Recent Headlines in the IP World:
- Nida Zafar: Meta Ordered to Pay Voxer Millions in Patent Infringement Case (Source: Mobile Syrup)
- Chris Burt: Trio of Apple Patent Filings Describe Biometrics Innovations for Various Devices (Source: Biometric Update)
- Brett Foote: Ford Patent Filed for Instant Cabin Heating System (Source: Ford Authority)
Commentary and Journal Articles:
- Prof. Colleen V. Chien: Redefining Progress and the Case for Diversity in Innovation and Inventing (Source: SSRN)
- Prof. Richard Epstein: Market Competition as a Constitutional Virtue: A Defense of Lochner and a Revitalized Dormant Commerce Clause (Source: SSRN)
- Prof. Peter Georg Picht and Prof. Jorge L. Contreras: Proportionality Defenses in FRAND Cases – A Comparative Assessment of the Revised German Patent Injunction Rules and US Case Law (Source: SSRN)
New Job Postings on Patently-O:
Somehow I knew that the traditional conservative horror at judges who “legislate from the bench” would evaporate the moment that conservatives took a majority on the Supreme Court. Sure enough, I see that Prof. Epstein has arrived to confirm my suspicions. No surprise there…
“it seems more probable than not that the total number of cases world-wide will peak out at well under 1 million, with the total number of deaths at under 50,000. In the United States, the current 67 deaths should reach about 5000 [total deaths from the covid-19 pandemic]”
Richard Epstein’s most lasting contribution to the planet. What a piece of work.
Prophet, it is no longer 1970. We have all sorts of BC methods. Even condoms are 98% effective. Why do men refuse to wear condoms and help ensure no pregnancy? Talk about equality! I trust no man who supports abortion because they may be doing so for selfish means.
For extra credit, can you explain what needs to be done to abort a fetus at 15 weeks?
As for immigration, Trump tried to cut a deal for the Dreamers. Agains what a majority of his voters would have preferred. Dems wanted nothing to do with it. Could not give him a win.
And you all need to learn how involved the cartels are in illegal immigration, and how much money they make. Billions of dollars. People pay/owe 5000 and up per person to cross. Women and children get raped along the way. Jorge Ramos did one story on this, and then stopped.
“ I trust no man who supports abortion because they may be doing so for selfish means.”
Get psychiatric help, you effing psycho.
How is pointing out the truth psycho? Do men not benefit from abortion being freely available even up to birth?
Why don’t men do all they can to prevent an unwanted pregnancy in the first place? Abortions, especially late-term, are not without safety concerns for the woman. Because they do not have to do so. They won’t become pregnant.
“Even condoms are 98% effective”
That’s a fancy way of saying 2% chance of pregnancy lol. Tho I’m pretty sure it is higher, like 1 in a thousand, if used correctly (tho many people can’t use em correctly lol). Those numbers don’t sound high, but they actually are over a population.
“And you all need to learn how involved the cartels are in illegal immigration”
It’s ridiculous. They basically control the other side of the border save a tiny few major ports of entry.
“Women and children get ra ped along the way.”
Illegal supporters are happy to look the other way.
“Jorge Ramos did one story on this, and then stopped.”
Even Vice did a piece on it, all the places that do a piece say the same thing, because it’s easy to ID the truth. But people are too attached to “fighting the ebil ra cists” and larping as virtuous paragons to acknowledge what is actually happening.
Fine , WT. nice story about illegal immigrants, as you seem to know exactly why they came and have chosen to stay. I don’t believe the crapola that you are spewing from your pie hole, but I suppose that will not change one thing.
And you are definitely a catholic hater, MM.
“And you are definitely a catholic hater, MM.”
To be fair MM is an equal opportunity hat er. Anti-gay, anti-women, anti-black people, anti-catholic, anti-you name it.
WT, you may assert that Biden is center-left , and perhaps he is, but he is also in the early stages of dementia and allowing others who are far left of him to run the country’s agenda. For you to argue otherwise shows you are part blind to things that are obvious for all to see.
“Not Seeing” IS a shockingly extensive mode of the Liberal Left.
Totally off-topic, but I see that the CA5 (per curiam opinion for a panel comprised of Judges King, Elrod, & Southwick) dismissed US Inventor’s suit against the USPTO on standing grounds last Friday.
Thanks Greg.
I’m confused.
How can Chien want an increase in the diversity of innovators and patent-holders . . . at the same time she spends so much of her professional life . . . trying to burn down the very patent system these folks must have to accomplish her desired ends?
I’m confused.
Colleen: A rising ocean lifts all the innovation / patenting boats for everyone.
E.v.e.r.y.o.n.e.
Sink one boat, you sink them all.
How can Chien want an increase in the diversity of innovators and patent-holders . . . at the same time she spends so much of her professional life . . . trying to burn down the very patent system these folks must have to accomplish her desired ends?
I was thinking the same.
. . . does she want a greater diversity . . . of failures?
And your little conundrum is solved if she is insincere. A huckster.
Holy cow bros, I was just watching some periscope films of yesteryear and saw one on sulfur mining, and some other industrial things and early nasa stuff. But more crazily I came across one that shows a very early driverless car, didn’t half believe it! Halfway through. May even be half decent prior art for some examiners needing some basic recitations for driverless car claims.
link to youtube.com
What is so strange WT is the way if I don’t agree with your politics that you have made up all these things in your head about me.
I am go with facts and my news sources are varied including things like the WSJ and foreign news sources.
What is so strange to me is the way you abstract away anyone that isn’t one of the “mainstream media” believers as some far right crazy person. Just weird. Particularly, when Biden is objectively far left and many of his policies are socialist and many of the policies he advocates for are against the US Constitution. And many of the mainstream commentators argue that the Constitution is a worthless document.
But I am extreme. Sorry, but my views are mainstream centralist views and you and the a large part of the country have moved very, very far to the left.
Anyway, it is truly like arguing with a Moonie from the 70’s when talking to people like you. Just no way to have a rational conversation.
It is also incredible to me the way the mainstream view does not attribute our current problems to the policies of Biden. Inflation, crime, energy costs, fentanyl, and so forth all are problems that somehow aren’t the fault of the Ds. But, of course, the rational people —like me—know all of those problems were caused by Biden’s policies.
And one of the most extreme positions of the Ds that somehow the Hunter Laptop was Russian disinformation and now ignoring it when it has substantial evidence that Joe Biden committed felonies and at the very least was influence peddling while Vice President and taking large sums of money.
Or that Hillary paid for the Steele document and personally approved a lawyer lying to the FBI about Trump communicating with a Russian bank.
All of those are facts.
Anyway….no way to talk to a Moonie.
(By the way, your Fox news lawsuit was the second such suit. The first suit was MSNBC where Rachel Maddow made the same arguments as Tucker Carlson and won.)
(Barbara Walters did the morning how in the late 60’s and watcher her report on the Kent State shootings the morning after they happened.)
I haven’t moved politically much at all. (Pro-Life, Pro-LGBQT+, supply side, small government, social programs fine but need to be verified they are working, and so forth.)
You Moonies have become Marxists and don’t even know it.
The answer to your question about the search results is things like academic papers on voting.
Just weird we have a Marxist movement in the USA and they call anyone that isn’t a Marxists all sort of names and try to link anyone that isn’t a Marxist with Trump and Jan. 6th. Moonies/Stalin/Mao redux. The dangerous people in the USA are you people on the left.
(Stack the Scotus, end the filibuster, end the Electoral College, forced quotas based on skin color and sex in every segment of society, equity (or equal outcomes), the FBI/DOJ as enforcement arms of the President, censorship on social media, and so forth.)
Ch ien>>>In the United States, women represent 50% of the workforce, but only 27% of STEM workers
This is a good example of the Marx ism. Women don’t like the STEM fields as much as men and the studies show that even with equal opportunity that women would rather not be in the STEM fields as much as men. But here here we see the Mar xist saying that if it isn’t 50/50, then it is the result of sex ist or rac ist policies. This plan and simple the redux of Marxism and we can count on it not ending well.
Women now make up almost 2/3 of college students and at least 50 percent in medical school and law schools.
Chie n has a long history of being a huckster. Making money burning down the patent system.
Yeah, Ch ien seems to be perched high on her ivory tower.
“This plan and simple the redux of Marxism and we can count on it not ending well.”
Small amounts of lead remain the only 100% cure for this malady. Obviously nobody likes having to resort to that though.
See Dr. Lindsay’s expositions on “what would be understood.”
Hint: you are NOT far off here, 6.
“What is so strange WT is the way if I don’t agree with your politics that you have made up all these things in your head about me.”
Not strange at all for leftists bruh.
“Particularly, when Biden is objectively far left and many of his policies are socialist and many of the policies he advocates for are against the US Constitution. ”
Funny to hear you say that, and I agree on some issues, but you’ll hear Jimmy Dore telling us all the things that make mainstream dems, biden included “Right wingers”. And Dore is not entirely incorrect either.
Dore misses, as he (appears) to mistake ‘authoritarianism’ as necessarily being only possible from the political Right.
Actual (and factual, for those concerned with such) historical records over the past 250 years Easily show that Left-Authoritarianism has been Far worse than Right-Authoritarianism.
“Dore misses, as he (appears) to mistake ‘authoritarianism’ as necessarily being only possible from the political Right.”
I have to disagree there. Ol Dore is definitely lefty but he is will come down like a ton of bricks on lefties that go authoritarian even half an inch. Indeed, he’s burned too many bridges over small sht with other people on the left imo over just such things. Needlessly (for him) even in some cases imo.
“Actual (and factual, for those concerned with such) historical records over the past 250 years Easily show that Left-Authoritarianism has been Far worse than Right-Authoritarianism.”
Nobody here is disputing that I don’t think.
“Or that Hillary … personally approved a lawyer lying to the FBI about Trump communicating with a Russian bank.
All of those are facts.”
This isn’t a fact. Someone said this and you uncritically lapped it up. Your analysis capabilities are no different than the extreme leftists you decry. Just an ovis of another color.
Yes Ben that is a fact. You just don’t know it because you watch MS NBC.
The Russian bank hoax was paid for by the HRC campaign and the final step of reporting it to the FBI was personally approved by HRC. FACT.
I note no links in your post.
Why don’t you put up some evidence of:
“Hillary … personally approved a lawyer lying to the FBI about Trump communicating with a Russian bank.”
You won’t because you can’t.
I’m pretty sure that you think you’re referring to Rob Mook’s testimony that Clinton approved sharing unvalidated information with the media. But that’s distinct in multiple ways from your claim. Someone warped a bit of real information, and you ate it up.
Why don’t you take a six month break from cable news and streaming media? Find a place on the internet where people disagree vehemently with you, but are willing to respectfully engage. I don’t think that sort of detoxing would be wasted on you. I think that after you mind clears a bit you might find we’re a lot closer on the political spectrum than you believe.
The Sussmann trial and the upcoming Danchenko trial have presented facts in evidence that the Hillary campaign did pay for the Steele dossier. Danchenko was the subsource used by Steele and became a CHS for the FBI which protected him from disclosure.
You can read the papers. Clearly, who you watch/read is not reporting it.
Sussmann was found not guilty of lying to the FBI by a jury in DC. He intentionally lied. The jury basically said it was a waste of resources.
Flynn did not lie intentionally, and would have probably been found guilty by that same jury. Lots or resources were wasted trying to take him down, for saying something contrary to a transcript regarding a call he had, during a meeting that the FBI claimed was informal and for which they said he did not need an attorney.
Do you really not know all this?
They don’t know any of this because they limit their news to the mainstream media, which is no longer a reliable source. They are like the Moonies in the 70’s. Their leaders say some nonsense and they go along with it. They all believe there is no inflation, no recession, that the border is closed, that crime is not out of control, and so forth.
It is bizarre too how the mainstream media has produced this ridiculous story in the Post about the laptop, which the left refers in order to dismiss the Joe’s culpability. The fact is there is enough to impeach Joe Biden now and enough to start an investigation by the DOJ/FBI into whether Joe Biden was acting as a foreign agent while Vice President. Plus the mainstream media doesn’t even report that Joe Biden right now is hiding foreign money transfers to Hunter that were flagged as being suspicious. There are something like 100 of them.
Plus, they don’t even seem to know that Hunter committed felonies with copious evidence on the laptop. But magically the FBI has drug their feet on it for years now.
WT, I’m not going to bother responding to all this as it all falls under the same category of misinformation.
Just take the Hunter Biden laptop. I read the Post story you cite to. It says very little. The evidence of Joe Biden’s involvement are either from verified email, voicemail, and such from the laptop or from secondary sources that verify the contents of the laptop. Such as business partners of Hunter’s verifying that Joe was involved and that he was the “big guy.” Foreign money transfer to Hunter. White House logs of Hunter’s business partners coming to the White House.
The fact is too that the FBI could resolve the issues raised in that article and have not. The fact is too that the Post knew before the 2020 election that the laptop was not Russian disinformation but chose to hide the truth to effect the election.
I just can’t believe that an educated person could look at all the evidence around the laptop and come up with your conclusions. Just weird. Moonie level thinking. The gaslighting is just beyond belief.
Or just take as another thing the Moonies don’t know about.
The fact that the civil lawsuit of the NY AG (is not only acting like a Soviet prosecutor in trying to find a crime to get Trump and ran on “getting” Trump) was previously investigated by the Southern District of New York —for two years–and their conclusion was that there was no crime committed and that it didn’t make sense to file a lawsuit. But somehow that fact is missing from the Moonie narrative.
Ben, you are such a joke.
The type of thing that divides the country is one side denying the reality of the laptop.
Every argument I have with you is like this where you try to mischaracterize what I’ve said or mischaracterize what you say.
What I said was a minor mistake. What I said is what real reporters said was likely to happen had it not been for the jurors that would not convict a person that admitted to a felony. Sussman would have turned over Clinton and her campaign had he feared being convicted.
What divides the country is not being able to get a jury in DC to convict a person guilty of lying to the FBI because he was a D working for Hillary.
Anyway, enough of your trash.
Mr. Mook testified as a witness in special counsel John Durham’s trial of Michael Sussmann, the lawyer accused of lying to the FBI. In September 2016, Mr. Sussmann took claims of a secret Trump connection to Russia’s Alfa Bank to the FBI and said he wasn’t acting on behalf of any client. Prosecutors say he was working for the Clinton campaign.
link to wsj.com
Still no link to defend the claim I asked about.
Because you can’t.
About as close as I can get quickly. Let’s see what Hillary would say under oath.
Mr. Mook testified as a witness in special counsel John Durham’s trial of Michael Sussmann, the lawyer accused of lying to the FBI. In September 2016, Mr. Sussmann took claims of a secret Trump connection to Russia’s Alfa Bank to the FBI and said he wasn’t acting on behalf of any client. Prosecutors say he was working for the Clinton campaign.
link to wsj.com
Monk did not testify that: “Hillary … personally approved a lawyer lying to the FBI about Trump communicating with a Russian bank.”
How could he say that when during his testimony he “was insistent that the campaign would not have wanted anyone to go to the FBI with the information” per National Review (hardly a liberal source thar you can handwave away).
link to nationalreview.com
As I said in comment 2.3.1.1, corroborated here by National Review, Monk testified that Clinton agreed to release the information to the press not the FBI.
I don’t know where you got your bad information, but it was bad. Part of being a reasonable person is admitting when you were wrong.
How about you admit that you were wrong?
So, as is typical of the extremists on the far left, they pick through what you write and when you slightly exaggerate one thing, then that is what they focus on. Ignore all the rest of what you wrote. Just unbelievable how they are like the Moonies in the 1970’s.
And note that most people would give you 10 to 1 odds that Hillary personally approved lying to the FBI. The lawyer hired to lie to the FBI just covered up what he did. That is pretty plain.
Notice too the way the extremists on the left also seem to feel if you don’t have absolute proof, then it is misinformation.
What we do know is that Hillary did do some nasty things regarding linking Trump to Russia. That it was a lie and an attempt to hamstring Trump from performing his duties.
We know that Hillary approved lying to the news. We know that Hillary’s campaign approved a smear campaign that include creating a fake slanderous dossier against Trump.
We know that the prosecutors believed that the campaign and likely Hillary personally approved lying to the FBI.
Slippery Hillary got off on from a prison term because the attorney was being prosecuted in DC where it is impossible to get a juror that isn’t a left extremist.
Note, though, all this evidence against Hillary and yet Ben wants to focus on the little bit that wasn’t proven. We know all know that Hillary did it. And we all know that Hillary was lying her face off when she was telling everyone about Trump’s connections with Russia.
But Moonie Ben wants all that wiped away because we don’t have absolute proof that Hillary approved lying to the FBI. We are supposed to believe that the lawyer did that on his own initiative when he was being paid by Hillary.
Just insane stuff from Moonie Ben.
The fact is that the link between Trump and Russia was paid for and orchestrated by Hillary Clinton.
Just think years of listening to people like Joy Reid and your other favorite MSNBC people like Rachel Maddow yap endlessly about Trump being a Russia spy and it was all made up by Hillary.
But Moonie Ben wants to ignore all that.
You were asserting “facts” based on someone else’s mischaracterization of testimony, and when called out, you can only complain about nitpicking…
The point of picking out specific errors was to demonstrate that the things you think are facts may not be. And I demonstrated just that.
Your disassembling response demonstrates that you don’t give a fig about the facts.
I’m not saying we should ignore Hilary’s role in those events. That’s something you’re saying to hide from the fact that you wrongly believed someone else’s mischaracterization of testimony to be a fact.
>>Your disassembling response demonstrates that you don’t give a fig about the facts.
I posted a link to the WSJ that came close to showing that Hillary personally approved lying to the FBI. And the only reason we didn’t 100 percent there is because DC is filled with Moonies like you so they couldn’t convict the attorney.
What it illustrates is that what you’ve done is taken a huge argument and situation and nitpicked with one fact that I admitted I exaggerated. And is not even material as what matters is that the FBI has ignored investigating Hillary. There is enough evidence that Hillary should have been investigated by the FBI and wasn’t.
And at the same time ignoring the larger issues. And, yet even with a minor exaggeration, you get off and believe that somehow all the larger contexts are proven in your Moonie positions.
Just weird.
And this is typical of your kind–Moonies.
I note that I was willing to engage you and find a reference. You, on the other hand, spout nonsense incessantly and rarely back it up. You feel your Moonie positions are the truth.
I minorly exaggerated one fact. Actually, what happened was that it was it expected that the attorney Sussman would implicate Hillary. But because the jury was made-up of Hillary supporters the attorney figured they wouldn’t convict him even though he admitted to a felony.
The expectation was that he was going to implicate Hillary.
Get it Moonie?
And just remember I was willing to go through this with you and at the end of the day what do we find? That Hillary probably did personally approve lying to the FBI but that we never got to the truth of the matter because of Moonies like you.
And then the Moonie Ben tries to fluff off Hillary’s role in the greatest hoax in modern American history where for years and years we heard nothing but that Trump was a Russian spy. Turns out it was all a lie. And it turns out that the FBI won’t even investigate Hillary.
There is enough evidence that Hillary should have been investigated by the FBI and wasn’t.
Mrs. Clinton was investigated by the FBI. Multiple times. How can anyone forget this? Do you not remember Dir. Comey saying that she had behaved very irresponsibly, but not in a way that merited criminal charges? It was a lead story in practically every news source worldwide.
The larger argument that I’m interested in is how people on both sides conflate facts with interpretations.
And you amply demonstrated that you are part of that problem despite all your claims to being a reasonable minded centrist.
Ben, you are trying to amplify a minor mistake. When challenged, I gave you a link to a WSJ that gave the correct facts. Typical of you to try and cloud any issue. Notice the way I was honest about all this and found a link of the best evidence I had. You, on the other hand, rarely even respond to your many mistakes.
Dozens, that is a different issue. Comey said that she had classified documents and that she was essentially reckless in caring for those documents. But that he didn’t think reckless rose to the level where she should be prosecuted.
This issue is about Hillary’s role in the Russian hoax.
You insisted it was a fact after I disputed it, and you acted like I wasn’t familiar with Mook’s testimony even after I described it to you. Then you provided “evidence” which didn’t even support your fact, apparently not realizing it. You don’t appear to read my posts and you don’t appear to read the sources either.
You may think this is a minor error, but I think people acting like their interpretations are fact, and assuming the positions and knowledge of their opponents is a major problem for this country.
This sort of thinking pushes people to treat their opponents like they are left-wing or right-wing caricatures. Basically your precise behavior.
Your behavior here is the sort of thing that divides this country. It is no minor error.
Ben, you are such a joke.
The type of thing that divides the country is one side denying the reality of the laptop.
Every argument I have with you is like this where you try to mischaracterize what I’ve said or mischaracterize what you say.
What I said was a minor mistake. What I said is what real reporters said was likely to happen had it not been for the jurors that would not convict a person that admitted to a felony. Sussman would have turned over Clinton and her campaign had he feared being convicted.
What divides the country is not being able to get a jury in DC to convict a person guilty of lying to the FBI because he was a D working for Hillary.
Or what divides the country is trashy people like you that nitpick and then ignore the larger issue.
Here, what is the larger issue? The larger issue is that the entire story that Trump was connected with Russia was fabricated by Hillary. That people like you listened to hundreds of hours of news that Trump was connected with a bank in Russia. But now there is no consequence for that. The FBI won’t investigate Hillary.
Anyway, enough of your trash.
This is how close what I said was to being true. What I misremembered is that before Sussman decided not to turn on Hillary, it was expected that he would make a deal to implicate Hillary. But, everything flipped because Sussman figured out that the jury wasn’t going to convict him because they were made of Ds. That is the type of thing that divides the country.
And you exaggerating what I’ve said is the type of thing that divides the country. Rather than focusing on the bigger picture.
Mr. Mook testified as a witness in special counsel John Durham’s trial of Michael Sussmann, the lawyer accused of lying to the FBI. In September 2016, Mr. Sussmann took claims of a secret Trump connection to Russia’s Alfa Bank to the FBI and said he wasn’t acting on behalf of any client. Prosecutors say he was working for the Clinton campaign.
link to wsj.com
Anyway, enough of this trashy conversation with you.
I’ll note that you yap endlessly about this one minor mistake but say nothing about WT’s assertion that because it is possible that parts of the laptop were not reliable that the entire laptop should be ignored
It is also amazing to me Ben that you won’t admit that what I said could be true and is suspected by the prosecutors as being true. But the prosecutors were unable to get Sussman to admit this.
Ben’s piety is so obviously false (not a coincidence that Greg chimes in on his side).
This is just an offshoot of the Liberal Left’s “Rules for Thee, Not Me” mantra.
Let’s talk about facts, baby….
link to m.facebook.com
Those are “Flynn facts.”
The irony of “uncritically lapped it up”…
Is this really necessary? It has nothing to do with patent law.
Aren’t there better forums for this?
Yeah, kind of agree. We got into it and here it is.
Still, this is really related to patent law. As this is why patent law is taking a beating. Lemley’s analysis of patents are Marxis t.
And the big corporations are the ones controlling patent law with the judge appointments, laws, and Obama.
So, in the bigger picture this is the zeitgeist that is controlling all our more focused conversations.
You have the better point here, Night Writer.
While certainly the political discussion is a bit ‘meta,’ tactics have definite parallels to the ongoing treatment of innovation protection law.
Mind you as well, that (what was it, a decade now…?) I described these larger Zeitgeist items with my description of the patent system under attack by the Left and the Right**.
**noting that my “Right” was not exactly equivalent to the political Right, but more reflected the transnational Big Corp.
And the big corporations are the ones controlling patent law with the judge appointments, laws, and Obama.
I’ve made this point before, but there have been Republican majorities in the Supreme Court for 50 years now and the AIA was passed with the House being in the hands of the Republicans. You want to point fingers, I suggest you also point them at Scalia and Thomas, both of whom didn’t/don’t like patents.
The Supreme Court could have curtailed the AIA in Oil States. They didn’t. They could have given us more clarity with regard to 35 USC 101 — they’ve repeatedly declined to do so.
The only person you explicitly named had little impact on patent law.
BTW, what is the name of this UK health blogger that you referred to earlier?
As I will every time I respond to you until you answer, what is the name of this UK health blogger that you referred to earlier?
I am go with facts and my news sources are varied including things like the WSJ and foreign news sources.
You do realize the WSJ is owned by the same group that owns Fox News?
You Moonies have become Marxists and don’t even know it.
Seriously, do you even know what Marxism is?
What is so strange to me is the way you abstract away anyone that isn’t one of the “mainstream media” believers as some far right crazy person.
Nice strawman. Try again.
Particularly, when Biden is objectively far left and many of his policies are socialist and many of the policies he advocates for are against the US Constitution.
Bernie is objectively far left. Biden is middle-left, which is why he won both the nomination and the election. Democrats are not necessarily “progressives” despite the likes of Tucker Carlson painting everyone who isn’t MAGA as someone who drinks kombucha with AOC.
Sorry, but my views are mainstream centralist views and you and the a large part of the country have moved very, very far to the left.
Except that your views square you up with the right, and hence, they aren’t “centralist” views.
It is also incredible to me the way the mainstream view does not attribute our current problems to the policies of Biden. Inflation, crime, energy costs, fentanyl, and so forth all are problems that somehow aren’t the fault of the Ds.
LOL. Somehow “the policies of Biden” have raised inflation and energy costs ALL AROUND THE WORLD. Seriously, do you have any idea as to how global economics works? Opioid use has been steadily climbing in the US over the last 20 years. As for the crime rate, what crime policies have the Biden administration enacted?
And one of the most extreme positions of the Ds that somehow the Hunter Laptop was Russian disinformation and now ignoring it when it has substantial evidence that Joe Biden committed felonies and at the very least was influence peddling while Vice President and taking large sums of money.
Then why did Fox News turn down the story when first offered to them? The reason is that there is no way to validate what was on the laptop is actually accurate. In a criminal case, it is important to establish a chain of custody for evidence. Absent that chain of custody, the evidence is suspect. From what I’ve read, while some of the data contained therein is seemingly legitimate, there reportedly is also a number of items were tampered with. While Hunter Biden’s Laptop makes a great boogeyman for the rightwing masses to latch onto, it has next to no value as “substantial evidence.”
Or that Hillary paid for the Steele document
Let’s forget for a moment that the Steele dossier originated as opposition research by a conservative organization/individual that supported Marco Rubio during the 2016 primary. Opposition research is hardly an unknown thing. All serious candidates do it.
personally approved a lawyer lying to the FBI about Trump communicating with a Russian bank.
Then why isn’t Hillary locked up yet? If these are “facts”, then it is a pretty open and shut case of conspiracy to commit perjury. It seems to me that your “facts” are mere allegations.
Stack the Scotus
Yup, the Republicans did that thanks to Mitch.
end the filibuster
The Democrats did that for executive/judicial nominees. The Republicans did that for Supreme Court nominees.
end the Electoral College
It would be long overdue. But that would require a Constitutional Amendment.
forced quotas based on skin color and sex in every segment of society, equity (or equal outcomes)
Not something I’m in favor of but even today we don’t have “forced” quotas – they are all voluntary. Regardless, forced (and even voluntary) quotas would very likely be unconstitutional (I believe a couple of cases are teed up for SCOTUS this term), so any talk about “forced quotas” is just another rightwing boogeyman.
the FBI/DOJ as enforcement arms of the President
You mean what Trump wanted to do?
censorship on social media
Boo hoo. A non-government entity has a right to censor anything on its own servers.
You forgot: allowing state legislatures to overturn the results of their voters and allowing unfettered gerrymandering, adopting Christianity as a state religion, and prosecuting all democrats as Satan-worshipping, blood-drinking pedophiles. I could go on and on and on but after thinking about all this rightwing filth, I believe I need to take a shower.
Wt,
You fall to the fallacy of the Sprint Left crowd.
You fall to the fallacy of the Sprint Left crowd.
You want to debate me on a point-by-point basis, feel free. However, general allegations using little more than generalities are of little interest to me.
“General”…?
Not so.
You remind of the WaPo guy — oblivious to his own bias:
Sprint left:
link to bloomberg.com
Your link is behind a paywall.
BTW, I am not oblivious to my own bias — I have no problem owning up to what I believe. However, I am not oblivious to the efforts of many on the right to destroy the American public’s confidence in our election system and by extension our democracy.
Is it a sprint to the left to believe that we should be protecting our environment more? A greater number of people believe that protecting our environment should take precedence over economic growth.
Is it a sprint to the left to believe that a woman should have autonomy over her own body? The most recent Gallup poll has Pro-Choice being at 55%.
Is it a sprint to the left to believe that laws covering the sale of firearms should be more strict? That is hovering at about 66% in the latest Gallup poll.
Is it a sprint to the left to believe that the Russia “special military operation” in Ukraine should be stopped? The majority in a recent Gallup poll supports Ukraine reclaiming lost territory.
Is it a sprint to the left to believe that immigration is a good thing for this country? Polls have shown over 70% of Americans believe that immigration is good for the country.
Is it a spring to the left to believe that there should be a strong separate of church and state? That is a principle strongly believed in by the left (not so much by the right). However, it is a principle held by over 50% of respondents.
I could go on, but when you talk about sprinting to the left, you may be looking at it backwards. I’m not saying that the left is perfect, but I would be scared to live in the “perfect world” envisioned by those on the right. The right’s ‘policy position’ isn’t about producing a better society but by demonizing those that don’t act/look/think like them.
WT, there is a big difference between legal immigration , which the majority supports, and illegal immigration. As to abortion, a woman’s autonomy of course is important, but when the fetus is of a size and growth where it can be considered a living being, whatever time frame that may be, it is not as clear cut as you make it sound (you certainly are not a Catholic). Stop wearing blinders and drinking the koolaid!!!
“ when the fetus is of a size and growth where it can be considered a living being”
Then kookoo klan man on a patent blog has a right to control the pregnant woman’s life and maybe even earn some bounty money while doing so!
But kookoo klan man on the patent blog is not a fetus obsessed misogynist crank or a deluded dominionist. Nope. Just a reasonable guy who likes fetuses.
WT, there is a big difference between legal immigration , which the majority supports, and illegal immigration.
And which side has long resisted any attempts to reform our immigration system? The fact of the matter is that illegal immigrants are a valuable workforce in the US — they do a great many jobs that US citizens/residents do not. Many illegal immigrants leave their families in order to come to the US to work. They would prefer to go back. However, because it is so difficult to get to the US, it is easier to stay.
Rather than create a system that allows migrant workers to easily cross the border, one side of the aisle would rather demonize them as criminals and drug mules. The demonization of illegal immigrants is not a solution to the problem. Rather, it is an appeal to the basest nature.
As to abortion, a woman’s autonomy of course is important, but when the fetus is of a size and growth where it can be considered a living being, whatever time frame that may be, it is not as clear cut as you make it sound.
“size and growth where it can be considered a living being” (i.e., viability outside the womb) was pretty much the old standard. Right now all, a large number of states are set to pass laws that go far, far beyond that.
(you certainly are not a Catholic)
I thought you were setting forth a scientific standard — not a religious one.
Stop wearing blinders and drinking the koolaid!!!
LOL. I’m not the one trying to drag the US back to the 19th century when men were men and woman were chattel.
Prophet, it is no longer 1970. We have all sorts of BC methods. Even condoms are 98% effective. Why do men refuse to wear condoms and help ensure no pregnancy? Talk about equality! I trust no man who supports abortion because they may be doing so for selfish means.
For extra credit, can you explain what needs to be done to abort a fetus at 15 weeks?
As for immigration, Trump tried to cut a deal for the Dreamers. Agains what a majority of his voters would have preferred. Dems wanted nothing to do with it. Could not give him a win.
And you all need to learn how involved the cartels are in illegal immigration, and how much money they make. Billions of dollars. People pay/owe 5000 and up per person to cross. Women and children get raped along the way. Jorge Ramos did one story on this, and then stopped.
I was a poll watcher in PA in 2020. The dems definitely did cheat. They were calling people on election day to come cure faulty mail-in ballots, and tried to give them regular instead of provisional ballots. I caught on of those. And reported it. There was a lawsuit recently filed challenging that.
Also here in PA, the dems used the Court to help them go against what the state laws provided. You may recall that the Constitution gives the power to state legislatures to determine electors. Let me know if you need the section. Our state law did not allow for ballots to be accepted after election day. The Supreme Court of PA said as long as they were postmarked by election day, they could be counted. You know what can be done when ballots received after election day are allowed to be counted?
Lots of funny stuff went on.
I don’t have a subscription, and the link worked fine for me – maybe check your device.
That being said, it’s easy enough to find with a search for “Elon Musk Stick Figure.”
And I see what you did there: you injected a strawman of blaming “those on the right,” while also employing a Mott and Bailey as to the tenants of what constitutes Sprint Left.
Your characterization on both fronts is not on point as to what Sprint Left means.
You then employ gaslighting about “wrecking democracy” while those you deem to be “wrecking” are trying to save it. Compare and contrast actual voter regs – say from Biden’s New Jersey with those of other states being criticized by the far left.
Further, your view on the border is reprehensible. Pointing out the negative consequences becomes — for you — something to blame the right. Those negative consequences are very real and need be owned by the D administration.
As far as demonizing “the other side,” you again are in the weeds, as identity politics is the hallmark of the Left.
Many of your other “points” as relying on (apparent) ‘Pure Democracy’ are also legally false, misleading, or both.
So while you “say” that you are aware of your biases, you really are not.
You – especially – would benefit from the Dr. James Lindsay series of podcasts.
You – especially – would benefit from the Dr. James Lindsay series of podcasts.
and from your other post (I don’t have multiple sock-puppets like you to avoid Dennis’s post count filter) …
(traditional) Center-Left (like Joe Rogan and Dr. James Lindsay)
LOL. Dr. James Lindsay — the so-called “far right’s ‘world-level expert’ on CRT and ‘Race Marxism.” This is what you call Center-Left? This is from a description of Lindsay’s new book:
The appearance was one of many Lindsay has conducted in recent days, as he promotes his new book, “Race Marxism: The Truth About Critical Race Theory and Practice,” published on Tuesday and, as of Wednesday, the top title in Amazon’s “philosophy criticism” section. If his digression into fantasies of bloody revolt against a cadre of bankers, media and George Soros — what one Lindsay-watcher called “straight-up Hitler talk” — seems like an odd detour, it’s one of many he’s made over the years: an academic turned intentional academic fraud, a “new atheist” who now counsels Christians on heresy, a blue-no-matter-who Obama volunteer turned intellectual leader of the far right. So meet the man behind the man behind the right’s most consuming contemporary moral panic.
Center Left? ROFL.
As for Joe Rogan, why would I want to get my news from a former host of Fear Factor and color commentator for UFC? The guy is an entertainer — not a serious news journalist. Center left for a guy who supposedly is “someone known for promoting transphobia, homophobia, Islamophobia, racism and misogyny”? LOL.
You then employ gaslighting about “wrecking democracy”
Holy f’n sh&t. Were you not in this country 21 months ago? This is what Mitch McConnel had to say about that time:
We saw it happen. It was a violent insurrection for the purpose of trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after a legitimately certified election, from one administration to the next. That’s what it was.
Michael Flynn, former US general and NSA advisor to the DJT, advocated seizing voting machines and ballots in contested states and/or essentially a military coup. Let’s not get into what the likes of Roger Stone and Steve Bannon were advocating for.
The vast majority of Republicans (70%) believe the elections are rigged. Once you believe the elections are rigged it is a small step to believe that your “representatives” are illegitimate and your democracy is illegitimate. Also, let’s not forget all the recent efforts by Republicans into having presidential elections not decided by the voters but by state legislatures and the gerrymandering. Admittedly, there has been some Democratic gerrymandering but not to the extend of the Republicans.
Let’s also not forget all the efforts by the right to make it harder to vote.
Many of your other “points” as relying on (apparent) ‘Pure Democracy’ are also legally false, misleading, or both.
Must be an Anon accusation — long on allegations and short on specifics.
Further, your view on the border is reprehensible. Pointing out the negative consequences becomes — for you — something to blame the right. Those negative consequences are very real and need be owned by the D administration.
Oh please. The right uses border issues to demonize immigrants and to rile up their base. However, they have put forth no good solution to the problem. BTW, this is another Anon accusation that is short on specifics.
In the past, you’ve run from commenting on DJT. Smart thing on your part as history is going to treat him much more unkindly than he is being treated now (which is saying a lot). That being said, a good portion of the Republican base (and those winning primaries) is running towards him and embracing him. However, there is another portion of the Republican base that absolutely detests him and his policies. There is no Republican party anymore. It is MAGA and RINOs.
As far as demonizing “the other side,” you again are in the weeds, as identity politics is the hallmark of the Left.
Don’t confuse Democrats such as Joe Biden with Progressives such as AOC. You (like the Tucker Carlsons of the world) like to paint the left all with the same brush. Just like there are many different flavors of Republicans there are many different flavors of those on the left. The FACT that you are incapable of distinguishing between these different flavors tells me a lot about your political savvy (or lack thereof).
Also, I suggest you look at a picture of all the Republicans in Congress and compare that to a picture of all the Democrats in Congress. One picture looks like a white supremacist’s dream come true (the vast majority being white men) and the other picture looks more like a snapshot of the demographics of this country. Now tell me again which party is engaging in identity politics?
Wow Wt, that’s a lot of projection — and misinformation from you.
I asked previously, but have not seen an answer (likely this would be incriminating against you), but where DO you get your information?
“Those negative consequences are very real and need be owned by the D administration.”
They need to be owned by all the admins, no need to make it a partisan issue.
anon, it is like the Moonies in the 70’s. The left are extremists that are like a cult.
They really have lost their “one mind.”
Facts don’t matter.