American Politics: Speaker's Corner

[EuroStralia]

I believe that they can be used for good things.

And what happens to those who do not conform?

They can be free to, though, I believe it won't benefit them.

[Pizza Friday Forever91]

my lawyer has advised me not to speak on the man I have foe'd.

[Necroghastia]

And what happens to those who do not conform?

They can be free to, though, I believe it won't benefit them.

Very Christian of you.

[Dimetrodon Empire]

And what happens to those who do not conform?

They can be free to, though, I believe it won't benefit them.

I'm not in favor of that, but If people voluntary participate in such a program, then fine... I guess.

Though I am more than a bit concerned since many Eugenicists would go a lot further with grotesque results.

[The Black Forrest]

He wore white Gucci boots to a disaster site, he’s not exactly good with intuition and perception

Let's be honest, the boots wore him.

*Puts dollar in jar labeled SNL*

One of these days these boots are gonna walk all over him.

[EuroStralia]

They can be free to, though, I believe it won't benefit them.

Though I am more than a bit concerned since many Eugenicists would go a lot further with grotesque results.

I don't agree with them, I believe in a voluntary eugenics program to benefit humanity that people can opt in or out of if they so choose.

[Dimetrodon Empire]

Though I am more than a bit concerned since many Eugenicists would go a lot further with grotesque results.

I don't agree with them, I believe in a voluntary eugenics program to benefit humanity that people can opt in or out of if they so choose.

Thanks for clarifying that.

I still don't agree, but it's good that you aren't planing on enforcing it on others.

[Celritannia]

https://twitter.com/RightWingWatch/stat ... 47969?s=20

This woman is a flat earther and ran for Senate in Delaware last year and lost in a landslide. She might very well run again. This isn't someone I want anywhere near elected office.

Flat earth is the least of her problems.

She is QAnon.

Reading her Wiki entry, she certainly comes across as a fascist.

[Zurkerx]

The Supreme Court has ruled for the Idaho landowners in the wetlands dispute, weakening the 1972 Clean Water Act:

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday weakened a landmark water pollution law by ruling that an Idaho couple's property does not include wetlands subject to federal oversight under the law.

The ruling, in which all the justices agreed in the outcome but differed on the legal reasoning, concluded that Chantell and Mike Sackett's land does not fall under jurisdiction of the 1972 Clean Water Act, so the couple does not require a federal permit to build on the property. The decision ends a years-long battle between the Sacketts and the federal government and is a victory for conservative groups and business interests opposed to the broad application of the water pollution law.

In reaching its broader legal conclusion, the court ruled on a 5-4 vote in an opinion authored by conservative Justice Samuel Alito that Clean Water Act jurisdiction extends only to wetlands that are "indistinguishable" from larger bodies of water by having a "continuous surface connection."

Kavanaugh was surprisingly the lone Conservative dissent on the broader challenge:

"By narrowing the act's coverage of wetlands to only adjoining wetlands, the court's new test will leave some long-regulated adjacent wetlands no longer covered by the Clean Water Act, with significant repercussions for water quality and flood control throughout the United States," Kavanaugh wrote.

Under the court's new approach, the ability to regulate the levee system on the Mississippi River and effectively oversee the Chesapeake Bay could both be threatened, Kavanaugh said. Levees dividing wetlands from the Mississippi River mean those wetlands could be outside of federal oversight and wetlands vital to the the Chesapeake Bay could be filled in without requiring federal permits, Kavanaugh said.

In a separate opinion, liberal Justice Elena Kagan took aim at the majority for rewriting a statute that Congress had enacted. She compared the ruling with the court's decision last year to limit the scope of the Clean Air Act as part of efforts to combat climate change.

[Ostroeuropa]

"My-my mommy-um my wife" - Governor Ron Desantis, attempting to talk about his wife during his presidential announcement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92R-7ELrwWw


I have nothing further to add.

[Elwher]

The Supreme Court has ruled for the Idaho landowners in the wetlands dispute, weakening the 1972 Clean Water Act:

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday weakened a landmark water pollution law by ruling that an Idaho couple's property does not include wetlands subject to federal oversight under the law.

The ruling, in which all the justices agreed in the outcome but differed on the legal reasoning, concluded that Chantell and Mike Sackett's land does not fall under jurisdiction of the 1972 Clean Water Act, so the couple does not require a federal permit to build on the property. The decision ends a years-long battle between the Sacketts and the federal government and is a victory for conservative groups and business interests opposed to the broad application of the water pollution law.

In reaching its broader legal conclusion, the court ruled on a 5-4 vote in an opinion authored by conservative Justice Samuel Alito that Clean Water Act jurisdiction extends only to wetlands that are "indistinguishable" from larger bodies of water by having a "continuous surface connection."

Kavanaugh was surprisingly the lone Conservative dissent on the broader challenge:

"By narrowing the act's coverage of wetlands to only adjoining wetlands, the court's new test will leave some long-regulated adjacent wetlands no longer covered by the Clean Water Act, with significant repercussions for water quality and flood control throughout the United States," Kavanaugh wrote.

Under the court's new approach, the ability to regulate the levee system on the Mississippi River and effectively oversee the Chesapeake Bay could both be threatened, Kavanaugh said. Levees dividing wetlands from the Mississippi River mean those wetlands could be outside of federal oversight and wetlands vital to the the Chesapeake Bay could be filled in without requiring federal permits, Kavanaugh said.

In a separate opinion, liberal Justice Elena Kagan took aim at the majority for rewriting a statute that Congress had enacted. She compared the ruling with the court's decision last year to limit the scope of the Clean Air Act as part of efforts to combat climate change.

My oh my! People are actually allowed to build a house on property they own.

[Dimetrodon Empire]

The Supreme Court has ruled for the Idaho landowners in the wetlands dispute, weakening the 1972 Clean Water Act:

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday weakened a landmark water pollution law by ruling that an Idaho couple's property does not include wetlands subject to federal oversight under the law.

The ruling, in which all the justices agreed in the outcome but differed on the legal reasoning, concluded that Chantell and Mike Sackett's land does not fall under jurisdiction of the 1972 Clean Water Act, so the couple does not require a federal permit to build on the property. The decision ends a years-long battle between the Sacketts and the federal government and is a victory for conservative groups and business interests opposed to the broad application of the water pollution law.

In reaching its broader legal conclusion, the court ruled on a 5-4 vote in an opinion authored by conservative Justice Samuel Alito that Clean Water Act jurisdiction extends only to wetlands that are "indistinguishable" from larger bodies of water by having a "continuous surface connection."

Kavanaugh was surprisingly the lone Conservative dissent on the broader challenge:

"By narrowing the act's coverage of wetlands to only adjoining wetlands, the court's new test will leave some long-regulated adjacent wetlands no longer covered by the Clean Water Act, with significant repercussions for water quality and flood control throughout the United States," Kavanaugh wrote.

Under the court's new approach, the ability to regulate the levee system on the Mississippi River and effectively oversee the Chesapeake Bay could both be threatened, Kavanaugh said. Levees dividing wetlands from the Mississippi River mean those wetlands could be outside of federal oversight and wetlands vital to the the Chesapeake Bay could be filled in without requiring federal permits, Kavanaugh said.

In a separate opinion, liberal Justice Elena Kagan took aim at the majority for rewriting a statute that Congress had enacted. She compared the ruling with the court's decision last year to limit the scope of the Clean Air Act as part of efforts to combat climate change.

My oh my! People are actually allowed to build a house on property they own.

I think their exclusions go way beyond the situation the couple's property falls under.

Because all the justices supported the couple and believed their property should be excluded. The only dissent was due to the belief that the exclusions are too broad now, and that conservatives just took the opportunity to pretty much unnecessarily defang the law.

[Ifreann]

The Supreme Court has ruled for the Idaho landowners in the wetlands dispute, weakening the 1972 Clean Water Act:

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday weakened a landmark water pollution law by ruling that an Idaho couple's property does not include wetlands subject to federal oversight under the law.

The ruling, in which all the justices agreed in the outcome but differed on the legal reasoning, concluded that Chantell and Mike Sackett's land does not fall under jurisdiction of the 1972 Clean Water Act, so the couple does not require a federal permit to build on the property. The decision ends a years-long battle between the Sacketts and the federal government and is a victory for conservative groups and business interests opposed to the broad application of the water pollution law.

In reaching its broader legal conclusion, the court ruled on a 5-4 vote in an opinion authored by conservative Justice Samuel Alito that Clean Water Act jurisdiction extends only to wetlands that are "indistinguishable" from larger bodies of water by having a "continuous surface connection."

Kavanaugh was surprisingly the lone Conservative dissent on the broader challenge:

"By narrowing the act's coverage of wetlands to only adjoining wetlands, the court's new test will leave some long-regulated adjacent wetlands no longer covered by the Clean Water Act, with significant repercussions for water quality and flood control throughout the United States," Kavanaugh wrote.

Under the court's new approach, the ability to regulate the levee system on the Mississippi River and effectively oversee the Chesapeake Bay could both be threatened, Kavanaugh said. Levees dividing wetlands from the Mississippi River mean those wetlands could be outside of federal oversight and wetlands vital to the the Chesapeake Bay could be filled in without requiring federal permits, Kavanaugh said.

In a separate opinion, liberal Justice Elena Kagan took aim at the majority for rewriting a statute that Congress had enacted. She compared the ruling with the court's decision last year to limit the scope of the Clean Air Act as part of efforts to combat climate change.

My oh my! People are actually allowed to build a house on property they own.

Wild how some people are as good as suicidal in their devotion to property rights.

[Pizza Friday Forever91]

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/25/us/s ... tw-nytimes blah, blah, blah, the supreme court sucks, blah, blah, blah.

[Cannot think of a name]

I guess international trade, economics, military deployments doesn't involve things like logistics.

You don't need to know the shape of the Earth to do those things.

Holy fucking shit, we're at a 'yay team' stage where you guys will twist yourselves into pretzels to defend a flat earther because she wears the proper jersey...that's a level of sad that just can't be measured by modern science.

[Hispida]

Let's be honest, the boots wore him.

*Puts dollar in jar labeled SNL*

One of these days these boots are gonna walk all over him.

only if those boots are made for walking, though.

[San Lumen]

Flat earth is the least of her problems.

She is QAnon.

Reading her Wiki entry, she certainly comes across as a fascist.

She also think mail in ballots are the reason she lost the Senate election.

[Rusozak]

I heard MTG presided over a meeting and got mad when the House wouldn't quiet down, and got a bipartisan laughing at.

[Pizza Friday Forever91]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/oa ... r-AA1bGHdx oath keepers founder and current leader sentenced to 18 years in prison.

[American Legionaries]

You don't need to know the shape of the Earth to do those things.

Holy fucking shit, we're at a 'yay team' stage where you guys will twist yourselves into pretzels to defend a flat earther because she wears the proper jersey...that's a level of sad that just can't be measured by modern science.

Are we pretending that the only differences between candidates are their thoughts on what shape the planet is?

[The Black Forrest]

My oh my! People are actually allowed to build a house on property they own.

Wild how some people are as good as suicidal in their devotion to property rights.

Indeed. He would have a fit over the fire marshal disallowing a land owner on my street from creating his own biofuel in his garage.

The fire marshall said the set up was so gerry rigged it was only a matter of time before it blew. Most likely the fire would have taken out the surrounding houses in the process…..

[Cannot think of a name]

Holy fucking shit, we're at a 'yay team' stage where you guys will twist yourselves into pretzels to defend a flat earther because she wears the proper jersey...that's a level of sad that just can't be measured by modern science.

Are we pretending that the only differences between candidates are their thoughts on what shape the planet is?

Even for you that was desperate.

[Thermodolia]

I mean, why should it make any difference whatsoever?

Id rather not have people who believe in nonsense like flat earth running political parties or running for office.

She’s not running a political party though, she’s a district chair. Meaning the state chair is her boss

[Gravlen]

I heard MTG presided over a meeting and got mad when the House wouldn't quiet down, and got a bipartisan laughing at.

Marjorie Taylor Greene gets laughed at after she, of all people, calls for 'decorum'

[Urkennalaid]

let's be honest, the Right supporting a flat-earther politician is just par for the course of the entirety of Right-Wing history. I can't even be surprised.