Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Follow the science, blindly, like a lemming, right over the cliff...

--------------------------------------------------

Vaccinated People: "You need to get muh vaccination shots that don't work because I got muh vaccination shots that don't work and I'm afraid of people that didn't get muh vaccination shots that don't work because muh vaccination shots that don't work don't work."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
At midnight on Wednesday, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
At midnight on Wednesday, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

---

No it didn't.

You are still free to murder your babies.

---

Quote:

---

JUSTICE KAGAN, with whom JUSTICE BREYER and JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR join, dissenting.
Without full briefing or argument, and after less than 72 hours' thought, this Court greenlights the operation of Texas's patently unconstitutional law banning most abortions. The Court thus rewards Texas's scheme to insulate its law from judicial review by deputizing private parties to carry out unconstitutional restrictions on the State's behalf. As of last night, and because of this Court's ruling, Texas law prohibits abortions for the vast majority of women who seek them—in clear, and indeed undisputed, conflict with Roe and Casey.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
At midnight on Wednesday, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

---

No it didn't.

You are still free to murder your babies.

---

You are still free to murder Republican Supreme Court Justices because you are innocent until proven guilty in a Court-of-Law.

---

Quote:

---

On the other hand, the Supreme Court wrote about Roe v Wade:

Quote:

---

JUSTICE KAGAN, with whom JUSTICE BREYER and JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR join, dissenting.
Without full briefing or argument, and after less than 72 hours' thought, this Court greenlights the operation of Texas's patently unconstitutional law banning most abortions. The Court thus rewards Texas's scheme to insulate its law from judicial review by deputizing private parties to carry out unconstitutional restrictions on the State's behalf. As of last night, and because of this Court's ruling, Texas law prohibits abortions for the vast majority of women who seek them—in clear, and indeed undisputed, conflict with Roe and Casey.

---

The Roe is Roe v Wade.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/21a24_8759.pdf

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
At midnight on Wednesday, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

---

No it didn't.

You are still free to murder your babies.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
You are still free to murder Republican Supreme Court Justices because you are innocent until proven guilty in a Court-of-Law.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I know it's still very early in the day, but that's going to easily be the stupidest thing I read today.

Also... archived.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
What are Democrats going to do about the Supreme Court's Abortion Decision? How about nothing? Does nothing work for you?

Late Wednesday night, the Supreme Court quietly gutted Roe v. Wade. At issue was a new Texas law that allows any dipshit in the state to sue anyone who “aids or abets” an abortion after six weeks, and to collect a $10,000 reward for their efforts. An unsigned, five-justice Supreme Court majority looked at the insane clusterfuck we described in the previous sentence and said, ahhhh our hands are tied, allowing it to go into effect while litigation is pursued, and making Texas’ creepy bounty-hunter abortion ban model legislation for every other red state to pursue. This would be an ideal time for Democrats, including the president, to act on their pledge to codify Roe protections into federal law. They will face substantial pressure to do so. But as with voting rights, the numbers just aren’t there. The relevant legislation here—the Women’s Health Protection Act—has 48 Democratic sponsors and co-sponsors in the Senate. The two not on board are Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey and West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, who are both anti-abortion. Casey could go wobbly in the next 10 seconds, but Joe Manchin seems far less likely to do so. Democrats would still need to eliminate the filibuster to pass it, too, and they won’t. Democrats are also not going to pack the courts, which, again, neither has majority support as policy nor is a policy over which they’d nuke the filibuster. Democrats will, instead, try to pocket the effective elimination of Roe as a potent wedge issue with lucrative fundraising and turnout potential. They’ll say they need more Democrats in Congress to enact the legislative change necessary to push back on the actions of this court. It will be aggravating to hear them say this. But—[ducks for cover]—they’ll basically be right.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/09/the-surge-roe-abortion-man
chin-democrats.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
When is a not-a-lie really a lie?

When the liar gives you a part of “true information” and leaves out “the whole truth” in order to lead you to a false conclusion. Or worse, to lead you to do something that hurts you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
The Social Security Trustees’ Report Is Out

When is a not-a-lie really a lie?

When the liar gives you a part of “true information” and leaves out “the whole truth” in order to lead you to a false conclusion. Or worse, to lead you to do something that hurts you.

Today Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, CRFB, issued a statement in which she said:

“Acting today, we could fix Social Security with a 27 percent tax increase or 21 percent benefit reduction.”

What makes this a lie, though technically “true,” is that MacGuineas knows that the “27% tax increase” is 27% of a 6.2% tax…or about a 2% of payroll increase. On the other hand, the 21% benefit reduction is indeed 21% of the whole benefit. An average benefit is about 1500 dollars…so the benefit cut would amount to 300 dollars, leaving the retiree with about 1200 dollars a month to live on.

But the 2% of payroll tax increase, that would eliminate this benefit cut, would be 2% of about a 1,000 dollar per week paycheck.. or about $20 dollars per week. And CRFB knows that this $20 per week increase in the tax does not have to happen all at once, but can be phased in about a dollar per week per year at a time, while wages are expected to grow by over 200 dollars per week (at 10 dollars per week per year).

MacGuineas also says, “Not only is this year’s outlook worse than in last year’s report,..” but it’s not. Not materially. The long-predicted shortfall in Social Security finances is the same as it has been since 2007 or earlier. SS will require a 4% increase in the tax in about 2030 or so, which can be reached by phasing it in at one-tenth of one percent at a time (if we start now). That 4% is the combined tax for both the employer and the worker. I used the one-tenth of one percent per year..which is the worker’s share and will be matched by a one-tenth of one percent per year increase in the tax paid by the employer. Sorry for the confusion, but I believe that the share paid by the worker is what matters to him, while the combined worker plus employer tax is what most people, not workers talk about.

https://angrybearblog.com/2021/09/social-security-trustees-report-out-
crfb-lies-about-it

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

You don't read shit or know anything about the recent ruling, buddy.

It's not anywhere near what your Lefty shill sites are saying it is.

But they rely on you being stupid and not looking at the ruling yourself and taking their word for it. Way to make them not have to work for a living, as per usual.

I wouldn't suggest trying anything stupid with the federal justices.

Go get yourself a hobby before you get yourself into trouble.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
The first sentence of the decision is the only sentence you need to understand, 6ix:

"The application for injunctive relief or, in the alternative,
to vacate stays of the district court proceedings presented
to JUSTICE ALITO and by him referred to the Court is denied."
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/21a24_8759.pdf

That is too much to read for most people. Simplifying: Alito says, "Request denied."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
The first sentence of the decision is the only sentence you need to understand, 6ix:

"The application for injunctive relief or, in the alternative,
to vacate stays of the district court proceedings presented
to JUSTICE ALITO and by him referred to the Court is denied."
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/21a24_8759.pdf

That is too much to read for most people. Simplifying: Alito says, "Request denied."

---

No.

That's dumbing it down for retards like you, to the point that it doesn't even mean what they say it means anymore.

That's also why you're angry over nothing here.

The Democrats are exceedingly good at riling up their voter base full of low-info morons via their Legacy Media.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Read the Newsweek article.

I'm done with you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
...so I asked my Houston lawyer who Blackman is.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
...so I asked my Houston lawyer who Blackman is.

---

No you didn't.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
No they didn't.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
By wanting others to force me to get a vaccine, you've already abandoned "my body, my choice".

You are a hypocrite and, as always, you have no valid argument here.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
By wanting others to force me to get a vaccine, you've already abandoned "my body, my choice".

You are a hypocrite and, as always, you have no valid argument here.

---

Nobody is forcing you to work, 6ix, but there are consequences involving money. Nobody is forcing you to get vaccinated, but there are consequences so do what you are going to do, 6ix, but don't expect your ex-employers, stepparent, ex-girlfriends, ex-whatevers to send you money or sneak you into places only the vaccinated go. There are consequence for you acting as you do.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Taking away somebody's ability to make money to live is no different than an actual mandate. Period.

I'm not worried about me. I can wait this out much longer than it will be in the news, replaced by the next big thing. I'm not now or ever getting the vaccination.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
People can go flip their own fuckin' burgers and cut their own fuckin' hair.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
People can go flip their own fuckin' burgers and cut their own fuckin' hair.

---

After the Civil War was over the plantation owners still grew cotton the same old way as before the Civil War and still needed their ex-slaves, who were now "free" to seek farm employment at whatever plantation paid the best wages. The new labor system based on "free" workers actually was less expensive for the owners than the old system based on slavery because in the new "free" labor system there was no more free food for the workers, no more free housing, no more free clothing, no more free anything, which is the system America still uses today.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
And meanwhile... nearly every person I've ever known is a wage slave to this day. Even the ones clearing six figures.

Gotta keep buying all that shit you don't need with money you don't yet have.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Are Democrats, Independents and Republicans psychologically different? Yes.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
And meanwhile... nearly every person I've ever known is a wage slave to this day. Even the ones clearing six figures.

Gotta keep buying all that shit you don't need with money you don't yet have.

---

You would think most Americans could learn from history, but you would be wrong:

13 Things Benjamin Franklin Said about Money that are Still True Today
https://www.moneymanagement.org/blog/things-benjamin-franklin-said-abo
ut-money-that-are-still-true-today

“If you know how to spend less than you get, you have the philosopher's stone.” -- B. Franklin

But for Americans who don't remember that the Philosopher's stone changes base metals into precious metals, Franklin's meaning is lost for them.

Another aphorism that goes completely over the heads of most Americans:

“Our necessities never equal our wants.” -- B. Franklin

It can be hard to tell the difference, but it’s crucial to learn what you really need and what you only want.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

My saying is every dollar I don't spend is another dollar I don't have to earn.

Not sure if I heard that one before or if I came up with it on the fly.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Are Democrats, Independents and Republicans psychologically different? Yes.

---

In other news...

The sky is blue and water is wet.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

My saying is every dollar I don't spend is another dollar I don't have to earn.

Not sure if I heard that one before or if I came up with it on the fly.

---

Every dollar in tax cuts is a dollar I . . . blah, blah:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
In a 2004 Esquire article, a “senior Bush administration official” explained why the U.S. had needed to invade Iraq. It turned out that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein’s continued existence in power “resulted in a very bad message to the world, including to Islamic terrorists, that America … could be defied.”

This emotionalism about Saddam was bipartisan. In 1993, the Clinton administration proclaimed that Iraq, having been defeated in the 1991 Gulf War, had tried to assassinate former President George H.W. Bush while the elder Bush was taking a victory lap in Kuwait. This later turned out to have been made up in exactly the same way as all the tales about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. Nonetheless, Clinton officials were filled with rage about it. As the New Yorker reported at the time, they were furious about Saddam’s “near-suicidal defiance of American pressure. … Many officials in the Pentagon and the State Department had become increasingly angry with Iraq in the early months of the Clinton Administration, feeling that Saddam Hussein had been ‘getting away with things.’”

Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s similar worldview was described in journalist Bob Woodward’s book “State of Denial”:

“Why did you support the Iraq war?” Bush aide Michael Gerson asked him.

“Because Afghanistan wasn’t enough,” Kissinger answered. In the conflict with radical Islam, he said, they want to humiliate us. “And we need to humiliate them.”

Why are all these people lost in these disturbing fantasy worlds? After witnessing the last two decades, I’d suggest that we need to understand a peculiar quirk of human psychology: The powerful always loathe those with less power. My grandfather was a historian who spent his life studying the Spanish conquest of the so-called New World, and as he put it:

“The hostility of those who have power toward those who can be called inferior because they are different — because they are others, the strangers — has been a historical constant. Indeed, at times it seems to be the dominant theme in human history.”

Of course, this doesn’t make “sense” in the way we want to think of it. But neither has the “war on terror.” It’s been 20 years of mindless violence, cruelty, and waste, the U.S. lashing out like a gigantic beast without a functioning frontal cortex, visiting numberless 9/11s on innocents as it staggered around the globe. But that does make sense if you ignore all the speeches and op-eds and instead start from the presumption that the political class running this country is overflowing with the primate wrath of the powerful who are nonetheless not omnipotent.

On September 11, 2001, I realized that I was on Al Qaeda’s list. Since then, I’ve learned that I’m also on the list of the far more mighty people in charge of America, just a little further down. Even with the most concrete dangers facing us — the destruction of a livable biosphere, an enduring pandemic, and much more — they are absolutely committed to following the same path, driven onward by complex delusions. Power tends to corrupt, not just in a standard moral sense but also intellectually and emotionally, and they’ve held extreme power for a very long time. What I know now that I didn’t know then is that if we let them, their corruption will surely destroy us all.

More at https://theintercept.com/2021/09/10/september-11-america-response/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Hey. You've got a huge house and a ton of money and a successful business.

Get in contact with somebody from the Administration* and tell them that you'll take in a sand-people family and that you won't even accept the $67,000 per person for it.

That, or shut the fuck up.

---