Objectively intelligent.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

"Who was going to be fooled by this?" Uh, that would have been Sebby.

Indeed. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, I must be Sebby.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

Yep. Get a majority in the Senate, get the Presidency. Eliminate Filibuster. Get two or four more Senators through DC and Puerto Rico. Expand the Supreme Court to 12, expand judiciary in general. Name expansion bills after McConnell.

Isn’t the problem that a dem Senate eliminated filibuster as to Judicial nominations?

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

Yep. Get a majority in the Senate, get the Presidency. Eliminate Filibuster. Get two or four more Senators through DC and Puerto Rico. Expand the Supreme Court to 12, expand judiciary in general. Name expansion bills after McConnell.

Also, finalize whatever the hell needs to be finalized to get the ERA put in the Constitution. The states are done with their voting.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

"Who was going to be fooled by this?" Uh, that would have been Sebby.

Hook, line, and sinker.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Isn’t the problem that a dem Senate eliminated filibuster as to Judicial nominations?

Is there some world in which Mitch McConnell would have let a Democratic filibuster stand in the way of his filling a Supreme Court seat? What color is the sun there?

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

Also, finalize whatever the hell needs to be finalized to get the ERA put in the Constitution. The states are done with their voting.

Fuck I was in sixth grade when they introduced that. Now my kid is finishing a masters.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Is there some world in which Mitch McConnell would have let a Democratic filibuster stand in the way of his filling a Supreme Court seat? What color is the sun there?

Filibusters were ended how? I’ve seen Mr Smith goes to Washington. Or are you saying if the Dems didn’t blow up the protection McConnel would do it now? You can’t say the words “ the Dems did something wrong” can you?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Hook, line, and sinker.

My position isn’t he wasn’t guilty. It’s that in politics, obstruction is a not a real crime.

Every investigation predicated on political bases, from Clinton to Rostenkowski to Stevens to Trump is a soiled endeavor the target of which deserves exoneration. To argue for conviction is deeply un-American.

Only the strange fucks who think law school was a good idea root for the rule custodians. Innovation is always born of walking outside the lines.

Right now crowds of alleged “anti-American” protestors are driving justice reform by violating laws.

The creative mind bends things. The bore enforces things.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

My position isn’t he wasn’t guilty. It’s that in politics, obstruction is a not a real crime.

Every investigation predicated on political bases, from Clinton to Rostenkowski to Stevens to Trump is a soiled endeavor the target of which deserves exoneration. To argue for conviction is deeply un-American.

Only the strange fucks who think law school was a good idea root for the rule custodians. Innovation is always born of walking outside the lines.

Right now crowds of alleged “anti-American” protestors are driving justice reform by violating laws.

The creative mind bends things. The bore enforces things.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

You're being obtuse. Democrats are the majority, nationally. Republicans have won the popular vote in exactly one presidential election since Mike Dukakis was the Democratic Candidate. Their voters are losing, demographically. Republicans know this, which is why they think every election now is a Flight 93 election.

I’m obtuse? You still think “nationally” is a relevant concept.

Psst... Ya think Coltrane’s joking about blue and red countries out of thin air? The internet is making everything increasingly regional/cultural.

There is no United States of America anymore. It’s a big tent that isn’t holding.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

https://gb-data.nyc3.digitaloceanspa...jpg?1590518589

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

My position isn’t he wasn’t guilty. It’s that in politics, obstruction is a not a real crime.

Because I admire your plucky spirit, I’m going to try to help you understand the two most significant flaws in your argument:

1. Everybody remembers that your position actually was that he wasn’t guilty.

2. Everybody remembers that you’re a liar.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Because I admire your plucky spirit, I’m going to try to help you understand the two most significant flaws in your argument:

1. Everybody remembers that your position actually was that he wasn’t guilty.

2. Everybody remembers that you’re a liar.

I may have argued it that way. In my thinking, all is fair and innocent in politics. (I’ll stipulate I did. I truly don’t recall because what I say to you doesn’t mean shit to me.) It makes no difference. I think obstruction of a political investigation is fine. The investigation is tainted, so a target is excused no matter what he does.

I’d give Clinton back his law license. Guilty or not, it’s frivolous. Only matters to officious opponents like you, and in the case of Clinton, Richard Mellon Scaife. Right, left — all hall monitors.

So again, Ralph, or Cartman, what’s my demerit? Cite me the rule, and how many days detention for refusing to recognize the naive ideal politics should be assiduously policed by opponents starting political witch hunts against each other?

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I may have argued it that way. In my thinking, all is fair and innocent in politics. (I’ll stipulate I did. I truly don’t recall because what I say to you doesn’t mean shit to me.) It makes no difference. I think obstruction of a political investigation is fine. The investigation is tainted, so a target is excused no matter what he does.

I’d give Clinton back his law license. Guilty or not, it’s frivolous. Only matters to officious opponents like you, and in the case of Clinton, Richard Mellon Scaife. Right, left — all hall monitors.

So again, Ralph, or Cartman, what’s my demerit? Cite me the rule, and how many days detention for refusing to recognize the naive ideal politics should be assiduously policed by opponents starting political witch hunts against each other?

Ooh, you’re such a jaded bad boy! Making fun of those nerds! I bet the suburban cocktail party chicks eat that routine up. Do you wear a black leather jacket with a heater tucked behind your ear when you deliver your little speeches?

Your problem is you incorrectly assume that I am engaging you on the substance of your little “all is fair in politics and war” thesis. BORING. Remember how Ty said that debating you is like reading a book review where the reviewer doesn’t talk about the book at all? The title of my book is “Sebastian is Always Wrong. (And then he lies about it.)”