The Real timschochet

I’m going to let you in on something in case you didn’t know it already: When you disagree with me about political issues in this forum, there’s always going to be a lot of folks who will cheer you on. Thats because as a general rule, your political views are a lot more popular around here than mine are. So when we argue you’re always going to get likes, you’re always going to be surrounded by folks who join in your opinion. That doesn’t mean any of them like or respect you. My best guess is that they don’t. Because you’re on “their side”, they’re not going to openly criticize your absurdity and stupidity, but they’re appalled by it. You’re an embarrassment.

Hegseth abruptly canceled all Senate meetings for tomorrow.

Sure, mostly. But in this case you’re talking about a guy who has openly wished for my children to be raped, and for me to be “rounded up”. I think I can make an exception in his case.

This is the sort of typical rebuttal on your part which has established your fully deserved reputation.

Beyond that, I think there is a significant distinction between alcohol and medical treatments.

OK? How does Canada rip us off by 100 billion?

Nicely done except…removing Hardcore’s balls implies that there were some to remove. I highly doubt this.

Well first off the FDA hasn’t banned these drugs so apparently according to them there is no concern about safety. And second, the FDA isn’t supposed to be a political body. I want the FDA making rules and regulations regarding health issues- state legislatures not so much. Finally you missed the main distinction: Tennessee isn’t banning these treatments. They’re only banning them under the age of 18. And that becomes problematic because of the question of parental consent.

The issue involved is actually bigger than transgenderism, from my understanding. When Tennessee made the ban they didn’t ban ALL gender affirming care, only for anyone under the age of 18. However, the plaintiffs here represented by the ACLU are adult parents who have given their permission for these procedures. So the question is whether the state has the right to take away medical procedures only for minors even if adult parents sign off on them. Which is, in my mind, a difficult question, even if I predict the post- Dobbs court will probably rule in Tennessee’s favor. Ironically it would have been more clear if Tennesee had simply made all gender affirming treatment illegal (but I sense that, among most conservatives, there is still a streak of libertarianism that prevents this no matter how opposed they are to trans.)

This sounds like a no-win situation for Captain Kirk.

Your absurd and idiotic scientific views mesh very well with your anti-semitism.

How does Canada rip off the United States to the tune of 100 billion? Can you explain this?

Your suspicion is wrong. First off I have no cognitive dissonance regarding Biden because I’ve never been a fan. I separate his effectiveness as President from all this other crap. Second I’m honestly sick of the Trump corruption stuff too,

The hypocrisy by guys like @Jon_mx, @Patented Phil and others never fails to amaze me. They are willing to buy into any story about Biden’s corruption no matter how flimsy or unproven. Conversely every accusation about Trump is false. The only standard they appear to have to reach these conclusions is that Trump is on their team and Biden is not. Which is why I have become both bored and disgusted by these corruption stories.

That’s correct. Why do you regard this as idiotic?

Why do you find my take idiotic?

It really doesn’t tell me anything else. And honestly no I don’t have an opinion. Lately I’ve been trying to divide political news into two categories: the first category deals with issues that will affect some of us or a lot of us: tariffs, immigration, crime, abortion, even the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East. I’m very much interested in discussing those issues. The other category is basically corruption. Both sides always accuse the other side of having committed actual crimes. Sometimes the charges are genuine; often they are overblown. I’m just not that interested, truly. If Trump does things I like then I will ignore most of this stuff. Same for Biden. My liberal friends have argued with me about this: they honestly believe that Donald Trump has committed numerous crimes and our justice system is meaningless unless he pays the price for them. I see their point but I disagree. The past couple of years have demonstrated that it is virtually impossible to hold a former President to account. But that doesn’t destroy the system, it just makes it meaningless for a former President. So I really want to move on from this stuff. No more court cases. Not for a Trump not for Biden. I really hope there is no new story over the next couple of years, no impeachment, etc. Let’s address our problems.

No idea. It doesn’t matter, he broke his word.

I’m not OK with it. I don’t like the whole pardon power. I think that any connection between the person pardoned and the President , whether it’s family or someone who worked for the President or a donor, etc, ought to be immune from pardons.

Looked it up and apparently you’re wrong: https://www.syracuse.com/living/2022/02/syracuses-first-black-resident-paid-80-for-his-own-freedom-helped-dig-the-erie-canal.html?outputType=amp

Probably true though I’m not much of an expert on the number of black people living in Pennsylvania during that time period. So why do you think that was?

Disappointing because he said he wouldn’t. If he hadn’t pledged not to do it I wouldn’t have a problem.

No you’re wrong and your worn out example of the 50 million dead Russians is really tiresome, because there is no comparison between Affirmative Action and anything the Soviets did. Even to bring it up is just laughable. Let’s take two examples: EXAMPLE ONE A company decides it doesn’t want to have any black employees, so it doesn’t hire any. All it does is hire white people. EXAMPLE TWO A company decides it would like to have some racial diversity and some black employees. So if and when two employees of equal ability are interviewed, one white and one black, it leans towards hiring the black employee. That being said , the vast majority of employees in the company are white and that’s probably not likely to change for years or forever. But the company is actively trying to do SOMETHING, to make an impact. Example One is clearly racism. Example two is not. Can you really not see the difference? You may disagree with example two, you may argue that such a program doesn’t work because it creates both bad results and resentment. Those are reasonable arguments against example two. But it’s not racism. No bigotry or discrimination is intended.

Complete misunderstanding of intentions and facts here. Also you’re going to lose this struggle.

Between your two choices it’s ignorant, in that I honestly believe what I’m writing. I’m not trying to troll you or anyone. @Strike is wrong; affirmative action is not a form of racism. The intent was not to discriminate against whites but to give those of color greater opportunity. Intent is everything. @Maximum Overkill is wrong; the bigotry against Italians and Irish had to do with their ethnicity not their skin color. I’m absolutely right about this. History bears me out.