Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, October 14, 2020

A new mental health treatment based on psilocybin, the active compound in magic mushrooms, is set to be licensed in the US next year. Some research has shown a long-term decrease in authoritarian leanings in patients even after treatment ends, posing intriguing medical and ethical questions.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Srooms make you puke and then get mellow. Nothing new here. Authoritarian thinkers are mostly --------. Srooms can cure ---------?

#1 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2020-10-13 01:27 PM | Reply

I know plenty of people for whom psychedelics have changed their lives for the better, becoming kinder, more understanding of one another, and more open minded. I also know a few who, following some bad experiences, have become angrier, more insular, more devoutly religious, more suspicious of others, and more closed minded in general. It's a mixed bag when people take things recreationally like we do in this country.

#2 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-10-13 02:09 PM | Reply

The SciAm article doesn't mention it, but Compass Pathways (CMPS) and MMEDF are two avenues to get exposure to this sector.

#3 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2020-10-13 05:00 PM | Reply

Eat some juicy green peyote buttons, you'll never puke on shrooms again.

#4 | Posted by bruceaz at 2020-10-13 06:11 PM | Reply | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 1

The Pill changed the political beliefs of people who never took it and can't even get pregnant!

#5 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-10-13 07:28 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

I think the writer of this article framed the story all wrong based on the title.

You liberals trying tell compel others what to think and believe and what words they may use are in serious need of some authoritarian deprogramming.

#6 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2020-10-13 08:31 PM | Reply | Funny: 4

compel others what to think and believe

You just defined religion, congrats.

#7 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-10-13 08:37 PM | Reply | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 2

" You just defined religion, congrats."

But that's different because it's the "truth." That makes it more than just okay, but necessary.

#8 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-10-13 09:05 PM | Reply

The religious leaders of today are much like the religious leaders of Jesus' day; money grubbers and worshipers of self rather than having any real concern for others.

He called them out on that, so they had him killed.

People who don't care for the religious leaders and their cultists of today have something in common with Jesus.

/

On mushrooms and peyote... well, yes, been there done that in college. Explored Carlos Castaneda books, studied my psyche major books, and tripped around campus on those and acid.

The shrooms under the cow patties in East Texas were plentiful, and they were like a cartoon world; Roger Rabbit comes to mind (so does Jessica!). Peyote eaten raw, or mescaline as a liquid shot at a dinner in Mexico was much stronger stuff.

LSD was the most powerful in it's way. All these psychedelics that alter perception temporarily, for good or ill, have the possibility of doing so for the longer term when used under supervision as, "medicine".

#9 | Posted by Corky at 2020-10-13 09:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I didn't get sick from mushrooms, I think it was the half gallon of whisky with which I washed them down.

#10 | Posted by REDIAL at 2020-10-13 10:27 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Was always a good time until you realized everyone was looking at you...

#11 | Posted by REDIAL at 2020-10-13 10:29 PM | Reply

#11 everyone was looking at you, hehe

Liquor and weed are social drugs. Psychodelics are a personal adventure. Nobody knows what you're experiencing.

Liquid 25 a religious experience and very pleasant, and wonderful but you need to have the time.

But if you want to see something, got to hand it to shrooms.

Advisory : they aren't for everyone.

#12 | Posted by bruceaz at 2020-10-13 11:11 PM | Reply

But if you want to see something, got to hand it to shrooms.

Seconded. Oh, and DMT. That ---- turned my buddy into the most peaceful looking goblin. Was short, sweet, and a lot of fun (low dose, haven't tried the 'infinity molecule' level just yet, but hoping to).

Advisory : [shrooms] aren't for everyone.

Absolutely seconded. I've done them once without smoking some weed and it was hellish out in the middle of the desert, cold, sleeping in the back of my friend's Jeep Wrangler. That was not a fun night. Weed really helps elevate and ease the come down.

Damn, I sound like a fnkcing druggy.

#13 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-10-13 11:22 PM | Reply

You liberals trying tell compel others what to think and believe and what words they may use are in serious need of some authoritarian deprogramming.

#6 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON AT 2020-10-13 08:31 PM

What is it with Boaz and now apparently you saying "you liberals?" Just curious but it really sounds like the opening to some sort of angry cartoonish manifesto.

#14 | Posted by JOE at 2020-10-13 11:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Beach

Lived in AZ most of my life so smoked mostly Mexican farmer weed, I am kinda past middLe age let's say. And every once in a blue moon got some rock star weed. We called it Columbian. But now, holy ----. I've eaten some edibles that have made me wonder if I was coming back home.

Still shrooms are the most fun. Kinda like the star trek intro.

#15 | Posted by bruceaz at 2020-10-13 11:47 PM | Reply

"You liberals trying tell compel others what to think and believe..."

What a farkin' riot.

Tell us again how you would vote for Biden, if only RBG would die and Trump could nominate who he wanted.

We all need a good laugh.

#16 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-10-13 11:49 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

#14

Goatman's "you proggies" was especially irritating

#17 | Posted by bruceaz at 2020-10-13 11:51 PM | Reply

But I guess it was meant to be.

#18 | Posted by bruceaz at 2020-10-13 11:51 PM | Reply

"Goatman's "you proggies" was especially irritating"

His First, let's all pretend we're stupid predicate even more so.

#19 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-10-14 12:00 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Here's a pill for what ails ya... take two of these and call me in the morning.

www.youtube.com

www.youtube.com

#20 | Posted by Corky at 2020-10-14 12:04 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

A number of psychotropic drugs used to treat mental illnesses make people more passive and docile and, I assume, more amenable to authoritarian thinking/philosophy, both personal, political and religious. It seems to me those drugs should raise "questions about medicine and values" as well and that we should expand the discuss to include them.

#21 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2020-10-14 10:00 AM | Reply

Dan,

I never said, "if only" as if I hoped she would die.

Liar.

#22 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2020-10-14 11:28 AM | Reply

Dan,

What I have proposed has been her resigning and allowing Trump to nominate someone.

#23 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2020-10-14 11:42 AM | Reply

"What I have proposed has been her resigning and allowing Trump to nominate someone."

Well, she certainly resigned her life.

You're just embarrassed being called out for the hypocrite you are. You were never going to vote for Biden. You got the result you wanted, and you're still going to pull the lever for Trump. You're not fooling anyone but yourself. Sound familiar?

#24 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-10-14 11:47 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#20

Got the chills! Thanks for that, Cork.

#25 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2020-10-14 12:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#25

She's a 24 year old Brit with a music degree, and is the 2019 Female Guitarist of the Year. And a badass shredder.

Some of the comments are great, though:

"If you notice, there's a guitar..."

#26 | Posted by Corky at 2020-10-14 05:19 PM | Reply

Dan,

"You're just embarrassed being called out for the hypocrite you are."

Aren't Democrats being hypocrite pushing a nominee in an election year but now they're against it?

At least be honest.

Both Democrats and Republicans play to win.

Democrats are just being sore losers.

You know what I'm dreading.

If Biden wins Democrats will be even worse winners.

#27 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2020-10-14 07:56 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

"Aren't Democrats being hypocrite pushing a nominee in an election year but now they're against it?"

No, not really.

#28 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-10-14 08:05 PM | Reply

Dan,

I never said I will vote for Biden so I am not being a hypocrite.

My comment about being able to vote for Biden was back when it seemed Trump wouldn't be getting that opportunity.

It is disgusting you would suggest I hoped for her death.

Plonk.

#29 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2020-10-14 08:06 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

The world of politics is getting more desperate and each side is determined to win at any cost.

Any pretense at civility is all but gone.

Both parties are going for the jugular.

There's so much at stake now.

I'd be willing to bet if Democrats get the Senate and the Presidency, there's about a 100% chance they will push to stack the Supreme Court.

#30 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2020-10-14 08:18 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Aren't Democrats being hypocrite pushing a nominee in an election year but now they're against it?
At least be honest.
Both Democrats and Republicans play to win.
Democrats are just being sore losers.
You know what I'm dreading.
If Biden wins Democrats will be even worse winners.

POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON AT 2020-10-14 07:56 PM | REPLY

The only hypocrites here are Mitch McConnell and his Republican colleagues. Of course people like You and Boaz won't hold your side accountable for anything. It's always someone else who did wrong. Not your party.

#31 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-10-14 08:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

" Aren't Democrats being hypocrite pushing a nominee in an election year but now they're against it?"

Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham "changed" that rule four years ago. Now they're violating their own rule.

Dems' fault, obviously.

#32 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-10-14 08:28 PM | Reply

" I'd be willing to bet if Democrats get the Senate and the Presidency, there's about a 100% chance they will push to stack the Supreme Court."

As well they should.

McConnell Rules, and all that.

#33 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-10-14 08:42 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

...there's about a 100% chance they will push to stack the Supreme Court.

What push? They'll just do it.

#34 | Posted by REDIAL at 2020-10-14 08:53 PM | Reply

You were never going to vote for Biden.

I remember JeffJ making heavily hedged statements like "based on what i know now, if the election were today, i would vote for Biden." I would bet good money that dope is voting for Trump.

#35 | Posted by JOE at 2020-10-14 09:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

^That just proves how embarrassed Republicans are these days for being Republicans.

Thanks Trump!

#36 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-10-14 09:09 PM | Reply

Remember when the Electoral College appointed GW Bush, and people were saying then that he might govern more from the center due to the split in the popular vote?

Obama got elected properly, even tried to nominate a centrist justice on the Supreme Court.

Spare me the "both sides do it" talk. For any political gamesmanship exercised by the Dems, the Republicans do it fourfold.

#37 | Posted by hamburglar at 2020-10-14 09:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

I never said I will vote for Biden so I am not being a hypocrite.

I'm no Hans, but I also recall you saying you'd vote for Biden.

It was during the primaries when you said if Biden got the nomination you'd vote for him.

Then, when he selected Kamala you said based on his VP selection you could no longer vote for him.

It's not a big deal.

Out of all the primary opinions, Biden was the only nominee (other than Bloomberg who joined later) I didn't want to vote for in the general. But. Here we are, and I voted Biden.

Not that it will matter. California will go for Biden and I expect Biden will win the popular vote.

#38 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-10-14 10:13 PM | Reply

Joe,
"You won't vote for Biden under any circumstances"
One problem with this posting environment is we read one post and people take it out of context of all the other posts that we write.
I've written before if Ginsberg would retire and let Trump nominate someone without fighting it, I could vote for Biden.
Ginsberg needs replaced with a conservative and not a lock step liberal.
POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON AT 2020-09-07 12:49 AM | REPLY

#39 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-10-14 10:26 PM | Reply

"My comment about being able to vote for Biden was back when it seemed Trump wouldn't be getting that opportunity."

But then when it became reality...you somehow found a different reason. How convenient for you. Of course, none of the rest of us fell for your obvious bull manure.

"Plonk"

You plonked me months ago. Yet you've been answering me on a regular basis ever since. Why did you choose to unplonk? And are you just fooling yourself and no one else, yet again?

#40 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-10-15 12:32 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

When you open your mind to facts you quickly find out the GOP is no longer appealing.

#41 | Posted by Nixon at 2020-10-15 07:49 AM | Reply

To all appearances, it seems Trump has killed the underpinnings of the GOP of yesteryear. Maybe even permanently.

That means there's going to be a vacuum ~ or at least some futile effort to resurrect the devil in 2024 and, failing that, again in 2028.

We're a two party system. A vacuum is usually an open invitation. But who ~ or what ~ is waiting in the wings.

#42 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-10-15 08:22 AM | Reply

Yes!!! And while we are at it, let's have a pill that changes your sexual orientation. Better yet, let's create special "therapy programs" and force people who have different political beliefs from you to attend so they can be "normalized". I mean, it's not like Dems have ever fought vehemently against therapy programs that force a person to change who they are, right?

"Spare me the "both sides do it" talk. For any political gamesmanship exercised by the Dems, the Republicans do it fourfold."

Blind hypocrites are the very worst kind. The whole "Nuh uh, you are" defense from blind hypocrites is so laughable that it's scary. Especially when there is ample evidence that proves them wrong daily.

#43 | Posted by humtake at 2020-10-15 09:39 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Re: #43

Blind hypocrisy!?

The GOP pulls this crap every time they quadruple down on what the Dems did. "Hillary Clinton was married to a guy accused of assaulting women, so I'm going to vote for a guy who actually brags about assaulting women"

"The Dems talked about delaying the confirmation of a Supreme Court Justice, so we actually did delay the confirmation"

I'm a progressive, not a Dem. The GOP is objectively far worse in their partisan gamesmanship.

#44 | Posted by hamburglar at 2020-10-15 10:21 AM | Reply

Re: #43

Also, read the article. It's about shrooms decreasing support for authoritarianism policies.

#45 | Posted by hamburglar at 2020-10-15 10:24 AM | Reply

Aren't Democrats being hypocrite pushing a nominee in an election year but now they're against it?

At least be honest.

You first.

When will you start?

Democrats may have pushed a new Supreme Court justice in an election year (which they were entitled to given a fair chance... which they were not) .

But not on Election Day.

GFY with a MAGA.

#46 | Posted by donnerboy at 2020-10-15 11:50 AM | Reply

I've had shrooms before. I was an atheist democratic socialist before I had them, and I'm still an atheist democratic socialist now.

Maybe they'll help the MAGAts, but I doubt it.

#47 | Posted by DarkVader at 2020-10-15 12:04 PM | Reply

oh wow clockwork orange in pill form.

#48 | Posted by Tor at 2020-10-15 01:28 PM | Reply

Donner,

"But not on Election Day."

Not buying it.

Liberals, "its not a human till it pops out"

Lets see. Exactly how many days before election are ok to nominate?

Or does the number change as a matter of convience?

#49 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2020-10-15 03:08 PM | Reply

Or does the number change as a matter of convience?
#49 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

That's exactly what the people in charge (Republicans) are saying.
Good job, BillJohnson.

#50 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-10-15 03:12 PM | Reply

Can society get to a point where people treat religion as a private thing? It would be best if folks STFU about the myths and superstitions they live by. Some of us don't need the crap our parents put into our minds as a kid (all religions pick on children).

#51 | Posted by Brennnn at 2020-10-15 03:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Can society get to a point where people treat religion as a private thing?"

I don't see how religious society can get to that point.

Do you?

#52 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-10-15 04:04 PM | Reply

People seem to have the innate assumption that their own beliefs are correct and should apply to everyone else. It is only through education that we leave such ignorance behind. A society structured by religious beliefs is by definition an ignorant and a fascist society.

#53 | Posted by moder8 at 2020-10-15 04:29 PM | Reply

"A society structured by religious beliefs is by definition an ignorant and a fascist society."

Really?
I'm perfectly fine with the tenets of the Satanic Temple:
I One should strive to act with compassion and empathy toward all creatures in accordance with reason.
II The struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions.
III One's body is inviolable, subject to one's own will alone.
IV The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forgo one's own.
V Beliefs should conform to one's best scientific understanding of the world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit one's beliefs.
VI People are fallible. If one makes a mistake, one should do one's best to rectify it and resolve any harm that might have been caused.
VII Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion, wisdom, and justice should always prevail over the written or spoken word.

#54 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-10-15 04:43 PM | Reply

Bren,

"Can society get to a point where people treat religion as a private thing?"

You're living in the wrong country.

Protecting Freedom of Religion is one of the very issues I am concerned.

Notice...Freedom OF Religion. Not Freedom FROM Religion.

Just make sure kids only go to public schools and be sure you only make friends with atheists and like minded people.

Or are you just angry at God because he didnt make all dreams come true like you were told by preachers selling you a bill of goods?

#55 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2020-10-15 04:52 PM | Reply

"Notice...Freedom OF Religion. Not Freedom FROM Religion."

So your right to swing your religious fist does not end at my nose, BillJohnson?
I believe you!

#56 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-10-15 04:55 PM | Reply

Separation of Church and State. We are not supposed to be governed theocratically

#57 | Posted by hamburglar at 2020-10-15 05:02 PM | Reply

BillJohnson is the type of person who would condone killing of Jews, slavery, and outlawing interracial marriage.

Because the Bible.

Make no mistake. Christians used the Bible to justify all of those things.

They're going to use the Bible to attack marriage equality and abortion.

These people are garbage.

They make the Devil proud with how much hate and misery they constantly spew into the world.

#58 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-10-15 05:03 PM | Reply

"Christians used the Bible to justify all of those things."

For instance, interracial marriage.
Opposed by Evangelical Christians.

Fifty years later, we saw the same thing with gay marriage.
Opposed by Evangelical Christians.

#59 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-10-15 05:16 PM | Reply

Lets see. Exactly how many days before election are ok to nominate?
Or does the number change as a matter of convience?
#49 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON AT 2020-10-15 03:08 PM

Well, according to Republicans in 2016, nominating a justice 237 days before the election was too close to the election.

So, if we are to follow that logic, nominating someone just 38 days before the election would also be too close. But Republicans aren't known for things like logic or consistency.

You see Bill, i dont really give a ---- when someone gets nominated. I think the senate should give an up or down vote even if it's on election eve. But Republicans changed that by establishing outlandish new rules 237 days before the 2016 election. So the least they (and you) could do when they spit in our faces this time around is *admit* they were full of ---- about "letting the people decide who they want their justice to be" back in 2016.

#60 | Posted by JOE at 2020-10-15 05:52 PM | Reply

Joe,

Here is what I will admit.

Yea..its pushing it but its no more than what Democrats would be doing if they could.

But they can't.

And then Democrats may have their chance, if they get the Senate and White House, to play revenge politics.

#61 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2020-10-15 07:17 PM | Reply

Ham,

Who said anything about making laws.

Or are you implying anyone who professes to be Christian should be disqualified from holding office?

#62 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2020-10-15 07:20 PM | Reply

"Yea..its pushing it but its no more than what Democrats would be doing if they could."

So it's okay for you to rob me, since in your mind, I'd do the same to you if I could.

You're getting me back, ahead of time!

You're a child in a man's body. A gay child.

#63 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-10-15 07:46 PM | Reply

You're a child in a man's body. A gay child.

#63 | Posted by snoofy

Snoofy shouting at the mirror :)

#64 | Posted by billy_boy at 2020-10-15 08:13 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Or are you implying anyone who professes to be Christian should be disqualified from holding office?

POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON AT 2020-10-15 07:20 PM | REPLY

Yep when they try and force their religious beliefs onto the nation.

#65 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-10-15 08:22 PM | Reply

Or are you implying anyone who professes to be Christian should be disqualified from holding office?

POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON AT 2020-10-15 07:20 PM | REPLY

Anyone who believes in a magical sky bro and thinks that should influence their interpretation of written law should be disbarred from any official office.

Morality didn't come from religion...morality came from evolution, and religion from a quirk in the human brain - from evolution.

The earth is a tiny dot in a huge (you think you know but you don't - it's unfathomably huge) local region we call the universe.

0

#66 | Posted by billy_boy at 2020-10-15 09:19 PM | Reply

Billy,

Just because someone is "religious" doesn't necessarily mean they believe stealing is wrong due to being "religious".

Just becausr someone is "religious" doesnt mean their every thought and belief is based on their religion just because that religion may actually agree.

#67 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2020-10-15 09:26 PM | Reply

"Just because someone is "religious" doesn't necessarily mean they believe stealing is wrong "

Feel free to show one religion which promotes stealing, or is even neutral on thievery.

#68 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-10-15 09:28 PM | Reply

At one time, Christians were the liberals leading the Abolitionist Movement during the Civil War.

en.wikipedia.org

www.britannica.com

Of course, today's rwingers are more like the Jewish religious leader hypocrites that Jesus condemned in his day.

But then, some supposedly liberal neo-atheists aren't much better.

www.newstatesman.com

#69 | Posted by Corky at 2020-10-15 09:29 PM | Reply

"Just becausr someone is "religious" doesnt mean their every thought and belief is based on their religion just because that religion may actually agree."

How about if one particular religion has a set of rules, like say, ten specific ones, and some Republican regularly breaks half of them?

#70 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-10-15 09:30 PM | Reply

"are you implying anyone who professes to want Sharia Law should be disqualified from holding office?"

If you can't substitute any religion for Christianity and be okay with it, you're a hypocrite.

#71 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-10-15 09:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Billy,

Lets be honest about sonething.

Diffetent cultures around the world religious or not have pretty well universally been opposed to homosexuality. Even cultures that are more toletate even still treated receptive gays as second class citizens.

My point is being opposed to gay activity in a culture seems to be innate on some level throughtout time and most societies.

But somehow if someone feels creepy discussing that topic its automatically because of religion?

#72 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2020-10-15 09:35 PM | Reply

Just my opinion...

The "moral" part of every religion boils down to what would be beneficial for ancient humans(including the 14-ish extinct human species correct me as you will) in a tribe or group.

Help your brethren, they will help you. The ones that help or are helped - it's a two way street - will survive to reproduce. Human behavior is very much the result of evolution. There's no special sky bro, we survived to this point because of evolutionary pressure favoring group cooperation.

If you don't think that is much more awesome than divine intervention, then I guess you're not like me.

#73 | Posted by billy_boy at 2020-10-15 09:45 PM | Reply

"You're living in the wrong country.
Protecting Freedom of Religion is one of the very issues I am concerned."

I think I am in the right country- I would be killed/jailed for speaking against religion in some places.

Sure the USA was "founded" by white folks who were too crazy for europe, but do we need to carry their torch? When I say I wish people would keep their religion personal, I don't mean to silence anyone. I just set the volume to where those of us who are not faithful to have a voice. We live in a world where religion pretends to carry the moral torch, it does not. We don't need it. Kids are born with more morality than the bible teaches. We have laws to cover the rest.

#74 | Posted by Brennnn at 2020-10-15 10:14 PM | Reply

"We live in a world where religion pretends to carry the moral torch"

WTC 1 and 2 were ugly buildings, but they made excellent moral torches!

#75 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-10-15 10:21 PM | Reply

"Diffetent cultures around the world religious or not have pretty well universally been opposed to homosexuality."

The Romans weren't.
The Janissaries weren't.

Why don't you know these things?
???

#76 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-10-15 10:28 PM | Reply

"Both Democrats and Republicans play to win. Democrats are just being sore losers."

Translation: Democrats were so stupid they thought Republicans would tell the truth, and be as good as their word. The losers.

#77 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-10-15 11:15 PM | Reply

Here is what I will admit.
Yea..its pushing it but its no more than what Democrats would be doing if they could.
#61 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

It's not just "pushing it." Republicans created a rule from thin air by which appointing a justice 237 days from the election was too close to the election. "Pushing it" would be if Trump appointed someone 250 days from the election.

But he didnt. He appointed someone 39 days from the election - nearly two hundred days closer to it than Garland was. That isn't "pushing it"; it's driving over it with a steamroller and taking a big stinky ---- on it afterwards.

Again. The least Republicans- and you - could do is admit they never believed their own rule in the first place instead of deflecting to Democrats who never created this rule and didnt turn around and violate it this time either. This entire disgusting spectacle is entirely of Republican creation. Own it, you -----.

#78 | Posted by JOE at 2020-10-16 01:45 PM | Reply

Joe,

"He appointed someone 39 days from the election"

Was it legal?

#79 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2020-10-16 07:45 PM | Reply

It was legal to force the Supreme Court to operate with 8 members for an entire year because of a claim that the next election's voters should decide who gets to have his nomination confirmed, not necessarily the one elected in the prior election unless he wins - 237 days before the election.

It is also legal to nominate and seat a new justice even after Americans had already started voting for their next President - and with less than 2 months before Election Day - by the very party who had made the above claim and allowed an 8 member court to exist 4 years ago - even though that election could have ended up in litigation requiring the Supreme Court as well.

The new American political ethos from this point forward is If it isn't illegal, it's alright - regardless of what we might have said or done before.

We got it. Just don't say ---- when the time for payback comes due. Payback's legal too.

#80 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-10-16 07:59 PM | Reply

'Member when some people were more interested in what was moral and ethical than technically legal?

#81 | Posted by Corky at 2020-10-16 08:19 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort