SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > General > General Topics
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-02-22, 10:13 PM   #3406
August
Wayfaring Stranger
 
August's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 22,632
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buddahaid View Post
It seems to me that with all the political interest in proving fraud there would have been some legal action that would have stuck by now. All we get are claims and statements by the losing side.

Seems to me that if the Biden administration intended to do their job the southern border would not be awash with illegal aliens.
__________________


Flanked by life and the funeral pyre. Putting on a show for you to see.
August is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-22, 03:20 AM   #3407
Catfish
Dipped Squirrel Operative
 
Catfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky
Posts: 16,880
Downloads: 38
Uploads: 0


Default

Wasn't there someone who promised to close the borders, and make Mexico pay for it?
But then maybe all illegal aliens should leave.. from 1600 AD on.
Very thin ice, i know
__________________


>^..^<*)))>{ All generalizations are wrong.
Catfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-22, 05:22 AM   #3408
Skybird
Soaring
 
Skybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the mental asylum named Germany
Posts: 40,340
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0


Default

Drip... drip... drip...

Quote:
Assume for a moment that this draft opinion becomes the law of the land. In an instant - because of statutes already on the books and "trigger" laws designed for such an occasion - abortion would be illegal in 22 states.

The legality of the procedure would become a vicious political battleground in the midst of an election year.

This is the significance of what may be unfolding in the Supreme Court.

Draft opinions, however, are just that - drafts. And there have been accounts of justices shifting their views as the opinion-drafting process unfolds within the cloistered court chambers. This unprecedented leak short-circuits all that.

For most of US history, the Supreme Court has operated like Mount Olympus, handing down opinions from on high. That opacity has been shattered perhaps for good, as the leaking spreads.

What it will mean for the legitimacy of the judicial process in the US remains to be seen, but within the institution itself it seems safe to assume that all trust between the judges, a collegial group once referred to as "the brethren", is gone.

In an era when political norms have been broken like pottery in an earthquake, another big piece has fallen.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61302740


__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert.
Skybird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-22, 03:00 PM   #3409
les green01
Seasoned Skipper
 
les green01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Freeman Missouri
Posts: 1,735
Downloads: 1375
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catfish View Post
Wasn't there someone who promised to close the borders, and make Mexico pay for it?
But then maybe all illegal aliens should leave.. from 1600 AD on.
Very thin ice, i know
That wouldn't bother me since I got Cherokee in me
__________________
I'll tell you what bravery really is. Bravery is just determination to do a job that you know has to be done.
Audie Murphy
les green01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-22, 03:40 PM   #3410
Skybird
Soaring
 
Skybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the mental asylum named Germany
Posts: 40,340
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0


Default

Neue Zürcher Zeitung correctly analyzes:


If the leaked draft corresponds to the final ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court on the abortion issue, it would mean a political earthquake. After decades of bitter dispute, it would make history of "Roe v. Wade," a nearly fifty-year-old landmark decision whose fame is probably surpassed only by the rulings on equality for African Americans.

Not surprisingly, it restricts abortion rights. After the Supreme Court received a clear conservative majority a year and a half ago with the third vacancy to be filled by Donald Trump, this was to be expected. What is more astonishing is the radicalism with which the justices overturned "Roe v. Wade." The draft speaks of a ruling that was "egregiously wrong from the outset," "extraordinarily weak reasoning," and damaging consequences.

Indeed, the decision at the time, with its very broad liberalization, has weaknesses that fueled rather than resolved the conflict over abortion. Nevertheless, the choice of words is remarkable for a precedent that has been confirmed several times and is of great importance in the Anglo-Saxon system in terms of legal certainty.
Abortions remain legal in only half of the states

The judges are thus likely to refrain from a compromise that the case to be judged would basically allow. It concerns a Mississippi law that allows abortions up to 15 weeks. To declare that provision permissible would be to curtail "Roe," but would still mean a liberal provision by international standards. In the U.S., 93 percent of abortions are performed before that time.

Chief Justice John Roberts is likely to favor this solution, experts say. But it would not end the wrangling over what is perhaps the most important issue in the American culture war. To that extent, an outright repeal of Roe v. Wade is the more consistent step.

The consequences, however, would probably be more serious in theory than in practice. Abortion would no longer be regulated at the national level, but fifty different state laws would come into force. This is not unusual in the distinctly federal United States. In anticipation of a change in jurisdiction, thirteen conservative states have already enacted so-called trigger laws that will ban abortions with the end of "Roe."

According to the non-governmental organization Guttmacher Institute, thirteen more states are certain or likely to ban the procedure in the future. Only in just under half of the states would abortions remain permitted, according to the report. In a country of this size, this is undoubtedly a problem and an anachronistic step backward for women's right to self-determination.

However, the possibilities for abortion in conservative regions have already been narrowly limited by constant tightening of the law. In six states, for example, there is only one abortion clinic, which forced women to travel long distances. In progressive states such as Illinois, gynecological practices have sprung up in close proximity to states with practical bans.

Organizations that advocate for women's freedom of choice pay for the travel expenses of needy pregnant women and can now count on a flood of donations. Even various companies have announced that they will cover the corresponding expenses of their female employees. Finally, more than half of all abortions are now induced by medication, with the possibility of procuring the necessary tablets legally or illegally from another member state or from abroad. Nevertheless, there are likely to be hardship cases with occasionally even fatal consequences. They will primarily affect poor women and thus disproportionately often members of ethnic minorities.

None of this changes the outcry that the draft ruling has triggered among advocates of liberal abortion rights in the United States. The fact that it was made public prematurely is unprecedented and is likely to shake the court permanently. It has been careful to maintain secrecy and cooperation based on trust - also to counter the accusation of politicization that has been raised with increasing frequency in recent years.

Only a small and exclusive circle of judges and their closest associates could have access to the draft. Who had an interest in the leak, presumably in order to steer the verdict in another direction, is an open question. What is certain, however, is that this drags the Supreme Court into the maelstrom of partisan politics. This is enormously damaging to the court's reputation - and thus to the acceptance of its decisions.


This will already be noticeable in June, when the judges will pass their final verdict on the abortion issue. Whatever the outcome: For part of the country, it will be a purely political decision, which will be compromised accordingly. For the Supreme Court, it will be a debacle. It will only fuel the controversy that the draft says it is trying to settle with the end of Roe v. Wade.


Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)


Rumors say that the Disunited States of America intend to deepen their gaps and trenches considerably in the near future by boosting the digging activities. The NRA will be happy - too much harmony spoils the business, and in the end people die of boredom: then they don't buy anything anymore.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert.
Skybird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-22, 03:42 PM   #3411
August
Wayfaring Stranger
 
August's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 22,632
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catfish View Post
Wasn't there someone who promised to close the borders, and make Mexico pay for it?
But then maybe all illegal aliens should leave.. from 1600 AD on.
Very thin ice, i know

There was, and other people managed to obstruct and hamstring the Dude enough that it prevented him from fulfilling his promise. It takes a village you know.
__________________


Flanked by life and the funeral pyre. Putting on a show for you to see.
August is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-22, 03:44 PM   #3412
August
Wayfaring Stranger
 
August's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 22,632
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0


Default

A much more interesting article:


https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the...court-leak?s=r


The Shocking Supreme Court Leak

And our race to the bottom.





Bari Weiss

In March, we ran a piece by the reporter Aaron Sibarium called “The Takeover of America’s Legal System.” The story made the case, backed up by exhaustive reporting, that just as education and the press and medicine were being transformed from within, so too, was the law. And those who comforted themselves with the notion that the law would be a bulwark against the new dogma were in for a rude awakening.
Aaron showed that the young lawyers who were entering the most elite legal institutions in the country—law firms and law schools and courts—didn’t necessarily share the ethos of those institutions. In fact, many of them explicitly seek to revolutionize them.
My thoughts immediately went to this story when I saw the shocking headline last night by Politico: The Supreme Court plans to overturn Roe. We know that because someone leaked what appears to be an initial draft of the majority opinion of a decision that was expected to land in late June.
You can read the entire thing here.
The opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito and joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, holds that “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start.” It goes on: “We hold that Roe and Casey”—the 1992 decision that upheld Roe, which passed in 1973—“must be overruled.” More: “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
Less than two hours after Politico dropped the story, CNN reported that Chief Justice John Roberts does not want to overturn Roe, but was willing to uphold the Mississippi law that would ban abortion at 15 weeks of pregnancy. Who knows what could leak next.
From what I can see, this is a shattering event on three levels. Substantively, politically, and institutionally.
Substantively. If indeed this draft opinion becomes the law, what will it mean for American women to live in a country where Roe is overturned and abortion is kicked back to the states? What will it mean practically? What would it mean for women in the 13 states where abortion would become immediately illegal? What would it mean for the doctors who perform those abortions, including in cases of rape and incest? Or in the case of ectopic pregnancies? And other unthinkable questions.
Politically. The most obvious take here is that the Democrats were in for a bruising in the midterms and this was leaked by a liberal to galvanize Democrats. Galvanize how? Perhaps to get voters to turn out as if their lives depended on it. Perhaps to pass a law before the midterms legalizing abortion. (Here’s Bernie Sanders on Twitter last night: “Congress must pass legislation that codifies Roe v. Wade as the law of the land in this country NOW. And if there aren’t 60 votes in the Senate to do it, and there are not, we must end the filibuster to pass it with 50 votes.”) Perhaps to reanimate the case for court-packing.
Institutionally. I know several people who have clerked for the Court. And because I am, like every journalist, utterly and shamelessly nosy, I have pressed all of them to share their personal anecdotes about the mysterious men and women in black robes. Sure, they’d share fun details about pick-up basketball, or the famously warm relationship between Scalia and RBG. Maybe, years after the fact, they’d tell a highly curated, well-rehearsed story. But the idea of breathing a word about the actual workings of the court, about a decision that had not yet been made public—that would have appalled every single one of these people, liberal and conservative alike.
How did we go from that ethos to a world in which—leaving the possibility of some kind of Russian or Chinese hack, or a more banal security breach, or someone pulling the draft from the garbage—one or more clerks are undermining the institution itself? (That question is the same whether the leaker was a liberal enraged about the decision, or, less obviously, a conservative, perhaps trying to firm up a fifth vote or somehow pressure the chief justice.)
On the question of abortion—its morality and its legality—I do not think there is a better piece that has been written than on the subject than this one by Caitlin Flanagan. It’s called “The Dishonesty of the Abortion Debate” and I urge you to read it. And, if you haven’t yet, please listen to the conversation I had with Caitlin about abortion on Honestly, which captures where I sit on this fraught issue.
Perhaps you feel torn. Most Americans do: A majority of Americans consistently say they do not want Roe to be overturned . . . and yet a majority of Americans also favor some restrictions on abortion. According to Gallup, less than 30 percent of Americans say that abortion should “generally be legal” in the second trimester. All of which suggests that few people have actually read Roe.
On the question of politics, and the hideous ways this leak and the decision itself will play out, there will surely be much more to say in the coming days. (As I write, the crowd gathered outside the Court is chanting, “Fascist scum have got to go.”) This leak is tremendous news for Democrats, who would spend every moment until the midterms promising to overturn this ruling (and running away from the subject of inflation).
To my mind, though, the question of what this leak means for the institution of the Supreme Court is the most profound one. That is because it captures, in a single act, what I believe is the most important story of our moment: the story of how American institutions became a casualty in the culture war. The story of how no institution is immune. Not our universities, not our medical schools, not legacy media, not technology behemoths, not the federal bureaucracy. Not even the highest court in the land.
The Supreme Court was always the most cloistered governmental institution in America—the one where wisdom and precedent and reverence for our great constitutional tradition outweighed everything else. If there was something sacred that remained, this was it. Yes, there have been leaks from the Court before. But as Politico pointed out, last night’s leak was historic, and not in a good way: “No draft decision in the modern history of the court has been disclosed publicly while a case was still pending.”
I called up one of the smartest professors I know at one of the top law schools in the country, and he echoed that: “To my knowledge, it’s never happened before in the modern history of the court. It is the most serious possible breach.”
Serious, severe, shocking, he said. But in the end, not surprising. Why not? Here’s how he put it: “To me, the leak is not surprising because many of the people we’ve been graduating from schools like Yale are the kind of people who would do such a thing.”
What did he mean by that? “They think that everything is violence. And so everything is permitted.”
He went on: “I’m sure this person sees themselves as a whistleblower. What they don’t understand is that, by leaking this, they violate the trust that is necessary to maintain the institution.”
Perhaps some of you feel that the institution had already been betrayed. That the Court, long before this leak or this explosive decision, had already been diminished. Maybe the refusal to consider Merrick Garland put you over the edge. Or maybe it was the revelations about Clarence Thomas’s wife and January 6th. Or maybe it was the Kavanaugh hearings. How he was grilled. Or that he was nominated. Or maybe it was earlier: Bush v. Gore or Anita Hill or Robert Bork.
This feels different than all of that. Why? Because all of those other instances were moments of outrage bookended by long periods of sobriety and seriousness. They were the exceptions that proved the rule. Now, everything seems to have been turned upside down, and the outrage, the uncontrollable or unslakable partisan fury, seems to have overtaken everything. Our sense of history, our respect for the institution, for norms, for even more basic human things: like trust, devotion, privacy, integrity. Jonathan Turley put it this way late last night: “There appears no ethical rule or institutional interest that can withstand this age of rage.”
To the jaded and hardened who have already crossed over into this new age—an age in which power and winning are the only tests of virtue, and the old ideas, like civility and respect, now seem twee—the leak might seem normal or even necessary. But it is nothing more than the most recent salvo in our race to the bottom.
__________________


Flanked by life and the funeral pyre. Putting on a show for you to see.
August is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-22, 04:34 PM   #3413
Rockstar
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 11,746
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catfish View Post
Wasn't there someone who promised to close the borders, and make Mexico pay for it?
But then maybe all illegal aliens should leave.. from 1600 AD on.
Very thin ice, i know
Ya the last president tried to construct a wall in Texas and it was stopped by Democrats who said it doesn’t do any good, it doesn’t work and mocked the idea of building one saying it was a shameful act. Let’s face it Biden could have continued the project.

It amazed me that Democrats seemed to me to be the loudest and most obnoxious of those who protested the idea of building a wall in Texas. Considering Democrats in California already have a wall which stretches from the Pacific Ocean into Arizona and continues to invest in its maintenance. In fact the Cali wall works so well that human traffickers attempt to go around the fence via the high seas in what we call launchas to smuggle people into the U.S.

I guess when the Vice President of the United States said: “Don’t come” she just meant don’t come to California because there’s a wall there. Texas is OK though they don’t have one.


__________________
Guardian of the honey and nuts


Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time.

Last edited by Rockstar; 05-03-22 at 08:09 PM.
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-22, 08:33 PM   #3414
Buddahaid
Shark above Space Chicken
 
Buddahaid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,526
Downloads: 160
Uploads: 0


Default

Too educated....
__________________
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/4962/oeBHq3.jpg
"However vast the darkness, we must provide our own light."
Stanley Kubrick

"Tomorrow belongs to those who can hear it coming."
David Bowie
Buddahaid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-22, 09:59 PM   #3415
Rockstar
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 11,746
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

Ya that’s what he says.

Wages stagnant, inflation continues to rise, congress continues to print money and spend, a war in Euroasia has the potential to expand into a conflict between NATO and Russia. And buffoons like this guy keep trying to place an entire population of voters into one box because of one man’s opinion. Which was most likely taken out of context to get likes anyway.

Honestly are either you really that concerned what’s happening in Florida or are you just desperately trying to convince yourselves things are so much better in your own state? If it matters so much why don’t you both register to vote in Florida?
__________________
Guardian of the honey and nuts


Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time.

Last edited by Rockstar; 05-04-22 at 10:18 PM.
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-22, 10:19 PM   #3416
ET2SN
ET2/SS
 
ET2SN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 2,462
Downloads: 56
Uploads: 0


Default

I have a way to fix all of this, but its never been popular.

Basically, recognize that it takes two to tango then take the burden off the women.

When a male turns 13, they have to report to a federal health clinic to get a vasectomy. Its just like the draft only with a bag of frozen peas.

OK, you say, what about the birth rate?
No problem, if you want kids and you're in a stable relationship (for example, you've been married for five years) and you have money in the bank to support the child(ren) and you pass the medical tests that say you would father a healthy child, you go to court with proof of your relationship and some pay stubs and medical records. If the court agrees, you get the vasectomy reversed until you have enough children to make you happy. Then, you go back for another vasectomy.

This plan would work. It would just be a pain in the balls.
ET2SN is online   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-22, 10:20 PM   #3417
Buddahaid
Shark above Space Chicken
 
Buddahaid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,526
Downloads: 160
Uploads: 0


Default

Re: Rockstar. So instead of addressing what he has to say you attack his credibility. I guess I'm too educated to get it.
__________________
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/4962/oeBHq3.jpg
"However vast the darkness, we must provide our own light."
Stanley Kubrick

"Tomorrow belongs to those who can hear it coming."
David Bowie
Buddahaid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-22, 10:26 PM   #3418
Buddahaid
Shark above Space Chicken
 
Buddahaid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,526
Downloads: 160
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ET2SN View Post
I have a way to fix all of this, but its never been popular.

Basically, recognize that it takes two to tango then take the burden off the women.

When a male turns 13, they have to report to a federal health clinic to get a vasectomy. Its just like the draft only with a bag of frozen peas.

OK, you say, what about the birth rate?
No problem, if you want kids and you're in a stable relationship (for example, you've been married for five years) and you have money in the bank to support the child(ren) and you pass the medical tests that say you would father a healthy child, you go to court with proof of your relationship and some pay stubs and medical records. If the court agrees, you get the vasectomy reversed until you have enough children to make you happy. Then, you go back for another vasectomy.

This plan would work. It would just be a pain in the balls.
You make the mistake of making males responsible for their weaknesses. The father is the head of the house etc. ad nauseum.
__________________
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/4962/oeBHq3.jpg
"However vast the darkness, we must provide our own light."
Stanley Kubrick

"Tomorrow belongs to those who can hear it coming."
David Bowie
Buddahaid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-22, 10:27 PM   #3419
Rockstar
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 11,746
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buddahaid View Post
Re: Rockstar. So instead of addressing what he has to say
I just did.

Quote:
I guess I'm too educated to get it.
I reckon so. You said it I didn’t.
__________________
Guardian of the honey and nuts


Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time.
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-22, 10:28 PM   #3420
ET2SN
ET2/SS
 
ET2SN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 2,462
Downloads: 56
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockstar View Post
Ya the last president tried to construct a wall in Texas and it was stopped by Democrats who said it doesn’t do any good, it doesn’t work and mocked the idea of building one saying it was a shameful act. Let’s face it Biden could have continued the project.
I missed the part where you were out in the fields picking lettuce.
ET2SN is online   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.