Butch Femme Planet  

Go Back   Butch Femme Planet > POLITICS, CULTURE, NEWS, MEDIA > Politics And Law

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-08-2019, 06:27 PM   #61
BullDog
Infamous Member

How Do You Identify?:
Dominant Stone Butch Daddy
Preferred Pronoun?:
She
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: .
Posts: 5,157
Thanks: 17,583
Thanked 21,820 Times in 4,262 Posts
Rep Power: 21474851
BullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST Reputation
Default

Does anyone have any theories on why Burr subpoenaed Junior? I mean obviously Junior lied and should be questioned again but Burr has been a Trump supporter and Republican of course. Maybe get to him before the House does? Intriguing.
__________________
Love consists in this, that two solitudes protect and touch and greet each other.

- Rainer Maria Rilke
BullDog is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to BullDog For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2019, 08:01 PM   #62
Kätzchen
~*~*~*~*~

How Do You Identify?:
Femme
Relationship Status:
No Thanks: not interested in online dating.
 
Kätzchen's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Under starry skies and moonlit nights
Posts: 12,835
Thanks: 40,315
Thanked 25,299 Times in 7,910 Posts
Rep Power: 21474858
Kätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST Reputation
Default Exhibit A & B: Two articles about Nepotism in T^^^p-land (...)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BullDog View Post
Does anyone have any theories on why Burr subpoenaed Junior? I mean obviously Junior lied and should be questioned again but Burr has been a Trump supporter and Republican of course. Maybe get to him before the House does? Intriguing.
Not sure, but I've always wondered why it seems like T***p is not being held accountable for the massive, in-your-face practice of Nepotism. Which to me, if any other organization or commanding officer of an organization was found to be sh*t deep in Nepotism, they'd be ousted, tried and convicted and be serving time in jail (massive punitive fines, included).

In fact, I have come across news articles by journalists who have been reporting concerns about this very type of thing, by the T***p administration: Nepotism.

Nepotism has a legal definition: "Nepotism means the act of hiring, promoting, or advancing a family member in state government or recommending the hiring, promotion, or advancement of a family member in state government, including initial appointment and transfer to other positions in state government. Laws forbid nepotism in the executive branch."

(definition & citation source: Nepotism Restrictions for State Legislators
http://www.ncsl.org/research/ethics/...trictions.aspx)



Here's an interesting recent article published by Vanity Fair:

How Congress Is Tightening The Trap Around The Trump Kids
(March 21st, 2019; author: Abigail Tracy).


And, here is another article, by NPR, which talks about Nepotism being passed into law by Congress, back in 1967, during the Kennedy era:

NPR: Anti-Nepotism Laws (…..) (sadly, it was published back in 2016, but it brings to front and center, Nepotism practices by T***p, and BTW, it's still a red hot button issue which needs to be publicly addressed. Jared & Ivanka, Don Jr, TP, Sr. etc ).
__________________
Kätzchen
Kätzchen is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Kätzchen For This Useful Post:
Old 05-10-2019, 07:19 AM   #63
dark_crystal
Infamous Member

How Do You Identify?:
jenny
Preferred Pronoun?:
babygirl
Relationship Status:
First Lady of the United SMH
 
dark_crystal's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 5,140
Thanks: 1,438
Thanked 25,228 Times in 4,402 Posts
Rep Power: 21474851
dark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputation
Default

Mother Jones: Michael Cohen Fixed Jerry Falwell Jr.’s Problem. Then the Evangelical Leader Went to Bat for Trump.
Donald Trump’s onetime lawyer and fixer helped line up a crucial endorsement for his boss on the eve of the Iowa caucuses in 2016, securing the support of prominent evangelical Jerry Falwell Jr. According to Reuters, Falwell’s endorsement came months after Cohen had done him a very big solid: Cohen helped Falwell and his wife prevent racy “personal” photos from becoming public.

Cohen, who reported to prison earlier this week to serve a three-year sentence for federal campaign violations and lying to Congress, told comedian Tom Arnold, who surreptitiously recorded the conversation on March 25, that he had prevented someone with compromising photos of the Falwells from releasing them to the public.

Before Falwell officially endorsed Trump, he was featured in a 60-second radio advertisement from Trump’s campaign. Falwell made an appeal to evangelical voters, who were expected to vote for Ted Cruz, by comparing Trump to his father, popular conservative televangelist Jerry Falwell Sr., who founded Liberty University, one of the largest Christian universities in the world. “I see a lot of parallels between my father and Donald Trump,” Falwell says in the ad, which used audio from Falwell’s introduction of Trump at a rally at Liberty University. “He speaks the truth publicly, even if it is uncomfortable for people to hear.”

Falwell continued to support Trump even after the leak of his lewd comments about women in a tape from Access Hollywood, blaming the leak on a conspiracy to harm the Republican candidate. Although he called Trump’s comments “reprehensible,” he did not rescind his endorsement, saying, “We’re all sinners, every one of us. We’ve all done things we wish we hadn’t.”

Falwell has continued to stick by the president in office, even after Trump called white supremacists “very fine people,” and after he began separating children from their parents at the US–Mexico border. In an interview with the Washington Post published on Jan. 1, 2019, Falwell said of Trump, “I can’t imagine him doing anything that’s not good for the country.”

Just this week, Falwell tweeted that Trump should have two years added to his term as “reparations” for Robert Mueller’s investigation.
i know Falwell's shittiness is no suprise to anyone but i am still kinda sick over this, as an Evangelical-adjacent.

Trump never would have won without people like my family. My family are smart, decent people, except for two, and they were extremely happy with Cruz (the "except for two" are actually friends with him and personally delivered Montgomery County to him in his original Senate campaign)

They were all hold-your-nose Trump voters, and i believe they are sincere Christians. They put their trust in their leaders and are now implicated in the family separations, which horrify them, especially my dad, who knows about being an orphan.

To find out now that the leader their leaders trusted acted so cynically, and associated their Lord-- not just their church, but their Lord-- with atrocities that may very well hasten the deaths of millions of people-- all to cover up his likely bisexuality-- just offends me to my core.

I mean, i don't really know day-to-day what my religion is, but even seeing Jesus as a strictly historical figure, it is crazy-making how boldly people warp his legacy and turn it to purposes that would devastate him if he knew. Like, just as a fan and not necessarily a born-again or even a full believer, i still want to be shouting scriptures at these people all day every day, because they are doing the opposite of everything they claim to support.

Like, i understand my parents are adults with their own free will, but they were indoctrinated into obedience and conformity at an age when they were defenseless against indoctrination. My issue is that this obedience and conformity would not be dangerous if their leaders were faithful to the the red-letter (words of Christ) parts of the Bible, which very specifically forbid hypocrisy ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY-NINE TIMES.

But, like, if the Lamb sent to save the world becomes the banner under which the world is destroyed, that is also in line with scripture-- not with the red letters, but with the end times prophecies, which are largely outside the red letters, but which are actually far more popular among Christians?

I guess it is the irony of it all that i can't get past.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
dark_crystal is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to dark_crystal For This Useful Post:
Old 05-11-2019, 08:22 AM   #64
Kätzchen
~*~*~*~*~

How Do You Identify?:
Femme
Relationship Status:
No Thanks: not interested in online dating.
 
Kätzchen's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Under starry skies and moonlit nights
Posts: 12,835
Thanks: 40,315
Thanked 25,299 Times in 7,910 Posts
Rep Power: 21474858
Kätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST ReputationKätzchen Has the BEST Reputation
Unhappy In my own opinion: Democracy vs Dictatorship

On my mind, is how certain legislators in Washington, DC have been saying that our country's crisis is an Constitutional Crisis and I think it is, yet I wish they'd just come out and call it for what it is: That we are witnessing with our own eyes is over 200 years of American Democracy inverting and imploding into an outright explosion of an American Dictatorship.

Democracy is built upon the idea that stipulates that government is a rule ordered by The People and For The People: which means that people choose to how to discuss and implement how society is ordered by the Will of The People. It's a People Choice Model of social order: rule by the people, laws created by and for the people, toleration of all people and not blindly ignoring or segregating people or pitting sectors of people against other people (s). All this to say, that when social order is centered around the will and good of and for the people, then people have a say in what happens, etc. Democracy is a form of rule which is ordered around putting the will and good of the people first.

A Dictatorship is centered upon the idea that one person has absolute power, complete power over a country. Rule by one is commonly known as an dictatorship. A dictator typically up-ends democratic order by up-ending all former democratic methods of social ordering, so that the only order left is the only order they intend to exert upon the people. Dictator's typically remove all ways that anyone can interfere with their process of order, which is order centered upon their will, not the will of the people. Dictators typically appoint their own so-called forms of 'justice' and 'judges' and do so, so that they can re-frame social and legal order so that no one can interfere with their method of rule or process. In a dictatorship, laws favor the dictator, not the people. In a dictatorship, the rights of the people are stripped; same for the economy, too, because the economy is stripped to serve an dictator's purpose -- not for the greater good of the people. Personal freedoms and liberties vanish under a dictatorship.

In short: A dictatorship is one ruler who has absolute power to rule over a Country, or a State. Law and framing of law is reframed to rest in the hands of the dictator, who makes fast decisions -- usually not in the interest of the people, but in their own interest, with no regard for the people or humanity itself. Personal freedoms and personal liabilities are sacrificed in a dictatorship, because an dictatorship serves itself first, with no care or regard or respect for the people.

Democracy is For The People, By The People and Of The People. Power is shared by the people. Decisions are made by and for and of the people in slow ways because democratic process requires thoughtful process with care and respect for others, not just one. Justice in an democracy is safeguarded and preserved; not tossed out or changed or dismantled or upended like one sees in an dictatorship.


If the constitution is created to protect the will of the people, then it is entirely possible to say that American's have an Constitutional Crisis of epic magnitude on hand. Because what I see is the rise of an American Dictator; and a Congress elected by the People, in an outright war against that Dictator, to preserve what is left of Democracy in America.
__________________
Kätzchen
Kätzchen is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Kätzchen For This Useful Post:
Old 05-15-2019, 05:45 AM   #65
dark_crystal
Infamous Member

How Do You Identify?:
jenny
Preferred Pronoun?:
babygirl
Relationship Status:
First Lady of the United SMH
 
dark_crystal's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 5,140
Thanks: 1,438
Thanked 25,228 Times in 4,402 Posts
Rep Power: 21474851
dark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputation
Default

One discussion that has emerged this week, as we watch women's rights be dismantled in Georgia and Alabama, is the hypocrisy pro-lifers sometimes have about fertility clinics (i say "sometimes" because there has been some protest of the destruction of leftover IVF embryos, and the pro-lifers fought hard against stem cells, plus there was the whole George W. Bush snowflake-baby photo op.)

Despite these caveats, it remains the case that you are more likely to see protesters outside planned parenthood than at the IVF place.

When we were tweeting about this over the weekend, my reply was "Because there’s no sex involved. No “sluts” to punish. Doctors created those embryos and lots of the doctors are men doing capitalism"

THEN, last night, I saw this, from a reporter who is covering the legislature's debate in Georgia:

@lyman_brian, reporter for Montgomery Advertiser, on Twitter
Chambliss, responding to the IVF argument from Smitherman, cites a part of the bill that says it applies to a pregnant woman. "The egg in the lab doesn’t apply. It’s not in a woman. She’s not pregnant."

(I wish there was more than a tweet from a reporter, like an actual news article, but "Bryan Lyman" is identified by the paper as covering the legislature, and the Montgomery Advertiser is a venerable paper with a 190-year history)

So, yeah. Someone said the quiet part loud. Life does not begin at conception unless that conception happens through sex. It is not about life, it is about sex.

It is about punishing women for having sex, which is STILL fucked up because they ALSO punish women for saying "no" to sex.

Like, men never stop trying to get you to have sex, and are total psychos when you resist, then they also want to go psycho on the women who do give in and give them what they want?

It just does not make sense. Like, the logical answer is that they are not penalizing women for having sex, they are penalizing women for having sex without giving up their independence. Like, what they are mad at is that women have sex with them but do not become their property by doing so?

That is the only thing that makes sense, BUT, they do not want all of that property. A man is going to seek sex from exponentially more women than he can afford to support. They seek sex from women they would never consider supporting, and they are especially not going to support all of those kids.

Men want LOTS of partners, but they are only going to take responsibility for one, then they want to limit the options of the non-primary partners who have to take responsibility for the results of their insistence on having lots of partners.

It's money, isn't it? Men want a variety of partners, but they would be broke if they had to support them. Best way to avoid that is to put women who could make claims on them in jail.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
dark_crystal is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dark_crystal For This Useful Post:
Old 05-16-2019, 06:59 AM   #66
dark_crystal
Infamous Member

How Do You Identify?:
jenny
Preferred Pronoun?:
babygirl
Relationship Status:
First Lady of the United SMH
 
dark_crystal's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 5,140
Thanks: 1,438
Thanked 25,228 Times in 4,402 Posts
Rep Power: 21474851
dark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputation
Default Still ranting about Christian hypocrites

Quote:
Originally Posted by dark_crystal View Post
Men want LOTS of partners, but they are only going to take responsibility for one, then they want to limit the options of the non-primary partners who have to take responsibility for the results of their insistence on having lots of partners.

It's money, isn't it? Men want a variety of partners, but they would be broke if they had to support them. Best way to avoid that is to put women who could make claims on them in jail.
We now live within a Christianity that places the fight against various kinds of sex above any other fight, although Jesus himself seems to have prized humility above all virtues and deplored hypocrisy among all sins.

One thing he did not spend much time on was any kind of sex. Christians need to leave sex alone. Even if fornication and homsexuality were wrong, their concern with these issues should not extend any further than His did. He mentioned sex twice. He mentioned hypocrisy in 159 verses, and humility in 254--more than any other topic. What would really be the consequences of laying the "biblical" sexual rhetoric on the ground and just backing away? What if they fought hypocrisy and promoted humility instead of fighting promiscuity and promoting heterosexual monogamy?

They do not do this because promoting humility and fighting hypocrisy threatens wealth, while fighting promiscuity and promoting marriage preserves wealth. The Red Letters contain 122 verses against materialism, but humans cannot resist it, so they find a scriptural justification for its continual pursuit. If our culture says that supporting one’s family is a Christian man’s highest calling, this provides an excuse to build wealth.

Pro-life ethics are actually pro-wealth ethics. Family planning gets women out of the home and puts them in competition with men, meaning the wealth pie gets cut into smaller slices. If the women are kept home and the man is encouraged to prove his virtue through how well she is kept, that is a license to ignore everything Jesus said about camels and the eyes of needles.

The thing that prevented me from seeing this for awhile is the fact that men are not capable of monogamy. Like, don’t they see that outlawing abortion means they are all about to get a lot more kids? And that's expensive? I now think 25% of your income is less expensive than economically competing with women. Child support is a loss leader for men.

Further, if supporting one family is virtuous, supporting multiple families can also, eventually, become virtuous. From there it’s a short step to polygamy, which takes even more women out of economic competition AND eliminates the need to pay child support to the state-- if all your co-parents are your legal wives and live in your home, you can dole out money as you see fit.

I saw this tweet last night (@willwilkinson):
The claim that abortion is murder implies that the conditions for women's social, political & economic equality come at an intolerable moral cost. It's no accident this view got traction with conservative Protestants as institutionalized gender hierarchy started to break down.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
dark_crystal is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dark_crystal For This Useful Post:
Old 05-17-2019, 12:03 AM   #67
homoe
Practically Lives Here

How Do You Identify?:
butch
Relationship Status:
Single
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: 30 minute ferry ride from Seattle
Posts: 30,884
Thanks: 16,903
Thanked 25,896 Times in 11,496 Posts
Rep Power: 21474876
homoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputation
Default

Susan Collins has faith Kavanaugh won't uphold Alabama abortion law



I'm thinking Susan Collins must be living in a fool's paradise if she really believes this..........
homoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2019, 05:09 PM   #68
homoe
Practically Lives Here

How Do You Identify?:
butch
Relationship Status:
Single
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: 30 minute ferry ride from Seattle
Posts: 30,884
Thanks: 16,903
Thanked 25,896 Times in 11,496 Posts
Rep Power: 21474876
homoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputationhomoe Has the BEST Reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by homoe View Post
Susan Collins has faith Kavanaugh won't uphold Alabama abortion law



I'm thinking Susan Collins must be living in a fool's paradise if she really believes this..........

I suggest all the females who voted in favor of Kavanaugh pay attention as well, after all, you's are all up for re-election at some point...
homoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2019, 10:14 AM   #69
dark_crystal
Infamous Member

How Do You Identify?:
jenny
Preferred Pronoun?:
babygirl
Relationship Status:
First Lady of the United SMH
 
dark_crystal's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 5,140
Thanks: 1,438
Thanked 25,228 Times in 4,402 Posts
Rep Power: 21474851
dark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputationdark_crystal Has the BEST Reputation
Default

"Australia's unexpected election result is being compared to Brexit and the 2016 US election"
Australia’s Liberal-National Coalition government has returned to power in the 2019 federal election, despite polls consistently predicting victory for the opposition Labor Party. The most surprising result for Labor came from the state of Queensland. Now, many people are comparing the shock result to the 2016 US election and the UK's Brexit referendum, which both defied opinion polls
‘Complete shock’: Australia’s prime minister holds onto power, defying election predictions
The reelection of Morrison’s government will mean that Australia was be much less ambitious in cutting emissions of greenhouse gases. It will also be firmly supportive of U.S.-led efforts to curtain the influence of China and blocking Chinese technology giant Huawei from government contracts.

Morrison was one of the architects of Australia’s tough approach on asylum seekers, which has confined thousands to Pacific Island camps, and is expected to continue with the approach that has been condemned by human rights groups around the world.
This is very bad. All of the biggest nations are in the grip of authoritarians now. We kind of have to hope China fixes climate change unilaterally for its own interests bc US, Australia, and Russia(?*) are not on-board
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
dark_crystal is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:10 AM.


ButchFemmePlanet.com
All information copyright of BFP 2018