Jump to content

US Politics: Supreme Courting to insanity.


Recommended Posts

Wait, what? Why does he need a deal for other judges when a simple majority is enough? Anyway, this is terrible.

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-unlikely-meet-bold-democrat-demands-after-abortion-ruling-sources-2022-06-29/

In a speech after the rollback of the Roe vs. Wade decision on Friday, President Joe Biden slammed the "extreme ideology" of the conservative-leaning Supreme Court, but said then there are few things he could do by executive order to protect women's reproductive rights. (...)

Biden and officials are concerned that more radical moves would be politically polarizing ahead of November's midterm elections, undermine public trust in institutions like the Supreme Court or lack strong legal footing, sources inside and outside the White House say.

Protecting abortion rights is a top issue for women Democrats, Reuters polling shows. The White House, which misjudged when the ruling would be issued, is still not meeting the moment on the issue, some health experts and Democrats complain.

"The White House had a month, if not a year, to plan for this and they should have really come out with a major white paper plan of action the moment Dobbs was announced," said Lawrence Gostin, a professor of medicine at Georgetown University and faculty director of its Institute for National and Global Health Law. "The impression is that the White House is leading from behind, that they were caught flat footed."

 

LOL to the bolded.

Also, ninja'd by Kalbear.

Republicasns are going to take away your rights and your democracy. Democrats will prevent this, unless they find a reason not to. Any reason will do.

Edited by Mindwalker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, JGP said:

Sure, but you were also pretty big on pragmatism re: getting shit done, but feels like maybe you get the fight is different now. That’s all I meant, not a dig.

Getting shit done is the goal. A lot of times that means you have to take less than what you want because it's better than nothing and then you come back and try and get some more next time. But if you're in a situation where you can grab the whole bag, take it. Every situation is different and you have to approach it that way. What I've constantly opposed is pursuing a path that is dead from the start that also serves no political purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

This is another example - Biden should be doing whatever he can to undermine this SCOTUS at every turn. Instead...oh no, can't do that.

 

Biden is trying really hard to be remembered as a bad president. Again, this is what I mean by needing to get rid of Dem leaders who are stuck in the past and lack the spirit to fight fire with fire. He wants to protect an institution hell bent on fucking him over. They're probably laughing at him in private.

This is another example of Dems bringing a spoon to a dual. And by not taking action he's actually sealing the faith he's desperate to avoid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing all this shit about how you definitely need all these "old school" political establishment centrist moderates who, when push comes to shove, won't do shit because it's just not done that way or whatever is so infuriating. It's the exact same problem we have with the Labour party in the UK - instead of backing a candidate capable of exciting and mobilising the electorate we've ended up with a leader of the opposition the political equivalent of beige wallpaper, and it seems like Biden came off the same roll.

This is what the right has known for a long time, and kinda perfected in the lunatic demagoguery of Trump: it doesn't matter one iota if all the people who were never going to vote for you any way respect you or not. Most people will only ever vote for one political team, the question is whether or not they care enough to bother to turn up to vote on the day. How many Dem voters are gonna stay home now because instead of tearing ass your president is telling people to calm down and saying he really doesn't want to do anything to protect their rights because it might be controversial?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a lot to catch up on in this thread!

I think BB as usual takes her rhetoric too far, but she ain't wrong about the political situation in this country. Fascists don't surrender power peacefully, and are weakening the civic institutions and traditions that have kept domestic peace possible. They are upping the ante and removing safeguards.

Civil rights aren't won peacefully. They are won because enough activists and marginalized people die in pursuit of those goals that the noise becomes too much to ignore for the placid, privileged, corn-fed "middle." Or because the ruling elites smelled that pushing further would end up with members of their class hanging from lamp posts.

Thomas Jefferson was an asshole and a shitbag and a source of a lot of our current structural problems, but he was right about that "blood of patriots and tyrants" thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think Biden deserves heavy criticism for his lack of response to the overturning of Roe.  It's entirely inexcusable that even if they did determine nothing of real substance could be done, the administration did not come up with anything better than Beccera's HHS briefing yesterday to indicate they are at least going to try to find ways to fight back.  Biden could also, of course, prepared to issue a bunch of guidance-based EOs that again aren't really substantive but at least show that you fucking care.  If he's worried that's what Trump did he's being an idiot.  Even Obama did that on gun control.

All that being said, getting back to that Reuters article and actual substantive things Biden can do, I think this quote is revealing:

Quote

Since then, lawmakers including Senator Elizabeth Warren and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have suggested Biden limit the Supreme Court's jurisdiction or expand its membership, end the legislative "filibuster" rule, build abortion clinics on federal lands, declare a national emergency and establish Planned Parenthood outposts outside U.S. national parks, among other options.

I mean, ok.  In terms of expanding the court (or "limiting the SC's jurisdiction," which of course the Supreme Court will just strike down), if you wanna say Biden is being feckless for coming out against it ok.  But I really don't care because he's not gonna be able to do it anyway.  As for ending the filibuster, don't see what the hell Biden is supposed to do about that.  

In terms of providing abortion clinics on federal lands I think that's an interesting idea and I thought AOC did a good job advocating for this position on MTP.  However, I also know the White House responded that their concern there is they can only protect federal employees from state prosecution if they did that.  I don't know if that's true or not, but it seems like a very legit concern you definitely would want to make sure doesn't happen before doing so.  I'm not faulting AOC et al. for proposing these efforts, but she's not the one that will be responsible if actually doing it blows up in Biden's face. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, DMC said:

As for ending the filibuster, don't see what the hell Biden is supposed to do about that.  

For starters, try? He's so afraid to do even that. It's pretty understandable that people left, right and center view him as weak because he won't do anything that will even mildly rock the boat. He's not the leader for these times because he fundamentally cannot lead. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

For starters, try? He's so afraid to do even that.

He came out for it publicly on voting rights.  Safe to assume he's tried to get Manchin and Sinema to budge on this privately.  And - as is clear as fucking day to everyone - Biden nor anyone else is gonna change their mind.  Don't really see the point of pushing for it again specifically on abortion.

As for shitting on Biden generally, well, I think it's foolish to think anyone else would be making THAT much more of a difference, which is usually the vantage point I'm coming from when I defend the administration.  But I did wanna say I am totally in agreement about the older generation stepping down.  We've talked about this for years now, and it was my primary complaint (or more source of depression) during the primary - that it came down to my two least preferred and oldest candidates in Biden and Sanders.

Reason I wanted to mention it is when I visited my parents and sister a couple weeks ago, this is something my sister actually brought up while talking to me and my mom.  I thought it was particularly interesting because my sister usually does not initiate political discussion, at least when my parents are around.  But she was so pissed about how old everybody was -- and then I of course detailed the ages of others she wasn't aware of to make her even more pissed.  And my mom readily agreed.  It was really striking to me that this was the immediate and intense (and really only) criticism they had at the Democrats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The beloved 'bipartisanship' is predicated on the assumption of two sane, functional parties. Pelosi will often remark to the effect of, "the US needs a strong Republican party not a cult"* 

Well, babes, we have a fascistic cult. A desire for bipartisanship is a pipedream detached from the current reality. There is no real common ground to be found here. Many people will die as a result of Dobbs and neither bipartisanship not voting will provide real solutions to save lives any time soon.

*https://www.newsweek.com/nancy-pelosi-us-needs-strong-republican-party-not-cult-1705081

Link to comment
Share on other sites

January 6 committee subpoenas Trump White House counsel Pat Cipollone for testimony

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/29/politics/pat-cipollone-january-6-committee-subpoena/index.html

We need to keep in mind that people are terrified, they and their families are threatened with dreadful treatment including execution.

This applies to everyone, no matter what 'side of the aisle' one is on.  The Dems are as terrified of the militias as the reichs.

Edited by Zorral
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, DMC said:

He came out for it publicly on voting rights.  Safe to assume he's tried to get Manchin and Sinema to budge on this privately.  And - as is clear as fucking day to everyone - Biden nor anyone else is gonna change their mind.  Don't really see the point of pushing for it again specifically on abortion.

As for shitting on Biden generally, well, I think it's foolish to think anyone else would be making THAT much more of a difference, which is usually the vantage point I'm coming from when I defend the administration. 

Here's the thing, I think a fifteen year younger version of Biden tries a lot harder, and maybe it works. I'm sure he has tried, but every vibe I get from him, and not just on this issue, is that he's been incredibly passive behind the scenes. 

Quote

But I did wanna say I am totally in agreement about the older generation stepping down.  We've talked about this for years now, and it was my primary complaint (or more source of depression) during the primary - that it came down to my two least preferred and oldest candidates in Biden and Sanders.

100%

Quote

Reason I wanted to mention it is when I visited my parents and sister a couple weeks ago, this is something my sister actually brought up while talking to me and my mom.  I thought it was particularly interesting because my sister usually does not initiate political discussion, at least when my parents are around.  But she was so pissed about how old everybody was -- and then I of course detailed the ages of others she wasn't aware of to make her even more pissed.  And my mom readily agreed.  It was really striking to me that this was the immediate and intense (and really only) criticism they had at the Democrats.

Similar experience in my family. There's a lot of old or recently deceased lawyers and doctors, who in their 80's were still sound of mind and they cannot believe how old the political class has gotten on both sides. And that's not to say the elderlies' opinion doesn't matter, it certainly does, but we're lying to ourselves if we think people in their 70s and 80s still are working with the same skills they had in their 40s, 50s and 60s. Their advice should always be sought after, but their time to lead has come and passed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Here's the thing, I think a fifteen year younger version of Biden tries a lot harder, and maybe it works.

I dunno, I don't think it matters what age Biden, or any president, is when it comes to inflation.  As for the filibuster/abortion thing, the Dems can't even get Manchin on board to vote for the damn WHPA itself.  A concerted push to abolish the filibuster for abortion is just going to make Biden look even more stupid, weak, and ineffectual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Vigilantism is what the reichlicans are All In On.

“Just because you jump across a state line doesn’t mean your home state doesn’t have jurisdiction,” said Peter Breen, vice president and senior counsel for the Thomas More Society. “It’s not a free abortion card when you drive across the state line.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/29/abortion-state-lines/

Quote

 

The Thomas More Society, a conservative legal organization, is drafting model legislation for state lawmakers that would allow private citizens to sue anyone who helps a resident of a state that has banned abortion from terminating a pregnancy outside of that state. The draft language will borrow from the novel legal strategy behind a Texas abortion ban enacted last year in which private citizens were empowered to enforce the law through civil litigation.

The subject was much discussed at two national antiabortion conferences last weekend, with several lawmakers interested in introducing these kinds of bills in their own states.

The National Association of Christian Lawmakers, an antiabortion organization led by Republican state legislators, has begun working with the authors of the Texas abortion ban to explore model legislation that would restrict people from crossing state lines for abortions, said Texas state representative Tom Oliverson (R), the charter chair of the group’s national legislative council.

“Just because you jump across a state line doesn’t mean your home state doesn’t have jurisdiction,” said Peter Breen, vice president and senior counsel for the Thomas More Society. “It’s not a free abortion card when you drive across the state line.”

The Biden Justice Department has already warned states that it would fight such laws, saying they violate the right to interstate commerce.

Roe’s gone. Now antiabortion lawmakers want more.

In relying on private citizens to enforce civil litigation, rather than attempting to impose a state-enforced ban on receiving abortions across state lines, such a law is more difficult to challenge in court because abortion rights groups don’t have a clear person to sue.

Like the Texas abortion ban, the proposal itself could have a chilling effect, where doctors in surrounding states stop performing abortions before courts have an opportunity to intervene, worried that they may face lawsuits if they violate the law.

 

 

Edited by Zorral
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, DMC said:

I dunno, I don't think it matters what age Biden, or any president, is when it comes to inflation.  As for the filibuster/abortion thing, the Dems can't even get Manchin on board to vote for the damn WHPA itself.  A concerted push to abolish the filibuster for abortion is just going to make Biden look even more stupid, weak, and ineffectual.

Correct on inflation, but for the rest I'd like to return to BBB (and no, I am not trying to relitigate it). One of my great frustrations which I expressed here numerous times was that the WH could not get the progressives and Manchin to sit down and talk face to face for months. That to me suggests a very passive leadership approach. What I badly wanted was for Biden to bring the necessary parties into the Oval Office, much earlier than he eventually did, and lock the doors and tell everyone we're not leaving without a deal, even if it was a measly $500B package. That never happened, and it always came across like Biden was asking politely for Manchin to help him rather than telling him to get the fuck in line. Now obviously that could have failed as well, but I've seen no evidence that Biden tried to play hardball. If anything he largely tried to not play much of a role at all. And once all that played out why would Manchin ever be deferential towards Biden again? I don't like shitting on Biden because his primary objective was to beat Trump and he did just that, but after the first six months or so of his Administration its just been mistake after mistake that's hard to ignore. That doesn't mean someone else could have solved everything else, but at least show me you're trying...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

Correct on inflation, but for the rest I'd like to return to BBB (and no, I am not trying to relitigate it).

Yes, for the sake of everyone that follows these threads - especially considering the current volatile sentiment - I do think it's best if you and I in particular do not revisit the internal dynamics of the BBB at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, DMC said:

Yes, for the sake of everyone that follows these threads - especially considering the current volatile sentiment - I do think it's best if you and I in particular do not revisit the internal dynamics of the BBB at all.

I just brought it up to highlight Biden's passive approach. Ever since then it's hard not to see his leadership style as such. That's not what several of these moments have called for. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...