US Politics: Roe, Roe, Roe you’re gone? (Hope not)

[ThinkerX]

Maybe just put the BBB up for a straight out vote - with very heavy reminders about party unity and consequences for voting against it - loss of committee seats, getting primaried, that sort of thing.

 

[Kalbear]

41 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

Maybe just put the BBB up for a straight out vote - with very heavy reminders about party unity and consequences for voting against it - loss of committee seats, getting primaried, that sort of thing.

 

Again, these are threats without any consequence for Manchin, and would possibly drive him to just change parties. 

At this point there is basically one and only one thing that can be done. Find out what Manchin wants and do it. Anything else simply won't get done, and Manchin knows it. The only people who don't appear to be leadership or hopeful thinkers. 

So there are two options on the table - find out what he wants and do that, or do nothing. This constant negotiating and getting nothing is the worst possible outcome - if you can't negotiate to get something better to pull the plug now and not have it be a deal for the midterms. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Kalsandra said:

Again, these are threats without any consequence for Manchin, and would possibly drive him to just change parties. 

At this point there is basically one and only one thing that can be done. Find out what Manchin wants and do it. Anything else simply won't get done, and Manchin knows it. The only people who don't appear to be leadership or hopeful thinkers. 

So there are two options on the table - find out what he wants and do that, or do nothing. This constant negotiating and getting nothing is the worst possible outcome - if you can't negotiate to get something better to pull the plug now and not have it be a deal for the midterms. 

Not trying to gloat, but it really needs to be stressed how bad Dem leaders fucked up here, Schumer chief among them. His negligence as a leader is astonishing when it comes to this specific issue. 

[ThinkerX]

well, months ago, I did predict the reconciliation bill would be either nothing or half the initial 3.5 billion. sucks to be right

 

[Fragile Bird]

Meanwhile, life goes on in America. The mayor of Anchorage, Alaska, snuck off to the water treatment plant on October 1 and shut off the fluoride. First he said it was a lie, and then admitted it was true, saying workers had “health and safety” concerns. The shut-off lasted 5 hours.

 

[sologdin]

shut off the fluoride

i love how rightwing crazy has no ideas except hyperreal derivatives of mass culture satire taken literally.

[Jace, Extat]

9 minutes ago, sologdin said:

shut off the fluoride

i love how rightwing crazy has no ideas except hyperreal derivatives of mass culture satire taken literally.

But out fluids, Mandrake! Our precious bodily fluids!!!

[Zorral]

"Constitutional" sheriffs are a present and growing danger to every bit of systemic legality.  They insist they are the only arbiters of what the law is in their counties, which have elected them sheriffs.  The numbers of these white supremacists are growing rapidly.

Links are w/in the WaPo site's text.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/12/17/constitutional-sheriffs-extremist-dangerous-unconstitutional/

Quote

 

.... These sheriffs base this claim to power on their oath to uphold the Constitution. (Although even the National Sheriffs’ Association notes that this oath is taken by every law enforcement officer and confers no special authority on sheriffs.) If their assertion brings to mind the anti-government, militia-supporting Oath Keepers organization, you are on the right track. Richard Mack, founder of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, was a longtime board member of the Oath Keepers, and the constitutional sheriff idea has explicitly white supremacist roots. Given that Mack has called the federal government “the greatest threat we face today,” it is no surprise that constitutional sheriffs have expressed support for the Jan. 6 insurgents. And it is completely on brand that the 2016 CSPOA “sheriff of the year” tried to recruit other constitutional sheriffs to help him seize Dominion voting machines in 2020.

Every believer in democracy should find it chilling that the CSPOA counts “several hundred” sheriffs as dues-paying members and hundreds of other sheriffs as supporters. The Center for Public Integrity reported five years ago that Mack had already trained more than 400 sheriffs in “how to interpret the Constitution and how to resist authorities and laws that violate it.” These numbers are almost certainly higher now and rising: Mack has continued to train, and both Montana and Texas this year approved official training events, led by Mack, to teach constitutional sheriff tenets to law enforcement personnel.

Sheriffs resisting police reform efforts, whether or not they are part of the constitutional sheriff movement, have cited its false tenets. These assertions are often accepted by lawmakers without challenge — thus moving anti-government and racist ideas from the fringe to the policymaking mainstream. Take the example of Virginia, where in 2020 the state legislature passed a law allowing local governments to establish civilian oversight of police departments. But legislators caved to Virginia Sheriffs’ Association assertions that the new oversight could not apply to sheriffs because sheriffs are “elected constitutional officers.” ....

 

See also:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/constitutional-sheriffs-elections-trump-pandemic/2021/11/01/4c14c764-368b-11ec-91dc-551d44733e2d_story.html
 

[DMC]

3 hours ago, Babblebauble said:

But out fluids, Mandrake! Our precious bodily fluids!!!

I first became aware of it, Mandrake, during the physical act of love...

 

[Centrist Simon Steele]

On 12/16/2021 at 7:42 PM, Kalsandra said:

Again, these are threats without any consequence for Manchin, and would possibly drive him to just change parties. 

At this point there is basically one and only one thing that can be done. Find out what Manchin wants and do it. Anything else simply won't get done, and Manchin knows it. The only people who don't appear to be leadership or hopeful thinkers. 

So there are two options on the table - find out what he wants and do that, or do nothing. This constant negotiating and getting nothing is the worst possible outcome - if you can't negotiate to get something better to pull the plug now and not have it be a deal for the midterms. 

Manchin switching parties might work in favor of Dems (and Biden) at this point. Most people know he's an obstructionist piece of shit, but if he switches sides, that could motivate voters.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

On 12/16/2021 at 9:03 PM, Tywin et al. said:

Not trying to gloat, but it really needs to be stressed how bad Dem leaders fucked up here, Schumer chief among them. His negligence as a leader is astonishing when it comes to this specific issue. 

What would you have to gloat about? You've been tooting the Manchin horn since summer--saying progressives better learn to negotiate. They went from 6.5 trillion to--hell, I don't know what it is now, 1.2 trillion? And they're still not getting it because they're negotiating with "moderates"--which just means Republican. 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

1 hour ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

What would you have to gloat about? You've been tooting the Manchin horn since summer--saying progressives better learn to negotiate. They went from 6.5 trillion to--hell, I don't know what it is now, 1.2 trillion? And they're still not getting it because they're negotiating with "moderates"--which just means Republican. 

In the end it was just that asshole from West Virginia, not moderates as a whole. 

[Ormond]

8 hours ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

Manchin switching parties might work in favor of Dems (and Biden) at this point. Most people know he's an obstructionist piece of shit, but if he switches sides, that could motivate voters.

Personally I think you are very wrong if you think this would motivate Democratic voters more than Republican ones. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

8 hours ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

What would you have to gloat about? You've been tooting the Manchin horn since summer--saying progressives better learn to negotiate. They went from 6.5 trillion to--hell, I don't know what it is now, 1.2 trillion? And they're still not getting it because they're negotiating with "moderates"--which just means Republican. 

I never tooted his horn, what I said more or less is that if this was a game of poker, he's got a royal flush and progressives have two pair and they need to stop squinting at their hand trying to convince themselves how it can beat him. They never had any leverage, they were always going to have to meet him on his terms and dragging it out only delayed the inevitable while actually putting their own interests at risk. 

[Zorral]

That guy who put on glasses so people would stop thinking he was dumber than a sack 'o hammers -- one of the many Jan 6 smoking guns??????

https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/17/politics/rick-perry-jan-6-text-mark-meadows-nov-4/index.html?

[DMC]

If you're trying to find some good news, at least there's this...

Of course, when digging into the numbers you can still make this depressing.  Of the 40 confirmed, 29 are for district courts and only 11 are for (the far more important) appellate courts.  Trump's first year involved 12 appellate confirmations and only 6 for the district courts (weirdly, a lot of his first year district court nominees waited nearly/up to a year to get confirmed - can't remember why that was).  Still, Biden and Schumer have done about as good as possible - there are only three current vacancies on the courts of appeals.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

5 hours ago, Ormond said:

Personally I think you are very wrong if you think this would motivate Democratic voters more than Republican ones. 

It puts Republicans in control of the senate, and lots of voters during midterms don't need much reason to sit out. Dems would have to mobilize--Republicans are already mobilized. It could take the narrative/focus off Biden, and the Dems could rally to hold the house and reclaim the senate. I see it changing little in how Republicans vote. 

[DMC]

5 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

They never had any leverage, they were always going to have to meet him on his terms and dragging it out only delayed the inevitable while actually putting their own interests at risk. 

Wait, what exactly are you gloating about?  All you did for months is whine about and blame the progressives, demanding they acquiesce to Manchin's demands and pass the infrastructure bill.  Of course, they eventually did both of these things - over a month ago now - and what have they gotten? 

Manchin is not only still stalling, but he's fundamentally and radically changed the frame of the debate by demanding a CBO score if the bill's provisions remained permanent over ten years - stupidly gifting the Republicans a way to attack the bill over a completely hypothetical score in the process.  Then he reneges on his agreement with the White House over the child tax credit, refusing to support the one year extension which was one of (if not the) cornerstones of the bill and widely popular - very likely blowing up the entire bill in the process.

I don't know why you're gloating when you've been proven wrong, conclusively.  All this serves to demonstrate is the progressives were exactly right not to trust Manchin (and/or Biden and the leadership's ability to corral Manchin) and at least try to maintain some leverage.  I also don't get why you seem to be getting some satisfaction out of Manchin dicking around for months then fucking over his entire party, but it's pretty gross.

[Varysblackfyre321]

11 minutes ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

It puts Republicans in control of the senate,

Yes.

One exampl of how that’s bad; it can whilst we may be waiting desperately for a SC judge to retire or die. 
 

14 minutes ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

the Dems could rally to hold the house and reclaim the senate.

If the party became a bit more pure than they’d win for sure/s.

[DMC]

So the coverage of Kamala Harris' interview with Charlamagne tha God is a perfect microcosm of the media's shameful coverage of her.  Tha God asked her who was the real president - Joe Biden or Joe Manchin - and here was her widely covered response:

Quote

Harris: “Come on, Charlamagne. Come on. It’s Joe Biden.”

Charlamagne: “I can’t tell sometimes.”

Harris: “No, no, no, no. It’s Joe Biden. It’s Joe Biden. And don’t start talking like a Republican … asking whether or not he’s president. And it’s Joe Biden. And I’m vice president, and my name is Kamala Harris. And the reality is because we are in office, we do the things like the child tax credit, which is going to reduce Black child poverty by 50%. … We do things that are about saying that our Department of Justice is going to do these investigations and require that we end chokeholds and have body cameras. It is the work of saying we’re going to get lead out of pipes and paint because our babies are suffering … It is the work of saying people who ride public transit deserve the same kind of dignity that anybody else does. … It is the work of saying that we have got to bring down prescription drug costs because folks who have diabetes should not be dying because they don’t have enough money in their pocket. It’s about saying Black maternal mortality is a real issue that must be treated by everybody — including the White House — as a serious issue. OK? So I hear the frustration, but let’s not deny the impact that we’ve had, and agree also that there is a whole lot more work to be done and it is not easy to do. But we will not give up and I will not give up.”

Charlamagne: “I just want you to know: That madam vice president, that Kamala Harris is the one I like. … That’s the one I’d like to see more often.”

I agree entirely with tha God, that was a great, near perfect, answer - delivered with appropriate intensity (here's the clip of it). 

But if you read an article about this exchange, nine times out of ten what is emphasized is Harris got in a "heated" exchange and her aides tried to end the interview.