If Putin dies or is overtaken, will you be sad?

[OddBeMe]

Seems weird to ask but apparently Trump-folk love him, scarily…

You prob think this pic is Ukraine. This is Rostov, Russia.

I’ll be sad. I like Putin

I’ll be happy, he’s a dictator.

[Anonymous]

Will I be sad as Russia is broken up and carved up by US corporations and of course Ukraine will have to pay back the aid they were given and of course US companies will be given exclusive contracts to rebuild Ukraine.
The Ukraine war looks to be going according to plan right from the invasion, the US government's plan. Putin walked Russia right into the trap and putin tried to dig Russia out of the trap only to make the whole deeper.
If you ever want to know what has happened and why regarding US foreign policy you have to always look at the result and how US corporations benefited.

[reds-noro]

Happy the fecker is gone, sad that a new one takes his place.

[OddBeMe]

You can say fucker here.

[reds-noro]

Fecker sounds more fun.

[Stoner710]

No I wouldn’t really care,

That being said, I hate both Vlads (Ukraine and Russia) the best outcome in my opinion is they both die, Zelenskyy lost my support when he lied about a Ukrainian missile killing 2 Polish farmers and tried blaming it on Putin which would have started WW3 based off a lie. Both of them are asshole in my opinion so I don’t support either one, I support the Russia women (because Russian women are hot) and I support the Ukrainian people because the people are fighting to protect there home businesses families and children.

[OddBeMe]

Strange how you evaluate which leaders you like. Zelenskyy lied once, now you hate him. Trump’s liked multiple multiple times, love him still. Clarence is a billionaires bitch, but you still love him…

You are an enigma…

[Stoner710]

The difference is Zelenskyy’s lie could have led to nuclear war. Also, Clarence Thomas is not a billionaire is bitch they are friends get over it if you don’t want politicians having billionaire friends, then get rid of the lobbyist groups and then guess what Democrats will never win again

[OddBeMe]

Friends who buy their mothers houses just before a court case hits their docket?

[Stoner710]

It wasn’t Crow’s court case, Crow even had a count case go to the Supreme Court and Clarance Thomas refused to hear the case. If I was a billionaire, I buy my friends houses is why not I’m a billionaire. Just another day for billionaires. You’re trying to find corruption where there is not.

[goaded]

Refusing to hear that case meant Crow won.

[Stoner710]

@goaded what was the case even about? Crow might have lost I know he was getting sued In 2004

[goaded]

"So there actually was one case where one of the companies associated with Harlan Crow did go up before the Supreme Court. And a Bloomberg News colleague actually reported this scoop out a couple of weeks ago. But it was a case where an architecture firm was suing a Trammell Crow residential, which is a firm that develops apartment buildings. And they were suing the apartment developer for allegedly misusing its designs, so accusing them of copyright infringement. But the court issued a one-sentence order and didn't have any recusals, so Thomas didn't recuse himself in this case."

[Stoner710]

@goaded ah seems like a very minor case compared to the cases that have recently came before the Supreme Court which was rejected.

Now this many just me being ignorant, but I don’t see how a Supreme Court justice, and recuse himself/herself from a case given there are 9 of them and we need an odd numbered decision. It’s not like the DOJ where Jeff Sessions with recused himself. I have a degree in history and political science but I don’t have a law degree. I don't know how the law would work in the case of SCOTUS

[goaded]

You don't need an odd-numbered decision, you need a majority decision. If the decision was otherwise evenly split then the person who'd been bribed and refused to recuse would be the one to decide the result. In the recent Harvard decision Jackson recused herself because she sits on the board. That's the way it should be.

SCOTUS is supposed to not just be impartial but also avoid even the appearence of partiality. Reasonable people can agree that taking expensive holidays from someone who you didn't know before you were a SCOTUS justice and not recusing yourself when they come before the court looks bad. Not reporting the holidays looks guilty.

The same can be said of Judge Cannon, who already was reprimanded in no uncertain terms by an appeals court for inserting herself unlawfully on Trump's behalf in an earlier stage of the case she's now overseeing.

[Stoner710]

@goaded “ you need a majority decision” that’s why you need an odd number of justices also, Jackson did not recuse yourself in the Harvard decision she wrote an entire descent which was full of racism American is horrible nonsense which sound is why he was ripped out of the pages of a Ibram X Kennedy book.

In terms of the way justices interpret the constitution is completely different there are 2 schools of thought. 1 is Wilsonian view of the constitution (referring to Woodrow Wilson). Who believe in 1912 the constitution was an old document that didn’t apply anymore in America life because now we’re to sophisticated for it. The other is an originalist interpretation where you read the constitution as it was written when it was written. Like the 14th amendment which Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan love to put there own modern interpretation into the constitution this is where we get the idea that gay marriage abortion and contraception is protected by the constitution. Thomas Cavanagh Gorsuch. And Amy Coney Barrett and Samuel Alito say they’re wrong because they’re originalist judges. (Robert’s is the middle of the pack hence why he tends to be the swing vote) which is why we got Roe v Wade over turned.

It all comes down to interpretation not left or right. Yes we call them conservative justices or leftist justices because they’re appointed by the president and the president who is a partisan figure especially after Obama and Trump are more partisan. Robert was appointed by Bush Jr and Bush Jr was a center right republican like Robert’s is.

[goaded]

5-3 and 6-2 are also majority decisions, and yes, Jackson did recuse, she didn't vote. She wrote what she thought of the decision. (There have been hundreds of times justices have recused themselves.)

""Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson recused herself from the Harvard case, because she had served for years on one of Harvard's governing bodies, but she participated in the North Carolina case.

And she wrote a scathing dissent, part of which reads this way: "With let them eat cake obliviousness, today, the majority pulls the rip cord and announces colorblindness for all by legal fiat. But deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life.""
www.pbs.org/.../breaking-down-the-supreme-courts-ruling-ending-affirmative-action-in-college-admissions

[Stoner710]

@goaded ok I was wrong on that one. But her opinion was 100% racist, It was like reading pages from an actual white supremacist diary, We do need to have a color blind society. Equal protection under the last means white don’t get an advantage over black black don’t get and advantage over whites. Latinos don’t get an advantage over Asians, etc..

[OddBeMe]

@goaded thank you, I didn’t feel like getting into this Harlan shit…even though I live miles from him and you live 15000 miles away lol

[goaded]

Pointing out the fact of racism is not racism, no matter how much some people want to pretend it is.

[Stoner710]

@goaded you can point out the facts of racism without advocating for racism. The fact is forcing Asian Americans to score 200 points higher of the SATs then blacks and Latinos in order to get into college is 1 not only racist towards Asians but 2 it’s racist towards blacks as well.

You’re discriminating against Asians, by not letting them into college when they pass the SATs but you’re also saying black people are inherently stupid, and cannot succeed like Asians do. That’s what the logic of what she said. She also suggest that racism of the pass is nice keys for racism now. It’s because black people were treated horribly in the past they must be given preferential treatment today. Which ends with an endless cycle of racism. Because presumably we’re being racist towards Asian people today so in 150 years from now we’re going to have to be racist again towards Black people or Latinos or order to make up for the racism that happened in 2023. The color of your skin shouldn’t determine whether or not you get into college, When you look at what she says in her descending argument is the same argument that the white supremacist make all the time. The only way we can get rid of racism in American society it seems like is government mandated color blindness and not take race into account at all. That what equal protection under the law means. Or should we not have equal protection under the law?

[goaded]

The problem is that the court essentially declared that there is no racism, which is obviously not true. More black kids grow up in poor areas with poor schools, and that's a reason they're less likely to perform well in exams. (We shouldn't forget that affirmative action was also to increase female participation in higher education.)

Now, I don't know the details of how the schools calculate these things (I suspect if varies from school to school, or at least area to area), but it seems to me that boosting people who managed to be in the top 10% (or 5%, whatever) in their schools could help without directly referring to a person's skin colour.

Legacy admissions, which is a boost for having a family member who attended the same school, is absolutely nothing to do with merit and since previous generations at most schools were predominantly white, has the effect of boosting white students over any of the others.

The result of keeping the latter and not the former will have a predictable effect, don't you think?

[Stoner710]

@goaded 🤦‍♂️ that’s not what the court was saying, of course there’s still racism at the individual level. What they are saying is under the constitution (the 14th amendment) you can’t use race as a determinant, whether or not you were accepted to college title 9 of the civil prevents the discrimination of men and women based on there sex. by the way there are more women going to college in modern society than men.

You can put in an essay that Your from a low income family and went to a low income school so you scored the way you have because of the situation you grew up in you can’t use race. There are poor American of all races, why should a poor Asian student who worked hard have to score higher on the SATs than the poor block student who grew up in a similar income level. The point is you can’t use race as an excuse.

I agree with you in Legacy admissions the reason why colleges admit Legacy students is because they think there going to get a giant check form the students parents the Legacy students should have to score high on the SATs and if someone of any race does better then that legacy student the non-legacy should get in over the legacy

[goaded]

Fair enough, I suppose, but people like Pence are talking about a "colorblind society", as if it's real, and as if legacy admissions don't inherently tip the scales away from Black (and Asian) students.

Perhaps a field for maximum, median, and mean SATs in your graduating years would be good for recognising exceptional candidates.

[Stoner710]

@goaded there will always be individuals racist out there I hate racism, there a difference between a racist joke that’s clearly a joke vs actual discrimination. One of the saddest Steven Crowder interviews when he did his affirmative action changed my mind segments was he was interviewing this black girl who was very clearly intelligent and she couldn’t say that she got in on her own merit, or if she got them because of affirmative action.

I think without affirmative action there is definitely a way of telling that somebody made it through college in to the career of their choice and we won’t know that they are actually qualified for the position.

https://youtu.be/UfEk8UJIwTc

[goaded]

B, but he'll just be replaced by another dictator.

[OddBeMe]

Oh his oligarchs will step in. Funny that’s what Repubs want really. A businessman as political leader. We can just point to Russia and say, no…
https://youtu.be/dOOmlwjPlbc

[goaded]

Rorschach!

I still haven't watched the HBO adaptation. Aw, and it's no longer available for free. :(
https://www.hbo.com/watchmen

[OddBeMe]

It was pretty good. I wished they continued. So much deeper than the Batman shit. They could've done a GoT on Watchmen. Prequels, sequels etc. But guess not many viewers were interested.

You could probably rent or buy the series on Amazon.

[goaded]

There's so much on TV, I'll get it at a second hand DVD place some time, maybe.

[OddBeMe]

Dvd? Ok gpa.

[Naydyonov]

Not sure the relevance of your picture. That is PMC Wagner during its takeover of the city. I am most sad by how Putin squandered so many opportunities & resources. Had he stepped down in ~2008-2010, he would've become the George Washington of Russia. By now, he will be remembered more as modern Russia's Nicholas 2nd once his system eventually unravels.

[OddBeMe]

You live in Russia?

[Naydyonov]

No. Also, I must've been tired, because suddenly I do see the relevance of the picture and am totally confused why I didn't before. :D

[Anonymous]

LoL no. Why would any of us be?

Of course that will never happen. I know, I know, you’re a big fanboy of Ukraine and their corrupt ass regime and country full of literal Nazis, but uh, Putin ain’t going anywhere any time soon.

There’s your buddies. 😉

[OddBeMe]

And who’s their boss? Oh a Ukrainians Jew.

[MysticDevice]

Here's the problem: if Putin dies, he'll just be replaced by an even more psychotic dictator.

Until Russia can truley embrace Liberty and real Democracy it's just gonna be one dictator after another. Old habits die hard. Especially in the old Soviet bloc.

[Anonymous]

If Putin dies he will be replaced by anther oligarch, inexperienced, in a already unstable situation.
Yes they could be better, but they could also be worse, the only thing we can be sure of is they won't necessary have the same iron grip on Russia Putin did,

[Drumlin2001]

Have no feelings towards Putin. But what comes after him. Who takes over? Sometimes better the Devil you know

[OddBeMe]

I look back at dictators and their predecessors are usually opposite, more liberal. Stalin to Khrushchev.

[jshm2]

Considering American backed regime change has fucked up 100% of the countries it's been attempted in, what makes you think it will work in Ukraine?

Yes, Zelinski is a puppet who got in after the West illegally deposed the democratically elected Viktor Yanukovych.

It's one reason Putin is doing what he is doing. He knows the West cannot be trusted to keep it's claws out of resource rich countries.

[Meropatrick]

I would. He is a great and smart leader which is rare nowadays. He is keeping our world fair and in check instead of the US taking over everything and ruining other people interest for the few American elites gain.

[OddBeMe]

I expect you’re Russian. How’s the ruble and your economy been under his reign? Shouldn’t that be a big issue?

[Juxtapose]

Better than your buddies here:

[OddBeMe]

Yeah and they’re taking orders from a Ukrainian Jew. I like that better than the Russian Nationalist commander who downed MH17.

[Juxtapose]

Putin isn't doing anything that doesn't make sense. As I have said before, if you were Putin you would not want NATO right at your border.

[OddBeMe]

Like Bush he illegally invaded another country without cause.

[Juxtapose]

Bush had no legitimate reason to think Iraq was a threat. Putin has every right to treat NATO like an enemy.. they were literally founded to oppose the Soviet Union.

[OddBeMe]

Actually he doesn’t. Only he has been attacking NATO. Not the reverse.

[OddBeMe]

Funny how I could say “go back to russia” when it was reverse during the counterculture.

[Juxtapose]

The fuck are you talking about? If the USA had an international faction that was founded just to fuck with the USA then yeah, you bet you would say would be running all kinds of secretive operations to fuck with that organization right back.

This is like the Cuban missile crisis which we almost went to war over.

[Juxtapose]

*you the USA would be running all kinds of secretive

[OddBeMe]

Woah…first off, get pUtins dick out of your mouth. Second nato isn’t fcking with Russian elections, not that they have fair ones anyway.

[Juxtapose]

Are you serious?

NATO is a threat to Russia.

[OddBeMe]

How? We buy their oil until they act like bitches

[Juxtapose]

Are you not aware that NATO was founded to oppose the Soviet Union?

[OddBeMe]

History isn’t that black and white. The Soviet Union literally closed ranks and iron curtained before NATO was conceived. And it did just as much whacky shit as we did.

[Juxtapose]

Putin has every right to be concerned about who is at his borders, especially enemies. Do not remember the Cuban missile crisis? That was not even at our borders.

[OddBeMe]

So a nation democratically ejects a Russian puppet, Putin had every right to invade?

[Juxtapose]

That used to be part of the Soviet Union. Do you think the USA would be cool with giving up Puerto Rico if it was right next to the USA and also was being taken by the USA's enemy?

Cuban missile crisis dude.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

I'll be happy when he gets killed. Disgusting human being he is.

[exitseven]

Putin had a good run as despots go. It is about time he goes away.

[LiamJHayden]

No, but I have a small concern that the next one could be even worse.

[OddBeMe]

Not sure. Historically, horrible dictators have been replaced by more moderate reformers. But Russia is weird in that they like this dictator.

[Jerre]

I would be sort of happy, just depends on whether holds an election to determine the next President or someone whose than Putin steps in.

[loveslongnails]

I'd be happy if it were a double funeral.

[OddBeMe]

Who’s the other guy?

[loveslongnails]

His lapdog D. J. Trump

[Dargil]

Neither. The next one may be worse.

[msc545]

don't care

[OddBeMe]

It might be the reason WW3 starts but I won’t be prognosticator. Lol