OP
OP
DaveC
Blue Crack Addict
i prefer it when people actually do what they promised to do but hey you do you bro.
US Politics XXVI: Sorry you're not Canada
- Thread starter DaveC
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
I know right bro? It's not like there isn't still 40 days left or anything
OP
OP
DaveC
Blue Crack Addict
lmao if you actually think he's going to spend 800 million dollars in the next month then i have some fine bridges over here that i'd like to show you.
lol I know it's not like he spent just shy of $200 million in the last two weeks of just she of half a billion in a month on his own campaign. It's completely unreasonable, bro!
LuckyNumber7
Blue Crack Addict
I made a generous wager. Half of what he talked up. I gave you a shot at being right and also a shot at a bottle of whiskey.
Quit bein all nose up about how he’s spending money because it ain’t a billion and that’s what he claimed.
Quit bein all nose up about how he’s spending money because it ain’t a billion and that’s what he claimed.
OP
OP
DaveC
Blue Crack Addict
the money he spent on his own pointless failed campaign doesn't count in that amount that he pledged. but i can see that you're prepared to die on the hill of a 60x billionaire's right to cheap out so whatever.
lol yea ok.
ehrmagad this guyighy only spend 600 well placed millions and helped reverse republican attempts at suppressing the votes on a key swing state but if you wanna die on that hill bra to ahead.
cool story, bro
ehrmagad this guyighy only spend 600 well placed millions and helped reverse republican attempts at suppressing the votes on a key swing state but if you wanna die on that hill bra to ahead.
cool story, bro
LuckyNumber7
Blue Crack Addict
Hell no you don’t get to claim money he spent on his own campaign.
The only surprising thing is that he didn’t nominate her earlier and instead went with a drunken frat boy.
womanfish
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
To really fuck with Trump's head, he should dump 50 million or so into Ohio. 
Vlad n U 2
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2008
- Messages
- 28,386
Good memories of the start of the year where a few here were more sympathetic to him than they were to Bernie.
Yea I'm not.
[emoji1782]
Vlad n U 2
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2008
- Messages
- 28,386
Bluer White
New Yorker
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
Yes that's true. Might have been that women folk problem. Just not as smart as any drunken frat boy.
https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1309672368076402688?s=21
I’m amazed that Trump can just openly state how he’s going to try and steal this election.
He’s going to go to court to stop votes from being counted because the ballots didn’t arrive on Election Day.
They’ll find one case of voter fraud (and it’ll probably be a trump voter who committed it) and that’s enough to stop the count! Whoever is in the lead on Tuesday night wins!!
It’s why we need a massive in person turnout. But understandable that during a pandemic it’s smarter and safer to vote by mail
I’m amazed that Trump can just openly state how he’s going to try and steal this election.
He’s going to go to court to stop votes from being counted because the ballots didn’t arrive on Election Day.
They’ll find one case of voter fraud (and it’ll probably be a trump voter who committed it) and that’s enough to stop the count! Whoever is in the lead on Tuesday night wins!!
It’s why we need a massive in person turnout. But understandable that during a pandemic it’s smarter and safer to vote by mail
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
It's literally Handmaid's Tale. I couldn't even continue watching that show because it was so depressing.
Newsweek.com
Former members of a self-described charismatic Christian community known as People of Praise have revealed details about the role of women within the group—of which potential Supreme Court justice pick Amy Coney Barrett is allegedly a member.
Barrett, a federal appeals court judge, is considered the frontrunner to be nominated by President Donald Trump to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died last week aged 87.
A devout Roman Catholic and mother of seven, 48-year-old Barrett and her husband, Jesse Barrett, are both reportedly members of People of Praise. The group does not publicly list its members and Barrett herself has never commented on the matter.
Barrett, through a spokesperson at the Notre Dame Law School where she is on the faculty, declined to comment for this piece.
The group, founded in 1971 in South Bend, Indiana, says it has a community of 1,700 members in 22 cities across the U.S., Canada and the Caribbean. In 2014, Pope Francis appointed one of its members, Peter Leslie Smith, the auxiliary bishop of Portland, Oregon.
With speculation swirling about who Trump will announce as his nominee for the Supreme Court on Saturday, people who were once part of the tight-knit community spoke to Newsweek, discussing how its leaders dictate almost every aspect of members' lives, including who they marry and how they raise their children.
People of Praise, the Catholic League and constitutional scholar Ilya Shapiro also spoke to Newsweek about allegations surrounding the group and speculation over Barrett's involvement, which are included further down in the article.
Coral Anika Theill, a former member of a branch of the group in Corvallis, Oregon, told Newsweek that women are expected to be "absolutely obedient" to their husbands and the men in the group. According to Theill, those who aren't are "shamed, shunned, humiliated."
Members of the People of Praise are also assigned advisers of the same sex, called a "head" for men and a "handmaid" for women—until the latter phrase apparently became too charged following the release of Hulu's television adaption of Margaret Atwood's dystopian novel The Handmaid's Tale. The novel portrays a totalitarian, theocratic regime where women are considered property of the state.
The term "handmaid" is rooted in the Bible. Mary, the mother of Jesus, described herself as "handmaid of the Lord." But the negative connotations from the show prompted People of Praise to start referring to female advisors as "women leaders," according to reports.
For a married women, her husband is her "head"—he makes the decisions for the family and serves as her moral compass. "Total discipline is imposed upon those who submit themselves to their head," said Theill, "and this includes submission of your will, your desire, your actions."
Regarding the allegations by Theill, Sean Connelly, communications director for People of Praise, told Newsweek: "Neither the men nor women leaders in the People of Praise Corvallis branch are aware that there were ever any allegations of physical or mental abuse concerning Ms. Thiell and her husband at the time.
"Her charges of the mistreatment of women, insularity, lack of privacy and shunning are contradictory to our beliefs and our practices as a community."
Tim Kaiser, who grew up in the People of Praise and left aged 18 in 1997, told Newsweek, "the submission to your husband bit is not negotiable or figurative.
"In the case of a woman, her 'head' is her husband—that's who is in charge of her. That is the person who is supposed to be making all of her moral decisions and taking responsibility for the condition of her soul. It's really creepy, but that's the idea."
"Subordinate role of women to men"
Members of People of Praise also make a lifelong vow of loyalty in a ceremony, which Theill and Kaiser both described as akin to a marriage contract.
Kaiser said his father moved their family from Ohio to South Bend, Indiana in order to join the community before he was born.
When he went off to college, he decided to cut ties before he was asked to make the lifelong commitment to the group, known as a covenant, because he had grown disillusioned with the level of authority the group exerts on members and its insular nature. Close family members remain part of the community.
"It depends on how well they think they've groomed you to some extent on whether or not they push you to join or whether they just let you go," he said. "I was let go fairly easy."
Those who do make the commitment find it tricky to leave, Kaiser says. "They don't let members go," he said. "In order to sever ties with the community, you have to mutually... essentially you and the community have to agree to break the covenant. They have to release you and they are very reluctant to do that."
Theill says she was forced to attend regular women's meetings, but never agreed to go through with the ceremony where she swore her loyalty. Likening the oath to "wedding vows," Theill said members "are taught that if they break that vow, their soul is in jeopardy."
Adrian J. Reimers, one of the founding members of People of Praise, later wrote a book criticizing the group, called Not Reliable Guides. In it, he explained the "sacrifice represented by making the covenant of the People of Praise is taken seriously."
One "lays down his life" according to the requirements of the community, he wrote, by "faithfully attending men's and women's groups, submitting to one's head willingly, performing four hours of service to the community every week, contributing 5-13 percent of one's gross income to the community, and so on."
The "subordinate role of women to men is a fundamental cultural premise" for the group, he wrote.
Reimers was forced out after 13 years for raising concerns about how much authority group leaders had over the lives of members as well as the group's deviation from Roman Catholic doctrine, according to The New York Times.
The final straw, Reimers said, came when he had objected to instructions given to his wife by a handmaid. When he relayed his concerns to his head, he was told his wife was "trying to undermine God's plan for her life."
In Not Reliable Guides, Reimers described how a married woman in the People of Praise is "expected always to reflect the fact that she is under her husband's authority."
"This goes beyond an acknowledgment that the husband is 'head of the home' or head of the family; he is, in fact, her personal pastoral head. Whatever she does requires at least his tacit approval," he wrote.
He continues: "The wife, as a good member of the community, has a prima facie obligation to obey her husband as the bearer of God's will. In practice, this means that the two do not—indeed, cannot—relate as equals."
"I had no rights"
Both Theill and Kaiser recalled how members of the People of Praise were urged to marry within the community, a practice common in many religious groups.
Kaiser recalls getting an invitation to his childhood best friend's wedding, years after he had left. "He had decided to join up and then a couple of years after that, I was invited to his wedding. And I asked, 'Oh, who are you marrying?' [It was] this woman from one of the other branches. 'How do you know her?' He's like, 'Well, I don't really.' He'd met her twice and he had been told this would be a good partner for him.
"He sounded like he was very enthusiastic about it and having met her once or twice, it was wonderful and it was a great fit, and now they were getting married, but the whole thing came across very arranged marriage... which is a common theme that I've heard from other people who have left, that there's pressure for these arranged marriages."
Kaiser said he "didn't want to paint the People of Praise as being, in all cases, bad."
"They do wonderful things, as far as they see them, but there are just some really problematic parts of their power structure and their core beliefs," he said.
Members were "all supposed to stay in the People of Praise group and marry other children of People of Praise members," Theill said.
She grew up in a Lutheran family and said she was pressured to convert to Catholicism after she married a man who a few years later signed up to the People of Praise community in Corvallis, Oregon, when she was 24.
"I had to join the group because my husband expected full obedience of me," Theill told Newsweek. She says the five years she spent in the community, between 1979 and 1984, traumatized her.
"There's just a lot of rules. As a wife, I couldn't even see my doctor alone. I couldn't see my family unless they gave me permission. I couldn't talk to neighbors, I couldn't see or talk to friends," she said.
Theill, who wrote a blog post called "I lived the Handmaid's Tale" last year, added: "The People of Praise community use coercive control, isolation, intimidation tactics. Their cult ideology is based on domination and the submission of women. I had no rights.
"I suffered two miscarriages back to back, I wasn't allowed contraceptives, that was something that I had no control of. I had no privacy. I lived like The Handmaid's Tale, and it was very painful."
Theill adds that some members "act happy, like it's wonderful—it's the way they express their obedience to God."
But she says: "It is not healthy. And I found many women that were not healthy. Some women had babies through their 40s. It didn't matter what their health was. It didn't matter. It was just the way of life."
"Conservative, authoritarian, hierarchical, and patriarchal"
Theill refers to the group as a "charismatic dictatorship" and a "cult."
"There was a lot of abuse and shaming, shunning, intimidation, bullying going on," she said. "You did not say no, or there was retaliation."
She said the "handmaids"—now called "women leaders"—were often cruel and abused their power. Theill said even if she had just given birth, she could still be called upon to, for instance, clean someone's house. "It didn't matter if you wanted to or not, it didn't matter what your health was, that's what you were supposed to do. And they really didn't consider your health, they did not care. You were just told what to do."
She recalled how she was once forced to sit on the floor in the hallway outside a community meeting "as a form of humiliation."
People were "fine with that," she said. "Many of them passed me and they just knew that that was a part of being in the community."
She added: "I was called mentally ill because I questioned the leaders. I think they used me as an example to show what you do when you do not submit to them. Men would stop by my home unexpectedly to check to make sure I was doing my chores."
Theill says although she was part of a People of Praise community in Oregon, different branches operate similarly.
"There's a lot of isolation, we are exposed to all these communities interacting with one another, on rare occasions with the outside world. They have their own schools and the kids are supposed to marry one another," she said.
Theill said she was a trained court reporter and a pilot but "she was not allowed to work, nor was I ever allowed to fly a plane again."
After she questioned leaders, she recalled how she was made to attend special meetings with a leader from South Bend. "They used the leaders from the Vancouver People of Praise branch to come and stay in our home if my ex-husband was ever gone," she added.
When Theill eventually left, she said lost access to her eight children, including her nursing baby.
"Even when you leave, it's just a very highly traumatic experience. For five years, I watched people's children, I took them meals, I helped them when they were ill, you know, I was friends with them and then all of a sudden because I walked out... I was no longer a human being to them."
Thomas Csordas, a professor of anthropology at the University of California, San Diego, who has researched and written about charismatic Christian communities, told Newsweek in an email that "People of Praise and other Catholic Charismatic covenant communities are indeed conservative, authoritarian, hierarchical, and patriarchal."
"That being said, they are obviously not so patriarchal that they deny women the right to have careers such as lawyer or judge," he added.
"They think the Bible says men should be leaders; originally women could have some authority over other women but not in the community as a whole, though my impression is that this has moderated somewhat over time. Women are subordinate to their husbands in the sense that the man has the final word, but not that the woman must be silent."
In response to the allegations made by former members, Connelly told Newsweek that women are not mistreated and instead take on "a variety of critical leadership roles."
"Mistreatment of women, insularity, control and shunning are contradictory to our beliefs and our practices as a community," he said.
"Contrary to what has been alleged, women take on a variety of critical leadership roles within People of Praise, including serving as heads of several of our schools and directing ministries within our community.
"In the People of Praise we live by the Gospel of Jesus Christ which recognizes that men and women share a fundamental equality as bearers of God's image and sons and daughters of God. We value independent thinking, and teach it in our schools. We practice honor and respect for one another in everything we do," Connelly added.
Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, America's largest Catholic civil rights organization, told Newsweek that by looking at Barrett's career, he is doubtful she is subservient to either her husband or to People of Praise.
"I have no idea whether there is any 'teaching' on women being subservient to men, but from everything I have learned about Amy Coney Barrett, she is not subservient to anyone, save for Christ," he said.
Speaking to Newsweek about Amy Coney Barrett's involvement with People of Praise, constitutional scholar Ilya Shapiro said that "it's not appropriate to cast aspersions on nominees because they're religious."
"It's fair game to ask whether and how someone's religious views might affect a nominee's jurisprudence—the Democrats did this poorly at Barrett's Seventh Circuit confirmation hearing—but being religious and being an impartial jurist aren't mutually exclusive," Shapiro added.
Newsweek.com
Former members of a self-described charismatic Christian community known as People of Praise have revealed details about the role of women within the group—of which potential Supreme Court justice pick Amy Coney Barrett is allegedly a member.
Barrett, a federal appeals court judge, is considered the frontrunner to be nominated by President Donald Trump to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died last week aged 87.
A devout Roman Catholic and mother of seven, 48-year-old Barrett and her husband, Jesse Barrett, are both reportedly members of People of Praise. The group does not publicly list its members and Barrett herself has never commented on the matter.
Barrett, through a spokesperson at the Notre Dame Law School where she is on the faculty, declined to comment for this piece.
The group, founded in 1971 in South Bend, Indiana, says it has a community of 1,700 members in 22 cities across the U.S., Canada and the Caribbean. In 2014, Pope Francis appointed one of its members, Peter Leslie Smith, the auxiliary bishop of Portland, Oregon.
With speculation swirling about who Trump will announce as his nominee for the Supreme Court on Saturday, people who were once part of the tight-knit community spoke to Newsweek, discussing how its leaders dictate almost every aspect of members' lives, including who they marry and how they raise their children.
People of Praise, the Catholic League and constitutional scholar Ilya Shapiro also spoke to Newsweek about allegations surrounding the group and speculation over Barrett's involvement, which are included further down in the article.
Coral Anika Theill, a former member of a branch of the group in Corvallis, Oregon, told Newsweek that women are expected to be "absolutely obedient" to their husbands and the men in the group. According to Theill, those who aren't are "shamed, shunned, humiliated."
Members of the People of Praise are also assigned advisers of the same sex, called a "head" for men and a "handmaid" for women—until the latter phrase apparently became too charged following the release of Hulu's television adaption of Margaret Atwood's dystopian novel The Handmaid's Tale. The novel portrays a totalitarian, theocratic regime where women are considered property of the state.
The term "handmaid" is rooted in the Bible. Mary, the mother of Jesus, described herself as "handmaid of the Lord." But the negative connotations from the show prompted People of Praise to start referring to female advisors as "women leaders," according to reports.
For a married women, her husband is her "head"—he makes the decisions for the family and serves as her moral compass. "Total discipline is imposed upon those who submit themselves to their head," said Theill, "and this includes submission of your will, your desire, your actions."
Regarding the allegations by Theill, Sean Connelly, communications director for People of Praise, told Newsweek: "Neither the men nor women leaders in the People of Praise Corvallis branch are aware that there were ever any allegations of physical or mental abuse concerning Ms. Thiell and her husband at the time.
"Her charges of the mistreatment of women, insularity, lack of privacy and shunning are contradictory to our beliefs and our practices as a community."
Tim Kaiser, who grew up in the People of Praise and left aged 18 in 1997, told Newsweek, "the submission to your husband bit is not negotiable or figurative.
"In the case of a woman, her 'head' is her husband—that's who is in charge of her. That is the person who is supposed to be making all of her moral decisions and taking responsibility for the condition of her soul. It's really creepy, but that's the idea."
"Subordinate role of women to men"
Members of People of Praise also make a lifelong vow of loyalty in a ceremony, which Theill and Kaiser both described as akin to a marriage contract.
Kaiser said his father moved their family from Ohio to South Bend, Indiana in order to join the community before he was born.
When he went off to college, he decided to cut ties before he was asked to make the lifelong commitment to the group, known as a covenant, because he had grown disillusioned with the level of authority the group exerts on members and its insular nature. Close family members remain part of the community.
"It depends on how well they think they've groomed you to some extent on whether or not they push you to join or whether they just let you go," he said. "I was let go fairly easy."
Those who do make the commitment find it tricky to leave, Kaiser says. "They don't let members go," he said. "In order to sever ties with the community, you have to mutually... essentially you and the community have to agree to break the covenant. They have to release you and they are very reluctant to do that."
Theill says she was forced to attend regular women's meetings, but never agreed to go through with the ceremony where she swore her loyalty. Likening the oath to "wedding vows," Theill said members "are taught that if they break that vow, their soul is in jeopardy."
Adrian J. Reimers, one of the founding members of People of Praise, later wrote a book criticizing the group, called Not Reliable Guides. In it, he explained the "sacrifice represented by making the covenant of the People of Praise is taken seriously."
One "lays down his life" according to the requirements of the community, he wrote, by "faithfully attending men's and women's groups, submitting to one's head willingly, performing four hours of service to the community every week, contributing 5-13 percent of one's gross income to the community, and so on."
The "subordinate role of women to men is a fundamental cultural premise" for the group, he wrote.
Reimers was forced out after 13 years for raising concerns about how much authority group leaders had over the lives of members as well as the group's deviation from Roman Catholic doctrine, according to The New York Times.
The final straw, Reimers said, came when he had objected to instructions given to his wife by a handmaid. When he relayed his concerns to his head, he was told his wife was "trying to undermine God's plan for her life."
In Not Reliable Guides, Reimers described how a married woman in the People of Praise is "expected always to reflect the fact that she is under her husband's authority."
"This goes beyond an acknowledgment that the husband is 'head of the home' or head of the family; he is, in fact, her personal pastoral head. Whatever she does requires at least his tacit approval," he wrote.
He continues: "The wife, as a good member of the community, has a prima facie obligation to obey her husband as the bearer of God's will. In practice, this means that the two do not—indeed, cannot—relate as equals."
"I had no rights"
Both Theill and Kaiser recalled how members of the People of Praise were urged to marry within the community, a practice common in many religious groups.
Kaiser recalls getting an invitation to his childhood best friend's wedding, years after he had left. "He had decided to join up and then a couple of years after that, I was invited to his wedding. And I asked, 'Oh, who are you marrying?' [It was] this woman from one of the other branches. 'How do you know her?' He's like, 'Well, I don't really.' He'd met her twice and he had been told this would be a good partner for him.
"He sounded like he was very enthusiastic about it and having met her once or twice, it was wonderful and it was a great fit, and now they were getting married, but the whole thing came across very arranged marriage... which is a common theme that I've heard from other people who have left, that there's pressure for these arranged marriages."
Kaiser said he "didn't want to paint the People of Praise as being, in all cases, bad."
"They do wonderful things, as far as they see them, but there are just some really problematic parts of their power structure and their core beliefs," he said.
Members were "all supposed to stay in the People of Praise group and marry other children of People of Praise members," Theill said.
She grew up in a Lutheran family and said she was pressured to convert to Catholicism after she married a man who a few years later signed up to the People of Praise community in Corvallis, Oregon, when she was 24.
"I had to join the group because my husband expected full obedience of me," Theill told Newsweek. She says the five years she spent in the community, between 1979 and 1984, traumatized her.
"There's just a lot of rules. As a wife, I couldn't even see my doctor alone. I couldn't see my family unless they gave me permission. I couldn't talk to neighbors, I couldn't see or talk to friends," she said.
Theill, who wrote a blog post called "I lived the Handmaid's Tale" last year, added: "The People of Praise community use coercive control, isolation, intimidation tactics. Their cult ideology is based on domination and the submission of women. I had no rights.
"I suffered two miscarriages back to back, I wasn't allowed contraceptives, that was something that I had no control of. I had no privacy. I lived like The Handmaid's Tale, and it was very painful."
Theill adds that some members "act happy, like it's wonderful—it's the way they express their obedience to God."
But she says: "It is not healthy. And I found many women that were not healthy. Some women had babies through their 40s. It didn't matter what their health was. It didn't matter. It was just the way of life."
"Conservative, authoritarian, hierarchical, and patriarchal"
Theill refers to the group as a "charismatic dictatorship" and a "cult."
"There was a lot of abuse and shaming, shunning, intimidation, bullying going on," she said. "You did not say no, or there was retaliation."
She said the "handmaids"—now called "women leaders"—were often cruel and abused their power. Theill said even if she had just given birth, she could still be called upon to, for instance, clean someone's house. "It didn't matter if you wanted to or not, it didn't matter what your health was, that's what you were supposed to do. And they really didn't consider your health, they did not care. You were just told what to do."
She recalled how she was once forced to sit on the floor in the hallway outside a community meeting "as a form of humiliation."
People were "fine with that," she said. "Many of them passed me and they just knew that that was a part of being in the community."
She added: "I was called mentally ill because I questioned the leaders. I think they used me as an example to show what you do when you do not submit to them. Men would stop by my home unexpectedly to check to make sure I was doing my chores."
Theill says although she was part of a People of Praise community in Oregon, different branches operate similarly.
"There's a lot of isolation, we are exposed to all these communities interacting with one another, on rare occasions with the outside world. They have their own schools and the kids are supposed to marry one another," she said.
Theill said she was a trained court reporter and a pilot but "she was not allowed to work, nor was I ever allowed to fly a plane again."
After she questioned leaders, she recalled how she was made to attend special meetings with a leader from South Bend. "They used the leaders from the Vancouver People of Praise branch to come and stay in our home if my ex-husband was ever gone," she added.
When Theill eventually left, she said lost access to her eight children, including her nursing baby.
"Even when you leave, it's just a very highly traumatic experience. For five years, I watched people's children, I took them meals, I helped them when they were ill, you know, I was friends with them and then all of a sudden because I walked out... I was no longer a human being to them."
Thomas Csordas, a professor of anthropology at the University of California, San Diego, who has researched and written about charismatic Christian communities, told Newsweek in an email that "People of Praise and other Catholic Charismatic covenant communities are indeed conservative, authoritarian, hierarchical, and patriarchal."
"That being said, they are obviously not so patriarchal that they deny women the right to have careers such as lawyer or judge," he added.
"They think the Bible says men should be leaders; originally women could have some authority over other women but not in the community as a whole, though my impression is that this has moderated somewhat over time. Women are subordinate to their husbands in the sense that the man has the final word, but not that the woman must be silent."
In response to the allegations made by former members, Connelly told Newsweek that women are not mistreated and instead take on "a variety of critical leadership roles."
"Mistreatment of women, insularity, control and shunning are contradictory to our beliefs and our practices as a community," he said.
"Contrary to what has been alleged, women take on a variety of critical leadership roles within People of Praise, including serving as heads of several of our schools and directing ministries within our community.
"In the People of Praise we live by the Gospel of Jesus Christ which recognizes that men and women share a fundamental equality as bearers of God's image and sons and daughters of God. We value independent thinking, and teach it in our schools. We practice honor and respect for one another in everything we do," Connelly added.
Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, America's largest Catholic civil rights organization, told Newsweek that by looking at Barrett's career, he is doubtful she is subservient to either her husband or to People of Praise.
"I have no idea whether there is any 'teaching' on women being subservient to men, but from everything I have learned about Amy Coney Barrett, she is not subservient to anyone, save for Christ," he said.
Speaking to Newsweek about Amy Coney Barrett's involvement with People of Praise, constitutional scholar Ilya Shapiro said that "it's not appropriate to cast aspersions on nominees because they're religious."
"It's fair game to ask whether and how someone's religious views might affect a nominee's jurisprudence—the Democrats did this poorly at Barrett's Seventh Circuit confirmation hearing—but being religious and being an impartial jurist aren't mutually exclusive," Shapiro added.
womanfish
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Post your - what should be asked at the debate Tuesday night, questions.
I'll start.
Mr. Trump. On several campaign stops in the midwest these past two weeks, you made a statement that in MI, "I got you so many damn auto plants, so many" and also said at a later stop that there were 5 new Japanese auto plants that will be coming to MI . Yet only one plant that hasn't opened yet - is being refurbished in MI, and that one was planned before you took office, and no Japanese plants have made plans to come to MI. Why are you not telling the truth to the voters of these states?
Or maybe a better set up: Mr. Trump. On several campaign stops in the midwest these past two weeks, you made a statement that in MI, "I got you so many damn auto plants, so many" and also said at a later stop that there were 5 new Japanese auto plants that you brought to MI. Can you name those plants for us here tonight?
Trump: Uh, well yes, it was a beautiful thing. So many plants, so many cars rolling off the assembly line, like you've never seen before. A man actually told me he'd never seen more cars being built in his life, and thanked God that I brought these plants.
Moderator: Can you name any of them sir?
Trump: I don't get into the details, but Honda probably. And frankly, the brand doesn't matter these are tremendous cars, whatever the company and a tremendous job creator.
Moderater: Would you be surprised if I told you that NO Japanese plants have made plans to open in MI, and only 1 Jeep plant that will be opening in 2021 in MI that was underway before you took office?
I'll start.
Mr. Trump. On several campaign stops in the midwest these past two weeks, you made a statement that in MI, "I got you so many damn auto plants, so many" and also said at a later stop that there were 5 new Japanese auto plants that will be coming to MI . Yet only one plant that hasn't opened yet - is being refurbished in MI, and that one was planned before you took office, and no Japanese plants have made plans to come to MI. Why are you not telling the truth to the voters of these states?
Or maybe a better set up: Mr. Trump. On several campaign stops in the midwest these past two weeks, you made a statement that in MI, "I got you so many damn auto plants, so many" and also said at a later stop that there were 5 new Japanese auto plants that you brought to MI. Can you name those plants for us here tonight?
Trump: Uh, well yes, it was a beautiful thing. So many plants, so many cars rolling off the assembly line, like you've never seen before. A man actually told me he'd never seen more cars being built in his life, and thanked God that I brought these plants.
Moderator: Can you name any of them sir?
Trump: I don't get into the details, but Honda probably. And frankly, the brand doesn't matter these are tremendous cars, whatever the company and a tremendous job creator.
Moderater: Would you be surprised if I told you that NO Japanese plants have made plans to open in MI, and only 1 Jeep plant that will be opening in 2021 in MI that was underway before you took office?
Last edited:
OP
OP
DaveC
Blue Crack Addict
debate moderators aren't there to bait the debaters into unanswerable "gotcha" moments.
OP
OP
DaveC
Blue Crack Addict
yeah, i memba. luckily that attitude stayed in the primaries and totally doesn't carry on here any longer.
Last edited:
dabiggestu2fan
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
It’s a good town, but there are some tough things. You may not know this, but we have no voice in the Senate! None at all! And we pay more per capita in federal tax that then gets doled out to red states where people hate our fucking guts and get excited when their representatives threaten to do things like flood our streets with guns or overturn marijuana legalization which passed by like 60% in a referendum. It’s quite a thankless place to be sometimes! But then we do get enjoy our beautiful neighborhoods, educated and sophisticated population, breathtaking monuments, diversity, and great museums.
I also sometimes live in Anarchist New York. I could talk your ear off on that one too.
Last edited:
womanfish
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
No gotcha moments in debates? Not sure about that. The opening question of the Rep primary debate to trump was saying that he called women pigs, and dogs. This is par for the course. The whole line of questioning to Trump is automatically set up for this, through no fault of the questioners. He lies about everything. So asking him a question on what auto plants have come to MI, that he clearly said at a campaign stop, isn't a gotcha question. It's just a question. If he lied about it, that's on him to explain.
I can see a question to Biden, saying, you said that there was nothing wrong with Hunter being on the board of Burisma, but why was he chosen of all people to be on the board of a Ukranian gas company?
And again, this is what you would like to see asked. Not saying by any stretch the moderators will ask very tough questions.
Last edited:
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
yeah, i memba. luckily that attitude stayed in the primaries and totally doesn't carry on here any longer.
It could be because some people believed Bloomberg would have been a better candidate and then president than Bernie. Not just because Bernie’s ideas proved to be unpopular with the people who were supposed to be the most sympathetic, but also because it’s a vastly more difficult thing running New York City than being a Senator from Vermont.
OP
OP
DaveC
Blue Crack Addict
thinking one guy would be a better president than another is totally fine.
acting like he's a living saint every time he spends a penny and mocking those of us who want to hold him accountable to what he actually promised like we're idiotic children is entirely another thing.
edit: look, i'm not trying to gloat about this or say "i told you so". i actually want to be wrong about this. but i'm naturally skeptical and cynical, a "i'll believe it when i see it" type of person. if he spends that money between now and the election then that's fantastic and i'll happily admit i was wrong. but i know full well that nobody gets to be a multi-billionaire because they were generous with their money. i don't trust any billionaire to actually do what they say because they know that nobody will (or can) hold them accountable if they welch or cheap out.
i guess the friction in this scenario comes from that - some people here trust this guy to do what he says (fair enough, that's your prerogative), whereas i feel that when it comes to money he inherently can't be trusted and i don't expect that he's going to follow through because it's not in the nature of people with more money than scrooge mcduck to give it away. like in the example i gave, if your friend promises they're going to give you a large amount of money and then they only give you a fraction of that even though they have way more than enough to give you the original amount, you'd feel stiffed no matter how close you are. for me the equation is the same in this case; you promised to spend x amount of cash so spend x amount of cash. "keep your promises" is basic shit that we were all taught at the age of 4 and i don't think it's totally unreasonable to expect that.
acting like he's a living saint every time he spends a penny and mocking those of us who want to hold him accountable to what he actually promised like we're idiotic children is entirely another thing.
edit: look, i'm not trying to gloat about this or say "i told you so". i actually want to be wrong about this. but i'm naturally skeptical and cynical, a "i'll believe it when i see it" type of person. if he spends that money between now and the election then that's fantastic and i'll happily admit i was wrong. but i know full well that nobody gets to be a multi-billionaire because they were generous with their money. i don't trust any billionaire to actually do what they say because they know that nobody will (or can) hold them accountable if they welch or cheap out.
i guess the friction in this scenario comes from that - some people here trust this guy to do what he says (fair enough, that's your prerogative), whereas i feel that when it comes to money he inherently can't be trusted and i don't expect that he's going to follow through because it's not in the nature of people with more money than scrooge mcduck to give it away. like in the example i gave, if your friend promises they're going to give you a large amount of money and then they only give you a fraction of that even though they have way more than enough to give you the original amount, you'd feel stiffed no matter how close you are. for me the equation is the same in this case; you promised to spend x amount of cash so spend x amount of cash. "keep your promises" is basic shit that we were all taught at the age of 4 and i don't think it's totally unreasonable to expect that.
Last edited:
LuckyNumber7
Blue Crack Addict
Also not holding Bloomberg accountable for the same behaviors that we criticize Donald Trump for.
Trump is going the blame the last four years on the Biden administration and the media will frame it as a time to change things up. Let’s give an outsider a chance to drain the swamp.
There is nothing Trump can do that will affect him or his polling. He could come out and just say the N word over and over and nothing would change.
Biden stutters and it’s OMG HIS BRAIN FAILED?? Is he healthy enough to do the job ??
Man. Person. Debate. Stupid.
There is nothing Trump can do that will affect him or his polling. He could come out and just say the N word over and over and nothing would change.
Biden stutters and it’s OMG HIS BRAIN FAILED?? Is he healthy enough to do the job ??
Man. Person. Debate. Stupid.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
