The DeSantis containment thread -- all things DeSantis go here

#2,527
#2,527
NCFisher said:
Whatever piques my curiosity.

So, Disney's property rights have been destroyed because they can't force vaccination on employees, or because FL owes them special status?
Click to expand...
Government retaliation for political speech is still primarily a first amendment issue.

Their property rights have not been “destroyed,” but government expanding its reach into the operations and staffing choices of private businesses is absolutely an erosion of private property.

I wonder when Republicans forgot that…
 
#2,528
#2,528
acd4476 said:
Maybe listening was the only way they could help their child? What if the conversation was, if you don't help me or love me for who I am, I am going to die? Maybe they tried therapy and that's why he said the were ignorant? Maybe they told their child it was a mental illness and that's why he said they were ignorant? We don't know the story so I sure as heck ain't going to judge them.

One of my best friends sons decided to transition last year. I had not a clue until I told them that they seemed off, short, and almost reclusive. At that point the friend explained the situation to me. I didn't ask questions and honestly I don't understand it to this day but then again I haven't had to LIVE it. One of these days I'm going to sit down and ask questions to help me understand. In the end I may never understand but I'll respect my friend and their daughter. If they elected to move to make their child feel safer I wouldn't fault them one bit. We all want the same for our children. A happy, purposeful life.
Click to expand...

Would you feel the same way if they wanted to amputate an arm or a leg?

Before you dismiss that, its becoming a thing as well to feel you are handicapped and want to have surgery to reflect how they identify as.

Many kids do crazy things as they go through "phases". Hormonal manipulation/ genital mutilation is NOT the way to support them. Once they go through that phase and find out eh, what was I thinking then? it is too late to EVER change. Its why we do not recognize minors as capable of signing a legal contract. They are not sufficiently mentally stable to do so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#2,530
#2,530
RockyTop85 said:
Government retaliation for political speech is still primarily a first amendment issue.

Their property rights have not been “destroyed,” but government expanding its reach into the operations and staffing choices of private businesses is absolutely an erosion of private property.

I wonder when Republicans forgot that…
Click to expand...

Not accurate. Here is a summary of what's going on.
 
#2,533
#2,533
scooty_vol said:
Of course you wouldn't. They'd own you in a debate while napping.
Click to expand...

I think that depends on the audience, but I agree that their lack of any obligation to be truthful or ground their responses in reality would be a significant advantage in front of their intended audience of morons.
 
#2,534
#2,534
RockyTop85 said:
I think that depends on the audience, but I agree that their lack of any obligation to be truthful or ground their responses in reality would be a significant advantage in front of their intended audience of morons.
Click to expand...

I guess you would think that having no idea who these guys are.
 
#2,535
#2,535
scooty_vol said:
I guess you would think that having no idea who these guys are.
Click to expand...
They’re infowars spin-offs. Barnes was a regular on infowars, pretty sure Freiheit is/was as well. Barnes represented Alex Jones in the litigation that Jones lost spectacularly. Barnes got fired after helping to screw that litigation up and then he and Freiheit did at least some commentary about it after the fact, which was posted here and all of which was complete horse ****.

If it were just that, I’d say he’s just one of those people who can’t admit when he ****ed up and Freiheit was his ride-or-die. However, the next time I saw them posted here he was presenting absurdly aggressive and sometimes discredited legal theories as if they were settled law re: the mar-a-lago search warrant. It was laughably dishonest analysis that was so bad that Trump’s own lawyers didn’t even present it in court and the 11th Circuit didn’t mention it before dropkicking the case, twice, with opinions that clearly showed Barnes, Freiheit, and those who were taken in by them were completely unhinged.

My conclusion is that they’re like night school law degree Johnathon Turley. They do slanted, trash, dishonest legal analysis that is intended purely to tell supremely stupid people what they want to hear. Then they move on to the next shiny object before reality squats and ***** all over their analysis.

Frankly, I’m ashamed that I know that much about them, and will actually feel better about myself if you can show any evidence that there’s more to know about them, but I’m not optimistic. They exist solely to leech off of the dumbest mother****ers on the planet. Congratulations on making it into that esteemed category, the competition is fierce.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#2,536
#2,536
RockyTop85 said:
They’re infowars spin-offs. Barnes was a regular on infowars, pretty sure Freiheit is/was as well. Barnes represented Alex Jones in the litigation that Jones lost spectacularly. Barnes got fired after helping to screw that litigation up and then he and Freiheit did at least some commentary about it after the fact, which was posted here and all of which was complete horse ****.

If it were just that, I’d say he’s just one of those people who can’t admit when he ****ed up and Freiheit was his ride-or-die. However, the next time I saw them posted here he was presenting absurdly aggressive and sometimes discredited legal theories as if they were settled law re: the mar-a-lago search warrant. It was laughably dishonest analysis that was so bad that Trump’s own lawyers didn’t even present it in court and the 11th Circuit didn’t mention it before dropkicking the case, twice, with opinions that clearly showed Barnes, Freiheit, and those who were taken in by them were completely unhinged.

My conclusion is that they’re like night school law degree Johnathon Turley. They do slanted, trash, dishonest legal analysis that is intended purely to tell supremely stupid people what they want to hear. Then they move on to the next shiny object before reality squats and ***** all over their analysis.

Frankly, I’m ashamed that I know that much about them, and will actually feel better about myself if you can show any evidence that there’s more to know about them, but I’m not optimistic. They exist solely to leech off of the dumbest mother****ers on the planet. Congratulations on making it into that esteemed category, the competition is fierce.
Click to expand...

Sorry, you're as off as you can be. Barns is quite the lawyer. His results speaks for himself. You clearly get your legal news from msnbc and mother jones.
 
#2,538
#2,538
RockyTop85 said:
Government retaliation for political speech is still primarily a first amendment issue.

Their property rights have not been “destroyed,” but government expanding its reach into the operations and staffing choices of private businesses is absolutely an erosion of private property.

I wonder when Republicans forgot that…
Click to expand...
must have gotten confused due to all of the Covid operational and staffing choices the government could unjustly do.
 
#2,541
#2,541
BowlBrother85 said:
So does the Build Back Better Act .... that was legislation passed to address the long overdue rebuild of American infrastructure. That was another Trump 2016 campaign pledge which went unfulfilled, even though Republicans had control of both chambers of Congress from January of 2017 to January of 2019.
Click to expand...
LOL So tell us all, what has been built back better as a result of this legislation?
 
#2,542
#2,542
BowlBrother85 said:
Donald Trump was a non-interventionist, who was especially averse to friction with Russia. Hell ... Trump would have probably blamed Russia's further incursion into the Ukraine on China.
Click to expand...
irrelevant speculation. It doesn't change the fact that Putin didn't invade until Puddinhead was holding the reins.
 
#2,544
#2,544
lawgator1 said:
There's no way Trump would have taken a tough approach to Putin. Putin would have complimented Trump til the cows cane home and fed his ego, then convinced him it was a short term skirmish to replace the government of Ukraine and Trump would have bought all of it.
Click to expand...
LOL Your TDS is showing again.
 
#2,545
#2,545
SpaceCoastVol said:
LOL So tell us all, what has been built back better as a result of this legislation?
Click to expand...
6 months in, President Biden's infrastructure plan has 4,300 projects

^^^ This article was from a year ago, so the projects will be in various states of development by now.

What Projects are Under Way as Part of the U.S. Infrastructure Bill?

^^^ This was from last November.

How the Infrastructure Bill Will Affect the Economy | U.S. Bank

During the 2016 Presidential Election Campaign, Trump pledged that his time as President would stand out, much as Eisenhower's does, for improvements made to the country's infrastructure. Despite Republicans having control of both chambers of Congress during his first two years in office, this never came to pass. Infrastructure was never addressed.

I believe that this was because of Trump's shortcomings as a leader, and as a person. He only wanted projects to be undertaken that could be completed during his time in office ... so he could take full credit for them before he left office. That will always be at the top of Trump's agenda - being able to take credit.
 
#2,546
#2,546
SpaceCoastVol said:
irrelevant speculation. It doesn't change the fact that Putin didn't invade until Puddinhead was holding the reins.
Click to expand...
Nothing changes the fact that Trump carried water for Putin for 4 years ... frequently siding with his denial of cyber-aggression, even over the conclusions of his own hand-picked Secretary of State, and his Attorney General.
 
#2,549
#2,549
BowlBrother85 said:
6 months in, President Biden's infrastructure plan has 4,300 projects

^^^ This article was from a year ago, so the projects will be in various states of development by now.

What Projects are Under Way as Part of the U.S. Infrastructure Bill?

^^^ This was from last November.

How the Infrastructure Bill Will Affect the Economy | U.S. Bank

During the 2016 Presidential Election Campaign, Trump pledged that his time as President would stand out, much as Eisenhower's does, for improvements made to the country's infrastructure. Despite Republicans having control of both chambers of Congress during his first two years in office, this never came to pass. Infrastructure was never addressed.

I believe that this was because of Trump's shortcomings as a leader, and as a person. He only wanted projects to be undertaken that could be completed during his time in office ... so he could take full credit for them before he left office. That will always be at the top of Trump's agenda - being able to take credit.
Click to expand...
What will Biden's bipartisan infrastructure bill do?

I just added up about $400B for actual infrastructure. Where is the other $800B going?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top