TenderLovingKiller®
Well-Known Member
Well, right now there are 3 too many conservative justices so what’s it gonna hurt?
Political Discussion
- Thread starter David A.
- Start date
Dtknuckles
Well-Known Member
They haven’t added justices, but let’s be honest they have gamed the system to the point where most people already see it as political. The Supreme Court is just a slow moving election.
Chucktshoes
Well-Known Member
I won’t disagree with that too much really. Still, the gamesmanship may be pretty peak but it’s still within the long-standing rules. Changing the rules of the game because you don’t like the outcome will create a situation where all bets are off.
Dtknuckles
Well-Known Member
Remember when the Dems changed the rules for the filibuster for judicial appointments? Humm. Bets have been off for a while now.
Chucktshoes
Well-Known Member
I’m not talking about what goes on in DC.
Dtknuckles
Well-Known Member
I understand that, and the general population may not see what the Republican Party has done as court packing, but they changed the rules to appoint judges, they bent the rules to get more appointments and they have corrupted the appointment process with money.
While officially banned in the late 1970s, California was sterilizing inmates as recently as 2010. There was a bunch of news last year about some immigration detainees being sterilized in... I wanna say Georgia? Officially they aren't supposed to, but you know how prisons work.
And in what way would the wheels come off that they haven't already with the way the GOP blocked Obama from appointing a justice, and then ramming through their own deeply shitty appointee (Kavanaugh)? I'm all for eroding the power of any single justice.
Chucktshoes
Well-Known Member
When I talk about the wheels coming off, what I am saying is that I’m terrified of the thought of my children growing up in Sarajevo circa 1994. That’s the game being played here.
If the Dems actually manage to ram that through, and pack the court with four justices, I’m pretty certain the whole fucking shit explodes. We’ve been sliding down that path for quite a while, but that’ll send it into overdrive.
Please don’t mistake my statement as yearning for threats of what I am going to do. I’m fucking terrified of the prospect. That said, what is coming is obvious to me as watching somebody standing on the train tracks with a locomotive barreling down at them. I sincerely believe the outcome of these actions are going to be bloody for everybody. Nobody wins here. We all lose.
I really hate the large medical group that pretty much everything in Massachusetts is part of.
For example, if you get a large unexpected bill and can't pay for it all at once they stand to profit. They do not accept partial payments. You have to either pay in full or negotiate a repayment plan with them where you end up paying more or they repayment term than if you were to just pay it all up front. They have interest and fees for this.
If you don't work out a repayment program with them, and you are just saving up to pay it off in full within the next couple months they still get you. There is a $30 late fee each month if you miss the due date of the bill they send you.
For example, if you get a large unexpected bill and can't pay for it all at once they stand to profit. They do not accept partial payments. You have to either pay in full or negotiate a repayment plan with them where you end up paying more or they repayment term than if you were to just pay it all up front. They have interest and fees for this.
If you don't work out a repayment program with them, and you are just saving up to pay it off in full within the next couple months they still get you. There is a $30 late fee each month if you miss the due date of the bill they send you.
debianlinux
Well-Known Member
I guess I should feel lucky that we have a couple very large not for profit hospital networks in my city. Kid had to have general anesthesia for a nose extraction. Still paying that $5k bill. Afterwards I had a hernia surgery which is just tacked onto the end of that debt. I service it at $150/mo zero interest. I mean I am still a debt slave for medical costs but at least I can reserve hope.
Dtknuckles
Well-Known Member
I’ve seen some right leaning people use this as vindication that the media is biased. Why should we trust immediate first had accounts coming from one source? You are a fool if you do. My main question for them is would he have had the strokes sitting on his couch at home? I’m not saying it should be murder charges, but what happened to this officer broke the law.
This Connecticut teacher was trying to help his neighbors with groceries, but when he raised over $40,000 on Facebook, he ended up with a $16,000 tax bill
Last April, Louis Goffinet, a 27-year-old middle school teacher from Mansfield, started grocery shopping for elderly neighbors who were afraid to go to the store at the start of the pandemic. More …
www.courant.com
When you try to do nice things and help others uncle sam robs you.
$16,000 tax bill for a fundraiser he did on Facebook to buy groceries for those in need during the pandemic.
He could have avoided this by registering as a non-profit. But the everyday joe trying to help out is going to know how to navigate that path or know they need to when trying to raise money to help others in need.
Chucktshoes
Well-Known Member
Single source? Every media outlet ran with the story that the rioters had murdered a DC cop (even though there were statements with days that questioned that narrative). Not only that but lots of folks who had spent all of 2020 railing against police were suddenly clutching their pearls. I bet if we went back through this very thread to then we would find some interesting posts doing just that. I could be wrong, but I strongly suspect I’m not.
Any assaults on officer Sicknick absolutely did break the law, just as any other assaults on other officers in the capital that day, or assaults on any officers around the country do. They should be charged accordingly.
What they weren’t is murder or manslaughter, or any serious felony for causing someone’s death.
Your couch question is not a question that can be answered in any reasonable way and is not a question that our legal system concerns itself with. It is wholly irrelevant outside of attempts to make an emotional argument.
Once again for the record, I don’t support or condone the capitol riot, but I’m not bleating about an non-existent insurrection either. I also don’t support or condone the other riots around the country for the last year or the one that’s getting ready to hit after the Chauvin verdict.
People’s views of these events are almost entirely determined by their politca alignment. The lack of any sort of logical consistency in approach to the events of the last year is boringly predictable pure partisan hackery.
Massachusetts finally got vehicle inspection services back online over this past weekend after suffering from a malware attack a month ago. Anyone with. March or April sticker have been extended to May 31 to get a new inspection sticker now.
It is estimated that there are over 90,000 cars with March inspection stickers that still need to be inspected and 160,000 with April.
This issue though isn't completely over. Not every shop is back online. This malware attack has resulted in the need of the state to replace the equipment at each and every location that does inspections. They have been doing this or the past several weeks, but still have aways to go. And the shops that are no back online yet feel betrayed by the state. Many of them are independent or smaller shops that have lower volume of inspections. And this is hurting their bottom line.
While they have never said it was ransomware, the fact they have had to replace the equipment at each location to me suggest that it probably was.
It is estimated that there are over 90,000 cars with March inspection stickers that still need to be inspected and 160,000 with April.
This issue though isn't completely over. Not every shop is back online. This malware attack has resulted in the need of the state to replace the equipment at each and every location that does inspections. They have been doing this or the past several weeks, but still have aways to go. And the shops that are no back online yet feel betrayed by the state. Many of them are independent or smaller shops that have lower volume of inspections. And this is hurting their bottom line.
While they have never said it was ransomware, the fact they have had to replace the equipment at each location to me suggest that it probably was.
Chucktshoes
Well-Known Member
There is no way to know that. That is a conclusion reached from an emotional place, not an evidentiary one.
jaycee
Well-Known Member
Aren't all arguments of a personal and therefore emotional nature? The exception perhaps is in the obscure corners of scientific or economic journals, but even there human illogic has influence.
Laws, determined by elected officials (by states and institutions), who are elected not solely based on facts, but based on the often manipulated emotions of the people, and who develop, propose, and vote on legislation from personal economic gain or loss and religious perspectives are by their nature creating a set of judgements and rules based on emotions - not logic - and not necessarily facts.
If someone hitting someone with a fire extinguisher was not an attempt to injure then we have to ask what else it could be? If it was an attempt to injure, for whatever reason, and if the officer's body was injured (stressed) as a result of the deliberate actions of another human, and the injury contributed in some way to the officer's death, that seems like it would meet the legal (yet still emotional) definition of manslaughter.
If it doesn't, then society has the job of determining whether or not it should and making those changes through the legislature. Debating whether or not that is a real possibility with our current systems of governance is another question.
Laws, determined by elected officials (by states and institutions), who are elected not solely based on facts, but based on the often manipulated emotions of the people, and who develop, propose, and vote on legislation from personal economic gain or loss and religious perspectives are by their nature creating a set of judgements and rules based on emotions - not logic - and not necessarily facts.
If someone hitting someone with a fire extinguisher was not an attempt to injure then we have to ask what else it could be? If it was an attempt to injure, for whatever reason, and if the officer's body was injured (stressed) as a result of the deliberate actions of another human, and the injury contributed in some way to the officer's death, that seems like it would meet the legal (yet still emotional) definition of manslaughter.
If it doesn't, then society has the job of determining whether or not it should and making those changes through the legislature. Debating whether or not that is a real possibility with our current systems of governance is another question.
jaycee
Well-Known Member
Just adding on:
Societies and all of their associated rules, cultural practices, hierarchies and power dynamics, are built on what people want... usually what certain people want, not all people... and what people want is rarely based on logic or sound predictive ability. It's much more often based on emotion, per-conceived notions or conditioning, propaganda / advertising, etc...
The idea that human socitities are anything other than emotional constructs is propaganda itself.
Societies and all of their associated rules, cultural practices, hierarchies and power dynamics, are built on what people want... usually what certain people want, not all people... and what people want is rarely based on logic or sound predictive ability. It's much more often based on emotion, per-conceived notions or conditioning, propaganda / advertising, etc...
The idea that human socitities are anything other than emotional constructs is propaganda itself.
Chucktshoes
Well-Known Member
The fire extinguisher story was just that, a story. It was walked back pretty early on from official sources. It didn’t happen. The media continued to run with it long afterwards, but within a couple of days family members said he died of a stroke.
The only ‘weapon’ there is any evidence was potentially used against Officer Sicknick was pepper spray.