs to be held to task regardless of the risk
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,660
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 9, 2022 21:12:05 GMT -5
"We" can because the process to do so is in place. I support following process we have in place. The process is broken. One party no longer agrees on the rules. They are lead by an amoral narcissist who is willing to destroy everything to stroke his wounded ego, and few in his party are willing to call him out on this and tell the truth. That is what you refuse to accept. You also want yo give trump a pass even though he committed a crime because you fear the consequences. He needs to be held to task regardless of the risk The process is not broken yet. But it is seriously at risk by all involved. That is what you refuse to accept. While your operation might be successful, you are at risk of killing the patient.
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,475
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Oct 9, 2022 21:18:00 GMT -5
The process is broken. One party no longer agrees on the rules. They are lead by an amoral narcissist who is willing to destroy everything to stroke his wounded ego, and few in his party are willing to call him out on this and tell the truth. That is what you refuse to accept. You also want yo give trump a pass even though he committed a crime because you fear the consequences. He needs to be held to task regardless of the risk The process is not broken yet. But it is seriously at risk by all involved. That is what you refuse to accept. While your operation might be successful, you are at risk of killing the patient. It is broken. One side no longer believes in the process. You are watching a patient get sicker and are waiting for the right time to intervene. Unfortunately, continuing to watch risks missing your opportunity to save the patients life. There is a point of no return here. You do not think we have reached it. Unfo, if you are wrong, we are fucked. And you still want yo give trump a pass in the crimes he has already committed because you fear the consequences. How can you say the system isn’t broken if you believe that
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,660
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 9, 2022 21:40:48 GMT -5
Wonderful is the effect of impudent and persevering lying. The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, and what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves. Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusets? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honourably conducted? I say nothing of it’s motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion.[1] The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure. Our Convention has been too much impressed by the insurrection of Massachusets: and in the spur of the moment they are setting up a kite to keep the hen yard in order. Tommy Jefferson
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,503
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 9, 2022 21:42:49 GMT -5
When the only person affected is the patient, they get yo decide. In this instance, there are significant consequences to both our society as well as the world, so allowing the patient to decide is criminal. As long as you are the only one affected, make any foolish decision you wish. Once the consequences affect others, you jo longer have that freedom. Just like we have vaccine mandates and we can incarcerate people who violate public health laws. "We" can because the process to do so is in place. I support following process we have in place. what you are proposing (allowing nature to take it's course) is a very passive means forward. as you yourself pointed out, congress HAD the power to stop him from running. perhaps the courts do, again. as i say, i think it is at least debatable.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,503
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 9, 2022 21:45:21 GMT -5
Wonderful is the effect of impudent and persevering lying. The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, and what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves. Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusets? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honourably conducted? I say nothing of it’s motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion.[1] The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure. Our Convention has been too much impressed by the insurrection of Massachusets: and in the spur of the moment they are setting up a kite to keep the hen yard in order. Tommy Jefferson many, including our own prior to 2021.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,503
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 9, 2022 21:47:04 GMT -5
The process is not broken yet. But it is seriously at risk by all involved. That is what you refuse to accept. While your operation might be successful, you are at risk of killing the patient. It is broken. One side no longer believes in the process. You are watching a patient get sicker and are waiting for the right time to intervene. Unfortunately, continuing to watch risks missing your opportunity to save the patients life. There is a point of no return here. You do not think we have reached it. Unfo, if you are wrong, we are fucked. And you still want yo give trump a pass in the crimes he has already committed because you fear the consequences. How can you say the system isn’t broken if you believe that this is precisely it. and they NEVER WILL BELIEVE IT. that is the problem. their discontent? i can suffer it. everyone can. the fact that it will be bourne by generations? nobody can suffer that. this is a relentless ocean of discontent that will only settle when it reduces the nation to sand.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,660
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 9, 2022 21:50:36 GMT -5
"We" can because the process to do so is in place. I support following process we have in place. what you are proposing (allowing nature to take it's course) is a very passive means forward. as you yourself pointed out, congress HAD the power to stop him from running. perhaps the courts do, again. as i say, i think it is at least debatable. We, through our elected representatives, should have acted to ban him. Since they didn't, we need to do it directly. We should not rely on the nonelected Judiciary.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,503
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 9, 2022 21:52:45 GMT -5
what you are proposing (allowing nature to take it's course) is a very passive means forward. as you yourself pointed out, congress HAD the power to stop him from running. perhaps the courts do, again. as i say, i think it is at least debatable. We, through our elected representatives, should have acted to ban him. Since they didn't, we need to do it directly. We should not rely on the nonelected Judiciary. i have already stated what i think is the flaw in this argument. i don't think you have acknowledged it. the only FUNCTIONING branch of government left is the judiciary, bills.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,660
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 9, 2022 22:03:02 GMT -5
Wonderful is the effect of impudent and persevering lying. The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, and what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves. Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusets? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honourably conducted? I say nothing of it’s motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion.[1] The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure. Our Convention has been too much impressed by the insurrection of Massachusets: and in the spur of the moment they are setting up a kite to keep the hen yard in order. Tommy Jefferson many, including our own prior to 2021. I think the Civil Rights Movement with its riots in the 1960's was a rebellion that intercede in our time without rebellion.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,660
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 9, 2022 22:08:07 GMT -5
We, through our elected representatives, should have acted to ban him. Since they didn't, we need to do it directly. We should not rely on the nonelected Judiciary. i have already stated what i think is the flaw in this argument. i don't think you have acknowledged it. the only FUNCTIONING branch of government left is the judiciary, bills. Sorry, thought I had. If not here you go. You are wrong. The successful election of 2020 and governance of the executive branch since January 20th shows functionality beyond the Judiciary.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,503
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 9, 2022 22:09:17 GMT -5
edit: this reply is to #2607.
i am sure many Republicans feel that way. but i don't.
this rebellion, which seeks to overthrow the vote and seat Trump, is qualitatively different than any rebellion we have faced since the Civil War.
when my dad was alive, he used to say we were facing a Civil War- but he thought it would be a class war. at least there would be some justification for that one.
|
|