Jump to content

US Politics: Supreme Courting to insanity.


Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, DMC said:

I've long been a proponent of expanding the size of the Court significantly.  I used to link to an article that was a really good argument for it, can't find it quickly right now.  But the point is it isn't just about how batshit the court's current composition is.  It also makes sense from practical, good government, and policy perspectives - and would make the court much more representative (and it sorely needs to be).

I mean, the first immediate thing to say is that we had 9 SCOTUS justices when we had 9 districts for courts and that's why we chose that number. We now have 13, so it stands to reason we should have 13 SCOTUSes. 

But really, as long as Dems are not willing to play hardball to get power back they are effectively not doing anything. 

On the administration ruling which I predict will be decided in favor of West Virginia - I think what you'll see is the courts happily ceding federal control for things that they are in favor of and happily nixing control over things they do not want. It will not be a one size fits all thing. California will have to cede their tougher environmental regulations as an example. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, DMC said:

 

Her team’s explanation is imo very plausible, ie meant to say ‘right to life’. Of course mistakes can be revealing, especially when the speaker goes on to quote Hitler in an affirmative sense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

I think what you'll see is the courts happily ceding federal control for things that they are in favor of and happily nixing control over things they do not want. It will not be a one size fits all thing.

Again, that's not what my primary concern is about.  The point is reasserting the nondelegation doctrine is a radical (and absurd) institutional power grab by the Court itself.  And again, if any Republican thinks that as president they will always agree with this Court's majority decisions after claiming this power across the host of the bureaucracies it applies to, they are being incredibly naive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

But really, as long as Dems are not willing to play hardball to get power back they are effectively not doing anything. 

Sorry, meant to respond to this too.  I'd say when it comes to expanding the court, the Dems definitely should not start pushing for it in earnest until they have a realistic chance of actually doing it.  It's not worth the capital otherwise, and that's before considering last time I checked it was still significantly unpopular with the public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone feel like they have enough of a handle on how the Maga-Ats might react to Trump having been used by the socons as a stalking horse? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, James Arryn said:

 

*as one clear example, look at the conversations where he’s desperately trying to persuade people to find him the votes in Georgia or similar. He makes it clear that this is about how beloved he is, how anything else must be wrong…and at the same time he offers as the ultimate inducement to these potential vote-finders the assurance that if they give him what they will be praised. He repeats that many times. Then when that stalls he gives up on carrots and threatens them with future prosecution. This is basically the understanding of others typical of a late pre-teen, but more importantly by depicting what he thinks motivates others while he’s under serious duress, he reveals what ultimately motivates himself. 

I know this is stating the obvious, but this is just such a perfect example of extreme narcissism I have to go ahead and point it out. It is just so classic as to how a malignant narcissist operates. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, James Arryn said:

Her team’s explanation is imo very plausible, ie meant to say ‘right to life’. Of course mistakes can be revealing, especially when the speaker goes on to quote Hitler in an affirmative sense. 

As a psychologist I actually think misspeaking in this way without a wrong intent is possible. However, she is now saying not that she misspoke, but that she was reading a written statement and "misread" it. It seems to me it would have to be something written in really bad cursive for that to be plausible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Ormond said:

It seems to me it would have to be something written in really bad cursive for that to be plausible. 

Or she secretly pronounces things like this guy...

 

Edited by DMC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was this posted yet?  Echoes of the Nixon tapes.   There was a documentary film crew at the White House from September 2020 to at least January 6th to cover TFG's re-election campaign and it doesn't seem like many people working there knew about it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Patients in Texas clinics were waiting to get their abortions. Then Roe fell
Providers reported ‘complete despair’ as patients with appointments only minutes away were turned away

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/25/patients-abortion-texas-clinics-roe-v-wade

Quote

 

Patients were in the lobby, waiting, the moment it became a post-Roe America.

The staff at Alamo Women’s Reproductive Services Clinic in San Antonio had just received a call from their attorney: abortion procedures in Texas would have to stop immediately. The dozen or so patients in the lobby on Friday morning would have to be turned away. The clinic staff would have to be the ones to tell them.

Gallegos watched each word land like a blow. People cried. They screamed. They begged for help, she said. It was “complete despair”.

Hours later, the clinic had emptied of all but those who had received their abortions hours or minutes before Roe v Wade, the 50-year-old court case that enshrined abortion as a right, was overturned by the supreme court on Friday, leaving the question of abortion access up to individual states. Only those with follow-up appointments could be seen.

Gallegos and her staff called about 20 people who were scheduled to come in later that day. Some were caught off guard, Gallegos said. “Why today? Why the day of their appointment did this happen?” patients asked her.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Classic Gay Pride Sunday  -- Hot, blue and white, purrfect for outdoor celebration.  Tonight, oo la la, will be even more purrfect, as the sun is no longer over head, the right temperature to wear as few clothes as possible.  People are celebrating while also mourning.  Here the Pride Parade kicked off after the traditional Gay Biker Club, with  Planned Parenthood float and marchers.

Everyone is aware there's an immensity of energy and money being devoted to this never being able to be celebrated again.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, James Arryn said:

I hold as a basic assumption that if the U.S. descends into a militant Republican ~theocracy or autocracy, either invading or destroying Canada (or reviving the Dulles two-step) is almost a given. Right-wing Americans have routinely expressed great frustration and outright anger at the frequency with which Canada is held up as a contrast by critics along many lines and almost automatically describe Canada as socialist and/or communist. I’m not remotely saying it’s anywhere near the top of their list of priorities, but I feel pretty confident it’s on there somewhere.

The US taking over Canada within 50 years is a pretty safe bet.

The main factor won't be cultural, but geostrategic though. The Western side of the US will face increasingly frequent droughts and desertification, eventually collapsing the agricultural production of the great plains. The southern regions from texas to Florida will be affected by deadly heatwaves due to the wetbulb effect, causing mass panic and migration to the north.
Of course, the US government would much rather preserve the illusion that it cares about self-determination, territorial integrity and stuff like that (though history tells us it only does so as long as other nations... take its interests into account), and convince Canada to become its willing breadbasket and freshwater distributor (i.e. a vassal). Unfortunately, the speed at which global warming is happening may prevent any kind of peaceful economic or diplomatic arrangement. It used to be that such apocalyptic events were predicted for the end of the century (around the 2070s or thereabout), but climate change has been accelerating fast, and a lot of studies are now predicting all that for around 2050. I've seen at least one study predicting the collapse of global agriculture as early as 2040! That one was probably a bit pessimistic, but there's no denying the fact that the aquifers on which the US relies are drying up fast. On a a global level the WHO has predicted that half of humanity will start finding freshwater scarce in... 2025, with actual depletion hitting that same half around 2040.

So yeah, Canada is definitely on the list, no question about that. But I'm sure if you buy a MAGA hat now and vote Conservative, it'll all work out. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Canada has willing journalists, who take the money and audition for Fox jobs. Tucker Calrlson is a hate speaker…I have read. He should be banned from Canadian airwaves. The Doug Ford fiasco comes from terrible biased journalism from Fox and Sinclair news. I will be anti conservative now until I die because of all the lawlessness, rabblerousing, white supremacy, and either lying or repeating dubious talking points. Justin Trudeau kept people safe. I snort loudly at the attempts to portray him as a tyrant. He is not at all. In particular, he is supportive of women’s rights and equality. American conservatives and Ontario conservatives to support weaseling and corruption( and try to take foreign money for this). Doug Ford is a perfect useful idiot with a crap drug addicted and dead brother, too. Oh I just read that somewhere….people say.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/25/2022 at 12:27 PM, LongRider said:

National Republican Radio continuously talking to Trump voters during the Trump years really bothered me.  When I heard them say yesterday on ATC that they would be talking to people about the SC's ruling, I immediately changed the channel, been to that rodeo before and wasn't interested in the opinions of woman haters.

It is bizarre to me to hear NPR damned from the Left and the Right…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...