Supreme court nomination

[billvon 2,380]

46 minutes ago, kallend said:

Federalist paper #68 explains the reasons for the EC.  Protecting smaller states is not one of the reasons.

Biased liberal authors!  Zuckerberg was probably the REAL author.

[ryoder 1,381]

2 hours ago, kallend said:

Federalist paper #68 explains the reasons for the EC.  Protecting smaller states is not one of the reasons.

Yale Law Professor Akhil Amar explains it very succinctly in 2 minutes:

 

Edited November 7, 2020 by ryoder

[brenthutch 383]

2 hours ago, kallend said:

Federalist paper #68 explains the reasons for the EC.  Protecting smaller states is not one of the reasons.

So your point is that the purpose of the EC in today’s America is to protect slavery?  

[JoeWeber 2,294]

On 11/5/2020 at 4:59 AM, brenthutch said:

The Ds abandoned the hard hats and embraced Globalists,  Antifa, BLM, illegal immigrants, snowflakes and the LGTBQABCDEVFG community.

I'd generally agree with the point but only to the extent it's broadly made. My disagreement, and I really wanted to let it pass, is specifically with how you represented the LGBTQ community. I know I've mentioned previously that I have a number of friends in that community. I don't know any who want to be identified by an alphabet soup nomer. But there are relatively small numbers of each group and they are all equally discriminated against so it works, I guess. Sort of like Native Americans instead of Sioux, Seminole and Crow, maybe. Just a thought.

[wmw999 2,116]

What some people call marginalized communities is a sign that they only care about themselves, and not what the communities prefer. Because their convenience and laziness is more important than learning something about that community.

Ignorance is fine; it can be addressed. Brandishing it is a sign that you not only know you have power over that community, but you're comfortable with, and feel you deserve, the power differential, because they don't have the power to object effectively.

Wendy P.

[brenthutch 383]

10 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

I'd generally agree with the point but only to the extent it's broadly made. My disagreement, and I really wanted to let it pass, is specifically with how you represented the LGBTQ community. I know I've mentioned previously that I have a number of friends in that community. I don't know any who want to be identified by an alphabet soup nomer. 

I was not being insulting, I have friends in those groups as well.  The additional letters were to represent the ever growing/changing list of sexual and gender identities that begin to alienate cisgender working class males of all races.  When ACB gets attacked by Democrats for using the term “sexual preference”  some folks just throw their hands in the air and say “I just don’t get them”

I intended no malice.

 

[jakee 1,254]

2 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

I was not being insulting,

Yes you were.

8 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

 The additional letters were to represent the ever growing/changing list of sexual and gender identities that begin to alienate cisgender working class males of all races. 

See, you just explained the insult.