gowlerk

Like a dog whistle?

The combination of nationalism, isolationism, the taint of racism, misuse of religion, showmanship and above all populism all are factors that Trump has combined into his own unprecedented formula for just enough success to gain power through exploiting the flaws in the American federal system. It is hard to compare him to any of the 20th century figures being alluded to here. I feel that he is uniquely American and an entrepreneur and of course narcissist of the first order. Two things stand out to me marking him as very different. His age for one. He is far too old to ever become a dictator like those being spoken of. But more importantly, he does not really have an overarching agenda he wants to accomplish. Other than of course to accumulate money and power. The real danger is not Trump. It is the forces that he may unleash that will follow him into the future. Trump is not disciplined enough or smart enough to really lead. He merely reinforces the worst in his supporters that is already present.

Today three arrests were made. All three Indian citizens and all in Canada. https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/03/americas/canada-sikh-nijjar-assassination-suspects-intl-latam/index.html https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nijjar-killing-arrests-made-1.7192807 The speculation seems to be that elements of the Indian government used hired gangsters already in Canada to carry out the assassination.

Kristi probably grew up listening to Johnny Cash.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6UAbDqCo4Q

Is Noem too young to remember the Mitt Romney dog controversy? Voters love dogs. If you mess with a dog and get found out it will cost you. Rightly or wrongly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_Romney_dog_incident

Even better, one of them is a woman.

Sort of the right thing. There is still the small matter of the 15 week ban.

Given the record and makeup of the current SCOTUS I would think that a change toward favouring more blatant governmental support for mainline religions is inevitable. It is already occurring on several fronts, especially support for parochial schools.

The USA is still largely controlled by those who are culturally "Christian". Meaning euro-centric and white. It has little to do with deities or theology. It is all about those who belong to the group with the most power clinging onto it as tightly as they can. It is a similar thing to how Hinduists have taken over in supposedly secular India. All US leaders must embrace the phrase "God bless America", it is a prerequisite even if only done performa.

I would kick in a couple greenbacks to John's GoFund Me.

Except that you would feel chastised and modify your behavior.

So that is the line, four weeks? That would basically be a ban. But I know, you would reluctantly accept giving relief to those women deemed to have an excuse. Because somehow even though the baby now has a heartbeat it would be justifiable homicide. It makes no sense at all. Either it is a human life worthy of all the protections of the law or it is not. It is an impossible thing to judge and that is why it needs to be left to the woman to decide. Because no one else can. You don't seem to be the slightest bit interested in saying who makes the call. And I understand that because there is no good answer so like all the hard questions here you just ignore it.

The world is full of people how think more of dogs than they do of people. On both ends of the political spectrum and not just in the US. Noem is an idiot.

Quit trying to have it both ways. Your basic posistion is that abortion is homicide but justifiable for certain women who meet a certain criteria. Mostly that they be good girls, preferably victims. It is both patronizing and completely impractical. One more time, and I am asking a serious question, not a rhetorical one. Who gets to decide which cases are justifiable homicide and which ones are murder?

Except for that word "imminent" and "psychological danger to the mother". Who decides that? Who gets to end up in front of a judge or losing their right to practice medicine if they get prosecuted? As always the devil is in the details. Is Keith willing to be the one sitting in judgement of which abortions are allowable and which are not? And if not Keith then whom?