Confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court

[TotallyGenericName]

Congratulations, you've discovered that social and cultural trends tend to happen over a long period.

Incidentally did you know 30 years is about on par for what is known by sociologists and cultural analysts as part of cultural nostalgic cycles? C'est interessant.

- - - Updated - - -



Why? They're squatting on federal land for the most part.

Ah, so I guess all those lifelong Democrats that lived and died Democrats just have nothing to do with it, huh? Like, gee, I don't know... Al Gore Sr.

Or, possibly Byrd, the KKK member who filibustered the Civil Right Acts for 14 hours?

No, yeah. You're toooootally right.

Cool story, bro.

But hey, you're welcome to keep wallowing around on the wrong side of history like a pig in mud. Nobody is stopping you, I suppose.

[Zan15]

No, it actually lives in a very small amount of territory scattered in a limited number of metropolitan areas, which have pretty much nothing in common anymore with the vast areas around them.

oh fucking god here we go again with land mass.....

So if some billionaire buys up 51% of Iowa should they have complete control over that state as king now?

[Elegiac]

So what is wrong with letting the land and the people represent each other more correctly by dividing it up?

Because the land doesn't need representation, and if you're going to start getting into that territory I've got some bad news for you about how much more restrictive your life will become under a system where rights of nature are a thing.

- - - Updated - - -

Ah, so I guess all those lifelong Democrats that lived and died Democrats just have nothing to do with it, huh?

Cool story, bro.

I mean we've already seen a whole host of former Republicans now identify as Independents within the space of a single electoral cycle.

Now drag that same process out over a 30 year period.

[postman1782]

I can't tell if any of you are even being serious right now.

It's literally common knowledge that the Democratic party owned slaves.

How do you not know that there was no party switch? It's literally documented historically for all to see.

Also, how do you explain the founding principals of the Republican party trying to take aim at "the twin pillars of barbarism: slavery and polygamy."

I'm aware it's inconvenient but it doesn't make it any less true.

No, it is not common fact that the Democratic party owned slaves, and the only morons claiming that there was no party switch, fails to see that the KKK, while yes was started by Democrats, now supports the Republicans. That is all the evidence you need to see that a party switch happened.

Also slavery was used by everyone until the Civil war. Then it was stopped by the LIBERALS, which happened to be Republican at that time.

[Kellhound]

Congratulations, you've discovered that social and cultural trends tend to happen over a long period.

Incidentally did you know 30 years is about on par for what is known by sociologists and cultural analysts as part of cultural nostalgic cycles? C'est interessant.

- - - Updated - - -



Why? They're squatting on federal land for the most part.

What do you care, its not like you would actually use the land for anything. Seems like your main desire is to force your agenda down peoples' throats in revenge.

[Elegiac]

What do you care, its not like you would actually use the land for anything. Seems like your main desire is to force your agenda down peoples' throats in revenge.

You do realise we are in the midst of a climate crisis, yes.

And maybe we could put that land to use housing refugees from said climate crisis and the homeless people that are apparently running rampant in our cities.

[Zan15]

So what is wrong with letting the land and the people represent each other more correctly by dividing it up?

here's news for you. If land became that important of a determining factor, liberals would branch out and own the majority of it.

Just like migration away from CA/NY that you are crowing about...the impact to republicans would be viciously negative and destructive for decades on their political possibilities


Besides the fact that most of the land "red" voters take credit for owning are technically owned by corporations, feds, state, banks, lease owners, etc etc.

[Kellhound]

oh fucking god here we go again with land mass.....

So if some billionaire buys up 51% of Iowa should they have complete control over that state as king now?

Nope, but they would have a great argument for controlling that 51%.

[Grapemask]

The Republicans are only the minority party in the collective total population sense.

They are the majority party in the electoral sense.

I just have to stop and laugh at "we're only the minority if you're counting real people instead of make believe points."

But you are certainly welcome to cruise right over the constitutional balancing mechanisms if your end goal is, in fact, not to live in a constitutional republic.

The constitution did not create the electoral process as we have it today. Andrew Jackson (and his followers) did. Because the constitution actually doesn't define most of the electoral process beyond "get ye some electors, and here's what they'll vote on."

[postman1782]

Ah, so I guess all those lifelong Democrats that lived and died Democrats just have nothing to do with it, huh? Like, gee, I don't know... Al Gore Sr.

Or, possibly Byrd, the KKK member who filibustered the Civil Right Acts for 14 hours?

No, yeah. You're toooootally right.

Cool story, bro.

But hey, you're welcome to keep wallowing around on the wrong side of history like a pig in mud. Nobody is stopping you, I suppose.

He hadn't been a KKK member for a very long time in 64 and 65.

[Kellhound]

Because the land doesn't need representation, and if you're going to start getting into that territory I've got some bad news for you about how much more restrictive your life will become under a system where rights of nature are a thing.

- - - Updated - - -



I mean we've already seen a whole host of former Republicans now identify as Independents within the space of a single electoral cycle.

Now drag that same process out over a 30 year period.

Never talked about "rights of nature", and you know that.

[Zan15]

Nope, but they would have a great argument for controlling that 51%.

So then why then hell are you even bringing up land mass and shit??

[TotallyGenericName]

No, it is not common fact that the Democratic party owned slaves, and the only morons claiming that there was no party switch, fails to see that the KKK, while yes was started by Democrats, now supports the Republicans. That is all the evidence you need to see that a party switch happened.

Also slavery was used by everyone until the Civil war. Then it was stopped by the LIBERALS, which happened to be Republican at that time.

LOL?

That is some epic revisionist history.

I'm pretty sure the KKK might be the worst white supremacists ever then.

- - - Updated - - -

He hadn't been a KKK member for a very long time in 64 and 65.

Yeah, I suppose in between lynching upstanding African American citizens, he saw the light. I suppose that explains why he filibustered for 14 hours.

L. O. L.

[Elegiac]

He hadn't been a KKK member for a very long time in 64 and 65.

Also the dude literally spent years apologizing for his former associations and working to help fix the damage they were causing.

Whereas the only thing we actually get in evidence of Republicans being the "anti-slavery" party is...the fact that they were against slavery during a time period where none of the current party members were actually alive. Lol.

[Kellhound]

You do realise we are in the midst of a climate crisis, yes.

And maybe we could put that land to use housing refugees from said climate crisis and the homeless people that are apparently running rampant in our cities.

Just build your cities higher. Its not like you dont have an endless supply of iron ore, boxite, timber, cement, etc. inside your metro areas.

[Elegiac]

Just build your cities higher. Its not like you dont have an endless supply of iron ore, boxite, timber, cement, etc. inside your metro areas.

I mean there's all that vacant land there, though. You yourself pointed out that it wasn't getting used.

[TotallyGenericName]

I just have to stop and laugh at "we're only the minority if you're counting real people instead of make believe points."


The constitution did not create the electoral process as we have it today. Andrew Jackson (and his followers) did. Because the constitution actually doesn't define most of the electoral process beyond "get ye some electors, and here's what they'll vote on."

Good lord, do you guys just nitpick everything. Yes, I'm aware it's not a constitutional mandate.

It's article 2, section 1. I am trying to point out that it exists for a reason.

The purpose of the electoral college is to FORCE campaigns to be national and not just cloistered behind the safe and comfy walls of densely populated cities.

[Kellhound]

here's news for you. If land became that important of a determining factor, liberals would branch out and own the majority of it.

Just like migration away from CA/NY that you are crowing about...the impact to republicans would be viciously negative and destructive for decades on their political possibilities


Besides the fact that most of the land "red" voters take credit for owning are technically owned by corporations, feds, state, banks, lease owners, etc etc.

I dont crow about people liberals leaving CA and NY, i would no one would ever leave those states again. You guys actually remind me a lot of the king in Braveheart...

- - - Updated - - -

So then why then hell are you even bringing up land mass and shit??

Wow, talk about going right over your head....

[Elegiac]

Good lord, do you guys just nitpick everything. Yes, I'm aware it's not a constitutional mandate.

It's article 2, section 1. I am trying to point out that it exists for a reason.

The purpose of the electoral college is to FORCE campaigns to be national and not just cloistered behind the safe and comfy walls of densely populated cities.

Grapemask is not incorrect because the idea of a national campaign does not predate Andrew Jackson who was notable for having the first national campaign, rather than just appealing to a set of electors as was the norm previously.

"Nitpicking" is a funny way of saying "insisting you adhere to fact, not whatever you were taught in a Texas high school".

[postman1782]

LOL?

That is some epic revisionist history.

I'm pretty sure the KKK might be the worst white supremacists ever then.

- - - Updated - - -



Yeah, I suppose in between lynching upstanding African American citizens, he saw the light. I suppose that explains why he filibustered for 14 hours.

L. O. L.

Jesus christ you are trying so fucking hard, just to be wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

Also the dude literally spent years apologizing for his former associations and working to help fix the damage they were causing.

Whereas the only thing we actually get in evidence of Republicans being the "anti-slavery" party is...the fact that they were against slavery during a time period where none of the current party members were actually alive. Lol.

Exactly, but Seashell doesn't care about facts.