Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

not fooled

(6,771 posts)

9. My take is more cynical

Reply to bucolic_frolic (Reply #8)

Fri May 12, 2023, 06:13 PM

May 2023

the cons are getting ready to gut the "administrative state" in earnest, by destroying the ability of Federal agencies to do their jobs.

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a43757262/supreme-court-chevron-deference-case/]

IME before those types of decisions are puked up by the engineered con majority we often see some slight "give" on more social issues (that their big money masters don't care about) to lull the populace before the gut punch of vicious conservatism (for the benefit of said masters) gets delivered.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

20 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

SCOTUS Unanimously Sides with Transgender Refugee, Affirming Her Identity in Historic Ruling [View all] Nevilledog May 2023 OP

The ruling is good news gratuitous May 2023 #1

I Also Thought It Quite Important ProfessorGAC May 2023 #2

It was an easy case for conservatives to side with Sympthsical May 2023 #4

Thanks ProfessorGAC May 2023 #6

Big implications RandySF May 2023 #3

Wait, wait, what? Clarence voted with the Court?? no_hypocrisy May 2023 #5

Good. underpants May 2023 #7

Maybe they can see society splintering and decided to be humane for once bucolic_frolic May 2023 #8

My take is more cynical not fooled May 2023 #9

The Headline Is Bullshit Click-Bait. There Was No Decision About Pronouns. MayReasonRule May 2023 #10

The headline is accurate. They used her proper pronouns in the ruling. Nevilledog May 2023 #12

The Article's Headline Has Nothing To Do With The Nature Of The Decision, The Usage Was Dicta MayReasonRule May 2023 #13

The problem is you are reading affirming as related to a ruling. That's not the meaning here. Nevilledog May 2023 #15

How Does Dicta "Affirm" Anything? It's Merely Used "In Passing", Right? MayReasonRule May 2023 #16

Because they're affirming that she identifies as a woman. Nevilledog May 2023 #18

Best I Can Tell They Merely Quoted The Dicta From The Prior Case MayReasonRule May 2023 #19

The Biden administration was seeking to deport this person. former9thward May 2023 #11

That's Precisely Correct. The Decision Had Less Than Zero To Do With Pronouns. MayReasonRule May 2023 #14

Thank you, Justice Jackson. Aristus May 2023 #17

Celebrating Usage Of Prior Dicta From Previous Decisions Seems A Hollow Victory At Best MayReasonRule May 2023 #20