South Attempts to Rise Again - Gets Smacked Down

[Dove]

Holidork, as the price of airplane glue and brown paper bags begin to rise significantly what impact do you think this will have on your current budgetary constraints considering you're too much of a loser to own your own car and you need teeth to chew a steak?

Asking for a friend

I like how he just decides himself what the "conservative" stance on immigration is and tries to tell US what our own stance is because HE wants to dictate everyone.

He clearly hates the leftwing open borders madness and recognizes it's horrible and a human rights offense .....but rather than calling out and opposing his shitty leftard team, he just goes full blown delusional and assigns open borders to conservatives as some additional delusional reason to hate "cons".

Now that didnt work out he is gonna pull some desperate and moronic mental gymnastics so he can still try to look smart

Pathetic. They are all genuinely intellectually lazy, low info retards who are convinced they are these super smart elites but they dont even know who stands for what. They've just been brainwashed to hate "cOnZ" and they dont even have any real reasons.

If their "side" directly said the Constitution was racist and evil.....these people would be fighting it and smearing everyone else. They are dumb mindless guard dogs of the establishment.

This delusional twat H supports government force and coercion of vaccines and claims to be a "true liberal" while arguing from a collectivism POV for authoritarianism.

It has to be mental illness. Cluster B personality traits are so in your face with a lot of them.

 

[Oerdin]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Georgia conservatives fail in bid to reinstitute field slavery.

Feds bust 'modern-day slavery' ring amid new immigration enforcement effort


Two dozen people were indicted in Georgia last month on charges of smuggling Mexican and Central American immigrants to the United States and forcing them to live in camps and work on farms in the state in what authorities say was an illegal enterprise akin to “modern-day slavery.”

Named “Operation Blooming Onion,” the yearslong probe brought together multiple federal agencies to investigate a “transnational criminal organization” that allegedly engaged in human trafficking, visa fraud, forced labor, mail fraud, money laundering and other crimes that earned the collaborators more than $200 million.

The collaborators of the ring are accused of taking advantage of and defrauding the federal visa program for guest farmworkers, known as H-2A, to bring immigrant workers from Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras and other countries to the United States.

At least two workers died under the working conditions, another was repeatedly raped, while others were kidnapped and threatened with death, according to the allegations in the indictment. Workers were also forced to work at gunpoint, the court documents say, earning 20 cents for each bucket of onions they dug up with their hands. Some were sold to farms in other states.


The defendants face charges that can carry up to a life sentence.

People who are enslaving them in this country should be put to death. That would send the message needed to be sent.

If I’ve learned anything while living in a border lining state, it’s that the Mexican cartel cannot be taken down. They stop one, and another cartel has already taken over in its place.

You can certainly harm the cartels by cracking down hard at the borders. If no illegals are getting across then that revenue source dries up. The same goes with drugs.

 

[Oerdin]

You people act like when democrats are in office they don’t appoint Supreme Court justices

I thought the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barret was fair but not Brett Kavanaugh. The Republicans refused to appoint a well qualified nominee by then President Barack Obama to replace Antonio Scalia.

So yes, his appointment would qualify as 'court stacking'

Nope. Court stacking specifically means intentionally expanding the number of justices on the court in order to create a partisan majority. Like what FDR tried and failed to do and what Democrats have spent most of this year trying to do but fortunately failing. The Senate simply refusing to confirm a nominee is the constitution working as designed.

 

[Biggie Smiles]

You people act like when democrats are in office they don’t appoint Supreme Court justices

I thought the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barret was fair but not Brett Kavanaugh. The Republicans refused to appoint a well qualified nominee by then President Barack Obama to replace Antonio Scalia.

So yes, his appointment would qualify as 'court stacking'

First off you're a fucking retard who hasn't the slightest clue what the fuck you are talking about.

Both appointments were fair and well within the guidelines set forth in the constitution. There is no "court stacking" as you morons like to suggest when a president has a perfectly justifiable reason to fill a supreme court vacancy. And that evil witch finally dying and going to hell where she belongs is a perfectly justified reason to replace that rodent piece of filth with an upstanding human being.

One can only hope that when Trump is reelected in 2024, that fucking Oak looking weback bandit sloth Sotamayor has a freak accident where a fucking asteroid traveling at many thousands of miles an hour collides with her residence, incinerating her and everyone in her household instantly, so that there is no doubt in anyone's mind this was an act of God.

 

[Joe]

You people act like when democrats are in office they don’t appoint Supreme Court justices

I thought the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barret was fair but not Brett Kavanaugh. The Republicans refused to appoint a well qualified nominee by then President Barack Obama to replace Antonio Scalia.

So yes, his appointment would qualify as 'court stacking'

Nope. Court stacking specifically means intentionally expanding the number of justices on the court in order to create a partisan majority. Like what FDR tried and failed to do and what Democrats have spent most of this year trying to do but fortunately failing. The Senate simply refusing to confirm a nominee is the constitution working as designed.

Whatever.

In the case of Ruth Bader Ginseng - she screwed the Democrats by staying on the Supreme Court far too long. She could have stepped down during Obama's 1st term but selfishly chose not to therby creating the 6-3 Conservative majority. Had she done so it would still be 5-4. And she had cancer then too.. I think that's why the US should get rid of lifetime appointments and reduce the maximum retirement age to 75 as many other countries have done.

 

[Biggie Smiles]

You people act like when democrats are in office they don’t appoint Supreme Court justices

I thought the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barret was fair but not Brett Kavanaugh. The Republicans refused to appoint a well qualified nominee by then President Barack Obama to replace Antonio Scalia.

So yes, his appointment would qualify as 'court stacking'

Nope. Court stacking specifically means intentionally expanding the number of justices on the court in order to create a partisan majority. Like what FDR tried and failed to do and what Democrats have spent most of this year trying to do but fortunately failing. The Senate simply refusing to confirm a nominee is the constitution working as designed.

Whatever.

In the case of Ruth Bader Ginseng - she screwed the Democrats by staying on the Supreme Court far too long. She could have stepped down during Obama's 1st term but selfishly chose not to therby creating the 6-3 Conservative majority. Had she done so it would still be 5-4. And she had cancer then too.. I think that's why the US should get rid of lifetime appointments and reduce the maximum retirement age to 75 as many other countries have done.

I bet you don't even realize why a supreme court justice is a lifetime appointment do you?

you clueless neanderthal

 

[Joe]

You people act like when democrats are in office they don’t appoint Supreme Court justices

I thought the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barret was fair but not Brett Kavanaugh. The Republicans refused to appoint a well qualified nominee by then President Barack Obama to replace Antonio Scalia.

So yes, his appointment would qualify as 'court stacking'

Nope. Court stacking specifically means intentionally expanding the number of justices on the court in order to create a partisan majority. Like what FDR tried and failed to do and what Democrats have spent most of this year trying to do but fortunately failing. The Senate simply refusing to confirm a nominee is the constitution working as designed.

Whatever.

In the case of Ruth Bader Ginseng - she screwed the Democrats by staying on the Supreme Court far too long. She could have stepped down during Obama's 1st term but selfishly chose not to therby creating the 6-3 Conservative majority. Had she done so it would still be 5-4. And she had cancer then too.. I think that's why the US should get rid of lifetime appointments and reduce the maximum retirement age to 75 as many other countries have done.

I bet you don't even realize why a supreme court justice is a lifetime appointment do you?

you clueless neanderthal

But I've read in recent years of calls in your country for making it a term as opposed to lifetime appointments.

Canada the Supreme Court Justice can only sit on the court til age 75.

Ginseng was 87 when she died and a successor was chosen. She was clearly too old and in poor health at the time.

She already had 20 years on the court and was 75 when Obama became President. She should have stepped down then.

G is a prime example of someone who stays on way too long at the expense of the greater good.

 

[Biggie Smiles]

But I've read in recent years of calls in your country for making it a term as opposed to lifetime appointments.

Canada the Supreme Court Justice can only sit on the court til age 75.

Ginseng was 87 when she died and a successor was chosen. She was clearly too old and in poor health at the time.

She already had 20 years on the court and was 75 when Obama became President. She should have stepped down then.

G is a prime example of someone who stays on way too long at the expense of the greater good.

You've heard that from people who are too stupid to understand why it is a life time appointment in the first place

Since when was Ginsburg ever concerned with the greater good?

 

[Joe]

But I've read in recent years of calls in your country for making it a term as opposed to lifetime appointments.

Canada the Supreme Court Justice can only sit on the court til age 75.

Ginseng was 87 when she died and a successor was chosen. She was clearly too old and in poor health at the time.

She already had 20 years on the court and was 75 when Obama became President. She should have stepped down then.

G is a prime example of someone who stays on way too long at the expense of the greater good.

You've heard that from people who are too stupid to understand why it is a life time appointment in the first place

Since when was Ginsburg ever concerned with the greater good?

Many Democrats pressured Ginseng to step down early in Obama's 1st term but she stubbornly chose not to. She like others was determined to stay til the bitter end.

I guess the perks were too get ta let go, eh? Gold star medical plan, no need to practice real law ever again, a guaranteed 6 figure income for life, getting chauffeured to work in a bullet proof limousine every day, 24/7 security in a gated community, etc.

Nice way ta go out eh.

That's why judges should get the shove at 75. So they don't get too comfy and use the bench as a privleged retirement home Bigly.

 

[Biggie Smiles]

And thankfuly she dropped dead and went to hell during Trump’s presidency

 

[Dove]

You people act like when democrats are in office they don’t appoint Supreme Court justices

I thought the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barret was fair but not Brett Kavanaugh. The Republicans refused to appoint a well qualified nominee by then President Barack Obama to replace Antonio Scalia.

So yes, his appointment would qualify as 'court stacking'

Nope. Court stacking specifically means intentionally expanding the number of justices on the court in order to create a partisan majority. Like what FDR tried and failed to do and what Democrats have spent most of this year trying to do but fortunately failing. The Senate simply refusing to confirm a nominee is the constitution working as designed.

Whatever.

In the case of Ruth Bader Ginseng - she screwed the Democrats by staying on the Supreme Court far too long. She could have stepped down during Obama's 1st term but selfishly chose not to therby creating the 6-3 Conservative majority. Had she done so it would still be 5-4. And she had cancer then too.. I think that's why the US should get rid of lifetime appointments and reduce the maximum retirement age to 75 as many other countries have done.

I bet you don't even realize why a supreme court justice is a lifetime appointment do you?

you clueless neanderthal

The problem is they view the SCOTUS as a political tool. That's why it matters to them what judge is on what side of politics.

Which shows us loud and clear the democrats should never ever get appoint justices because they want activists on the bench.

 

[Biggie Smiles]

You people act like when democrats are in office they don’t appoint Supreme Court justices

I thought the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barret was fair but not Brett Kavanaugh. The Republicans refused to appoint a well qualified nominee by then President Barack Obama to replace Antonio Scalia.

So yes, his appointment would qualify as 'court stacking'

Nope. Court stacking specifically means intentionally expanding the number of justices on the court in order to create a partisan majority. Like what FDR tried and failed to do and what Democrats have spent most of this year trying to do but fortunately failing. The Senate simply refusing to confirm a nominee is the constitution working as designed.

Whatever.

In the case of Ruth Bader Ginseng - she screwed the Democrats by staying on the Supreme Court far too long. She could have stepped down during Obama's 1st term but selfishly chose not to therby creating the 6-3 Conservative majority. Had she done so it would still be 5-4. And she had cancer then too.. I think that's why the US should get rid of lifetime appointments and reduce the maximum retirement age to 75 as many other countries have done.

I bet you don't even realize why a supreme court justice is a lifetime appointment do you?

you clueless neanderthal

The problem is they view the SCOTUS as a political tool. That's why it matters to them what judge is on what side of politics.

Which shows us loud and clear the democrats should never ever get appoint justices because they want activists on the bench.

They want to legislate from the bench which is retardex as it invalidates the whole purpose of the bench

I cannot believe functioning adults are too stupid to understand this

 

[Joe]

You people act like when democrats are in office they don’t appoint Supreme Court justices

I thought the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barret was fair but not Brett Kavanaugh. The Republicans refused to appoint a well qualified nominee by then President Barack Obama to replace Antonio Scalia.

So yes, his appointment would qualify as 'court stacking'

Nope. Court stacking specifically means intentionally expanding the number of justices on the court in order to create a partisan majority. Like what FDR tried and failed to do and what Democrats have spent most of this year trying to do but fortunately failing. The Senate simply refusing to confirm a nominee is the constitution working as designed.

Whatever.

In the case of Ruth Bader Ginseng - she screwed the Democrats by staying on the Supreme Court far too long. She could have stepped down during Obama's 1st term but selfishly chose not to therby creating the 6-3 Conservative majority. Had she done so it would still be 5-4. And she had cancer then too.. I think that's why the US should get rid of lifetime appointments and reduce the maximum retirement age to 75 as many other countries have done.

I bet you don't even realize why a supreme court justice is a lifetime appointment do you?

you clueless neanderthal

The problem is they view the SCOTUS as a political tool. That's why it matters to them what judge is on what side of politics.

Which shows us loud and clear the democrats should never ever get appoint justices because they want activists on the bench.

But don't you think that Conservative judges in your country are just as guilty of judicial activism Dovey?

 

[Oerdin]

By definition they are mostly strict construction issues. It has always, and I do mean always, leftist judges who claim they can imagine certain other rights are there even though they are never once mentioned in the text. That is pretty much exclusively a left wing disorder.

 

[Lokmar]

You people act like when democrats are in office they don’t appoint Supreme Court justices

I thought the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barret was fair but not Brett Kavanaugh. The Republicans refused to appoint a well qualified nominee by then President Barack Obama to replace Antonio Scalia.

So yes, his appointment would qualify as 'court stacking'

Nope. Court stacking specifically means intentionally expanding the number of justices on the court in order to create a partisan majority. Like what FDR tried and failed to do and what Democrats have spent most of this year trying to do but fortunately failing. The Senate simply refusing to confirm a nominee is the constitution working as designed.

Whatever.

In the case of Ruth Bader Ginseng - she screwed the Democrats by staying on the Supreme Court far too long. She could have stepped down during Obama's 1st term but selfishly chose not to therby creating the 6-3 Conservative majority. Had she done so it would still be 5-4. And she had cancer then too.. I think that's why the US should get rid of lifetime appointments and reduce the maximum retirement age to 75 as many other countries have done.

I bet you don't even realize why a supreme court justice is a lifetime appointment do you?

you clueless neanderthal

The problem is they view the SCOTUS as a political tool. That's why it matters to them what judge is on what side of politics.

Which shows us loud and clear the democrats should never ever get appoint justices because they want activists on the bench.

But don't you think that Conservative judges in your country are just as guilty of judicial activism Dovey?

The country has moved continuously LEFT until Saint Trump, fuktard.

 

[Dove]

You people act like when democrats are in office they don’t appoint Supreme Court justices

I thought the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barret was fair but not Brett Kavanaugh. The Republicans refused to appoint a well qualified nominee by then President Barack Obama to replace Antonio Scalia.

So yes, his appointment would qualify as 'court stacking'

Nope. Court stacking specifically means intentionally expanding the number of justices on the court in order to create a partisan majority. Like what FDR tried and failed to do and what Democrats have spent most of this year trying to do but fortunately failing. The Senate simply refusing to confirm a nominee is the constitution working as designed.

Whatever.

In the case of Ruth Bader Ginseng - she screwed the Democrats by staying on the Supreme Court far too long. She could have stepped down during Obama's 1st term but selfishly chose not to therby creating the 6-3 Conservative majority. Had she done so it would still be 5-4. And she had cancer then too.. I think that's why the US should get rid of lifetime appointments and reduce the maximum retirement age to 75 as many other countries have done.

I bet you don't even realize why a supreme court justice is a lifetime appointment do you?

you clueless neanderthal

The problem is they view the SCOTUS as a political tool. That's why it matters to them what judge is on what side of politics.

Which shows us loud and clear the democrats should never ever get appoint justices because they want activists on the bench.

They want to legislate from the bench which is retardex as it invalidates the whole purpose of the bench

I cannot believe functioning adults are too stupid to understand this

Believe it. And fear it.

 

[Dove]

You people act like when democrats are in office they don’t appoint Supreme Court justices

I thought the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barret was fair but not Brett Kavanaugh. The Republicans refused to appoint a well qualified nominee by then President Barack Obama to replace Antonio Scalia.

So yes, his appointment would qualify as 'court stacking'

Nope. Court stacking specifically means intentionally expanding the number of justices on the court in order to create a partisan majority. Like what FDR tried and failed to do and what Democrats have spent most of this year trying to do but fortunately failing. The Senate simply refusing to confirm a nominee is the constitution working as designed.

Whatever.

In the case of Ruth Bader Ginseng - she screwed the Democrats by staying on the Supreme Court far too long. She could have stepped down during Obama's 1st term but selfishly chose not to therby creating the 6-3 Conservative majority. Had she done so it would still be 5-4. And she had cancer then too.. I think that's why the US should get rid of lifetime appointments and reduce the maximum retirement age to 75 as many other countries have done.

I bet you don't even realize why a supreme court justice is a lifetime appointment do you?

you clueless neanderthal

The problem is they view the SCOTUS as a political tool. That's why it matters to them what judge is on what side of politics.

Which shows us loud and clear the democrats should never ever get appoint justices because they want activists on the bench.

But don't you think that Conservative judges in your country are just as guilty of judicial activism Dovey?

No, I dont. Which one of the many reasons I stopped supporting Democrats.

The biggest reason people dont want leftwing SCOTUS is because they will start legislating from the bench and forcing a NEW ideology on the country.

Wanting to preserve the liberal order of the country and the Constitution isnt activism. Its protection.