Jump to content

US Politics: Manchin Shin Drinks the Blood and Cracks the Bone


A True Kaniggit

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, HoodedCrow said:

I spent time on a left wing website. At least one person came every day and posted an anti Hilary screed with all the usual innuendos, and lots of cut and paste. It started in election season and ended exactly when Clinton lost. “Jeyne’s” punchline was always telling people to vote for Jill Stein. That worked. Ralph Nader worked. Mondale worked. It just doesn’t work in all 50 States, at present. 
I also live in Canada, where the conservatives get in all the time, if the left is split. I’m a progressive like you, but you can’t turn a ship of state quickly. Now there is a double dealing 50 th senator. We need better than Manchin.

Do you think you will get better than Manchin from West Virginia? What do you mean “Mondale worked”?  He was the Democratic nominee in 1984… not a third party spoiler.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, HoodedCrow said:

I spent time on a left wing website. At least one person came every day and posted an anti Hilary screed with all the usual innuendos, and lots of cut and paste. It started in election season and ended exactly when Clinton lost. “Jeyne’s” punchline was always telling people to vote for Jill Stein. That worked. Ralph Nader worked. Mondale worked. It just doesn’t work in all 50 States, at present. 
I also live in Canada, where the conservatives get in all the time, if the left is split. I’m a progressive like you, but you can’t turn a ship of state quickly. Now there is a double dealing 50 th senator. We need better than Manchin.

Hey! Why is my old professor catching strays here?!?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/22/2021 at 9:02 AM, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

So, you are go for a full on dictatorship so long as the dictator is doing what you want them to do?  If so, I hope you realize that is how Trumpanistas justify Trump’s actions.

I know I'm late to the party but I wanted to respond to this because there seems to be an agreed-upon assumption that Trump employed unilateral action in an unprecedented way.  He did not.  In terms of EOs - the predominate unilateral tool for positive policymaking - the only egregious example is the travel ban (which of course was delayed and altered due to the courts).  Other than that, his EO issuance is not significantly discernible from Obama's, and lags behind Dubya's in terms of advancing one's policy agenda.

Where Trump was prodigious in capitalizing on available tools of unilateral action is through abolishing and blocking rules and regulations.  As well as, quite simply, undermining the oversight and enforcement abilities of the administrative state.  Now all this obvious sucks, very hard, but it's not really an institutional problem (moreover, this really isn't presidential unilateral action but rather executive unilateral action).  The powers employed by the Trump administration in these instances are certainly something the executive should retain (or, well, at least think they are).  Otherwise the ability of the federal government to function would only be further weakened.

Other unilateral tools at Trump's disposal weren't extraordinarily abused either.  Signing statements, in particular, were a worrying new avenue during Dubya administration.  His most infamous use of these was the 2005 McCain torture bill.  Dubya allowed it to pass because he knew a veto would just be overridden, so in his signing statement he effectively simply instructed agencies to ignore the law.  Anyway, while I haven't heavily scrutinized Trump's use of signing statements, I'm not aware of much concern of him utilizing them in such a way (and I almost certainly would have heard about it if he did).

Finally, other than student loan debt, I'm still not entirely clear what EOs Biden should be issuing to advance his agenda.  People say "climate change," but there needs to be much more specificity on what that actually entails.  One semi-optimistic not on curbing presidential power/unilateral action - recent research shows that its use, at least on salient issues, does impact public opinion.  Of course, public opinion's ability to act as a mechanism for constraint on unilateral action is entirely reliant on free and fair elections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Do you think you will get better than Manchin from West Virginia? What do you mean “Mondale worked”?  He was the Democratic nominee in 1984… not a third party spoiler.

 

Such talk from progressives on replacing Mancin reminds of cons chest-thumping on being the silent majority in practically every state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DMC said:

I know I'm late to the party but I wanted to respond to this because there seems to be an agreed-upon assumption that Trump employed unilateral action in an unprecedented way.  He did not.  In terms of EOs - the predominate unilateral tool for positive policymaking - the only egregious example is the travel ban (which of course was delayed and altered due to the courts).  Other than that, his EO issuance is not significantly discernible from Obama's, and lags behind Dubya's in terms of advancing one's policy agenda.

Where Trump was prodigious in capitalizing on available tools of unilateral action is through abolishing and blocking rules and regulations.  As well as, quite simply, undermining the oversight and enforcement abilities of the administrative state.  Now all this obvious sucks, very hard, but it's not really an institutional problem (moreover, this really isn't presidential unilateral action but rather executive unilateral action).  The powers employed by the Trump administration in these instances are certainly something the executive should retain (or, well, at least think they are).  Otherwise the ability of the federal government to function would only be further weakened.

Other unilateral tools at Trump's disposal weren't extraordinarily abused either.  Signing statements, in particular, were a worrying new avenue during Dubya administration.  His most infamous use of these was the 2005 McCain torture bill.  Dubya allowed it to pass because he knew a veto would just be overridden, so in his signing statement he effectively simply instructed agencies to ignore the law.  Anyway, while I haven't heavily scrutinized Trump's use of signing statements, I'm not aware of much concern of him utilizing them in such a way (and I almost certainly would have heard about it if he did).

Finally, other than student loan debt, I'm still not entirely clear what EOs Biden should be issuing to advance his agenda.  People say "climate change," but there needs to be much more specificity on what that actually entails.  One semi-optimistic not on curbing presidential power/unilateral action - recent research shows that its use, at least on salient issues, does impact public opinion.  Of course, public opinion's ability to act as a mechanism for constraint on unilateral action is entirely reliant on free and fair elections.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.yahoo.com/amphtml/lawsuit-argues-biden-administration-could-have-avoided-gulf-coast-oil-offshore-drilling-auction-224436722.html

I mean this seems like something climate related that could have been avoided.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Lermo T.I. Krrrammpus said:

I mean this seems like something climate related that could have been avoided. 

I mean, he did issue an EO and the court then struck it down.  Whether the administration should be more legally combative in appealing the decision I'm no expert in, but it's not really unilateral action at that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

I mean, he did issue an EO and the court then struck it down.  Whether the administration should be more legally combative in appealing the decision I'm no expert in, but it's not really unilateral action at that point.

There were other options detailed in the article (including one that Obama used successfully), and when you're dealing with stuff like oil drilling that can't be undone you need to pursue all avenues.  They obviously felt differently.  That tells me this administration doesn't really care much about oil drilling.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Lermo T.I. Krrrammpus said:

There were other options detailed in the article (including one that Obama used successfully), and when you're dealing with stuff like oil drilling that can't be undone you need to pursue all avenues.

I did read the other options.  Two were legal recourses, which again is not my area, but as for turning around and issuing another EO based on what Obama used, no, that'd be a great way to just piss off the courts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just trying to one up all the right wingers I come across now on batshit conspiracy stuff.  Was working with this guy the other day who is pretty much full Qanon and anti COVID vax.  Told him that Trump as we know him never existed and it's a media conspiracy that goes back generations.  Said he actually served in Vietnam and was killed there by friendly fire.  Told him the real Trump killed Kennedy and that's why they did it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Build Back Better' might return to life...or maybe an undead state...

Joe Manchin's 'Scaled-Back' Framework May Be Better Than It Sounds (yahoo.com)

 

Manchin has also said he objects to the bill’s basic structure. By funding several of the programs for only a few years with the expectation that future lawmakers will renew them, Manchin says, Democratic leaders have disguised the bill’s true cost ― which, he says, is $3 trillion over 10 years, rather than the $1.85 trillion in the official Congressional Budget Office projection.

The best hope for moving forward may lie in an alternative framework that, according to The Washington Post, Manchin gave the White House last week. It would include the bill’s climate and pre-kindergarten initiatives, along with improvements to the Affordable Care Act, funding all of them for the full 10 years of the budget window. It would leave out most of the bill’s other components.

It’s difficult to know how serious this proposal is, given that it’s not public, or whether Manchin sincerely wants to get to “yes.” Even if he does, reconstructing legislation and assembling votes for it at this late stage in the process would be difficult. Progressives in particular are likely to resist endorsing a bill that is already being described in the media as a “scaled-back” version of the House bill.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I've long suspected, America"s so called labor shortage is a complete hoax.

What employers have been calling a shortage, is more readily explainable as age discrimination according to the latest participation rate statistics.

Three key numbers that explain America's labor shortage

https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/25/economy/labor-shortage-early-retirement-charts/index.html

Older workers have been forced out and then the companies, unwilling to employ older workers, claim there is no-one available. They want it both ways.

There's no replacements at the front door, because you've been busy pushing them out the backdoors.

There is no labor shortage, there's a flawed management problem with businesses unable to think outside the box or even more simply, to just overcome there ageism, bias and discrimination against workers over 54. Workers who are only participating at about 38% in the current workforce.

There are millions and millions of workers available in America. The companies that are able to compete need only to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and go out and get themselves those workers.

They may have to train themselves in new skills to find those workers, but they are out there, by the millions.

Enough with the lazy corporate excuses and whining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The shortages in health care, education and some other professions can't be fixed by hiring older workers though.  It's the conditions themselves that make it impossible for mental and physical health reasons for the teachers, etc. to continue.  Plus in health care and education where I live the shortages are also due to the staff being sick with covid. Plus the kids in public schools are not necessarily vaccinated either, their parents are against mask mandates and vaccinations -- why should the teachers keep putting their lives on the line for this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/24/2021 at 10:35 PM, ThinkerX said:

'Build Back Better' might return to life...or maybe an undead state...

Joe Manchin's 'Scaled-Back' Framework May Be Better Than It Sounds (yahoo.com)

 

Manchin has also said he objects to the bill’s basic structure. By funding several of the programs for only a few years with the expectation that future lawmakers will renew them, Manchin says, Democratic leaders have disguised the bill’s true cost ― which, he says, is $3 trillion over 10 years, rather than the $1.85 trillion in the official Congressional Budget Office projection.

The best hope for moving forward may lie in an alternative framework that, according to The Washington Post, Manchin gave the White House last week. It would include the bill’s climate and pre-kindergarten initiatives, along with improvements to the Affordable Care Act, funding all of them for the full 10 years of the budget window. It would leave out most of the bill’s other components.

It’s difficult to know how serious this proposal is, given that it’s not public, or whether Manchin sincerely wants to get to “yes.” Even if he does, reconstructing legislation and assembling votes for it at this late stage in the process would be difficult. Progressives in particular are likely to resist endorsing a bill that is already being described in the media as a “scaled-back” version of the House bill.

 

I am sick of Manchin's political kabuki. If he has a proposal, how do you American's say? He should just put up, or shut up.

If the climate provisions are in, I'd still take the deal in a heart beat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

As I've long suspected, America"s so called labor shortage is a complete hoax.

What employers have been calling a shortage, is more readily explainable as age discrimination according to the latest participation rate statistics.

Three key numbers that explain America's labor shortage

https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/25/economy/labor-shortage-early-retirement-charts/index.html

Older workers have been forced out and then the companies, unwilling to employ older workers, claim there is no-one available. They want it both ways.

There's no replacements at the front door, because you've been busy pushing them out the backdoors.

There is no labor shortage, there's a flawed management problem with businesses unable to think outside the box or even more simply, to just overcome there ageism, bias and discrimination against workers over 54. Workers who are only participating at about 38% in the current workforce.

There are millions and millions of workers available in America. The companies that are able to compete need only to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and go out and get themselves those workers.

They may have to train themselves in new skills to find those workers, but they are out there, by the millions.

Enough with the lazy corporate excuses and whining.

The article really doesn't have any statistics on what % of the early retirees are voluntary and what % are facing true age discrimination. There'd have to be more research to determine that. 

I know people who have retired earlier than they planned because of the pandemic but who are happy with their decision and do not want to go back to work. The latest is the sister of my best friend in Omaha, who is a schoolteacher in a suburban Omaha district. She is 63 and was planning on working a few more years but is retiring at the end of this school year because she is just burned out after having to deal with all the extra hassles around the pandemic. She won't have any real finanical hardship because of this and is looking forward to it. 

I am sure there are both people like my friend's sister, and people like the "Linda" mentioned at the end of the article who really would like to go back to work among the 55+ workers who are not back to work yet. I just don't know which of these is the bigger proportion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Further regarding the wishful thinking that the 'red' has peaked in the USA and the world -- you ain't seen nothin' yet!

“I don’t like to be played the fool,” said Ms. Crabtree, who also works as an assistant to a Christian author and speaker."

Pandemic and Enid Oklahoma.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/26/us/oklahoma-masks.html

Quote

 

.... “The red shirts have assumed effective control of most of the public bodies in Enid,” Mr. Ezzell said this month. He estimated that those who cared enough about the mask mandate to show up at a public meeting to speak against it were a small minority of the city’s 50,000 population. But they had an outsize effect on the Council’s moderate members, because in this moment of defensiveness and threat, going against members of your own tribe is extremely difficult. ....

.... but Mr. Burleson has continued to bring national politics to Enid. One Sunday this past August, he sat down in his church with Charlie Kirk, the right-wing speaker, who during the pandemic has been visiting churches across the country calling on people to get involved in politics. ....

.... “We’re going to have an explosion,” he said. “Whether it’s literal or figurative. It’s going to be bad.” ....

.... Ms. Crabtree now attends most every City Council meeting. The Christian author she works for is now running for Congress. She herself was tapped for a seat on the state board of education, but after an outcry that she was against mask and vaccine mandates and that she home schools instead of participating in public schools, and some threatening messages online, she withdrew.

Still, she is hopeful for the future.

She is proud of her son, who she said cares deeply about the country. He flew to Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6 to go to Mr. Trump’s speech with her father. She said they did not participate in what came after. He graduated from high school last year but did not want to go to college and “pay $100,000 to fight indoctrination.” She said he now works at Chick-fil-A and wants to teach his peers about patriotism.

“He wants to right all the wrongs in the world,” she said. “He said, ‘Mom, I don’t have time to go to college. We have a country to save.’” ....

 

These are the same sorts of communities who think this is a good way to deal with their schools:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2021/dec/13/south-dakota-teachers-scramble-for-dollar-bills-to-buy-classroom-supplies-in-half-time-game-video

And yet, yet, AND YET! they are shocked there is a labor shortage now in public education -- and health care.

It is NOT ageism, it is deliberate policy on the part of the communities and corps themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In other "non Manchin" events we have the Jan 6th committee steadily building its case for accountability from the violent insurrectionists and their leader Donald Trump.

Trump and the January 6 committee are now locked in a full-on confrontation

https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/27/politics/donald-trump-january-6-committee/index.h

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...