Loser left
Comments
-
It's entertaining but shows how lost the left is in regards to what they stand for. The Warren's, Kamala's, Bernie's, Beto's are huge problems. They have no shot against Donald.SFGbob said:I love leftist cat fights.
Pelosi supporting reparations is a mistake. -
The left knows what it stands for. There is the segment of the left that is up front in their beliefs that they are entitled to your labor and there is the group that feels the same way but lies about it.
-
While exploring a run for president in Nevada, Mayor Bill de Blasio endorsed a committee to study reparations for descendants of slaves and then went further — saying that the country needs “a program of actual redistribution” of wealth…
“There’s no question that the issue of reparations has to be taken seriously,” said de Blasio, whose Vegas area barnstorming continues today, stating a clear, public position on the topic for the first time. But, he added, there needs to be a “bigger discussion about income inequality and oppression of other groups including Latinos, Native Americans, Asian and women,” he said at the event organized by the immigrant advocacy group Make the Road.
“I think we’re going to need something bigger even in a way, broader even in a way, then some of the ideas that have been put out there,” he said to the approximately 35 attendees.
“I think a program of actual redistribution which includes much heavier taxes on the wealthy,” he said. -
Touche.SFGbob said:The left knows what it stands for. There is the segment of the left that is up front in their beliefs that they are entitled to your labor and there is the group that feels the same way but lies about it.
-
Link?SFGbob said:While exploring a run for president in Nevada, Mayor Bill de Blasio endorsed a committee to study reparations for descendants of slaves and then went further — saying that the country needs “a program of actual redistribution” of wealth…
“There’s no question that the issue of reparations has to be taken seriously,” said de Blasio, whose Vegas area barnstorming continues today, stating a clear, public position on the topic for the first time. But, he added, there needs to be a “bigger discussion about income inequality and oppression of other groups including Latinos, Native Americans, Asian and women,” he said at the event organized by the immigrant advocacy group Make the Road.
“I think we’re going to need something bigger even in a way, broader even in a way, then some of the ideas that have been put out there,” he said to the approximately 35 attendees.
“I think a program of actual redistribution which includes much heavier taxes on the wealthy,” he said. -
DiBiaso lives a ridiculously wealthy NYC and likely receives massive kickbacks like every NY mayor in history. He can afford to be all uppity about reparations with his Swiss bank accounts brimming.
-
He doesn't "want to" do that. He says that it's one of many ideas to consider when trying to figure out how to depoliticize the Supreme Court. He also says that term limits for justices should be considered, and he's open to a discussion about rotating judges up from the appellate courts.jecornel said:
He wants to expand the supreme court to 15. 10 elected by Congress, the other 5 unanimously voted on by the 10. There is one position I support buddy.allpurpleallgold said:A 10 minute interview where he doesn’t talk about policy once.
Here’s his website- https://www.peteforamerica.com/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMImtiv5d-_4QIVKR6tBh0APQFEEAAYASAAEgJ1nfD_BwE
You can buy shit, you can donate, you can’t learn anything about his policy positions.
What policy positions does he have that you support? -
Well, that was his position when talking with Chris Wallace. He is open to other alternatives.BearsWiin said:
He doesn't "want to" do that. He says that it's one of many ideas to consider when trying to figure out how to depoliticize the Supreme Court. He also says that term limits for justices should be considered, and he's open to a discussion about rotating judges up from the appellate courts.jecornel said:
He wants to expand the supreme court to 15. 10 elected by Congress, the other 5 unanimously voted on by the 10. There is one position I support buddy.allpurpleallgold said:A 10 minute interview where he doesn’t talk about policy once.
Here’s his website- https://www.peteforamerica.com/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMImtiv5d-_4QIVKR6tBh0APQFEEAAYASAAEgJ1nfD_BwE
You can buy shit, you can donate, you can’t learn anything about his policy positions.
What policy positions does he have that you support? -
WALLACE: The Supreme Court, you talk about -- possibly expanding the court from nine justices to 15.jecornel said:
Well, that was his position when talking with Chris Wallace. He is open to other alternatives.BearsWiin said:
He doesn't "want to" do that. He says that it's one of many ideas to consider when trying to figure out how to depoliticize the Supreme Court. He also says that term limits for justices should be considered, and he's open to a discussion about rotating judges up from the appellate courts.jecornel said:
He wants to expand the supreme court to 15. 10 elected by Congress, the other 5 unanimously voted on by the 10. There is one position I support buddy.allpurpleallgold said:A 10 minute interview where he doesn’t talk about policy once.
Here’s his website- https://www.peteforamerica.com/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMImtiv5d-_4QIVKR6tBh0APQFEEAAYASAAEgJ1nfD_BwE
You can buy shit, you can donate, you can’t learn anything about his policy positions.
What policy positions does he have that you support?
BUTTIGIEG: Yes, but it's not just about throwing more justices on the court. What I think we need to do it some kind of structural reform that makes the court less political. We can't go on like this where every time there's a vacancy, there's this apocalyptic ideological battle. So the idea that -- one idea that I think is interesting as, you have 15 members, but only ten of them are appointed in the political fashion. Five of them can only be seated by unanimous agreement of the other ten.
There are other ideas that have been floated too about term limits or about rotating justices up from the appellate bench. I think we should have a national debate about what's appropriate, especially within the framework of the Constitution. But the bottom line is, we've got to make some kind of structural form to depoliticize the Supreme Court. -
The supreme court is a political body and pretending it can be depoliticized is a centrist fantasy. Expand it to 11 justices or impeach Kavanaugh or Thomas. Otherwise every left legislative bill is going to be ruled unconstitutional or neutered like Obamacare was.




