1994
Comments (90)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
-1
VoterIDMatters -1 points ago +1 / -2

It’s definitely concern trolling and verges on consensus cracking. Not even once has anyone linked a concerning opinion that she herself authored.

2
mornings 2 points ago +3 / -1

Ugh. Have you been reading KafkaGoesWest’s posts? There’s 100 times more substance there than in anything you’ve posted.

You’re essentially arguing for us all to just rubber stamp anything our side proposes without thought... in other words you want us to be just like the left.

And you’re marginalizing and hurling epithets (shill, concern troll) against any discussion you disagree with. Again just like the left.

0
VoterIDMatters 0 points ago +1 / -1

No, I want SUBSTANTIVE ARGUMENT.

Linking a decision that she was part of (which was actually a decision that gave Pritzker the leeway to allow church worship services but not battle of the bands or picnics at the church property) just because the author of that decision who was not ACB made a passing comment about a concerning case, is consensus cracking.

If a SINGLE FUCKING POST contained a SINGLE FUCKING DECISION ACTUALLY AUTHORED BY ACB I would consider it relevant. So far, nothing.

I agree the decision was concerning. Barrett didn’t fucking write it, though.

2
mornings 2 points ago +2 / -0

And by the way. I’ve never heard anyone use a term like “consensus cracking” who wasn’t on the left.