• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Kavanaugh sworn in

mal3volent said:
So he donated to groups that organize protests...and some are making it seem like they were all in a dark room somewhere coordinating the whole thing? Is that basically it? Woah, earth shaking stuff there.

Maybe we should forget the NYT story about Trump being a fraud, and how he just put a partisan, unstable, sexual predator on the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...
You saw the thread title change right?

Prove he is a sexual predator (I thought we were past this and it was "temperanment.")
 
Captain.Heroin said:
Nope, don't work, never going to. Lovely little socialist welfare state we have going on. Soon we'll be just like Europe. No guns, no jobs, and all the free gov't cheese you can eat.

I assume if I was going to have a job interview that paid $244,000 per year and involved being on a very public nine person court that was the top court of law in the entire country perhaps yeah, I'd expect something like that.
Click to expand...
Ahhhhhh, I think your stance on various issues has been explained by this, IF you are being srs.

You dont work, never going to, hope u r ok mate and dont wanna know what's private, but you are benefitting from a social welfare system yes?


You have said elsewhere you are more Republican than Democrat, yet aren't showing much support for Kav, Trump or Republicans, yet dont seem to support social welfare.

V confused.
 
He's more right wing than Republican, economically mostly...I think. There's a difference.
 
Yeah, I'm trying to figure some things out that are confusing, I'm not from there so it's like a whole different universe you guys live in
 
We feel like it's an alternate universe right now too. What does "Republican" even mean right now, seriously? When I was in high school they were religious, anti gay, and wanted to start wars. Soon after they became obsessed with taxes, the deficit, and wanting to expose secret Muslims. Now they are just a Trump cult, I think.
 
Last edited:
zephyr said:
Yeah, I'm trying to figure some things out that are confusing, I'm not from there so it's like a whole different universe you guys live in
Click to expand...

Many of us who live here find it confusing as well. You have the benefit to stand outside the shtstorm, pointing and laughing if you wish. We have to figure out what we want, and who can help us get there.
 
mal3volent said:
We feel like it's an alternate universe right now too. What does "Democrat" even mean right now, seriously? When I was in high school ...
Click to expand...

Can you finish that version of your statement? I'd be interested.

I also don't think it's fair to ask such a question without offering my own answer, to show it isn't baiting or trolling but actual curiosity. Myself, I hate labels or labeling anyone. Trying to describe a group, to me, limits what they may really be or could be. Even for myself, I don't particularly identify any certain way. Others may label me, but they don't know all my views on things, so they'd be wrong. I prefer to change my views based on new facts that I may not have known before.
 
hey zephyr, TLB put it best. to put it bluntly those here who side with political parties today are mostly air heads who can't think for themselves but whine about every lil thing that is wrong with this country and want it fixed. i envy you.

to elaborate: less self identity and more whining equals more complicated labels and elaborate organizing of groups with nothing getting done about anything.

they use to stand for something (especially when the country was first formed) but have lost there orientation since and much like the government and soul/spirit of the citizens here today have become corrupted.

93dPNUF.jpg
 
I’m a libertarian

Abolish ICE IRS CIA and DEA

Fire at least half the police force if not entirely and privatize

No public schools

No border wall and end the war on drugs

I’m alright with SSI/SSDI but SS is a SScam. I’m not on welfare of any kind.

Resume Korean War. Get rid of DPRK. Eliminate all the Houthis at all costs. Get rid of Iran. The Middle East is so close to being done. Saudis will be last major Muslim majority country and they will modernize.

Let Israel keep all their land. Palestine is not a legitimate country. Never will be, not going to happen.

Most of EU, UK and Aus, Japan, and South Korea will continue to conspire against Russia and China. This will avoid another war like Vietnam.

Raise poverty level 10 fold and eliminate minimum wage.

At least 1% cut on all facets of the gov’t budgets.
 
TheLoveBandit said:
Can you finish that version of your statement? I'd be interested.

I also don't think it's fair to ask such a question without offering my own answer, to show it isn't baiting or trolling but actual curiosity. Myself, I hate labels or labeling anyone. Trying to describe a group, to me, limits what they may really be or could be. Even for myself, I don't particularly identify any certain way. Others may label me, but they don't know all my views on things, so they'd be wrong. I prefer to change my views based on new facts that I may not have known before.
Click to expand...
I think what you said about being labeled and wanting to base your opinions on the information you have is common to most everyone. Though if we really couldn't learn about people based on the groups they identify with advertisers would be way behind in their methods and writing a persuasive speech for a particular audience would be a much more monumental task. Nuance is always present and nobody in a group will agree on everything, but they are bound by fundamental beliefs or experiences that bring them together. If you were selected to be the "diplomat" between the modern world and some lost tribe, you would probably want some background on their culture so that you could properly communicate with them right? I think this is partly why political concepts are so difficult to discuss. For most people they are abstract concepts and there isn't one commonly accepted definition of democracy, or socialism, or fascism., it's almost impossible to discuss without having common-ground definitions to work off of.

To reply to your question, right now Democrat means "anti-reactionary" IMO. It's a bad place to be since it doesn't really stand for much except "fuck trump and anybody else looking out for their own self-interest" and I think it's the similar position to Obama-era republicans who just wanted to stop anything the democrats did. It's hard to reconcile with my reformist beliefs, I really do believe compromise is necessary and I don't believe in forcing people to agree, but if both parties are just going to spite each other in order to get votes then I don't know what to do.

It's hard to reconcile because I agree with some points of horseshoe theory, that that far-left and far-right tend to share totalitarian or authoritarian beliefs, but there reasons are radically different.

The far-left see globalization as a threat it's because they see the over-exploitation of workers/resources and limitations on free travel and other liberties, their solution to this is to globally acquire the means of production and collectively work in the best interest of everyone or reduce globalization drastically in what would probably fit an anarcho-primitivist view (people just aren't capable of working on a global scale without exploiting, killing, controlling one another).

On the other hand the far-right see's globalization as a threat to their culture, traditions, and way of life as the influx of culture melding and immigrants brings new societal issues or (and forgive me if I'm wrong) they believe that it's a natural consequence of the world, limited resources means people will never truly be equal, unless you deprive everyone.

The problem I then have is the centrists. In the horseshoe theory the centrist would be responsible for keeping things moving, compromising between the sides, and would probably be the ideal position. Although, history shows us that this is not often the case. It seems centrists will typically support whichever side benefits them immediately or doesn't come into conflict with their beliefs. Fascists and Socialists states have been built on the centrists backs. To think everyone in Germany, Italy, and Spain were far-right is ridiculous, but it's not so ridiculous to think that the fascist policies were less menacing to the centrists' status quo. They aren't taking their private property, they don't want to strive for egalitarian policies, and they would have inspired pride in any nationalists heart. For the case of socialist countries like China, USSR, and Cuba, the majority of the population were not well-off or felt like their work and lands were being used to support foreign citizens so socialist policies (in theory) were more beneficial to the centrists in that case.

I appreciate anyone that took the time to read this, been pissy the last few days so anyone I may have put-off I apologize.

Edit: One last thought I had as I was typing this. Thank god the turnover on this site isn't like a reddit or 4chan. Since we don't have to worry about getting lost in the flood of comments, taking the time to put all your ideas into a post feels much more rewarding and increases the overall content.
 
Last edited:
I guess so. It's all relative. ^

TLB, when I was in high school, Democrats were weak. They tried every way in the world to look as much like a Republican as they could. They were hesitant to adopt any kind of socially progressive stance. Gore and Kerry both were seriously lacking in the testicular fortitude department. As were most Dems. They pretended to be hawkish because they didn't want to be be perceived as weak on terror.

the year after I graduated, despite being deep into punk rock and revolution and all that fun stuff, I was glad Obama won. But was soon disappointed when he and the Dems didn't fight harder for their original vision of health care. They caved as they have time and time again since then. I was disappointed again when he pretty much continued the Republican foreign policy. But I was at some level content that there was a good man in the White House who was an intellectual and genuinely wanted to do the right thing, even though I disagreed with him a lot with what the right thing was.

in the last general election...and in the dem primary...I was very cynical knowing that the establishment Dems would never accept Bernie. All the shenanigans that went on that hurt Bernie, and the overwhelming since that the fix was in for Hillary, I became totally disillusioned with the process. All the polls showed Bernie performing much better in the general, yet they nominated Clinton...because...she deserved it? Because it was her turn? Because we wanted to break the glass ceiling? I can promise you, if Bernie had won the nom, it would've been a landslide in his favor. All the research available on that subject bears it out.

Since the Trump reign began, it's just more of the same for the most part. All talk, no action. Now Warren and Booker are out there touring the country acting outraged. I wonder why they're doing that. Could it be because they are going to run for the Democratic nomination?
 
mal3volent said:
TLB, when I was in high school, Democrats were weak. They tried every way in the world to look as much like a Republican as they could. They were hesitant to adopt any kind of socially progressive stance. Gore and Kerry both were seriously lacking in the testicular fortitude department. As were most Dems. They pretended to be hawkish because they didn't want to be be perceived as weak on terror.

the year after I graduated, despite being deep into punk rock and revolution and all that fun stuff, I was glad Obama won. But was soon disappointed when he and the Dems didn't fight harder for their original vision of health care. They caved as they have time and time again since then. I was disappointed again when he pretty much continued the Republican foreign policy. But I was at some level content that there was a good man in the White House who was an intellectual and genuinely wanted to do the right thing, even though I disagreed with him a lot with what the right thing was.

in the last general election...and in the dem primary...I was very cynical knowing that the establishment Dems would never accept Bernie. All the shenanigans that went on that hurt Bernie, and the overwhelming since that the fix was in for Hillary, I became totally disillusioned with the process. All the polls showed Bernie performing much better in the general, yet they nominated Clinton...because...she deserved it? Because it was her turn? Because we wanted to break the glass ceiling? I can promise you, if Bernie had won the nom, it would've been a landslide in his favor. All the research available on that subject bears it out.
Click to expand...

We're probably derailing the thread (sorry mods!), but I'm not sure of a more appropriate one for the mods to move posts into, and the Kavanaugh buzz seems to be dying down significantly (at least for now).

For myself, my family never talked politics. To this day, I can only guess what party my parents support (then, or now). When I reached voting age, my buddy's mom paid us both $5 to go register (didn't care what party, just become active - pay attention and cast an informed vote). I took the $5 and registered Republican. Why? Because it started with R like my name. That's as deep as it went, and while I've probably voted in all presidential elections since then, I've not been real well informed until the last decade or so and never voted in non-presidential elections (I plan to next month). Bottom line, I never had a context or image of Dem or Rep, so it feeds into my lack of identifying with either party today.

As to the Hillary nomination...I think Bernie may have fared better than she did, but I believe the Dems would have lost a lot of their party to Trump if they put Bernie out there as the nominee. Bernie's policies, while very appealing to a vocal minority, are still only supported by a minority. I think even a lot of Dem voters would have been scared off by it and gone to Trump just to have more of something they can identify with and hold onto hope of regaining power in 4 yrs. Just my opinion. But wholly agree with 'the fix was in' for Hillary, and that alone keeps me away from the Dem party if that's how they play.

mal3volent said:
Since the Trump reign began, it's just more of the same for the most part. All talk, no action. Now Warren and Booker are out there touring the country acting outraged. I wonder why they're doing that. Could it be because they are going to run for the Democratic nomination?
Click to expand...

Booker as in Corey Booker? They guy who admitted sexual assault as a teen? He'll get nowhere after what was done to Kavanaugh.
 
Chief Justice Roberts Requests Tenth Circuit To Investigate Kavanaugh Ethics Questions

...
The complaints were not made without legal basis. More than 2,400 law professors have determined that Kavanaugh has ?displayed a lack of judicial temperament that would be disqualifying for any court.?

Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens also stated that Judge Kavanaugh has demonstrated bias and is ?not fit for the Supreme Court.? Former Justice Stevens, in remarks to retirees in Boca Raton, Fla, declared that Kavanaugh?s statements on September 27 revealed prejudices that would make it impossible for him to do the court?s work. ?They suggest that he has demonstrated a potential bias involving enough potential litigants before the court that he would not be able to perform his full responsibilities.?
...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Witches to Hex Justice Kavanaugh in Occult Ritual in NYC

Witches plan to place a public hex on Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh through an occult ritual on Oct. 20 in New York City, an event sponsored by Catland Books, which describes itself as "Brooklyn's premiere occult bookshop & spiritual community space." The planned ritual has been advertised on Facebook.

"Please join us for a public hex on Brett Kavanaugh, upon all rapists and the patriarchy at large which emboldens, rewards and protects them," reads the description for the event, "Ritual to Hex Brett Kavanaugh."

"We are embracing witchcraft's true roots as the magik of the poor, the downtrodden and disenfranchised and it's history as often the only weapon, the only means of exacting justice available to those of us who have been wronged by men just like him," reads the description.

"He will be the focal point, but by no means the only target, so bring your rage and all of the axes you've got to grind," states Catland.

"There will also be a second ritual afterward -- "The Rites of the Scorned One" -- which seeks to validate, affirm, uphold and support those of us who have been wronged and who refuse to be silent any longer," reads the description.
Click to expand...
 
TheLoveBandit said:
Many of us who live here find it confusing as well. You have the benefit to stand outside the shtstorm, pointing and laughing if you wish. We have to figure out what we want, and who can help us get there.
Click to expand...

Not really pointing and laughing from here, just wondering if the wood can be seen coz trees are in the way.


Hopefully the entertainment industry and political arena will go back to 2 separate(ish) areas and the fascination into private lives of boring public servants will not be a huge drawcard for headlines.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top