Election 2024

Thought about putting this in the "photos, vids ..." thread but since it's from the Republican National Convention of 2016 ....

"... not only as sacrilegious a prayer as you'll ever hear, but as incoherent a prayer as you'll hear save those which purport to be in tongues."

 
54YDL78.png


S1yQhlN.png


Continued here
 

The Creators of Florida’s Black History Standards Get an F on Their Homework​

Many of the figures they cite as slavery’s “beneficiaries” were never enslaved.​

JACKIE FLYNN MOGENSEN​


Florida education officials and the state’s governor, Ron DeSantis, are facing a wave of criticism this week after the Florida Board of Education approved a new set of guidelines for teaching public school students about slavery in America. Among the guidelines is a provision implying that slavery benefitted some Black people because they learned skills while being enslaved.

Middle schoolers, the guidelines read, should be taught about “how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit.” As my colleague Arianna Coghill wrote on Thursday, this prompted national outrage. “Our children deserve nothing less than truth, justice, and the equity our ancestors shed blood, sweat, and tears for,” Derrick Johnson, president and CEO of the NAACP, said in a statement. “It is imperative that we understand that the horrors of slavery and Jim Crow were a violation of human rights and represent the darkest ...

www.motherjones.com

The creators of Florida's Black history standards get an F on their homework

Most of the figures they cite as slavery's "beneficiaries" were never enslaved.
www.motherjones.com www.motherjones.com
 
Shiftless2 said:

"Many of the figures they cite as slavery’s “beneficiaries” were never enslaved." #64​

Click to expand...
- piffle -

The criterion of enslavement is not the tasks the slave is forced to perform, but whether the slave has Liberty, the legal right to think, act, and express as s/he wishes. Slaves by definition do not.
Slavery is theft of labor. The slaves do the work, the "owners" keep the $profits.

It is hardly a flash of enlightenment that slaves were forced to use marketable skills. If otherwise, why enslave them?
The pretense of charitable nobility based on the notion that picking cotton was a marketable skill a slave could use to earn a living if they weren't enslaved is absurd.

To accept this notion suggests one of two things:
- gullible stupidity, or
- a preference (for whatever reason) to accept this revisionism as significant fact, as if to ease a guilty conscience.

Certainly a slave that did blacksmithing had a useful skill. Was that ever in doubt?
The issue is they were slaves. They did the work. The owners kept the profits.
 
Shiftless2 said:
"So Republicans are running on unlimited price-gouging of insulin, ending Social Security and Medicare, and forcing ten year old rape victims to give birth. That's some platform." AW #66
Click to expand...
I think that's detrimental to the Democrat cause.
Those that would agree are already convinced. Preaching to the choir wins few converts.
Those that disagree recognize it as argument of extremes.

Good political speech enlightens, persuades, alters political election outcomes for the better.
Denting helmets isn't effective at opening minds.

Try persuasion Andy.
It would make an interesting chart. Rows of issues in a list, followed by the Democrat & Republican stands on each. Get busy Andy. Let us know when it's ready.

S2 #67
It looks dystopian to me. Not plausible.

PS S2 #67
Many eyes are on Special Counsel Jack Smith. BUT !
Many eyes were on Mueller. The Mueller report caused high hopes to tumble into the abyss.
The fat lady isn't even in costume.

Assuming Trump doesn't make it (that's not a foregone conclusion) that means some other Republican will. What remains to be seen, will they be slinging mud? Or will they be passing out knuckle-sandwiches?

The cliche' is: Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line. That GOP standard has evidently been suspended indefinitely.
 

Trump Tells Allies He’s Skipping Debate to Punish Fox, Murdochs​

It’s not the only reason he plans to ditch the Fox debate. Still, Trump is very bitter about the Murdoch family trying to replace him with DeSantis
ASAWIN SUEBSAENG, ADAM RAWNSLEY

IN THE WEEKS leading up to his announcement that he’d snub Wednesday’s Fox News GOP presidential debate, Donald Trump was relishing the idea of punishing the Murdoch family. The ex-president’s plans to ditch and counter-program the debate is in part retribution for the Fox-controlling clan’s backing of Florida governor Ron DeSantis, Trump’s leading rival in the 2024 primary, two sources with direct knowledge of the matter and another person close to the former president tell Rolling Stone.

“Maybe they should have been loyal,” Trump has privately sniped — about Fox, and Rupert Murdoch, specifically — earlier this month, suggesting that the Murdochs and Fox News executives forgot that their viewers are Trump devotees, according to one of the people with direct knowledge.

In discussions with his political advisers and during sit-down meals with allies at his Bedminster club this month, Trump has repeatedly ....

www.rollingstone.com

Trump Tells Allies He's Skipping Debate to Punish Fox, Murdochs

It’s not the only reason he plans to ditch the Fox debate. Still, Trump is very bitter about the Murdoch family trying to replace him with DeSantis
www.rollingstone.com www.rollingstone.com
 
"Punish"ment is something a superior imposes on a subordinate.
Trump, a tireless and resourceful self-promoter insinuates that Trump is superior to FOX / Murdoch.

To me it's more interesting as insight into the creativity of the ploy, than substance.

note:
There may be many that envy Trump, perceive Trump as living a life mere mortals can only dream of.
Seems to me the reality is, Trump has a totally insatiable hunger for attention, the basis for a life of dissatisfaction and frustration. I don't envy Trump. I pity him.
And I suspect Trump has been lying so long, Trump sincerely may not even know what his own true feelings are.
 
S2 #74
226257849260d12d94e74cc99e45670d6db2725.gif
She's blonde. What else do you need to know?
[/satire?]
It might be nice to think she was drunk, or stoned.
 
Trump's continuing popularity despite numerous insurrectionist convictions & indictments of his own, support the conclusion Trump violated the United States Constitution Trump swore to uphold.

We don't seem to have a legal mind with the gravitas of Louis Brandeis, Clarence Darrow, or William Kunstler.
But we have capable technicians. Consider Professor Dershowitz' perspective:
Democrats who are floating the validity or prospect of invoking the 14th Amendment as a means to disqualify former President Trump from seeking office again are playing with Constitutional fire, Harvard Law professor-emeritus Alan Dershowitz said Tuesday.
Dershowitz, who noted he did not vote for Trump, said whether or not voters support the former president, all should have the right to make their voice heard at the polls.
Several Democrats have recently been asked about or have discussed the potential of using the 14th Amendment – which primarily granted citizenship to former slaves and all who were born or naturalized in the United States.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/democ...st-dangerous-legal-developments-law-professor
Click to expand...
Dershowitz has failed to persuade me here.
Perhaps Dershowitz failed by conflating importance, with legitimacy.

"Dershowitz ... said ... all should have the right to make their voice heard at the polls." FOX

Indeed, within the bounds of the law.
But didn't President Trump, presenting to a large public gathering in or near DC tell the crowd they'd have to "fight like Hell" or they wouldn't have a country anymore?
ARTICLE #14: Ratified July 9, 1868
SECTION 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Click to expand...
You're an impressive guy Professor Dershowitz. But I believe you are clearly outright wrong on Trump's eligibility.
I took an oath of fidelity to the United States Constitution Professor Dershowitz. So did you. Right?
I take my oath to the Constitution seriously sir. You?
 

Ballot Chaos: Trump eligibility court cases begin!​


aXHjT53.jpeg


Let the chaos begin! This is the first of likely many challenges to the whether Trump is even retro-actively eligible for office due to the 14th Amendment's Sec. 3, which states that no person shall hold any office if they "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" after having taken an oath to support the Constitution.

Saucy Sauce Sauce for your ethical sauce lovers:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/20...e-lawsuit-remove-trump-2024-ballot-rcna103660


S5YsKDt.jpeg


This lawsuit comes just a month after two prominent conservative legal scholars published a draft of their year-long legal analysis of Sec. 3, A14 and the historical context of its adoption - and that they concluded that it precludes Trump from eligibility.

Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6 Saucy Sauce:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/10/...conservatives.html?smid=nytcore-android-share

What is more bonkers is that it argues that figures in positions of determining ballot eligibility have the power and obligation to make this determination, which will lead to a wide swath of court cases.

I expect this to quickly make its way to the Supreme Court of the United States... where an unprecedented three Justices were appointed by Trump and a fourth is married to a MAGA cult extremist and is unphased by completely unvarnished corruption.
 
Shiftless2 said:
Ballot Chaos: Trump eligibility court cases begin!
"I expect this to quickly make its way to the Supreme Court of the United States... where an unprecedented three Justices were appointed by Trump and a fourth is married to a MAGA cult extremist and is unphased by completely unvarnished corruption." S2 #77
Click to expand...
complication #1:
Timing matters here.
There are deadlines established in law for election candidates. Bill Hank died after inauguration.
But what happens when a party nominates a candidate, the legal deadline for such nomination passes, and after that the nominee becomes ineligible, whether by death, or by declaration?
If by law the party's candidate nominating window has terminated for that election cycle, and that party no longer has a candidate, doesn't that hand election victory to the opposing party?

complication #2:
Bush v. Gore and other precedents indicate the Republican appointees in our judiciary may wish to rule in favor of their party, rather than in service to our Constitution.
If polling verifies that candidate Biden (D) would win in 2024 against candidate Trump (R) would SCOTUS "do the right thing" and declare Trump eligible, even if it means forfeiting the 2024 presidential election to the Democrats? - OR -
Independent of Constitutional merit would a determinative majority within SCOTUS rule Trump ineligible, to give the Republican party an opportunity to nominate a candidate with a better chance of beating Biden?

William Henry Harrison: 9th President of the United States​


William Henry Harrison (February 9, 1773 – April 4, 1841) was an American military officer and politician who served as the ninth president of the United States. Harrison died just 31 days after his inauguration as president in 1841, making his presidency the shortest in U.S. history. He was also the first U.S. president to die in office, causing a brief constitutional crisis since presidential succession was not then fully defined in the United States Constitution. More from Wikipedia / Wikipedia text under CC-BY-SA license
 
wuQbqbH.jpeg


While speaking at the ‘Pray Vote conference’ on September 15, 2023 in Washington the Orange Genius implied that if YOU rely on ‘cognitively impaired’ Biden that could lead us into WW2… With Russia! World War 2 huh Donny??? - That war ended 78 years ago you fucking moron. - And this is the best and brightest the GOP has to offer. THIS IS THEIR CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT of the United States.

www.businessinsider.com

Trump, who called Biden 'cognitively impaired,' mocked for saying the president would lead the US into 'World War II' in a gaffe-strewn speech

Former US president and 2024 candidate Donald Trump is being mocked online for mixing up Obama and Biden and saying Biden would cause "World War II."
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com

https://imgur.com/Qhq6k2M
 
FNS230917.JPG

- grim -

On the oblique side, Biden is sometimes credited with keeping Trump out of the white house. Perhaps we should embrace the more enlightened perspective, that Trump is securing Biden's second term.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top