Leftist don’t even need cicumstancial evidence, they just need to have “feelings” about a subject to judge it. Leftism is a mental illness.

I live in SC and with the way the Gerrymander is my street of North Charleston falls into Clyburn but it really should be under Mace as she would be a better person for us and the people on my street. Clyburn is a crook.

The NAACP does not do anything for Blacks. The NAACP is working for the DNC and this is just to change voting. The SCOTUS allowing this to appear before them without full evidence and facts is wrong and shows how bad our Judicial System has become.

akshully, technically the answer to ‘is leftism a mental illness’ would be ‘yes, and no’.

Yes, because the behavior is relative to a culture, and in this case what the psychology profession classifies as ‘normal’ is based in academic subculture, and wildly diverged from actual US culture. Normally you would be able to say that inside the context of their own culture, they are sane and functional. Problem is, where that culture exists on its own in isolation, it tends to self destruct, so it does not really count for that purpose.

No, because only some of the extremes of behavior are self destructive, dysfunctional, and pathological enough to classify that way, and probably also because the learned behavior does not show up spontaneously enough.

We have some profound stuff going on with litigating our disputes over voting rules.

Giving the Democrats a legal proxy in the federal DoJ civil rights organization and restricting the GOP’s ability to dispute elections was premised in the theory that ‘the parties switched places’ and that the GOP was thus now a white supremacist criminal conspiracy.

This has a number of flaws as a theory.

1. Analysis of specific political personalities, of known influence and career history.

2. Arsons directed at poor black neighborhoods in recent years, and the obvious coincidences of political alignment.

3. The government funded scholarship, rooted in critical theory, that asserts that government funded academics are legitimate and perhaps sole legitimate spokesmen for parties that the government allegedly is carefully and thoroughly discriminating against. These risibly self impeaching statemetns are treated as fact by a number of persons.

4. The sort of conspiracy theory that may not be worth confronting, and maybe it helps peopel feel better, definitely must be confronted as the costs become significantly higher. PRobably we should have paid the costs to oppose earlier, before quite so many people had driven themselves bad nuts. But, the costs are high enough that we pretty much have to dispute it now.

5. Admitting one conspiracy theory to a set of elgal disputes implies fairness in addmitting another conspiracy theory to those disputes. Some people might object to the ultimate results of the precedent that they are trying to establish.