Jump to content

US Politics: What will the InJustice League do next?


Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Fez said:

Right. But that's business as usual, a constant pendulum swinging between the parties; not a permanent right-wing dictatorship. 

The American electorate seemingly disagrees about it being any different. Don't shoot the messenger, but the pendulum involves authoritarianism and democracy. Before you start with but the pendulum won't swing back. Don't tell me that, get that message into the skulls of so called swing voters and moderate Republicans. Your fellow citizens for most parts are either unaware of the gravity of the situation, or they don't care. So say hello to President de Satan in 2024, and emperor de Satan ever after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

 

When did this version of the Republican party exist, because it's never been that in my lifetime? The overwhelming majority of elected Republicans, long before the Tea Party and Trump takeover, were never even remotely fiscal conservatives.

So, Tywin, just what year were you born? I have gotten the impression from Wilbur's posts that he is considerably older than you are. Apologies to him if that impression is wrong, but I know that I am certainly considerably older than you are.

There were a lot of Republicans for whom reducing government debt was a main issue before Reagan. My father was one of them. His chief concern about government was his belief that most of the national debt was immoral because it was people of earlier generations creating obligations that would have to be paid by their grandchildren long after they were gone. I well remember him writing letters to his Republican congressman during the Reagan administration complaining about the increase in the debt and being angry at the responses he got. He always realized that the "cut taxes and the economy will grow enough that the debt will go down" was a fantasy.  

Now maybe the anti-debt rhetoric of Republican politicians before Reagan was always insincere and it was just because they hadn't held undivided control of the federal government for so long that they were able to convince people they really believed it. But there are still people over 70 like myself who do remember a time over 50 years ago when it did seem like many Republican officeholders were serious about being fiscally responsible. 

 

2 hours ago, straits said:

No, the core of it is tribalism with some weird calvinist-derived prosperity gospel. If it wasn't Christianity, it would have been some paradoxical, libertarian-inspired Cult of the Free Man, with privileges for the in-group.

Please don't blame the modern "prosperity gospel" on Calvinism.  Though some (not all) Calvinists in previous centuries may have seen prosperity as a sign of being "among the elect", this was because they expected that people who were believing Christians would tend to become prosperous because they would have virtues of frugality, hard work, and prudence that would lead to prosperity.  The modern "prosperity gospel" preachers tell people "send my ministry money and you will receive an unexpected check in the mail", and that one can obtain wealth simply by "claiming it through the word of God", which is a very different idea. 

Edited by Ormond
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark Meadows’ associate threatened ex-White House aide before her testimony
It was the second warning Cassidy Hutchinson had received before her deposition, cautioning her against cooperating with the panel

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/30/jan-6-hearings-trump-mark-meadows-cassidy-hutchinson-threatened

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is fascinating witnessing the despair in this thread. It's a very light sampling of what is to come. As the world gets increasingly desperate in the coming years, interesting times will persist.

This has been an entirely predictable trajectory since Americans (particularly boomers) decided that the only electable parties are extremist Republicans and neoliberal pseudo-Republicans like our current president.

This isn't just a problem of the US. Authoritarianism will envelop the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you all persist in projecting authoritarianism into the future, when it is here?  Domestic terrorism reigns, certain it can operate w/impunity, as with the groups of fully kitted out Proud Boys charging into libraries all month to terrorism children at story hour, crafts and games sessions, with a theme of tolerance, i.e. Gay Pride, howling and screaming to the children they were being groomed by pedophiles -- and taking selfies of Themselves doing so, and posting on Twitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Why do you all persist in projecting authoritarianism into the future, when it is here?  Domestic terrorism reigns, certain it can operate w/impunity, as with the groups of fully kitted out Proud Boys charging into libraries all month to terrorism children at story hour, crafts and games sessions, with a theme of tolerance, i.e. Gay Pride, howling and screaming to the children they were being groomed by pedophiles -- and taking selfies of Themselves doing so, and posting on Twitter.

I don't think things have reached a particularly exceptional point in history quite yet. I do think we've passed an inflection point where we as humanity can reasonably overcome our inertia and right our path so that exceptional point can be avoided.

I'm not preaching end times, but I am preaching extraordinarily hard times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Mindwalker said:

In better news, Ketanji Jackson was sworn in today.

Decades and decades of honing her dissent writing skills ahead!

 

 

It's too bad this phenomenal human has to serve on such a shit show of a court. I think she's the minority in the judiciary, and she exemplifies what it should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IFR said:

I don't think things have reached a particularly exceptional point in history quite yet. I do think we've passed an inflection point where we as humanity can reasonably overcome our inertia and right our path so that exceptional point can be avoided.

I'm not preaching end times, but I am preaching extraordinarily hard times.

At almost every point throughout history (at least western history), there's been a sizable number of people proclaiming it to be the end times. This is nothing new. But it wasn't then and it won't be now. I agree it'll be hard times, regardless of what form exactly it takes. But not the end times; it will not be Orwell's boot stamping on a face forever nor the extinction of the entire species. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, IFR said:

It is fascinating witnessing the despair in this thread. It's a very light sampling of what is to come. As the world gets increasingly desperate in the coming years, interesting times will persist.

This has been an entirely predictable trajectory since Americans (particularly boomers) decided that the only electable parties are extremist Republicans and neoliberal pseudo-Republicans like our current president.

This isn't just a problem of the US. Authoritarianism will envelop the world.

Just because it was predictable doesn't mean it's not devastating.

Edited by Mindwalker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

That shitty deal Biden made with mcconnell ? It wss to get a lifetime appointment in Kentucky in exchange for two nonlifetime lawyers.

How does that deal look now, @Ran?

Well, I'm not a big fan of the deal either, but Millhiser is being overdramatic here.  First, as the highlighted quote he used stipulated, Caldwell was only going to "retire" (move to senior status) on the condition she was replaced by Meredith anyway.  She's only 66, so it's very possible she otherwise wouldn't retire for over a decade (or when there's a Republican president) anyway.

Second, confirming US attorneys is nothing to scoff at just because they're "temporary," and Millhiser damn well knows that.  Look at all the current vacancies for US attorneys.  It's not a coincidence that the vast majority of vacancies/unconfirmed appointments are in red states like Kentucky.

ETA:  Third, and perhaps most important to keep in mind, Caldwell's seat is only a district court judgeship, she's not even an appellate judge.

Anyway, I wouldn't have done the deal but it's hardly "unconscionable."

Edited by DMC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arguable, but what's fascinating to me is how bad PR minds have gotten over the last few decades. Even if you could make a slightly longer pro than con list, it looks terribly mindless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

That shitty deal Biden made with mcconnell ? It wss to get a lifetime appointment in Kentucky in exchange for two nonlifetime lawyers.

How does that deal look now, @Ran?

Looks pretty reasonable based on the full reporting in Slate: the judicial opening exists only because a conservative judge has opted to go to  senior status provided a successor is named, namely the person being teed up to replace them. The judge could just wait for the next election to see if a Republican wins before going to senior status, or they could just wait to mid-terms and see how many seats the Republicans take in the Senate such that Biden will get nothing at all without paying a pound of flesh.

Biden is playing the hand he is dealt, and it's better to get something than nothing, IMO. It's Kentucky, it's a district court, blue slips are in effect and basically try to get the best deal you can out of the situation. Is this the best deal Biden could get? I don't know, but as @DMC suggests US attorney appointments are nothing to sneeze at.

Edited by Ran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Ran said:

Looks pretty reasonable based on the full reporting in Slate: the judicial opening exists only because a conservative judge has opted to go to  senior status provided a successor is named, namely the person being teed up to replace them. The judge could just wait for the next election to see if a Republican wins before going to senior status, or they could just wait to mid-terms and see how many seats the Republicans take in the Senate such that Biden will get nothing at all without paying a pound of flesh.

Biden is playing the hand he is dealt, and it's better to get something than nothing, IMO. It's Kentucky, it's a district court, blue slips are in effect and basically try to get the best deal you can out of the situation. Is this the best deal Biden could get? I don't know, but as @DMC suggests US attorney appointments are nothing to sneeze at.

I disagree completely- it is not better to get something when it means being directly complicit in taking away women's rights. 

Better to resist. 

Also, blue slips are not a thing any more. Haven't been for a few years now.

Edited by KalVsWade
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ormond said:

So, Tywin, just what year were you born? I have gotten the impression from Wilbur's posts that he is considerably older than you are. Apologies to him if that impression is wrong, but I know that I am certainly considerably older than you are.

1988, and yes he's closer in age to you than me.

Quote

There were a lot of Republicans for whom reducing government debt was a main issue before Reagan. My father was one of them. His chief concern about government was his belief that most of the national debt was immoral because it was people of earlier generations creating obligations that would have to be paid by their grandchildren long after they were gone. I well remember him writing letters to his Republican congressman during the Reagan administration complaining about the increase in the debt and being angry at the responses he got. He always realized that the "cut taxes and the economy will grow enough that the debt will go down" was a fantasy.  

Now maybe the anti-debt rhetoric of Republican politicians before Reagan was always insincere and it was just because they hadn't held undivided control of the federal government for so long that they were able to convince people they really believed it. But there are still people over 70 like myself who do remember a time over 50 years ago when it did seem like many Republican officeholders were serious about being fiscally responsible. 

And this matters how? Saying there were legitimate fiscal conservatives in 70s is meaningless. Once Reagan took over the party they ceased being fiscal conservatives despite how they branded themselves. I'd argue almost every Blue Dog Democrat was more fiscally responsible than >95% of Republicans from Reagan through the rise of the Tea Party, and since then there are basically no fiscal conservatives left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

1988, and yes he's closer in age to you than me.

And this matters how? Saying there were legitimate fiscal conservatives in 70s is meaningless. Once Reagan took over the party they ceased being fiscal conservatives despite how they branded themselves. I'd argue almost every Blue Dog Democrat was more fiscally responsible than >95% of Republicans from Reagan through the rise of the Tea Party, and since then there are basically no fiscal conservatives left.

It's relevant to answering your question "Just when did this version of the Republican party exist?"  And it's not "meaningless" as long as it affects how people vote. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

 

Or even just debt accumulation vs debt payment. By State, by government, then country wide and which party was in power. Pretty plain and I doubt it's very different from Canada. @Tywin et al. is right. Putting covid aside, acknowledge rightish corporate tax cuts being offset by public service cuts.

Conservatives, Republicans, this fiscal responsibility shit has been a lie for a long ass time, elevating one while suppressing another.  

Edited by JGP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...