PortaJohn

[Hobo Hilton]

As the ship sinks, here is what the Senate is working on.

A new bill that aims to give the marijuana industry access to banking services is expected to move forward in the Senate on Wednesday.
The Secure and Fair Enforcement Regulation Banking Act was introduced by a bipartisan group of senators last week. The bill would provide legal protection to banks or other financial institutions that offer services to state-legal marijuana businesses.
The Senate Banking Committee will mark up the bill Wednesday, and the panel is expected to vote to advance it to the full chamber’s floor.

Landmark marijuana financing bill clears big hurdle in the Senate

The Secure and Fair Enforcement Regulation Banking Act advanced out of a Senate committee.

www.cnbc.com

 

[babyguppy]

I reckon we are going to find out what happens if they "Try That In a Small Town" because those enclaves are exactly where they are focusing their push into.

.

Ireland went down without a whimper, so did Scottland, England, Europe, and most of America.
I believe 'they' know they can get away with it, without a fight.

 

[babyguppy]

As the ship sinks, here is what the Senate is working on.

A new bill that aims to give the marijuana industry access to banking services is expected to move forward in the Senate on Wednesday.
The Secure and Fair Enforcement Regulation Banking Act was introduced by a bipartisan group of senators last week. The bill would provide legal protection to banks or other financial institutions that offer services to state-legal marijuana businesses.
The Senate Banking Committee will mark up the bill Wednesday, and the panel is expected to vote to advance it to the full chamber’s floor.

Landmark marijuana financing bill clears big hurdle in the Senate

The Secure and Fair Enforcement Regulation Banking Act advanced out of a Senate committee.

www.cnbc.com

"The bill would provide legal protection to banks or other financial institutions that offer services to state-legal marijuana businesses."

As banks try to stop LEGAL gun providing industries from using their services. Where are the legal protections for the gun industry?

 

[babyguppy]

4.5 Billion for Ukraine...Meanwhile our military couldn't find a fucking 85 million dollar fighter jet and the pilot had to call 911 (actually had to have someone call for him) to get rescued. You can't make this shit up.

Ironic that a plane is named after its greatest weakness (among others)
All weather fighter, as long as all the weather is perfect.

 

[samadisoulcrusher]

As the ship sinks, here is what the Senate is working on.

A new bill that aims to give the marijuana industry access to banking services is expected to move forward in the Senate on Wednesday.
The Secure and Fair Enforcement Regulation Banking Act was introduced by a bipartisan group of senators last week. The bill would provide legal protection to banks or other financial institutions that offer services to state-legal marijuana businesses.
The Senate Banking Committee will mark up the bill Wednesday, and the panel is expected to vote to advance it to the full chamber’s floor.

Landmark marijuana financing bill clears big hurdle in the Senate

The Secure and Fair Enforcement Regulation Banking Act advanced out of a Senate committee.

www.cnbc.com

Yep stoners are to stoned to give any fucks about pretty much anything. Except weed.

 

[babyguppy]

Been easier to just respond with a chain and a Patty Wagon. back the Patty Wagon up to the front door, and chain the back door so they can't get out. They take your time and wait for reinforcements.....
Oh wait, its Philly. they approve looting, I mean, reparations.

 

[Threadcutter308]

Trudeau issues statement on 'deeply embarrassing' standing O for Nazi SS vet during Zelenskyy visit · American Wire News

"I think it’s gonna be really important that all of us push back against Russian propaganda, Russian disinformation."

americanwirenews.com

What a fucking moron...........I'm not even Canadian and I'm embarassed by him.

 

[babyguppy]

ZeroHedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Snipers Hide called this 2 years ago.
I said, Biden for two years, and Mike as new VP, then big mike runs for President, and Kamala would step down. There's still time left, Weekend at Bernie's continues.
How's Sen Fienstein doing? Do they have a Senator whisper to tell everyone how she's voting?

 

[MrSmith]

Snipers Hide called this 2 years ago.
I said, Biden for two years, and Mike as new VP, then big mike runs for President, and Kamala would step down.

But .. if the rumors are true (and, of course, there's no way they could be) wouldn't the powers that be have to encourage increased acceptance of the gay and transgender lifestyle within the voting masses? We should keep an eye out for any evidence of this beginning to happen.

Thank you,
MrSmith

 

[theLBC]

 

[theLBC]

 

[Mwalex]

Bribery by a foreign government should carry a charge and conviction of treason with the guilty being dealt with accordingly.

 

[UKDslayer]

Snipers Hide called this 2 years ago.
I said, Biden for two years, and Mike as new VP, then big mike runs for President, and Kamala would step down. There's still time left, Weekend at Bernie's continues.
How's Sen Fienstein doing? Do they have a Senator whisper to tell everyone how she's voting?

Posted here April 22, 2022...46779

I fear Michael/Michelle is going to be on the 2024 ballot so Obama gets a fourth term. Hillary is sure gunning hard but there is no way...

 

[UKDslayer]

Tucker Carlson Gives Speech on Abortion: 'This is Not a Political Debate. This is a Spiritual Battle' (VIDEO) | The Gateway Pundit | by Mike LaChance

Tucker Carlson recently gave a speech on abortion at a conservative organization called the Center for Christian Virtue.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

 

[UKDslayer]

Illegal Alien Bites Off NYPD Sergeant's Finger | The Gateway Pundit | by Anthony Scott

An illegal alien reportedly bit off an NYPD sergeant’s finger while being detained in a holding cell.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

 

[Terry Cross]

Posted here April 22, 2022...46779

Let's just hope that Killary causes enough dissension within their circles that Michelle/Mike trips on his dick politically.

.

 

[clcustom1911]

Aspartame may have an effect on sperm quality and causing learning issues in offspring of those who regularly consume it.

Aspartame could cause memory and learning deficits in future generations, a new study suggests | Fox News

Industry experts maintain the safety of the low-calorie sweetener, saying 'facts are important'

www.foxnews.com

 

[Mike Islander]

Tucker Carlson Gives Speech on Abortion: 'This is Not a Political Debate. This is a Spiritual Battle' (VIDEO) | The Gateway Pundit | by Mike LaChance

Tucker Carlson recently gave a speech on abortion at a conservative organization called the Center for Christian Virtue.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Fuck this moron. Abortion is about legal rights. Whether to do so or not is a moral (and sometimes medical) decision to exercise this basic human right of not being required to use your body to sustain another body. If men could get pregnant, we could get an abortion in 7/11.

 

[babyguppy]

Just 6 Percent of New S&P Jobs Went to White Applicants in The Wake of George Floyd, Analysis Shows

Only 6 percent of new S&P 100 jobs went to white applicants in the year after George Floyd’s death, according to an analysis by Bloomberg News, a testament to the pervasiveness of legally tenuous diversity programs throughout corporate America.

freebeacon.com

S&P 100 companies added 323,094 new jobs between 2020 and 2021. Of that total, 302,570 of them—94 percent of the total increase—went to "people of color," defined as blacks, Asians, and Hispanics, the analysis found. Together, those groups make up just 40 percent of the U.S population.​

 

[lariat]

Fuck this moron. Abortion is about legal rights. Whether to do so or not is a moral (and sometimes medical) decision to exercise this basic human right of not being required to use your body to sustain another body. If men could get pregnant, we could get an abortion in 7/11.

He was talking to religious conservatives, not you. He is stating to them what they consider to be obvious. And evidently a significant percentage of the population agrees, based on the number of states that have or are in the process of implementing abortions or at least late term abortions.

 

[Rthur]

Fuck this moron. Abortion is about legal rights. Whether to do so or not is a moral (and sometimes medical) decision to exercise this basic human right of not being required to use your body to sustain another body. If men could get pregnant, we could get an abortion in 7/11.

Explain to me how they are required to sustain “another” body.
There is a hint in my last sentence about the morality.

R

 

[Sandhog308]

Aspartame may have an effect on sperm quality and causing learning issues in offspring of those who regularly consume it.

Aspartame could cause memory and learning deficits in future generations, a new study suggests | Fox News

Industry experts maintain the safety of the low-calorie sweetener, saying 'facts are important'

www.foxnews.com

My wife passed away in 2014 from Glioblastoma aka Brain Cancer.
Hit fast , lasted 10 weeks , a very brutal way to die.

Her ONLY vice was swilling diet- Mountain Dew like water. No illegal drugs , ate clean, never smoked …..maybe a Beer at a BBQ.
Knocked down a 2 liter in a minute..though
Not sure if its sweetened with aspartame per se ?

 

[Hobo Hilton]

Just 6 Percent of New S&P Jobs Went to White Applicants in The Wake of George Floyd, Analysis Shows

Only 6 percent of new S&P 100 jobs went to white applicants in the year after George Floyd’s death, according to an analysis by Bloomberg News, a testament to the pervasiveness of legally tenuous diversity programs throughout corporate America.

freebeacon.com

S&P 100 companies added 323,094 new jobs between 2020 and 2021. Of that total, 302,570 of them—94 percent of the total increase—went to "people of color," defined as blacks, Asians, and Hispanics, the analysis found. Together, those groups make up just 40 percent of the U.S population.​

All part of the plan. When the white folks are forced to go into one of the Government agencies to apply for unemployment or other government subsidies... The "people of color" will shuffle them to the back of the line, lose their paper work or send them to stand in another line. Ask me how I know.

 

[Beefmanne]

Fuck this moron. Abortion is about legal rights. Whether to do so or not is a moral (and sometimes medical) decision to exercise this basic human right of not being required to use your body to sustain another body. If men could get pregnant, we could get an abortion in 7/11.

Just another bullshit post claiming people are not responsible for their actions.

 

[theLBC]

 

[Mike Islander]

Explain to me how they are required to sustain “another” body.
There is a hint in my last sentence about the morality.

R

This is a terrible medium to explain the bodily autonomy argument. But YouTube has many good examples.

In a nutshell, no person can legally be required to donate a portion of their body to keep another person alive. You can create, for example, children that will inherit a disease that will kill them, and not be obligated to donate a kidney to save the child's life. It's a LEGAL argument of bodily autonomy. The morality of this is of course deciding to donate the kidney or not. Certain religions would find it immoral to donate the kidney. Others wouldn't. The legal argument protects both viewpoints as the LEGAL DECISION of the donor. Same argument for "remaining pregnant".

 

[Mike Islander]

Just another bullshit post claiming people are not responsible for their actions.

It's a legal argument, not a moral argument. Probably a bit of a cross-post, but the headline says it's not about legality. The problem might be about morality, but the process is all about legality and legal protection for bodily autonomy.

 

[Mike Islander]

He was talking to religious conservatives, not you. He is stating to them what they consider to be obvious. And evidently a significant percentage of the population agrees, based on the number of states that have or are in the process of implementing abortions or at least late term abortions.

By your argument a significant percentage of the population also disagrees. My comment was based on legal protections for bodily autonomy, not the morality of the decision.

Gallup found that 69 percent of Americans — an all-time high for the poll — say abortion should be legal in the first three months of pregnancy, up to about 12 weeks. Support declines after that period, with 37 percent saying abortion should be allowed in the second trimester of pregnancy, and 22 percent supporting abortion in the third trimester. Those numbers are record highs in Gallup’s history of abortion public opinion research.

 

[Rthur]

This is a terrible medium to explain the bodily autonomy argument. But YouTube has many good examples.

In a nutshell, no person can legally be required to donate a portion of their body to keep another person alive. You can create, for example, children that will inherit a disease that will kill them, and not be obligated to donate a kidney to save the child's life. It's a LEGAL argument of bodily autonomy. The morality of this is of course deciding to donate the kidney or not. Certain religions would find it immoral to donate the kidney. Others wouldn't. The legal argument protects both viewpoints as the LEGAL DECISION of the donor. Same argument for "remaining pregnant".

Your example isn’t relevant.
Donating a kidney is a false equivalent.
They weren’t forced to partake in sex, IE the leading cause of pregnancy.
If we must rely on the legal profession to instruct morality/proper life choices it would
explain the state we are in.
One can’t remove this argument from morality.
Those that would have tried and only the blind have been swayed.

R

 

[Mike Islander]

He was talking to religious conservatives, not you. He is stating to them what they consider to be obvious. And evidently a significant percentage of the population agrees, based on the number of states that have or are in the process of implementing abortions or at least late term abortions.

And he couched it as religious human (child) sacrifice, which is ludicrous. "Political debate" in this case means legal debate, as it really makes no difference what any legislator believes if they don't apply that belief to legal rights.

It's a legal debate about bodily autonomy.

 

[W54/XM-388]

This is a terrible medium to explain the bodily autonomy argument. But YouTube has many good examples.

In a nutshell, no person can legally be required to donate a portion of their body to keep another person alive. You can create, for example, children that will inherit a disease that will kill them, and not be obligated to donate a kidney to save the child's life. It's a LEGAL argument of bodily autonomy. The morality of this is of course deciding to donate the kidney or not. Certain religions would find it immoral to donate the kidney. Others wouldn't. The legal argument protects both viewpoints as the LEGAL DECISION of the donor. Same argument for "remaining pregnant".

NOT in any way the same.

But thanks for being brainwashed...

 

[lariat]

House approves bill striking down Biden's crackdown on hunting and archery in overwhelmingly bipartisan vote

The House voted on a massive bipartisan basis in favor of legislation reversing the Biden administration's interpretation of a 2022 law to defund school shooting sports programs.

www.foxnews.com

 

[lariat]

And he couched it as religious human (child) sacrifice, which is ludicrous. "Political debate" in this case means legal debate, as it really makes no difference what any legislator believes if they don't apply that belief to legal rights.

It's a legal debate about bodily autonomy.

So what do you do with the representatives that vote in politics about proposed laws using their religious beliefs? If it becomes law, what do YOU do? What do you do with representatives that have the backing of their religious constituents for the banning of abortion? Because that's what's happening with this issue.

I'm curious, you stepped out there to voice your strong opinions on this matter. What past experience has brought you to this conclusion?

 

[theLBC]

i don't know if this is legit

 

[Dead Eye Dick]

A bit off the subject but some comic relief to the issues of the day

 

[Dead Eye Dick]

Something we need to consider as a people in every endeavor (especially our national government)

 

[Beefmanne]

And he couched it as religious human (child) sacrifice, which is ludicrous. "Political debate" in this case means legal debate, as it really makes no difference what any legislator believes if they don't apply that belief to legal rights.

It's a legal debate about bodily autonomy.

So making it an economical sacrifice justifies it?

 

[Mike Islander]

So what do you do with the representatives that vote in politics about proposed laws using their religious beliefs? If it becomes law, what do YOU do? What do you do with representatives that have the backing of their religious constituents for the banning of abortion? Because that's what's happening with this issue.

I'm curious, you stepped out there to voice your strong opinions on this matter. What past experience has brought you to this conclusion?

Past experience is simply living and thinking about this for over 60 years. I've been fully on both sides of this fence. My current opinion is one based on individual rights of bodily autonomy. This is a position I was argued into by good arguments that I could not refute. Many examples on YouTube.

I believe religious belief has no place in decision-making if it violates constitutional rights. That's my belief. A great example is Christian sects that refuse to give or receive blood transfusions for themselves or their children. If legally prohibited that would violate the rights of those who don't share that belief to bodily autonomy.

What do I do? I express my beliefs when asked. I think there is a huge difference in aborting a 3-day old zygote versus a viable fetus. I believe killing the a viable fetus is wrong. Removing it upholds bodily autonomy of the mother, but killing it violates the autonomy of the then child. Removing it before it is viable upholds bodily autonomy of the mother, at the expense of the fetus. Just as not requiring a parent to donate a kidney to a living, breathing child with friends and life experiences upholds bodily autonomy at the expense of a living, breathing human being. I believe the moral question is not a legal question, nor should it be. I believe the moral DECISION rests within the PERSON making the decision.

This is not a simple topic, though some will impose a simplistic solution.

 

[Mike Islander]

So making it an economical sacrifice justifies it?

Wrong quote, as I literally said absolutely nothing about economics. If you mean something deeper, you'll have to expand beyond a short sentence for me to offer any reasonable reply.

 

[Hobo Hilton]

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene Passes Amendment on House Floor to FIRE Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin​

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene Passes Amendment on House Floor to FIRE Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin

greene.house.gov

 

[quietmike]

Fuck this moron. Abortion is about legal rights. Whether to do so or not is a moral (and sometimes medical) decision to exercise this basic human right of not being required to use your body to sustain another body. If men could get pregnant, we could get an abortion in 7/11.

66% of the entire federal budget goes to sustaining other bodies. Bodies who are ostensibly adults, but can't figure out how to run their own lives.

 

[Beefmanne]

Wrong quote, as I literally said absolutely nothing about economics. If you mean something deeper, you'll have to expand beyond a short sentence for me to offer any reasonable reply.

You said “religious human (child) sacrifice is ludicrous,” I’m just trying to see what form of child sacrifice is acceptable.

 

[quietmike]

Past experience is simply living and thinking about this for over 60 years. I've been fully on both sides of this fence. My current opinion is one based on individual rights of bodily autonomy. This is a position I was argued into by good arguments that I could not refute. Many examples on YouTube.

I believe religious belief has no place in decision-making if it violates constitutional rights. That's my belief. A great example is Christian sects that refuse to give or receive blood transfusions for themselves or their children. If legally prohibited that would violate the rights of those who don't share that belief to bodily autonomy.

What do I do? I express my beliefs when asked. I think there is a huge difference in aborting a 3-day old zygote versus a viable fetus. I believe killing the a viable fetus is wrong. Removing it upholds bodily autonomy of the mother, but killing it violates the autonomy of the then child. Removing it before it is viable upholds bodily autonomy of the mother, at the expense of the fetus. Just as not requiring a parent to donate a kidney to a living, breathing child with friends and life experiences upholds bodily autonomy at the expense of a living, breathing human being. I believe the moral question is not a legal question, nor should it be. I believe the moral DECISION rests within the PERSON making the decision.

This is not a simple topic, though some will impose a simplistic solution.

If viability is the metric, able to sustain oneself, then open season at the welfare office and public housing?

 

[lariat]

Past experience is simply living and thinking about this for over 60 years. I've been fully on both sides of this fence. My current opinion is one based on individual rights of bodily autonomy. This is a position I was argued into by good arguments that I could not refute. Many examples on YouTube.

I believe religious belief has no place in decision-making if it violates constitutional rights. That's my belief. A great example is Christian sects that refuse to give or receive blood transfusions for themselves or their children. If legally prohibited that would violate the rights of those who don't share that belief to bodily autonomy.

What do I do? I express my beliefs when asked. I think there is a huge difference in aborting a 3-day old zygote versus a viable fetus. I believe killing the a viable fetus is wrong. Removing it upholds bodily autonomy of the mother, but killing it violates the autonomy of the then child. Removing it before it is viable upholds bodily autonomy of the mother, at the expense of the fetus. Just as not requiring a parent to donate a kidney to a living, breathing child with friends and life experiences upholds bodily autonomy at the expense of a living, breathing human being. I believe the moral question is not a legal question, nor should it be. I believe the moral DECISION rests within the PERSON making the decision.

This is not a simple topic, though some will impose a simplistic solution.

Although I wholeheartedly do not agree with you, I found this to be a reply that gave reasons and was void of insults and emotions and I can respect a reply that does that. Thank you.

 

[Mike Islander]

If viability is the metric, able to sustain oneself, then open season at the welfare office and public housing?

I meant what I wrote. I don't think I left anything out.

 

[Mike Islander]

You said “religious human (child) sacrifice is ludicrous,” I’m just trying to see what form of child sacrifice is acceptable.

To couch a woman's decision to end pregnancy as somehow being an actual religious ceremony (i.e. "religious rite"; note the spelling) is obtuse and demonstrably wrong (i.e. bullshit used to incite a response). Women who make that difficult decision aren't thinking "I'm going to offer a child sacrifice in this religious ceremony". Tucker can pretend, for the benefit of his audience, that one has anything to do with the other, but it's a grossly formed simile and metaphor at best.

 

[Beefmanne]

To couch a woman's decision to end pregnancy as somehow being an actual religious ceremony (i.e. "religious rite"; note the spelling) is obtuse and demonstrably wrong (i.e. bullshit used to incite a response). Women who make that difficult decision aren't thinking "I'm going to offer a child sacrifice in this religious ceremony". Tucker can pretend, for the benefit of his audience, that one has anything to do with the other, but it's a grossly formed simile and metaphor at best.

The simple fact is that it is sacrificing the child’s life, wether it is religious, economic, or selfishness, it’s still a sacrifice. You can justify it any way you wish, the result is the same.

 

[Mike Islander]

The simple fact is that it is sacrificing the child’s life, wether it is religious, economic, or selfishness, it’s still a sacrifice. You can justify it any way you wish, the result is the same.

It's not a religious sacrifice as characterized by Tucker. He was careful to add that it's basically a Satanic ritual and that anyone who advocates for bodily autonomy is "our enemy". That's divisive and damaging to the country, of which, BTW, 69% support at least some legal access to abortion.

Sacrifice carries with it some implicit baggage that does not cover the full story. And language matters. A zygote with 16 cells in not a "child". It has the potential to become a child. But "God" will abort 75% of all zygotes. Is God aborting children? Language matters, and Tucker's language is device and self-serving. IMO

 

[Hobo Hilton]

LOL.... Another gimmick by Costco to get memberships renewed.... Costco has no shame

Costco is selling gold bars and they are selling out within a few hours

The retail warehousing giant is your one-stop shop for one-ounce gold bars, handsomely detailed and ready for purchase.

www.cnbc.com

 

[quietmike]

I meant what I wrote. I don't think I left anything out.

I'm looking for clarification. Why is it ok to kill non-viable babies, but not adults who can't sustain themselves?