America - The Official Thread

  • Thread starter ///M-Spec
  • 38,984 comments
  • 1,696,177 views
2024 can be a good year to vote something else than Demopublicans. Red are going backwards in time trying to turn the USA into a Middle Eastern religious ********, and blue is just incapable of anything. But what I think actually will happen is that Trump is going to run again, and all the feeble minded people will once again vote for whatever pile of crap blue comes up with, because it's the lesser crap of craps, continuing the downwards spiral.
 
2024 can be a good year to vote something else than Demopublicans. Red are going backwards in time trying to turn the USA into a Middle Eastern religious ********, and blue is just incapable of anything. But what I think actually will happen is that Trump is going to run again, and all the feeble minded people will once again vote for whatever pile of crap blue comes up with, because it's the lesser crap of craps, continuing the downwards spiral.
See, I would vote for you, but you're ineligible.
 
2024 can be a good year to vote something else than Demopublicans.
"Demopublicans" and voting third party makes a ton of sense when the differences between the two main parties are not particularly meaningful. That is not what's happening today.

-----------------------------

To anyone reading this, if your representative voted "no" on keeping birth control legal and you're thinking of voting for them*, I want to have words with you.


* or if you're voting 3rd party but there's a remotely sane person who has a shot at winning running against them
 
Last edited:
I want to say, this is exactly what democrats should be doing. The supreme court has demonstrated a radical disregard for both longstanding precedent and basic rights. So trying to legislate ahead of the supreme court taking any further steps is the right course of action to preserve consistency and rights within the US. The cluster that is roe should not be repeated in the way that Thomas and Alito plan, and I would like to see yet another bill come through the house enshrining Lawrence.

Republicans have the power to shoot down every one of these in the Senate, but they do so at the cost of their own accountability.
 
Last edited:

After looking into this one more, I think some republicans felt that the birth control methods would allow certain early abortions. So it's (at best) a vote against suuuuper early term pregnancy termination. Which is a hell of a lot more restrictive than Roe and still not good enough. We've gone from arguing that partial-birth abortions can be restricted to 1-second old embryos can't be terminated. It's zealotry for sure.

Some of it is no doubt a desire to restrict contraception as well.
 
Last edited:
After looking into this one more, I think some republicans felt that the birth control methods would allow certain early abortions. So it's (at best) a vote against suuuuper early term pregnancy termination. Which is a hell of a lot more restrictive than Roe and still not good enough. We've gone from arguing that partial-birth abortions can be restricted to 1-second old embryos can't be terminated. It's zealotry for sure.

Some of it is no doubt a desire to restrict contraception as well.
Access to the uterus for the purposes of procreation must be granted at all times.

How far are we from the prohibition of obstetrics practice so as to inhibit detection of harm or defect?

Captive breeding? Obviously you start with the non-binary uterans because they're not deserving of basic rights, then you go after the lesbians because they willfully reject procreation with their relentless hedonistic scissoring. Finally you go after the tomboys because...reasons.
 
Access to the uterus for the purposes of procreation must be granted at all times.

How far are we from the prohibition of obstetrics practice so as to inhibit detection of harm or defect?

Captive breeding? Obviously you start with the non-binary uterans because they're not deserving of basic rights, then you go after the lesbians because they willfully reject procreation with their relentless hedonistic scissoring. Finally you go after the tomboys because...reasons.
It's funny, but I don't think they care nearly as much about breeding as stopping people from having a good time.

The upshot of all of it based on the demographics will be disproportionately more black babies and more black poverty. Basically the entire population of anti-black racists in the US is within the right-wing. I feel like they haven't thought it through.
 
Last edited:
It's funny, but I don't think they care nearly as much about breeding as stopping people from having a good time.
The Office Reaction GIF by NETFLIX

I feel like they haven't thought it through.
On the other hand, they have and they see it as useful to fuel their white replacement narrative and spark additional political and racial violence.
 
Last edited:
It's funny, but I don't think they care nearly as much about breeding as stopping people from having a good time.
Absolutely, I'm convinced of this. It's a shame-riddled fake morality thing.

I was told not to have fun otherwise be sent to hell, and I obeyed that without inherently believing it giving me a lifetime of bouncing between regret and shame making me existentially miserable, and the only thing that (momentarily) relieves my dread is to inflict dread and disingenuous moral judgement (the only thing left in my hollowed-out soul) on anyone who dares to have fun without internal conflicts!
 
Last edited:
Absolutely, I'm convinced of this. It's a shame-riddled fake morality thing.

I was told not to have fun otherwise be sent to hell, and I obeyed that without inherently believing it giving me a lifetime of bouncing between regret and shame making me existentially miserable, and the only thing that (momentarily) relieves my dread is to inflict dread and disingenuous moral judgement (the only thing left in my hollowed-out soul) on anyone who dares to have fun without internal conflicts!
I guess originalism goes back way further than the time of the Founding Fathers and is intended to evoke the puritanism of the original settlers. Soon those guys will be giving their kids names like Tribby and Fly-Fornication.
 
Last edited:
Some of it is no doubt a desire to restrict contraception as well.
Look, you're a smart guy, right? How do you even come close to believing this crap?

Do you actually believe 96% of Republicans want to ban contraception?

Why was the bill even necessary? It wasn't, that is why they didn't vote for it.

The same thing with that stupid marriage thing a few weeks ago.
 
Last edited:
Look, you're smart guy, right? How do you even come close to believing this crap?

Do you actually believe 96% of Republicans want to ban contraception?

Why was the bill even necessary? It wasn't, that is why they didn't vote for it.

The same thing with that stupid marriage thing a few weeks ago.
Given you've ignored an answer to this in another thread, here we go again, oh and I'm going to 100% ignore your piss poor strawman.


Oh I don't know, maybe because they said they were and already are!

On top of Thomas specifically saying it should be targeted by the SCOTUS (quite how you are still ignoring that doozy is beyond me, but you do you), we have..

"Tom Leonard, former state House speaker, state Rep. Ryan Berman and Matthew DePerno, an attorney who has garnered attention after peddling election conspiracies, were asked during a debate Friday in Alpena about the 1965 case Griswold v. Connecticut. All three attacked the ruling, arguing the Supreme Court should not infringe on a state's authority to pass its own laws. "

"Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee has suggested contraceptives should only be available to married couples."

"Blake Masters, a Republican candidate for Senator in Arizona, announced that he would only vote for Supreme Court justices who would overturn cases that protect the right to contraceptives. Masters wants access to contraceptives to be a state-level decision."

"Republican lawmakers in Louisiana are seeking to pass a law that would define life as starting “at fertilization.” Doing so would criminalize forms of birth control including Plan B,"

"Republican Governor Tate Reeves refused to rule out the possibility of banning contraceptives."

"in the fine print of their measure, those Republicans revealed that their ambition wasn’t only to target a familiar abortion foe. They were going after specific forms of birth control as well, notably, emergency contraceptives, often sold under the brand name Plan B, and intrauterine devices, known as IUDs. GOP lawmakers tried to stop Missouri’s Medicaid agency from paying for those forms of contraception."

"Idaho state Rep. Brent Crane, Republican chair of the powerful House State Affairs Committee, said he would hold hearings on legislation banning emergency contraceptives and possibly IUDs as well."

"Wieland and Republican colleagues in the Missouri House this year stopped two measures that women’s reproductive advocates say would have increased access to birth control"





..that took less than five minutes to compile, would you like more? Or are the above and the 195 Republicans who voted against protecting access to contraception enough to demonstrate how ****ing wrong you are?
 
Last edited:
Gosh.



It turns out that Zeldin is a rat ****ing Trumper and an electon denier, because of course he is, and he was among the 147 congressional Republicans who voted against certification of Biden's election win.

Zeldin is also alleged to have perpetrated election fraud himself by submitting fraudulent ballot access petition signatures (in the form of repeat pages, the absence of which would have resulted in the signature requirement not having been met) when the Independence Party lost automatic ballot access due to not having sufficient votes in the 2020 election, prior to having gotten the Republican Party gubernatorial nod.
 
Lol at asking how people can believe “this crap” whilst firmly continuing to believe Republicans who have a strong, recent history of saying, “We would never do that, that’s not how it works” & then promptly doing it.

Some people in the country would probably end up chains and still go, “The people who put me here are still better than the commies”.
 
I'm for free markets. I abhor communism. Of course I also recognize that communism is distinct from socialism, which I also oppose. But right now, I'd take the commies over the connies. The connies are the ones that pose a legitimate, violent, existential threat to the nation. The connies are absolute ****ing garbage.
 
Look, you're smart guy, right? How do you even come close to believing this crap?
Because they say it.


(I just realized this is literally the same article Scaff posted. Kinda funny that we both liked the same summary)

And because griswold is in the crosshairs of the supreme court (by their own statements). This is the law that griswold overturned:

"any person who uses any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purposes of preventing conception shall be fined not less than forty dollars or imprisoned not less than sixty days... any person who assists, abets, counsels, causes, hires or commands another to commit any offense may be prosecuted and punished as if he were the principle offender."
Do you actually believe 96% of Republicans want to ban contraception?
That was what the vote was for... so yes? I mean, literally they just voted to not protect contraception.
Why was the bill even necessary? It wasn't, that is why they didn't vote for it.
Because the supreme court just overturned a 50 year old personal right and several justices have stated that they're interested in expanding that to gay marriage and contraception. That's why. It's not like it's hard to explain or anything.
The same thing with that stupid marriage thing a few weeks ago.
Even if you think they won't overturn gay marriage (and you have every reason to think they will), what's the harm in easing the minds of gay people?


As with impeachment, it's never the right time for republicans. You shouldn't pass the federal law after the supreme court unleashes chaos because then the supreme court has said it's for the states, blah blah, supreme court knows best. You shouldn't pass a federal law before the supreme court unleashes chaos because then there's no need, waste of time, blah blah. All of it's nonsense of course.
 
Last edited:
@Chrunch Houston

I know this doesn't come easy for you, but just try, for a moment, to see it from the eyes of a non-believer. Someone who does not believe in the purity of spirit and intention of anyone who declares themselves republican. Just for a moment. I know it's hard, but it's really helpful.

The supreme court says they're coming for gay marriage, and they just declared absolute disrespect for established law and general order (Roe). And let's pretend, just for a moment, that you think they might do what they say they're going to do, precisely because they just did it to abortion. I know, this does not come naturally to you.

When the house introduces a bill to help prevent the overturning of protections for contraception, gay marriage, and (presumably next up is) some kinds of gay sex, what do republicans do? Do they assuage your concerns that the country is going hard Christian right? Do republicans realize that you're concerned, that your stability has been rocked, that you're hearing the words of an extreme supreme court and pass a law that they might think is a waste of time but at least will calm an unrested country.

HELL NO

They behave precisely consistently with a group that is going to overturn those protections, that is going to roll back personal rights to the stone age, just like the supreme court is saying.

I get that you're a believer. But not everyone has your misplaced faith.
 
Hello? 9-1-1? I'd like to report a murder.

Fist pumper to fleeing coward: Jan. 6 video shows Missouri who Josh Hawley really is

Josh Hawley is a laughingstock.

During Thursday night’s televised hearings of the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, coup attempt at the U.S. Capitol, Rep. Elaine Luria showed video of Missouri’s junior senator that will surely follow him the rest of his life.

In the clip, Hawley sprints across a hallway as he and his fellow senators are evacuated after insurrectionists had breached the Capitol building. When it played on the screen, the audience in the room with the committee erupted in laughter.

Of course, Twitter immediately dogpiled. Hawley’s name was the No. 1 trending topic in politics that evening as users shared the hashtag #HawlinAss along with GIFs of a galloping Forrest Gump.

“From now on, if political reporters ask Josh Hawley if he’s planning to run, he’s going to have to ask them to clarify,” quipped one.

Hawley has become one of the defining figures of that day. A famous photo captured by Francis Chung shows him raising a fist in solidarity with the crowds that would soon break through doors, loot offices and assault law enforcement. Luria quoted a Capitol Police officer who was there and told the committee that Hawley’s gesture “riled up the crowd, and it bothered her greatly because he was doing it in a safe space protected by the officers and the barriers.”

And later, when the Senate reconvened after the halls of the Capitol had been cleared and secured, Hawley took to the floor as the very first voice calling to throw out millions of Americans’ votes cast fairly and legally for the rightful winner in a presidential election. And never forget: He was joined in his campaign to discard ballots by Kansas Sen. Roger Marshall.

A signature Hawley issue is masculinity — as in, how little of it American men seem to have these days. It’s a frequent topic in his speeches and on his podcast, where “the left-wing attack on manhood” is a dire threat to our society. Regnery Publishing is set to release his book “Manhood: The Masculine Virtues America Needs” next year. Twitter didn’t see much virile bravado as he ran from the mob.

But funny as the visual of the self-proclaimed manly senator’s immediate retreat was, there’s absolutely nothing amusing about Jan. 6, 2021. A bipartisan Senate report concluded seven people died as a result of the attack. Two more Metropolitan Police officers took their own lives shortly after. About 150 members of law enforcement were injured, and it’s impossible to know how many others caught up in the horrific event will carry scars for life, of body and mind.

We said that day Hawley has blood on his hands for his role in perpetuating the lies that drove thousands of people to violence. That remains true.

Beyond the physical toll, though, is the damage Jan. 6 continues to inflict on our democracy and our shared sense of truth. The House committee is systematically demonstrating how too many Republicans in Donald Trump’s orbit allowed him to incite the riot, which he had promised in advance “will be wild,” and were then unable to get him to call his fans off until unimaginable damage had already been done.

Chung’s photo of Hawley and his salute has become iconic. Taking a page from the Trump playbook, Hawley has co-opted the famous image, flagrantly violating copyright laws by slapping it on T-shirts and camouflage beer koozies for sale on his political campaign’s fundraising website. Politico, owner of the image, sent a cease-and-desist demanding the merchandise be removed from sale. And duh, Hawley refused — a defiance shameful and shameless in equal measure.

Shame, clearly, is not a motivating factor for any number of Republicans still caught up in Trumpworld. Hawley has never apologized for attempting to reinstall a man who everyone around him knew had lost the election, as witness testimony continues to confirm. Surely the Yale and Stanford grad isn’t gullible enough to believe the craven lies about tampering with voting machines and dead people casting ballots that ooze through social media.

And that’s the reason watching Hawley racing away from the Capitol invaders struck so many people as blackly hilarious. Saluting the Trump posse was politically expeditious for him before the siege began. Yet once he realized his own safety was in real danger from the angry revolutionists swarming the building, he hotfooted it away from “his” people to the protection of the security forces charged with protecting him. Where’s that fist in the air now?

We realize Hawley’s conscience won’t make him suddenly do the right thing and tell the Jan. 6 committee what he knew and when he knew it. But as GOP Rep. Liz Cheney said Thursday while announcing more public hearings to come: “Doors have opened, new subpoenas have been issued, and the dam has begun to break. … We have considerably more to do.” The committee has delivered on its promises so far.

Since Trump left office, many insiders have revealed in interviews and tell-alls that his administration really was as unethical and chaotic as its worst detractors claimed all along. (Gee, thanks guys, but why couldn’t you have come clean back before the damage was done?) History will not look kindly upon the dead-enders who continued to defend Trump long after it became apparent his conduct was indefensible. When Cheney is saying even more birds are singing, believe her.

Sen. Josh Hawley might not fear a little mockery of his hasty flight from Capitol marauders. But he might be justified if he’s afraid of what emails or text messages some previously-loyal staffer might be considering turning over to the House committee. Stay tuned to the hearings.
 
Back