As I mentioned elsewhere, we all know you and Jack broke your backs working for Obama, and all Obama supporters should be eternally grateful to you. I'm sure we are.
That said, I would still characterize the post I referred to as defeatist and simplistic--and for the reasons I cited.
When the poster is finished venting, perhaps she could tell us exactly why this is an inaccurate description.
And my posts are not a case of "pursuing" anybody. It's just a case of pointing out what I see as simplistic and/or unsupported statements. As the old New York Times motto had it: "without fear or favor". You may have noticed I criticize across the political spectrum--as Teribus and BB, among others, can attest.
If it pushes people to use more logic, provide sources, and steer away from conspiracy theories, so much the better.
Rather than make erroneous statements that the Senate cannot pass bills, I would prefer actual suggestions on how we can fight back against the recent Supreme Court decision which is the subject of the thread.
My own suggestion would be that we push Congress to require all political contributions over $1,000 to be listed on the Net--with full name of each contributor, and any corporate position the person might hold. It seems to me that transparency is a good goal here.