Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Recent Posts
91
DnD Central / Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?
Last post by ersi -
The following are notes for myself. You are completely unqualified for this discussion, Oakdale.

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
First, the U.S. is not subject to the so-called World Court. So, your "serious charge" amounts to nothing more than impotent moralizing.
Second, immigrant status is not conferred by mere aspiration.
This is exactly my point, knowing that "conservatives" and "literalists" in USA do not acknowledge the concept of human rights, even though Declaration of Independence of USA takes it "to be self-evident that all men and women are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights." It's an enlightenment concept, not a World Court concept.

A country that is in denial of this concept is not an enlightened country. It is in plain evidence now that what Declaration of Independence proclaims does not obtain in the legal and moral sense of the inhabitants of the country at all. The bussing of immigrants is a clear example that the moral turpitude is not limited to Oakdale rednecks in the country, but it is a general state of mind among the country's officials and jurists. As follows:

Quote from: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/02/us/migrants-marthas-vineyard-desantis-texas.html
The flights last month, carrying 48 migrants, attracted international attention and drew condemnation from Democrats as well as several legal challenges. Mr. DeSantis immediately claimed credit for what appeared to be a political maneuver — dumping dozens of asylum seekers on the doorstep of Northeastern Democrats who have resisted calls to clamp down on immigration.
The fact that DeSantis is using the budget of his own state to bus immigrants of another state (since his own state does not have such readily abusable immigrants) to a third state should be an inter-state/federal legal challenge in multiple ways, but this is not the most pertinent point. The most pertinent point is that "legal challenges" in this article refer to lawyers trying to figure out whether there is something legally challengeable in this activity.[1]

If lawyers are puzzled about human trafficking on the level of governors of states, then clearly USA is a sad third-world dump when it comes to the legal framework concerning human trafficking.

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
Third, if you're in the country legally (i.e., have been processed by Border Patrol and have a scheduled court hearing) and I offer you a bus or plane ticket to -say- New York, that is not "trafficking". That is largesse.
To reduce the concept of human trafficking as far as possible, its minimum key feature is the consent of the trafficked. Now, many people *want*, even desperately so, to get to a country that has been presented to them as a better country. They are lured by alleged opportunities. So people's want is not the kind of consent relevant to the concept. Trafficking comes in with a trafficker/smuggler who does the allegations of the work/living opportunities and then the opportunities don't obtain at the destination.

Say a pimp promising a different job to someone at a destination while the actual job ends up being prostitution — this is sex trafficking even when the pimp pays all the costs to the destination and provides accommodation at the destination.  This should be easy peasy to understand for a ten-year-old, if not a five-year-old. For an Oakdale pimping is a largesse because he cannot afford it, but legally pimping is sex trafficking. In case of the bussing of immigrants, the perpetrators provide nothing at the destination.

DeSantis and Abbott qualify as human traffickers. Human trafficking is a serious crime when regular people do it, but lawyers in USA are puzzled about it when governors do it, so once again so much for being a law-and-order country where people allegedly have rights. Immigrants deserve more adequate information about their destination country: USA is a below-average third world dump where non-citizens have zero constitutional rights and there is no recourse against state officials. African smugglers advertise the EU as the place where everyone who crosses the border receives an Adidas jumpsuit, iPhone and a fully equipped apartment. Sorry, dear immigrants, the traffickers are lying to you.
1 There's a class action lawsuit that has amounted to nothing much thus far.↵
92
DnD Central / Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?
Last post by OakdaleFTL -
Quote from: ersi on
If immigrants had no nominal rights, then USA would be under serious charge due to lack of legal framework for human rights at home. But if immigrants have nominal rights, then bussing them *is* human trafficking and against the law. Which way is it?
First, the U.S. is not subject to the so-called World Court. So, your "serious charge" amounts to nothing more than impotent moralizing.
Second, immigrant status is not conferred by mere aspiration.
Third, if you're in the country legally (i.e., have been processed by Border Patrol and have a scheduled court hearing) and I offer you a bus or plane ticket to -say- New York, that is not "trafficking". That is largesse.
And since you only want to consider Florida's governor (and not Abbott of Texas... :) ), I'd ask how -do you think- the "migrants" got to Florida in the first place? :)

Of course, your quoted comment poses a false dilemma — and you know it. Is all your legal analysis predicated on self-righteous indignation? So it seems to me... If only you were Czar, eh? :)
93
Hobbies & Entertainment / Re: Films and Books
Last post by ersi -
Sergei Guriev recommended Klara and the Sun by Kazuo Ishiguro in his latest (or perhaps penultimate) livestream. The little book club of my colleagues at work took it on.

I'm halfway through now and I guess I can recommend it too, even though I don't know what the final turn will be. The only other work I know from Kazuo Ishiguro is The Remains of the Day (the movie, not the book) and judging from that, no sharp turns are expected.

Klara and the Sun qualifies as science fiction. The first-person narrator Klara is an "artificial friend," preoccupied and constantly concerned with serving its human. In this sense the novel is similar with the main theme of The Remains of the Day. Also similar is the class society and the focus on mannerisms and etiquette.

But I'm expecting a science-fictiony turn in Klara and the Sun. Perhaps artificial intelligence sinking into abuse mode while failing to sense anything out of the ordinary?

As said, I'm only halfway through. Hope I did not spoil anything for anyone. Really lovely piece of literature it is.
94
DnD Central / Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?
Last post by ersi -
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
FYI: Resident Aliens are both subject to U.S. jurisdiction and protected by most constitutional provisions — one obvious exception being the right to vote in federal elections. :)
Your dilemma is as follows: If immigrants had no nominal rights, then USA would be under serious charge due to lack of legal framework for human rights at home. But if immigrants have nominal rights, then bussing them *is* human trafficking and against the law. Which way is it?

Either way I know both the legal situation and concrete facts better than you. You are not in a position to FYI anything. All your years on this forum you have provided very little factual information, but none that was not known already. Otherwise you have only provided so-called alternative facts, which are sometimes fascinating to observe for psychoanalytical purposes.

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
What? I'm now required to agree with anyone you call "conservative" or "literalist"?
An entrenched Trumpite who did not see the insurrection happening and thinks Hillary is somehow crooked while Trump is not obviously lacks sufficient epistemological acumen to agree or disagree with anything. 

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
(But I did note your failure to cite an example or culprit! :) Typical "ersi".)
The name and example is DeSantis. Come on, it's directly in the post you were responding to, inside the embedded quotes. Typical Oakdale dropping off half of the content when parsing sentences both when reading and writing. Since you are clearly overburdened with incoming information already, I won't bother you with any further details.
95
DnD Central / Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?
Last post by OakdaleFTL -
Quote from: ersi on
The facts are as follows:

The immigrants are taken to where they do not want to go. They are not going by themselves. They are taken to where nobody expects them, i.e. they are literally dumped at the destination. The name of the crime is human trafficking.

And you are completely clueless of the fact that the American constitution has been argued (by "conservatives" and "literalists") to guarantee literally nothing to non-citizens. You really have no grasp on law. Same as on facts.
Sigh... Your set of "facts" supporting the human trafficking charge happens to be another of your delusions.

FYI: Resident Aliens are both subject to U.S. jurisdiction and protected by most constitutional provisions — one obvious exception being the right to vote in federal elections. :)
What? I'm now required to agree with anyone you call "conservative" or "literalist"? No thanks: I'm not a follower! And -even if I were- your pervasive and constant bad faith would preclude me from accepting your recommendations at face value...
(But I did note your failure to cite an example or culprit! :) Typical "ersi".)
96
DnD Central / Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?
Last post by ersi -
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
Quote from: ersi on
But Trump will not be the overall winner of the presidential elections. He never got the popular vote ever once
Had you the ability and the inclination to pay attention, you'd know that winning the national popular vote doesn't matter...
I know this. Trump does not. His false argument for his victory is that he got more votes than anybody had ever seen, and he got even more the second time. Therefore "they stole it" even though all the traces of election theft are on him.

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
Hillary Clinton learned that lesson the hard way! (Her husband tried to tell her...but I guess she believed her own hype. :) )
Had you the ability and the inclination to pay attention, you would actually note that Trump is yet to learn it. And he is making absolutely sure that he learns this in the hardest way anyone has ever seen.

But of course, you prefer factless partisan delusions of grand propaganda. Hillary conceded within a day. Trump has still not conceded to this day. Are you paying attention? No, you are not. Facts are not your thing.

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
Quote from: ersi on
My own opinion of DeSantis is that of course he should be in jail by now too, for bussing immigrants.
Why? Once an "immigrant" is cleared by the federal authorities[1], they can go wherever they want!  In fact, the constitution guarantees such freedom of movement.
So you have not been paying any attention to this one either. The facts are as follows:

The immigrants are taken to where they do not want to go. They are not going by themselves. They are taken to where nobody expects them, i.e. they are literally dumped at the destination. The name of the crime is human trafficking.

And you are completely clueless of the fact that the American constitution has been argued (by "conservatives" and "literalists") to guarantee literally nothing to non-citizens. You really have no grasp on law. Same as on facts.

Then again, this is to be expected in the Trump cult. As you were.
1 Processed and given a court date for an administrative hearing...↵
97
DnD Central / Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?
Last post by OakdaleFTL -
Quote from: ersi on
But Trump will not be the overall winner of the presidential elections. He never got the popular vote ever once
Had you the ability and the inclination to pay attention, you'd know that winning the national popular vote doesn't matter...
Hillary Clinton learned that lesson the hard way! (Her husband tried to tell her...but I guess she believed her own hype. :) )
Of course you wouldn't consider the possibility that Trump meant American voters were more numerous and engaged than ever before... :)

Quote from: ersi on
My own opinion of DeSantis is that of course he should be in jail by now too, for bussing immigrants.
Why? Once an "immigrant" is cleared by the federal authorities[1], they can go wherever they want! In fact, the constitution guarantees such freedom of movement.

What I consider to be DeSantis' strong points you likely decry — so we needn't go into his record of electoral success and his record as governor. Yes, he's Trump-y enough for me, with the advantage of being eligible to serve two terms — time enough to right the ship!
1 Processed and given a court date for an administrative hearing...↵
98
DnD Central / Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?
Last post by ersi -
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
Are you off your meds, ersi? :)
I take this as one of your regular reflexive projections. Being a hyperpartisan hypocrite you think everyone else is a hyperpartisan hypocrite, and also, being on meds you think everybody else must be on meds as well.

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
(BTW: I still prefer DeSantis for the 2024 nomination... Hope my mentioning it again doesn't cause you any "cognitive dissonance"; as if that were a possibility!)
Sure enough this can be a possibility for you. It fits with your characteristic pattern by adding another layer of compulsive delusion. DeSantis is the Trumpiest of all Republican candidates. Maybe Ramaswamy would be Trumpier, but his skin colour prevents him from getting sponsors and supporters.

However, I have to warn you on two points. First, DeSantis is an actual politician. This means he is professionally guaranteed to disappoint you. He says Trumpy stuff, but he may very well turn around after he gets what he wants. And what does he want? As a politician, he wants the office, and do nothing with it. (On second thoughts, Trump also betrayed every promised value and principle once he got into office - actually he had already demonstrated that he has nothing to do with those values before he got into office -, but his supporters disregard this reality and stay with the Trump cult, so maybe this point will not deter you at all.)

Second, Trump is making sure that in the current Republican party no other candidate has a chance, except when Trump is literally gagged, handcuffed and thrown in jail. Or dies on the campaign trail. So if you want to stick with the likeliest winner among Republicans, it's Trump. But Trump will not be the overall winner of the presidential elections. He never got the popular vote ever once, despite his false claims to the contrary (which again should have been handled in the court system years ago, if law and order matters) and this time the establishment will make sure his election manipulations are actionably countered.

Edit: My own opinion of DeSantis is that of course he should be in jail by now too, for bussing immigrants. Or is there no legal punishment for that in USA? So much for being a law-and-order country then...
99
DnD Central / Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?
Last post by OakdaleFTL -
Are you off your meds, ersi? :) Your hallucinatory world must be fascinating — as a case study!

(BTW: I still prefer DeSantis for the 2024 nomination... Hope my mentioning it again doesn't cause you any "cognitive dissonance"; as if that were a possibility!)
100
DnD Central / Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?
Last post by ersi -
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
But we'll see what happens, no?
So you lay all your love and hopes on Trump because he might become good in the future? Wait, this cannot be. You lay all your love and hopes on Trump because he is a Republican who worships power regardless of principles and so do you. You condone insurrection — as long as it is your guy doing it. This takes some major lack of legal and moral sensibilities.

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
Quote from: ersi on
Trump should have been stopped at the latest when he was pimping together with Jeffrey Epstein back in the 90's
You mean when he barred Epstein from his clubs? Let's add libel to the list...
Wow, you were able to dig up a fact for once! Well done! Trump banned Epstein from his parties in 2008 after Epstein had already become a legally certified pedophile. However, I spoke about 90's, when Trump and Epstein were, hm, very intimate business partners in the same business servicing (themselves first of all but also) the Hollywood & financial & (worldwide!) political elite who were keeping it under the radar.[1] They are both pimps.

Since you are a hypocrite with no principles, you are perfectly fine with a pimp (and a dictator insurrectionist, obstructor of justice, tax evader, business fraudster, serial adulterer etc. etc.) if he is in your beloved political party. But here's a minor hilarious note: in 2008 Trump was a Democrat, so how can you possibly look favourably at the fact that he banned Epstein? Oh, right, you have no principles, therefore anything goes.

Well, you are in good company with Trump: He has no principles either, neither moral, legal or political! His main desire is to do stuff like shoot people on the Fifth Avenue in broad daylight and get away with it. And to pay no taxes because that makes him smart. Is there something similar you need to get away with too? You can open up here, we won't tell anyone :)

Until now I assumed you still had some way to go until absolute irreversible depravity. I didn't realise I had some way to go to drop all assumptions.
1 Edit: As a corollary, Trump has/shares dirt (in Russian, kompromat) on those people. This partly explains why the political elite (of both parties) and the judicial system pamper him on issues that would get an average person ostracised and jailed many times over. It's not due process that protects him. It's corrupt privilege. This corruption is part of why it can be reasonably expected that Supreme Court lets him off the hook with all aspects of the insurrection. The other part is that it is a solid political tradition that the president of USA has no accountability, and Trump did the insurrection while he was president, so there. For the same reasons, a similar outcome can be expected in the election theft case (which Trump will naturally appeal all the way to the Supreme Court), but perhaps not (one would hope, if law and order matters) in the case of theft of state documents, because that one he perpetrated while moving out of office.↵