Democrat Party

Obama judge tosses Alaska Senate case
The Justice Department recently sued over Alaska’s questionable Senate election, trying to block the certification of the state’s Senate results if Republican incumbent Dan S. Sullivan loses. Even The New York Times admitted that Democrat Mary Peltola’s campaign recruited Dan J. Sullivan to run as a spoiler candidate to confuse voters and siphon votes from the real Sullivan. Alaska uses a ranked-choice election system, which opens the door to this voter-confusion tactic. On Sunday, however, an Obama-appointed judge rejected the DOJ’s bid, arguing that the Justice Department didn’t explain how it planned to address the issue without compromising ballot secrecy. The DOJ appealed the ruling to the San Francisco-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
 
Stu Farish said:
Schumer's big personal lie: Politicians are infamous for bending the truth, but their lies aren't often complete fiction made up out of whole cloth. Recently, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer was blasted across social media for his repeated references to "the Baileys," whom he describes as a "middle-class couple" from "a suburb on Long Island" who "bought into Reagan Republicanism in 1980." Schumer made extensive notes of the Baileys over the years, including in his book Positively American: Winning Back the Middle-Class Majority One Family at a Time. He even claims, "I have guided my political life through the Baileys." So, who are the Baileys? Well, it turns out they don't actually exist; they are simply a figment of Schumer's imagination. And "Bailey" wasn't even their original name. A former spokesman for Schumer noted that he used to ask his staff, "What would the O'Reillys think?"
Click to expand...
Wtf
 
DSA candidates could be barred from Congress
A “loophole” of sorts in the Constitution may bar Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) members elected to Congress from serving. All elected members must swear an oath to uphold the Constitution before becoming full members of the House or Senate. However, any member-elect can challenge another member-elect’s right to be sworn in if evidence shows the latter would not serve and defend the Constitution while in public office. For any DSA member in either chamber, the evidence is well known. The DSA’s platform includes a call to “draft a new constitution, and create a democratic socialist republic.” Based on that, no DSA member should be sworn into the House or the Senate. Certain lawmakers have suggested that they would invoke the maneuver, which would make for a very interesting January.
 
Stu Farish said:
DSA candidates could be barred from Congress
A “loophole” of sorts in the Constitution may bar Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) members elected to Congress from serving. All elected members must swear an oath to uphold the Constitution before becoming full members of the House or Senate. However, any member-elect can challenge another member-elect’s right to be sworn in if evidence shows the latter would not serve and defend the Constitution while in public office. For any DSA member in either chamber, the evidence is well known. The DSA’s platform includes a call to “draft a new constitution, and create a democratic socialist republic.” Based on that, no DSA member should be sworn into the House or the Senate. Certain lawmakers have suggested that they would invoke the maneuver, which would make for a very interesting January.
Click to expand...
Won't be holding my breath though.....
 
Superior Argument.png
 
Kind of the same mindset we have nationally. We know the government wastes, gives away, and sometimes outright embezzles the money it takes from us in taxes, yet we keep playing along like we're somehow going to vote our way out of it. We know the system is corrupt, or that those who aren't corrupt when they get there eventually figure out how things work. But hey, every election we line up, pick our team, and convince ourselves this time it could be different. Apparently, we're pretty good at recognizing the problem as long as it's somebody else's government.
 
Funny how we focus on which party is wasting our money while overlooking that federal, state, and local governments are all dipping into the same taxpayers' pockets. The money just changes hands a few times before it disappears. Look at DOGE. It started digging into government waste and spending, but what exactly came of all that? Where's the accountability? And remind me, which party controlled the White House, House, and Senate when all this started? But hey, at least we're keeping score for our favorite team. 😂
 
Hell, the government has already determined I'm broken and not quite right in the head, which qualifies me for tax exemptions. You'd think I'd be the one needing to have this explained to me, rather than the one pointing it out. Yet somehow we're expected to believe that same government is perfectly qualified to manage the money it takes from the rest of us. Funny how perspective works. What a world. 😂
 
Heymartay said:
I don’t see republican run cities or states in hock like democrat ones. Not to many republican cities though.
Click to expand...
Erie, PA has been democrat led for as long as i can remember. they raise taxes every year, people complain and go vote for the same people all over again.

dumbest city i have near me.
 
Back
Top