Welcome to Thunderdome

https://apnews.com/article/idaho-aborti ... 372885ad5a

Marshall has not prosecuted anyone for providing abortion assistance, but he has made statements saying that his office would “look at” groups that provide help.

“Attorney General Marshall will continue to vigorously enforce Alabama laws protecting unborn life which include the Human Life Protection Act. That includes abortion providers conspiring to violate the Act,” Marshall’s office said in an emailed response to the lawsuit. His office did not respond to an email asking to clarify if actions such as providing financial assistance could be prosecuted.

It exaggerates, but there's some truth.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2024 11:31 am

Leisher wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2024 10:37 am There is no "they". It's her and she very clearly does.

Weird that the title was plural, and now you're saying it's not. Despite the fact that it still is.

Just so we're clear, one had better not pluralize something when it clearly shouldn't be, and that's a crossed line worth arguing over, but "exaggerating" that cops are going to illegally pull over women and make them pee on a stick is ok?

That is one hell of a moving bar...

Leisher wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 3:53 pm Just so we're clear, one had better not pluralize something when it clearly shouldn't be, and that's a crossed line worth arguing over, but "exaggerating" that cops are going to illegally pull over women and make them pee on a stick is ok?

My positions are consistent. "The hosts of The View" when really it was "1 host, immediately corrected by 2 other hosts" is grossly misrepresentational. The entire conclusion of the video was "oh yeah, that's bullshit" when the headline was "THEY ARE ALL CRAZY"

A few conservative states are definitely exploring ways to punish people leaving the state, or people helping them, for abortion. Thus, actual basis in fact. Despite the pee stick part.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 4:01 pm My positions are consistent.

I think you know I was just having some fun with you and perhaps you're trolling me back, but before you think I'm attacking you, let me 'splain. Generally, yes, you are consistent. I think we all are and when opinions have changed or we're undecided we've spoken up about it. No one should want to be so rigid that their opinions cannot change.

On that note, I disagree with your explanation. Sorry.

Calling out the entire cast of The View is absolutely understandable considering that show is nothing but left wing propaganda. Anytime they have anyone right leaning on they either throw them off the show, pester them until they leave, or these same hosts storm off/refuse to participate. There is no one credible on the show. They all say bigoted, biased, and/or ignorant shit on a day to day basis. Thus, actual basis in fact.

Showing a women getting pulled over without cause, then being forced to piss on a stick before being arrested is grossly misrepresentational, and that's being nice about it. There are multiple Constitutional violations taking place in that ad and so far you haven't shown me anyone saying anything remotely like "We're going to pull you over and commit unlawful search and seizures. Fuck the Constitution."

And that's not to say that politicians from both parties don't try to circumvent the Constitution on a daily basis. They do and they will continue to do so for as long as we have one. Which probably won't be much longer.

Women have different personalities from one day to the next. It's science.

Therefore, one woman could be technically referred to in the plural.

Leisher wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 4:40 pm Calling out the entire cast of The View is absolutely understandable considering that show is nothing but left wing propaganda.

You're generalizing something whereas the statement was specific, and incorrect. You're not evaluating this situation on its own, but rather getting distracted by your prior conclusion.

Leisher wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 4:40 pm Showing a women getting pulled over without cause, then being forced to piss on a stick before being arrested is grossly misrepresentational, and that's being nice about it.

It's at least symbolically accurate, as opposed to the other statement.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 5:26 pm You're generalizing something whereas the statement was specific, and incorrect. You're not evaluating this situation on its own, but rather getting distracted by your prior conclusion.

No sir. I was just explaining how I can understand someone generalizing all the hosts of that show when one says something stupid because it happens daily. Pick a host and you can find YouTube compilations of them saying racist, sexist, and/or bigoted shit.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 5:26 pm It's at least symbolically accurate, as opposed to the other statement.

It's blatant fear mongering. And while I'll give you symbolically accurate, it doesn't excuse or justify it.

Leisher wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 5:37 pm It's blatant fear mongering. And while I'll give you symbolically accurate, it doesn't excuse or justify it.

Not really arguing against that.

Fetterman comes out against lab grown meat.
Fetterman has no patience for the anti-Israel idiots.

Get this guy on the fucking presidential ballot already!

Leisher wrote: ↑Fri May 03, 2024 11:17 am Fetterman comes out against lab grown meat.

This law is dumb. You can agree not to eat it, or buy it, or maybe have it labeled, but prohibition is wrong.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Fri May 03, 2024 11:20 am You can agree not to eat it, or buy it, or maybe have it labeled, but prohibition is wrong.

Agree, except for the "maybe have it labeled". It absolutely MUST be labeled.

House Ds unanimously vote against Equal Representation Act.

It passed the House, but is expected to be killed by Ds in the Senate.

What's the bill do? Adds a citizenship question to the census so illegals would not be counted for electoral means.

Leisher wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 3:35 pm What's the bill do? Adds a citizenship question to the census so illegals would not be counted for electoral means.

The Constitutions says "count whole persons." It doesn't say "citizens"

A bill won't matter.

Does the constitution apply to people who aren't Americans, or is the authority of the Constitution dependent on geography?

GORDON wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 4:02 pm Does the constitution apply to people who aren't Americans, or is the authority of the Constitution dependent on geography?

The Constitution applies to the United States.

So, geography.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 4:00 pm

Leisher wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 3:35 pm What's the bill do? Adds a citizenship question to the census so illegals would not be counted for electoral means.

The Constitutions says "count whole persons." It doesn't say "citizens"

A bill won't matter.

Then here's hoping Trump actually follows up with his mass deportation plan when he wins while sitting in prison.

Leisher wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 9:55 pm

TheCatt wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 4:00 pm

Leisher wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 3:35 pm What's the bill do? Adds a citizenship question to the census so illegals would not be counted for electoral means.

The Constitutions says "count whole persons." It doesn't say "citizens"

A bill won't matter.

Then here's hoping Trump actually follows up with his mass deportation plan when he wins while sitting in prison.

Just like he ddid the first time?