Jump to content

US Politics: Red, Red Whine


Fragile Bird

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Morpheus said:

The reason they did not interview Kavanaugh and Ford was to keep Kav from having to answer questions given his penchant for lying and dodging. 

Not that it matters now, bit Heitkamp is a “no”.

Her statement below.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, illrede said:

Look at it this way. In the current administration's 2nd Supreme Court Nomination (notably from a widely available and closed population list- high court oppo for this political moment has been given a rare handicap), after some excitement in speculation, they go with the "safe" pick. Which is to say someone not seen as one to revisit a certain decision unprompted (the key distinguishment from the speculated alternative that people perceived), a former clerk of the Judge being replaced, broad spectrum recommendation on account being very much the "establishments" representative. Some intra-establishment animosity in the past but that had been perceived as having been worked out with a brief career progression delay; good broad patronage and likewise a wide patron of others. Safe. (Gutless, if you're being uncharitable and inclined that way.)

Events occur that it is perceivable that if one assumes this was someone's plan to disrupt the nomination process at a specific moment using an item kept at hand, obtain a prompt withdrawal when a second nomination process would be mechanically impossible under this Legislature and the current administration's 2nd Supreme Court Nomination can be neutralized utilizing a further expansion of some new mutually observed legislative norms should events allow.... it's believable, if you assume some out of the ordinary optimism to go with the out of the ordinary cutthroat political behavior.

Inordinate optimism in three related areas (which I personally believe haven't been born out). The disrupting item has to obtain a conventional standard of importance and proof (either already possess it, or acquire it in the truncated timeframe allowed- as would in at least some way have to be a blind draw, optimistic to rely on). Ones opponents have to in sufficient degree cooperate with where these conventional standards are (historically speaking, they've been appalling low as well appallingly high. If I had to take a guess about somebody else's guess, I'd say an expectation to err towards "low" at the moment. This is still unreasonably optimistic.). There must not be a widening, extended, and unresolved conflict over these (which would be unwarranted optimism- you don't pick the size and duration of a fight unilaterally).

That's gone about as badly as it could while still being implemented, but isn't contradicted as an assumption.


It's much more attractive to see this as a series of events (surrounding another event) with a genesis in and carried on with error and animosity (and it's never a mistake to hold out for that), But I recommend making allowances for people that don't.


(I know this is harder to follow than it needs to be but I see that as meaning anyone who bothers to try to understand what I am saying will also bother to understand what I am saying)

Your writing style is more impenetrable. than professional jargons.  Is there even a core there of meaning?  If I were given this to edit, I'd send it right back with instructions to write as thesis sentence of fewer than 20 words.  Then provide an outline of the points that you think will support that thesis sentence.  That's where editing would have to start, just to begin to organize and structure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Your writing style is more impenetrable. than professional jargons.  Is there even a core there of meaning?  If I were given this to edit, I'd send it right back with instructions to write as thesis sentence of fewer than 20 words.  Then provide an outline of the points that you think will support that thesis sentence.  That's where editing would have to start, just to begin to organize and structure.

Then you've missed the point. Concise doesn't aid comprehension here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, illrede said:

Look at it this way. In the current administration's 2nd Supreme Court Nomination, after some excitement in speculation, they go with the "safe" pick. Which is to say someone not seen as one to revisit a certain decision unprompted, a former clerk of the Judge being replaced, broad spectrum recommendation on account being very much the "establishments" representative. Some intra-establishment animosity in the past but that had been perceived as having been worked out with a brief career progression delay; good broad patronage and likewise a wide patron of others. Safe. 

Events occur that it is perceivable that if one assumes this was someone's plan to disrupt the nomination process at a specific moment using an item kept at hand, obtain a prompt withdrawal when a second nomination process would be mechanically impossible under this Legislature and the current administration's 2nd Supreme Court Nomination can be neutralized utilizing a further expansion of some new mutually observed legislative norms should events allow.... it's believable, if you assume some out of the ordinary optimism to go with the out of the ordinary cutthroat political behavior.

Inordinate optimism in three related areas. The disrupting item has to obtain a conventional standard of importance and proof. Ones opponents have to in sufficient degree cooperate with where these conventional standards are. There must not be a widening, extended, and unresolved conflict over these.

That's gone about as badly as it could while still being implemented, but isn't contradicted as an assumption.

It's much more attractive to see this as a series of events with a genesis in and carried on with error and animosity, But I recommend making allowances for people that don't.

After taking out all those useless statements in parenthesis I think your point is they picked him as a safe conservative candidate and knew about the baggage and didn't care due to the timeline and the GOPs need to get him confirmed fast.

Really long winded way to say that, and also pretty horseshit IMO, they could easily confirm a different judge in a lame duck session.  They'd do it because they are Republicans and they give 2 shits about breaking norms to get a SC justice in.  I think they think this will play well for the midterms, and it's gonna blow up in their faces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russian/FarRight bots drove, fed, politicized and were overall responsible for the online backlash to "The Last Jedi"

https://www.polygon.com/2018/10/2/17927554/star-wars-last-jedi-backlash-study-rian-johnson-trolls-russian-bots-political-far-right

 

Now THAT may get some silicon valley reform rolling, when billion dollar entertainment companies lose out on revenue because of silicon valley giants not putting into place reasonable anti bot restrictions on their platforms, you've now got something someone might care about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Zorral said:

It does read like a robot troll, doesn't it.

It's a old account, which of course doesn't rule out a bot or identity theft, but if this site was a high profile target to the robo-troll state assets the politics forum would already be closed since it's far too small not to be turned into a sea of shit. The fascist trolls we do have were were first GoT fans and are just spreading their poison where they hang out.

 

No this is either a schizophrenic off the meds or someone thinking he's 'smart' about his genial idea to force people to expend effort to read his meaningless mush. Newsflash: there is a reason thrump does speeches and not newsletters. His rhetoric turns into memes on the internet no matter the 'side' because it's so fucking shit to read a Alzheimer's rant without the bought crowds, the idiot churches and the idiot-whisperer factor.

Replacing insanity for vague ephemeral language about nothing is not even a improvement - you're literally a worse public writer than Trump (after a few rounds of star war memes) due to having less entertainment value. That's how bad this 'experiment' was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much truly vomitous stuff as I've witnessed in on the Hill over the years, maybe the howls that this is a thorough, complete and fair report may be the greatest spew sewage yet. There were four days of investigation, nobody was talked to, it's all secret and there is a SINGLE copy of the report for all the congress to read -- and it's secret and we the voters who pay the assholes' lovely salaries and benefits are not allowed to see it.

What these people are that they not only live with themselves but are happy with themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main GOP base is and always was a racist death cult howling about 'demographic decline of the white race'. This is everything to them and i wouldn't be surprised if in the next 1 to 5 years they tried to genocide for their 'white america' (if the mexican kids aren't already being murdered).

The thing is: any thinking, middle class woman or man realizes that having a child is a direct threat to their quality of life (and health in the case of women), and most of the middle class is still white - the racist calculus is the 'why behind the why' about their moronic religious justifications for the oppression of women and enabling of impoverishment (oppression of minorities being for a obvious reason).

This is the reason why they were shrieking about 'we lost france' 5 years ago. This is the reason they were freaking about Obama, this is the reason for Brett the rapist, this is the reason they volunteer to get sodomized by Putin. Ironically, because the far right tyranny they want won't save their demographics, as russia shows. Turns out people don't like living or having children in mafia states even if they're nominally 'homogeneous' and that removing contraceptives and family planing and making people poor just spreads deadly diseases that further decline birthrate and life expectancy, who knew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Zorral said:

And we pay them their wealth.  What is wrong with us??????

wealth does not come from wages, duh, ergo they owe us nothing and nothing is wrong with us.

 And gross, ew, they are not Rich, they are Wealthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, lokisnow said:

wealth does not come from wages, duh, ergo they owe us nothing and nothing is wrong with us.

 And gross, ew, they are not Rich, they are Wealthy.

I disagree that we don't aid and abet their wealth.  They have no need at all to worry about health care because their health insurance and coverage is the best in the land, and we pay for it -- and includes mental, dental, audio and optical health coverage.  They don't even have to pay their punutive fines for sexual harassment, and even legal representation because  -- we do! They receive the perks and privileges of so much more too.

This is the swamp that orange nazi vowed to drain, but he and his ilks are the biggest sewers that empty into that swamp that ever existed.  So much so, he howled that the rethugs were stealing his money, when campaign contribution funds were to be used to help rethug candidates in elections.  It all belongs to him and the rest of his ilks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Serious Callers Only said:

The main GOP base is and always was a racist death cult howling about 'demographic decline of the white race'. This is everything to them and i wouldn't be surprised if in the next 1 to 5 years they tried to genocide for their 'white america' (if the mexican kids aren't already being murdered).

The thing is: any thinking, middle class woman or man realizes that having a child is a direct threat to their quality of life (and health in the case of women), and most of the middle class is still white - the racist calculus is the 'why behind the why' about their moronic religious justifications for the oppression of women and enabling of impoverishment (oppression of minorities being for a obvious reason).

This is the reason why they were shrieking about 'we lost france' 5 years ago. This is the reason they were freaking about Obama, this is the reason for Brett the rapist, this is the reason they volunteer to get sodomized by Putin. Ironically, because the far right tyranny they want won't save their demographics, as russia shows. Turns out people don't like living or having children in mafia states even if they're nominally 'homogeneous' and that removing contraceptives and family planing and making people poor just spreads deadly diseases that further decline birthrate and life expectancy, who knew.

Just giving birth is brutally expensive.  When my first son was born, everything was reimbursed because I am blessed with an employer who provides good insurance, but it was AFTER I had to pay the hospital.  I was out over 20k for the two days we stayed in a military hospital, which really brought home how insanely expensive it was.  After we brought him home, I noticed how all our other expenses also went up, water, gas, even electricity went up some prior to the previous.  It was very enlightening how adding a third person, even a very small person, has a lot of extra costs.  And then once he started eating food on his own, that was a surpisingly large increase to our grocery bill.

And just today I looked at what my alma mater is charging for tuition and about had a heart attack.  I graduated 14 years ago and its increased at least 5x since then.  I can't imagine what it will be when my son is ready to go in another 15 years.  We're solidly middle class for our area and I'm already worried i won't be able to put him through college, tuition and housing would take up like a quarter of my pre-tax income at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

As much truly vomitous stuff as I've witnessed in on the Hill over the years, maybe the howls that this is a thorough, complete and fair report may be the greatest spew sewage yet. There were four days of investigation, nobody was talked to, it's all secret and there is a SINGLE copy of the report for all the congress to read -- and it's secret and we the voters who pay the assholes' lovely salaries and benefits are not allowed to see it.

What these people are that they not only live with themselves but are happy with themselves.

And it is even more disturbing that Collins is pushing this BS. Pretty soon she will be howling like Lindsey Graham. The brain snatchers keep taking the moderates one by one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

It would be very weird regardless of whatever words came after ‘of course’.

Yes, I realize, but Trump went out of his way to say his accusers were ugly and he’d never be interested in any of them. He kept saying ‘have you seen their pictures?’ Do these women see something different when they look in the mirror? Is Republican stamped on their forehead, making them alluring to Trump?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The People of New York State - against - Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump, Eric F. Trump, and The Donald J. Trump Foundation

 

This dropped as expected.

 

edit: laame, it's 'just' a response to a brief for a previous lawsuit, not a new one because of the NYT investigation about the tax dodge.

 

Still many zingers there about the traitors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, illrede said:

Then you've missed the point. Concise doesn't aid comprehension here.

It absolutely does in political statements. Trust me, I used to write them, and while I understood the point you were making, it was not done efficiently. 

2 hours ago, aceluby said:

Really long winded way to say that, and also pretty horseshit IMO, they could easily confirm a different judge in a lame duck session.  

Sure, if they hold the Senate, but if they did that after losing it, all hell would break loose. Government would grind to an absolute halt for at least two years.

Quote

I think they think this will play well for the midterms, and it's gonna blow up in their faces.

Maybe, maybe not. NPR put out a poll yesterday showing that the enthusiasm gap has disappeared between Democrats and Republicans. Now obviously that's just one poll, but you know Republicans have been doing internal polling and I'm sure it shows that Republicans think they're better off pushing Kavanaugh through than pulling his nomination. Their main selling point for power was the Supreme Court, and failing to get Kavanaugh through while they have unified control of the government will show their base they're worthless. Why go out and vote for that?

Side note, there is something weird in that poll. Enthusiasm among female Democrats went down (albeit by just a smidgen). I figured it would have gone up, even though it's already high, over this whole affair. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw a tweet from one of the Capitol Hill reporters that staffers in Cornyn's whip office haven't heard yet from *four* Republican senators about Kavanaugh. Three are obvious, but I've no idea who the fourth might be. I'm sure whoever it is will vote 'aye,' but I wonder who's dragging their heels?

I might've guessed Sasse, but he was as gung-ho as the rest of the Judiciary members (other than Flake) when that vote had happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...