Well I don't see you ministering the skin heads or lunatics or even suggesting it, even though you know where they are, who they are and what they want. If you don't they are rather easy to find so lend your morality to those that need it most the immoral doing dastardly deeds to the public.

I wake up to reality that the so called "moral" among us deny the reality of skinheads and lunatics, and choose to convert the peaceful heathens that just want what the constitution grants us all. Makes me wonder why giving liberty and justice for all is such a hard moral choice to make for you.

Quote:

---

Well I don't see you ministering the skin heads or lunatics or even suggesting it, even though you know where they are, who they are and what they want. If you don't they are rather easy to find so lend your morality to those that need it most the immoral doing dastardly deeds to the public.

I wake up to reality that the so called "moral" among us deny the reality of skinheads and lunatics, and choose to convert the peaceful heathens that just want what the constitution grants us all. Makes me wonder why giving liberty and justice for all is such a hard moral choice to make for you.

---

You have lost your ever-lovin mind if you think I have denied the reality of skinheads and lunatics. You post a quote of where I have done that. I don't personally know any and have no idea where to find them, but what they do and stand for is despicable in the same manner of the black or Hispanic supremacist groups. They, like everyone else, need Jesus to change their lives.

But by your standard, aren't they simply exhibiting their "human failings" and trying to work out the law of the jungle? Surely you are not suggesting they are morally corrupt are you???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

Spare me the B/S Tal, you have the option of saying No! unless you live in a Muslim country. the question isn't what you believe as much as it is whether you force others to agree with you. I think you are a true believer in the 21st century religion of AGW

---

I like to think we live in a free country and just want clean air, water, and soil to be put over profits for the few, which it seems some of my fellow citizens are so against, but is it not also true that those fellow citizens are passively, yet aggressively trying to force others to agree with them, and drink the poison Kool Aid of ignorance to the fouling of our resources that give life?

Maybe the choices for you are far in the future, but eventually you will arrive at them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

You have lost your ever-lovin mind if you think I have denied the reality of skinheads and lunatics. You post a quote of where I have done that. I don't personally know any and have no idea where to find them, but what they do and stand for is despicable. They, like everyone else, need Jesus to change their lives.

But by your standard, aren't they simply exhibiting their "human failings" and trying to work out the law of the jungle? Surely you are not suggesting they are morally corrupt are you???

---

No they are EVIL as it gets. Hunt them and eradicate the threat they pose.

Quote:

---

No they are EVIL as it gets. Hunt them and eradicate the threat they pose.

---

Well, being "evil" is a moral judgement. I didn't think you believed in moral standards. And to "hunt them" and "eradicate" them would mean to murder them wouldn't it? Do you feel the same way about the violent black and Hispanic supremacist groups?

Murder is your word, I clearly meant bring them to JUSTICE and eradicate their threat to FREEDOM of us all. You can fill me in on those other supremacists that I have you to be aware of.

Quote:

---

Murder is your word, I clearly meant bring them to JUSTICE and eradicate their threat to FREEDOM of us all

---

.
OK. Fair enough. I will be with you on that completely.

Quote:

---

You can fill me in on those other supremacists that I have you to be aware of.

---

This is from that famous, right-wing group called the Southern Poverty Law Center. "Israel United in Christ, a Black Hebrew Israelite group, led an 800-person march in Tennessee on Aug. 4, 2018. Louis Farrakhan leveraged his attendance at Aretha Franklin’s funeral to legitimize himself and recruit new members by putting her on the cover of the group’s publication, The Final Call, and distributing 50,000 copies in Detroit, Michigan. The New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense hosted black men’s conferences and rallied in front of the White House to denounce Trump and praise Farrakhan." They are all characterized as black nationalist groups.

Now they, of course, don't mention BLM, which was responsible for the looting and destruction of a great deal of private property in Ferguson, MO, all of which, as it turned out, was in support of a young man who basically caused his own death by an innocent policeman. When was the last time you heard of a WSG causing that kind of riot and damage? Now are you going to step up to the plate and condemn that behavior? Might add that not a single person was ever brought to justice because of the violence and destruction. After all, they vote democrat.

Quote:

---

This is from that famous, right-wing group called the Southern Poverty Law Center. "Israel United in Christ, a Black Hebrew Israelite group,

---

Fringe group though they be, no reference to violence as was any other you named, but hate spewing group for sure. The rest of your hodgepodge references are dismissed, and the sarcastic reference of SPLC ignored.

Quote:

---

Fringe group though they be, no reference to violence as was any other you named, but hate spewing group for sure. The rest of your hodgepodge references are dismissed, and the sarcastic reference of SPLC ignored.

---

BLM. No violence?? Really? Try telling that to the people who lost businesses and jobs in Ferguson.

As far as fringe groups go, which WSG do you know of that has a large membership? I ask that sincerely. I don't know of one, but it might be out there.

I believe it's several small loners and friends or sympathizers who network online with some loose affiliations with not very big groups. That's where they seem to congregate and feed the hate stuff to each other. That's part of the danger is you can't see them coming in their ambushes. True LOONS on there own but dangerous to say the least.

SCOTUS should tell them to go pound sand! You cannot threaten someone who cannot be fired because they are hire for what is left of their life. Anyone threatening a SCOTUS member should be drawn and quartered!

Clueless did not want to make a call on SCOTUS packing .So he dodged by creating a commission to "study" it . It's task was to"provide an analysis of the principal arguments in the contemporary public debate for and against Supreme Court reform,"

President Biden to Sign Executive Order Creating the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States | The White House

The commission finished it's task and came to a conclusion . It's conclusion is that it takes no position in 200 some odd pages .

"Although there is widespread agreement among legal scholars that Congress has the constitutional authority to expand the Court's size,there is profound disagreement over whether Court expansion at this moment in time would be wise. We do not seek to evaluate or judge the weight of any of these arguments, and the Commission takes no position on the wisdom of expansion."

SCOTUS-Report-Final-12.8.21-1.pdf (whitehouse.gov)

Your tax dollars well spent !

Tax dollars? More likely printed or borrowed dollars.

One consolation in all of this insanity is the red wave that seems to be coming next November.

What we really need is a Jesus wave at any time.

With all the hollering and screaming, shenanigans and scheming, a neutral CYOA move is appropriate. Like conservative wingers really care about taxpayer dollars.

You guys got both hands in the cookie jar and squeal on everybody else.

I would actually agree with Tal on that one. There is no longer any political party which has the courage to exercise fiscal responsibility. Liberal dems are worse, but both are bad. Both Bush and Trump had excellent opportunities to enforce a balanced budget and just blew it. A day is coming, however. A day is coming. The national debt is now approaching 100,000 dollars for every man, woman, and child in America, and we stupidly stand by while these corrupt pols buy votes with borrowed or printed money.

But be careful when you complain about conservatives "squealing". At least there are a few of us out there who see the danger and speak out about it. Liberal dems? Not a one that I know of.

So Tal are you happy with the commission's recommendations ? Tal joins me in the consolation rounds of our league.

I honestly don't care one way or another about political opinions given SCOTUS has been expanded in the past, and may well be in the future even if Ole Joe doesn't now. Lol... I've been out of the hunt all year in our league after two years of domination! I'm no stranger to stumbling, bumbling, and completely fumbling. It be that way sometimes!

;(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I would actually agree with Tal on that one. There is no longer any political party which has the courage to exercise fiscal responsibility. Liberal dems are worse, but both are bad. Both Bush and Trump had excellent opportunities to enforce a balanced budget and just blew it. A day is coming, however. A day is coming. The national debt is now approaching 100,000 dollars for every man, woman, and child in America, and we stupidly stand by while these corrupt pols buy votes with borrowed or printed money.

But be careful when you complain about conservatives "squealing". At least there are a few of us out there who see the danger and speak out about it. Liberal dems? Not a one that I know of.

---

The pols just do as their corporate masters command them to do.

Having a president pack the court won’t solve anything and would make SCOTUS more political; not less. But I have offered an alternative to that for a long time now. I think term limits are needed for all judges in the Federal system, especially SCOTUS. End lifetime appointments. Presidents with Senate confirmation could decide to replace or keep a justice on the court. But this time when confirmation hearings take place there will be a record of the justice on the court to evaluate. No longer would Senators have to rely on only what the candidate says is their judicial philosophy and all the non-answers candidates typically regurgitate.

I don't know what the answer is. Even with term limits we will at times have a legislative SCOTUS, and that's the major problem. I just don't know how to ensure that honest men and women who will faithfully interpret and apply the law are appointed to the courts. Roe is a prime example of justices just making it up as they go along.

Without a lot of detail ;the Marbury v Madison decision where SCOTUS became the self appointed " final arbiter " is where the real problem lies .