372
Biden calls for supreme court reforms including 18-year justice term limits
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2024
372 points (98.9% liked)
politics
31007 readers
2544 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
It'll still be nice to get the "small government" party saying in writing that they support the presidency having unlimited power.
They've been saying that for decades. It's not been the Democrats pushing the "unitary executive" theory.
What kind of thinking is this? That it's better to lose as long as you have the moral high ground? Maybe that thinking works for little league, but not when healthcare, women's rights, and climate are on the line.
"Sure the fascist uprising happened in record time, but at least we put it on the record that the fascists have occasional issues with intellectual honesty!"
Only in the liberal mindset does intellectual honesty come with more primacy than physically protecting people who are actually vulnerable.
The fact that it appears we are 1 or 2 years away from door-to-door gestapo visits, and liberals are still circle jerking about their epic, pragmatic, civil, patriotic, "play by the rules" mindset, means we are most likely doomed.
I don't know what got your goat but you're projecting an enormous amount of non sequitur into my very innocuous remark.
I was pointing out one itty bitty silver lining of an effort that's doomed to fail. I never suggested that we should be satisfied with that silver lining and call it a day.
I'm fully supportive of all actions, including those outside the realm of politics, to defend against fascism. But that's no reason to stop taking political actions, even those which we estimate to be doomed.
Porque no los dos?