NRO's The Corner: Obamacare ‘like a house on fire’ with more flammable parts yet to come

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed

cuz Jonah said so.

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 6 February 2014 20:20 (four years ago) Permalink

sounds like an impending disaster! can we buy reverse credit-default-swaps on obamacare's house?

Daniel, Esq 2, Thursday, 6 February 2014 21:18 (four years ago) Permalink

our friend:

In the latest Need to Know, Mona Charen starts off by talking about music. Then she gets into the tawdry subject of Bill Ayers, that “old, washed-up terrorist,” as John McCain described him during the 2008 campaign. We also talk about IRS harassment, Barack Obama, and the press. Mona gives a social-science tour de force on the matter of family breakdown. We wax lyrical, and truthful, about the ability of free enterprise, under the rule of law, to uplift the poor.

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 8 February 2014 13:18 (four years ago) Permalink

please add truthful to the thread title somehow

mustread guy (schlump), Saturday, 8 February 2014 14:57 (four years ago) Permalink

The Value of Putin
Putin ends up existing to warn us in the West of what we are not.
By Victor Davis Hanson

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 16:33 (four years ago) Permalink

All that said, there is a value for us in Putin. I don’t mean the strange Pat Buchanan–style admiration for Putin’s creepy reactionary social agenda and his tirades about Western social decadence. Rather, I refer to Putin’s confidence in his unabashedly thuggish means, the brutal fashion in which a modern state so unapologetically embraces the premodern mind to go after its critics, be they journalists or academics, or stifles free debate without worry over Western censure. Putin is a mirror showing more than just what we should not be.

We in the West get into fiery debates over civil union versus gay marriage as the appropriate legal means of recognizing homosexual unions, with all the accompanying charges of insensitivity — without much notice of how the vast majority of gays are treated elsewhere in the world. In contrast, Putin, mostly to global silence, does nothing as his thugs with impunity terrorize gay activists (who mostly demonstrate for basic freedom of speech, not marriage). Miley Cyrus insults our sensibilities and becomes fabulously rich; the Pussy Rioters go to jail.

We in California divert life-saving water to save a baitfish; Putin’s $50 billion Olympics may prove to be an ecological disaster.

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 16:34 (four years ago) Permalink

that goddamn miley always insulting my sensibilities, maybe she should go to jail, makes you think

Corpsepaint Counterpaint (jjjusten), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 16:42 (four years ago) Permalink

on first glance I thought VDH had written Miley was an ecological disaster.

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 16:43 (four years ago) Permalink

lol @ the idea that the star of Hannah Montana had to insult our sensibilities in order to become fabulously rich

Fight the Powers that Be with this Powerful Les Paul! (DJP), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 16:45 (four years ago) Permalink

the Pussy Rioters insult our sensibilities and go to jail

bet VDH smacked his lips over that one

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 16:46 (four years ago) Permalink

the life we save might be a baitfish

miserable pissy riot (Hunt3r), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 16:48 (four years ago) Permalink

We in California divert life-saving water to save a baitfish

i hate him so much

there's no water to divert or not divert. that's the problem. that's the fact.

goole, Tuesday, 11 February 2014 17:12 (four years ago) Permalink

yup. we should be building new reservoirs, not debating this non-issue

How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 17:13 (four years ago) Permalink

In contrast, Putin, mostly to global silence, does nothing as his thugs with impunity terrorize gay activists (who mostly demonstrate for basic freedom of speech, not marriage).

this isn't true you lying sack of shit

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 17:15 (four years ago) Permalink

also "Well, we in the liberal West don't care about gays unless they demonstrate for marriage" fuck you

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 17:16 (four years ago) Permalink

You know he can't hear you, right?

waterbabies (waterface), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 17:23 (four years ago) Permalink

oh shit how do I retract

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 17:50 (four years ago) Permalink

lol at right-wing putin envy. here's the best part:

Putin is almost Milton’s Satan — as if, in his seductive evil, he yearns for clarity, perhaps even a smackdown, if not just for himself, for us as well. He is not the better man than Obama but, again like Milton’s Satan, the more interesting, if only because he reminds of us of our own limitations.

(The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 17:55 (four years ago) Permalink

this is a whole other kettle of right-wing zaniness but TAC's rod dreher -- who normally writes as the magazine's token 'thoughtful christian' voice -- wrote some really disgusting, hateful, misogynistic stuff about pussy riot, pretty much applauding their arrest. finally got me to quit reading that site altogether, except for larison.

(The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 18:05 (four years ago) Permalink

did they just compare obama to god? or is it just any american president who's god.

i want to say one word to you, just one word:buzzfeed (difficult listening hour), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 18:07 (four years ago) Permalink

"there are some people to whom health-insurance ought to remain an aspirational luxury"

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/arkansas-private-option-medicaid-021114

reggie (qualmsley), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 18:22 (four years ago) Permalink

goole! Your boy has some thoughts on feminism.

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 20:02 (four years ago) Permalink

always behind his own stable, that guy

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/370451/feminist-mystique-kevin-d-williamson

goole, Tuesday, 11 February 2014 20:06 (four years ago) Permalink

Feminism began as a simple grievance, mutated into a kind of conspiracy theory (with “patriarchy” filling in for the Jews/Freemasons/Illuminati/Bohemian Grove/reptilian shape-shifters/the fiendish plot of Dr. Fu Manchu/etc.), spent the 1980s in grad school congealing into a ridiculous jargon, and with the booming economy of the 1990s was once again reinvented, this time as a career path.

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 20:14 (four years ago) Permalink

^^ NRO knows its audience.

Aimless, Tuesday, 11 February 2014 20:28 (four years ago) Permalink

a challenger appears

http://thefederalist.com/

goole, Wednesday, 12 February 2014 14:56 (four years ago) Permalink

Celebrate Love, Not War: Don’t Use Valentine’s Day to Attack Men

Yes, men and women are different. But the answer is not a feminist Promised Land that is exhausting, devoid of love, and not much fun at all.

goole, Wednesday, 12 February 2014 14:57 (four years ago) Permalink

Bill De Blasio’s Law Enforcement Racket

Is Bill de Blasio about to take New York City’s public safety back to the bad old days of rampant street crime and murder – or is it just a charade?

goole, Wednesday, 12 February 2014 14:58 (four years ago) Permalink

Most of these contra-feminist pieces rely on the technique of first defining feminism in exactly the terms they prefer to apply to it, then attacking that version. The inevitable conclusion: feminism is horrible and ought to be rejecting by all right-thinking people. What is rarely clear is what they endorse, which is usually a misty, nebulous, sentimental warm-fuzziness that they are certain would arise spontaneously if only feminism weren't impeding its arrival.

Aimless, Wednesday, 12 February 2014 18:10 (four years ago) Permalink

I'd say that's the least of their problems, but you are not wrong.

Orson Wellies (in orbit), Wednesday, 12 February 2014 18:15 (four years ago) Permalink

if they're attempting to rebrand the war on women as just ye olde war on feminism that's probably the smartest response they've had yet (/= actual smart respone ftr). there's still alot of women, esp among independent voters, that reject the feminist label cuz they 'don't hate men' or some other taylor swift reason.

balls, Wednesday, 12 February 2014 19:36 (four years ago) Permalink

http://www.nationalreview.com/node/370957/print

Geographically, trans in Latin is a preposition that meant “on the other side” (Caesar refers to the Germans, who dwell “trans Rhenum,” on the other side of the Rhine) and cis meant “on the same side” (Livy describes how in early Rome a certain banished ethnic group, if caught “cis Tiberim,” on this side of the Tiber, had the price of their liberty set at a thousand units of bronze, which sounds like a good deal more than the Gang of Eight would ask for).

Where we now like to apply these to galling (for some) concepts about gender and sex, the Romans used them as prefixes to refer to the province of Gaul that was on the same side of the Alps as the city of Rome — Cisalpine Gaul — and the part that was on just the other side — Transalpine Gaul.

haha

polyphonic, Wednesday, 12 February 2014 19:46 (four years ago) Permalink

sorry I guess this isn't from The Corner, just NRO.

polyphonic, Wednesday, 12 February 2014 19:48 (four years ago) Permalink

what we claim is lawless unconstitutional kenyan muslimism under soetero we'd be cool with under the mormon

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/370854/democrats-media-slam-president-romney-over-health-care-law-changes-charles-c-w-cooke

reggie (qualmsley), Wednesday, 12 February 2014 22:43 (four years ago) Permalink

thohan
• 3 hours ago

Excellent piece. It's nice to have guys like Cooke on my side.

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 12 February 2014 22:45 (four years ago) Permalink

Check Your Privilege, Facebook! Social Media Giant Slights Members of 51st Gender
By Alec Torres
February 13, 2014 4:34 PM
Comments0

As Patrick Brennan recently discussed on the Corner, it’s getting harder to know how to refer to another person’s gender(s). Now, Facebook is making it even harder.

The Associated Press recently broke the news that Facebook now offers users a customizable gender option with about 50 different gender-identifying terms people can use to describe themselves along with three separate pronoun choices: him, her, or them.

The grammatical debate over the application of the plural pronoun “them” to a single subject aside, it’s a sad sign of the times that Facebook excluded whatever the 51st gender descriptor is, thus committing a hate crime against the dozens of people who probably describe themselves with said descriptor.

How dejected — nay depressed — must flexual people feel knowing that Facebook now accepts cisgender females, Trans*Men, and Trans*Males (don’t worry, the distinctions elude me, too) but not them and their girlfag peers.

Or what of all the trigender people who find out that Facebook will let one choose up to “bigender” but not beyond. They must be at least a third as offended as the flexuals.

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 13 February 2014 21:43 (four years ago) Permalink

it gives me pleasure to think how bad these assholes are gonna hate the future

joe perry has been dead for years (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Thursday, 13 February 2014 21:45 (four years ago) Permalink

xpost amen
fuck y'all str8 men

my collages, let me show you them (bernard snowy), Saturday, 15 February 2014 03:18 (four years ago) Permalink

jesus christ, that Charles C. W. Cooke 'satire' piece has its head so far up its ass, it could probably discover three or four new genders just by opening its eyes

my collages, let me show you them (bernard snowy), Saturday, 15 February 2014 03:22 (four years ago) Permalink

I used to be way into subjecting myself to the internet conservative cesspool; nice to see that the quality of the prose hasn't slipped:

Among her most enthusiastic boosters is Cecile Richards, daughter of the late Texas governor, who is paid nearly a half-million dollars a year for her work defending the surgical dismemberment of unborn children in the furtherance of sexual convenience.

my collages, let me show you them (bernard snowy), Saturday, 15 February 2014 03:33 (four years ago) Permalink

... And You Will Know Her by the Surgical Dismemberment of Unborn Children in the Furtherance of Sexual Convenience

my collages, let me show you them (bernard snowy), Saturday, 15 February 2014 03:34 (four years ago) Permalink

also, I mean, just, huge roffles at these guys scratching their heads all "The ideology of feminists is incoherent—some of them want one thing, but others want this different thing!! Whatta buncha flighty dames!!!!" (You don't need to keep capitalizing 'feminist' — ED.)

my collages, let me show you them (bernard snowy), Saturday, 15 February 2014 03:39 (four years ago) Permalink

"why is it okay for Hillary to call other women in politics 'whiny', but not for me, a white man at a computer, to continue dragging Anita Hill's name through the mud??" *tears flow into bib*

my collages, let me show you them (bernard snowy), Saturday, 15 February 2014 03:44 (four years ago) Permalink

hahahaha

WilliamC, Saturday, 15 February 2014 04:04 (four years ago) Permalink

It’s one thing to be tolerant of what once were known as “alternative lifestyles.” It’s another thing to be asked to celebrate them, as the exuberant mythologizers of Michael Sam and Johnny Weir ask us to do. And it is way beyond the pale to hold forth on any sort of sex life — perhaps apart from self-restraint — as if it’s a form of heroism.

Yet the culture of the professional Left, enthusiastically aided by the establishment media, is going bonkers in pushing active homosexuality (or any one of several exotic variants thereof) as an absolute virtue. One can hardly turn around these days without facing, in fiction or in real life, what amounts to homosexual chic. From the amount of primetime air time afforded to gay Americans, one would think they constitute at least a large minority of the population, rather than the 3 to 5 percent they actually do.

“Not that there’s anything wrong with that,” as Seinfeld wisdom had it. Most Americans assuredly don’t much care what other people do as long, as the saying goes, as they “don’t do it in the street and frighten the horses.” And if the Bible tells us it’s a sin, well, we can leave that issue between the putative sinner and a God famous for both judgment and mercy. Our job, speaking spiritually rather than physically, is to love our neighbor, not from some misguided impulse to charity but instead genuinely, as equals — and to worry about not committing our own particular brands of transgression.

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 24 February 2014 18:24 (four years ago) Permalink

active homosexuality (or any one of several exotic variants thereof)

ooh do tell!

*fans self*

How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 24 February 2014 18:25 (four years ago) Permalink

Steve_Seattle • 33 minutes ago

For liberals, it is an easy step to go from support of fornication, abortion, pornography, and prostitution to support of homosexuality. It costs them nothing, while giving them an opportunity to bash conservatives as bigoted and unenlightened. For that reason alone, the MSM will not soon drop this issue.
But I sometimes wonder how sincere is this liberal celebration of homosexuality. In less-guarded forms of liberalism, such as blue-collar liberalism, you still hear gay jokes and gay epithets, and these typically go unchallenged even if the participants don't care much about gay marriage. And in unguarded moments, liberals such as Alec Baldwin resort to gay epithets when they are angry, or will refer to some conservative as a "closet homosexual."

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 24 February 2014 18:29 (four years ago) Permalink

I am looking forward to crowds of conservatives, milling about, holding crude signs and fervently chanting, "Down with fornication!"

Aimless, Monday, 24 February 2014 19:01 (four years ago) Permalink

For liberals, it is an easy step to go from support of fornication, abortion, pornography, and prostitution to support of homosexuality.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_kYBdM44_J58/Sa3OeSHaArI/AAAAAAAABbU/k2MeHt1WpXE/s400/PornInUtah.JPG

bi-polar uncle (its OK-he's dead) (Phil D.), Monday, 24 February 2014 19:39 (four years ago) Permalink

BOYFRIEND: Honey, did you remember to water the plants on the second floor?
ME: WHATEVER THIS IS, THIS VILE STRATAGEM, IT ISN'T JOURNALISM!

— Jacob Bacharach (@jakebackpack) April 24, 2018

Simon H., Tuesday, 24 April 2018 18:41 (two months ago) Permalink

two weeks pass...

Erickson will never change:

Ummmm, no. I think conservatives should avoid normalizing mental health issues. But never accuse @NRO of being hostile to a broad spectrum of voices. They're probably more open than @TheAtlantic these days. https://t.co/ND58NkbG9F

— Erick Erickson (@EWErickson) May 9, 2018

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 15:41 (two months ago) Permalink

obvious assholic tweet but original article is also hilarious/maddening - look at these assholes desperately trying to run away from an issue that was once central to their whole platform, and pretend like it's so settled that even trying to outlaw conversion therapy is merely "performative." see, we're real reasonable folks over here!

noel gallaghah's high flying burbbhrbhbbhbburbbb (Doctor Casino), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 15:55 (two months ago) Permalink

that article is as compassionate as NRO gets though

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 15:56 (two months ago) Permalink

"there exists broad understanding that homosexual people are unavoidable and common"

𝔠𝔞𝔢𝔨 (caek), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 16:05 (two months ago) Permalink

ha, i was about to highlight that too, caek. what's sad is that this IS as compassionate as NRO gets.

obviously DLC (Karl Malone), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 16:22 (two months ago) Permalink

NRO, august 2016:

Here is the world according to the LGBT Left: Just as there are black and white, there are gay and straight. One’s sexual orientation, like one’s race, is fixed and immutable at birth. The process of “questioning” one’s orientation isn’t a process of deciding but of discovering.

Similarly, when it comes to gender identity, there is “cis” and there is “trans.” A cis person’s gender identity matches the sex they were “assigned” at birth. A trans person — well, a trans person is any one of the fifty-plus other genders on the entirely reputable Facebook spectrum.

This, you see, is science. Anyone who contradicts it — whether relying on ancient, discredited “holy” texts or outdated notions of morality — isn’t just ignorant, but bigoted. And when it comes to bigots, why draw minute moral distinctions? Is there really much difference between a Klan member and a Christian conservative?

i think that last sentence was rhetorical.

obviously DLC (Karl Malone), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 16:25 (two months ago) Permalink

I had started by going back as far as 2003 for lawrence v. texas era material and hoo boy

noel gallaghah's high flying burbbhrbhbbhbburbbb (Doctor Casino), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 16:28 (two months ago) Permalink

The Judeo-Christian model, by contrast, is aspirational, calling on people not to do what they want, but what they should. Admittedly, this path is far easier for some than others, but there has always been some play in the cultural joints. The Left’s response is alluring, but it offers a self-indulgent path down which lies cultural ruin. The LGBT Left is driving us there just as fast as it can depress the gas pedal, but thanks to McHugh and Mayer, we now know they most assuredly are not doing so in the name of “science.”

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 16:30 (two months ago) Permalink

sorry, back to today's article:

Part one of the compromise will be borne by cultural conservatives and traditionalists. It asks for broad tolerance for the reality that transgender men and women exist, and are entitled to basic human dignity, just like everyone else. This does not mean having to morally endorse behavior many may believe runs contrary to God’s plan for a just and healthy society, but it does imply that acts like ostentatiously calling people by pronouns they don’t want, or belittling their personal struggle, are boorish and petty. It means acknowledging that arbitrary discrimination against transgender people is a cruel bigotry like any other.

But part two of the compromise requires sacrifice on the part of progressives, who are currently overplaying their hand in an effort to strong-arm sweeping social change as a flex of their power. There must be a halt in the use of state authority to impose accommodation of transgenderism in a fashion far more totalitarian than is rationally justified. Transgender people constitute a tiny minority of Americans who, in the vast majority of cases, are explicitly eager to opt into the broad two-gender social order our civilization is based around. Tolerance does not necessitate a purge of any and all public manifestations of the gender binary in the name of extreme exceptions to the rule.

wow, FUCK YOU NRO

obviously DLC (Karl Malone), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 16:30 (two months ago) Permalink

"Judeo-Christian" is the fucking worst fake idea

valorous wokelord (silby), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 16:36 (two months ago) Permalink

pic.twitter.com/la9Nf0NNbh

— David Klion (@DavidKlion) May 8, 2018

Simon H., Wednesday, 9 May 2018 18:45 (two months ago) Permalink

No. Normalizing it isn't good, nor what a conservative would do.

— hubris (@Fit_And_Hubris) May 9, 2018

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 18:49 (two months ago) Permalink

The response didn't take long!

Let me lay down my prediction, here. We are not headed toward some civilized modus vivendi but imminent tragedy. In the future, the current psychological theories and surgical enthusiasms associated with this movement will be regarded with open horror.

The beginning of the end will come when a some poor young man, upon reaching the age of majority, decides to sue the deep-pocketed psychologists, and university hospitals that tried to remake him as female when he was a child according to their enlightened theories about his behavior, destroying the function of his sexual organs, depriving him forever of the chance at fatherhood, and condemning him to a life of yet more surgeries. He will show that in this matter and only this matter did it become accepted to recommend treatments that increase the likelihood of suicide. Do you think the settlement figure will be somewhere in the 9-figures? Lately I’m tempted to guess 10. Imagine the new suggested guidelines from malpractice insurers . . .

Until that day, I’m not going to compromise with this movement, anymore than conservatives should have compromised with the eugenicists and their surgeons.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/transgender-issues-conservatives-should-not-compromise/

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 22:20 (two months ago) Permalink

conservatives should have compromised with the eugenicists and their surgeons

I lol'd

Οὖτις, Wednesday, 9 May 2018 22:23 (two months ago) Permalink

I mean, conservatives loved eugenics!

Οὖτις, Wednesday, 9 May 2018 22:23 (two months ago) Permalink

so did progressives tbh

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 22:24 (two months ago) Permalink

it was equal opportunity horseshit

Οὖτις, Wednesday, 9 May 2018 22:25 (two months ago) Permalink

“Depriving [her ] of the chance of fatherhood” lol who gives a shit

valorous wokelord (silby), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 23:11 (two months ago) Permalink

you don't understand, it is very very important that we base public policy decisions on nonsensical hypothetical scenarios

Οὖτις, Wednesday, 9 May 2018 23:15 (two months ago) Permalink

An interesting mistake conservatives make about queer liberation and transfeminism is that they are squishy relativist ideologies. It seems like this guy is the one who wants to argue a premise is bad from a bad consequence.

valorous wokelord (silby), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 23:19 (two months ago) Permalink

This guy isn’t even doing doctrinaire conservatism right, where’s the doctrine, who hires these facile muttonchop bloglords

valorous wokelord (silby), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 23:24 (two months ago) Permalink

surely the proper conservative position is to assert the trans person's responsibility for their own transition and also trial lawyers are thieves

mookieproof, Wednesday, 9 May 2018 23:53 (two months ago) Permalink

The Judeo-Christian model, by contrast, is aspirational, calling on people not to do what they want, but what they should.

like to introduce this fellow to a little thing called ANCIENT GREEK PHILOSOPHY

j., Thursday, 10 May 2018 00:55 (two months ago) Permalink

far more totalitarian than is rationally justified

uh

how much would be???

j., Thursday, 10 May 2018 00:57 (two months ago) Permalink

Degrees of totalitarianism, huh.

Leaghaidh am brón an t-anam bochd (dowd), Thursday, 10 May 2018 10:33 (two months ago) Permalink

four weeks pass...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DfHXIc1UYAAcu-P.jpg

jerkoff.gif

mookieproof, Thursday, 7 June 2018 20:28 (one month ago) Permalink

Jonah?

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 7 June 2018 20:31 (one month ago) Permalink

bingo

mookieproof, Thursday, 7 June 2018 20:37 (one month ago) Permalink

I knew from the ham-scented cargo short emanating from the equivocations.

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 7 June 2018 20:41 (one month ago) Permalink

Apparently Michael Potemra died recently - one of their few writers that I don’t recall ever posting insane bullshit. The commenters hated him, he seemed like a pretty nice guy.

JoeStork, Thursday, 7 June 2018 23:12 (one month ago) Permalink

Probably their only poptimist on staff: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/taking-temperature-american-pop/

JoeStork, Thursday, 7 June 2018 23:23 (one month ago) Permalink

two weeks pass...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dgn5N-_XkAAtUVI.jpg

mookieproof, Tuesday, 26 June 2018 14:16 (three weeks ago) Permalink

LOLry has been wonderful the last week.

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 14:18 (three weeks ago) Permalink

lol

Joe Gargan (dandydonweiner), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 16:46 (three weeks ago) Permalink

Roe is judicially wrought social legislation pretending to the status of constitutional law. It is more adventurous than Miranda and Griswold, other watchwords of judicial activism from its era. It is as much a highhanded attempt to impose a settlement on a hotly contested political question as the abhorrent Dred Scott decision denying the rights of blacks. It is, in short, a travesty that a constitutionalist Supreme Court should excise from its body of work with all due haste.

Roe has been commonly misunderstood since it was handed down in 1973, in part because its supporters have been so determined to obscure its radicalism. It is usually thought that Roe only prohibits bans on abortion in the first trimester, when it effectively forbids them at any time, imposing a pro-abortion regime as sweeping as anywhere in the advanced world.

The confusion arises from the scheme set out in the majority opinion, written by the late Justice Harry Blackmun. In the first trimester, the Court declared, the right to abortion was absolute. In the second, states could regulate it to protect the mother’s health. In the third, states could restrict abortion in theory, but had to allow exceptions to protect the life or health of the mother, defined capaciously in the accompanying case of Doe v. Bolton to include “emotional, psychological, familial” considerations, as well as “the woman’s age.”

Roe struck down 50 state laws and has made it all but impossible to regulate abortion, except in the narrowest circumstances. More to the point, the argument that its particular set of policy preferences is mandated by the Constitution is flatly preposterous.

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 3 July 2018 19:12 (two weeks ago) Permalink

I'm surprised LOLwry didn't quote Ginsberg.

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 3 July 2018 19:12 (two weeks ago) Permalink

have to say I am adamantly pro-choice but yeah the legal reasoning behind Roe has always seemed weak/a bit of a head-scratcher to me

Οὖτις, Tuesday, 3 July 2018 19:17 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Yeah, I'm not against the argument that it's a messy fix that leaves the door open to catastrophic rollbacks.

Mario Meatwagon (Moodles), Tuesday, 3 July 2018 19:18 (two weeks ago) Permalink

I'm not sure how you re-litigate this case (a) with this Congress (b) this Court

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 3 July 2018 19:19 (two weeks ago) Permalink

unsuccessfully!

we'll never get a federal law legalizing abortion, I just don't see the legislative majorities lining up that way. which means this gets back to the states, which means abortion will be legal in CA, NY etc and illegal in huge swathes of the country.

Οὖτις, Tuesday, 3 July 2018 19:21 (two weeks ago) Permalink

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DhL93tLX0AAd9V8.jpg

mookieproof, Tuesday, 3 July 2018 19:25 (two weeks ago) Permalink

ah yes, who could forget the main problem with dred scott - that it attempted to settle one of the outstanding legal questions of its day

This is a total Jeff Porcaro. (Doctor Casino), Tuesday, 3 July 2018 19:26 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Always seeing these fucking cheesedicks pretend they wouldn't have 100% supported the Dred Scott decision at the time it was issued makes me so angry I could bite through rebar.

Eliza D., Tuesday, 3 July 2018 19:47 (two weeks ago) Permalink

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dh7M-5dX4AAZXlN.jpg:small

mookieproof, Thursday, 12 July 2018 18:30 (one week ago) Permalink

when you thrust your kids into a deep wet cave you'd better be prepared to deal with consequences, writes mona charen

look, you’re just gonna get gravy on the baby sometimes 🤷‍♂️ (bizarro gazzara), Thursday, 12 July 2018 18:44 (one week ago) Permalink

Abort the mothers, that'll stop them

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 12 July 2018 18:53 (one week ago) Permalink

you never know, you might abort the next elon musk

the bhagwanadook (symsymsym), Friday, 13 July 2018 02:21 (one week ago) Permalink

Stopped clock!

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 14 July 2018 11:24 (one week ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.