El Guapo wrote: ↑Thu Aug 02, 2018 10:19 am
There's no reason why any Republicans or NeverTrumpers or what have you have to become Democrats. What is *essential* is just voting Democratic in 2018. The house is on fire now, and putting the opposition party (the democrats) in power in at least one part of government is the only reliable way to start to put it out. Once the emergency has passed, then is the time to figure out whether the GOP can be saved, whether to form a new party, etc.
The author talks a little about that, I think equating this whole thing to Japan/Germany post-WWII in that you have to burn it down to build it back up...but I'm not enough of a poli sci guy to know if that's right or not. Stay in and affect change from within or do it from the outside? Are you more effective by decreasing the population #s and donor $ to the R by going D, or being able to vote in primaries that put reasonable Rs on the ballot? I totally agree with the idea of voting D just to put the fire out though; I can't even put into words how on board I am with that.
Speaking for me personally, I'm not even sure I'm a R in my views anymore but that's my own personal demons I have to slay...hate that there's not a viable third party in this country. :/
OR
cry in a corner that the world has come to a point where you have to pay for imaginary shit.
Hope. And for once that hope largely goes to an (R), and one for whom I've showed little respect, our governor, who appointed to Viviano, who did not submit to pressure from the "conservative legal challenges"
The Michigan Supreme Court ruled 4-3 on Tuesday that Michigan voters will be able to vote on a ballot measure this fall that is designed to rein in excessive partisan gerrymandering.
The case is being closely watched because Michigan is considered one of the most severely gerrymandered states in the country. Republicans controlled the redistricting process in 2011 and have consistently won nine of the state’s 14 congressional seats, even though Democratic President Barack Obama carried Michigan in his 2012 re-election bid and it is considered a competitive state.
State lawmakers currently control the redistricting process in Michigan, but, under the proposal, that power would be transferred to a 13-person independent commission that would have strict requirements about public meetings and who could serve on it.
Michigan officials had approved the measure for the ballot in June, but a conservative group mounted a legal challenge saying the measure was not an amendment to the state constitution but a general revision. A general revision, they said, could only be approved through a constitutional convention, not a ballot measure. Tuesday’s ruling allows the ballot measure vote.
The majority opinion, authored by Justice David Viviano, who was appointed to the bench by Republican Gov. Rick Snyder, said the state’s 1963 constitution originally gave the power to redistrict to a commission, and the ballot proposal amounted to an effort to restore that power.
“VNP’s proposed standards are no revolution in redistricting, and they certainly do not portend a transformation of our form or structure of government,” he wrote in his opinion, referring to Voters Not Politicians, the group backing the proposal. “VNP’s proposal leaves the form and structure of the government essentially as it was envisioned in the 1963 Constitution. Consequently, it is not equivalent to a new constitution and is therefore a permissible amendment.”
Viviano was joined in the majority by Justices Richard Bernstein (D), Bridget Mary McCormack (D) and Elizabeth Clement, who was appointed by Snyder.
1. That's cute, but our next Supreme is on record as believing that only legislatures can draw districts -- they cannot delegate the job. Your reform is unconstitutional.
2. Did you know that it should be pronounced "Garymander" and not "Jerrymander"? The fellow for whom it was named, Elbridge Gerry, pronounced his name with a hard G. There must be a .gif proving this.
From the comments: “Even at the height of Segal’s popularity, circa 1987, this scenario would have gone straight to VHS. I would have passed over this at Blockbuster in favor of Children of The Corn 3”
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
A medical school in the Japanese capital apologized Tuesday for altering the results of entrance exams to stop women from studying there.
An internal investigation found that Tokyo Medical University started manipulating the results in 2006 - or possibly earlier - because its leaders thought female students would leave their careers when they became mothers.
The investigation found that last year, the school reduced all applicants’ first-stage test scores by 20 percent, then added up to 20 points for male applicants. It said similar manipulations had been taking place for years.
Lawyers investigating the scandal said the university’s former chairman and president each received money from parents of prospective students whose entrance exam results were “padded," Japan’s Kyodo news agency reported.
The manipulation was revealed during an investigation into the alleged wrongful admission of a bureaucrat’s son in exchange for favorable treatment for the school in a ministry project. The bureaucrat and the former head of the school have been charged with bribery.
Convicted sheriff Joe wants you to know he was super-sneaky tricked into that interview,
“So he’s talking and I couldn’t understand him. He’s talking about golden showers. I thought he was talking about — the president has gold [in his shower].”
“And then handjob," Arpaio continued. "What was that? He was talking about illegals coming over working with their hands on their job."
“Then the other thing — the only thing I got was that he would offer me a job. I didn’t hear that little thing before that,” Arpaio said, referring Cohen’s asking him if he would take a blowjob from the president. “I don’t know where that came from.”
During the initial interview, Arpaio appeared to tell Cohen that he would accept a "blowjob" from the president. He also said that "it wouldn't surprise me" if Trump had a golden shower.
My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream
“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell
“Then the other thing — the only thing I got was that he would offer me a job. I didn’t hear that little thing before that,” Arpaio said, referring Cohen’s asking him if he would take a blowjob from the president. “I don’t know where that came from.”
During the initial interview, Arpaio appeared to tell Cohen that he would accept a "blowjob" from the president. He also said that "it wouldn't surprise me" if Trump had a golden shower.
47% of Democrats view capitalism positively, down from 56% in 2016
57% of Democrats now view socialism positively, little changed from 2010
I'm hoping this is more due to ignorance, with people assuming Socialism is just Social Democracy, than due to Democrats actually preferring Socialism.
A simple approve/disapprove is a terrible way to ask such an enormous question.
"I disapprove of capitalism" is far more likely to mean "I hate capitalism's problems, which should be addressed" than "I want a bloody revolutionary process of chaos and collapse followed by experimentation with a socialist state."
Likewise, "I approve of socialism" means "I'd prefer a Scandinavian-style safety net" rather than "[see above]."
I'm pretty sure the millennials and others attracted to socialism today are looking at Europe, not Venezuela (or even China).
47% of Democrats view capitalism positively, down from 56% in 2016
57% of Democrats now view socialism positively, little changed from 2010
I'm hoping this is more due to ignorance, with people assuming Socialism is just Social Democracy, than due to Democrats actually preferring Socialism.
From the actual article:
Socialism as a concept is open to many interpretations. Gallup was describing socialism in questions asked in the 1940s in terms of government ownership of businesses -- something that Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez and most other left-leaning Democratic candidates have not advocated. Instead, socialism today seems to embody sets of programs by which the government helps regulate and in some instances run and pay for social programs focused on basic population needs in health, education, housing and employment.
Socialism clearly sounds better as a concept to young people than to those who are older, as it has over the past eight years.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Paul Krugman wrote:A funny thing happens when you demonize universal health care, nutritional aid, and unemployment benefits as "socialism": lots of people decide socialism is OK
Socialism is such a weird political term in general. It's not communism (pretty much everyone agrees that's bad), but it's kind of like communism, but different in a vaguely liberal way.
It's sort of like "neoliberal" - at this point is more of a vibe than a specific policy or form of government per se.
Holman wrote: ↑Mon Aug 13, 2018 4:39 pm
This seems right:
Paul Krugman wrote:A funny thing happens when you demonize universal health care, nutritional aid, and unemployment benefits as "socialism": lots of people decide socialism is OK
That was pretty much my take on it. The right has been misusing the term for so long that no one on either side of the aisle actually understands what it is.
The thing about the programs listed as "socialism" in the article per my quote above - "basic population needs in health, education, housing and employment."
Every single one of those is about keeping people out of perpetual poverty caused by excess Capitalism. They are all reactions to the externalities associated with unfettered Capitalism.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Holman wrote: ↑Mon Aug 13, 2018 4:39 pm
This seems right:
Paul Krugman wrote:A funny thing happens when you demonize universal health care, nutritional aid, and unemployment benefits as "socialism": lots of people decide socialism is OK
That was pretty much my take on it. The right has been misusing the term for so long that no one on either side of the aisle actually understands what it is.
+1. Once you'v opened the door and attacked all government service you've laid the groundwork to attack all of the amenities that come with living in contemporary civilization, roads, electricity, heat, schools. You name it as being socialist takeover of capitalistic ideals made real. Suddenly you open the door to single payer health care as workable reality and the bogeyman's not so scary.
One of these day's we'll learn that speaking in extremes isn't necessary.
Black Lives Matter
"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
noxiousdog wrote: ↑Mon Aug 13, 2018 5:03 pm
One of these day's we'll learn that speaking in extremes isn't necessary.
WE'LL NEVER LEARN THAT YOU FASCIST DOG!
I was thinking of going antifa just because i've yet to see a newsletter.
Black Lives Matter
"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
West Virginia lawmakers completed the extraordinary move of impeaching all four state Supreme Court justices Monday night for spending issues, including a suspended justice facing a 23-count federal indictment.
The state House of Delegates voted to impeach Justice Allen Loughry on eight articles, setting the stage for a trial in the state Senate.
Beth Walker became the final justice to be impeached when an article was approved stating all four justices abused their authority. It said they failed to control office expenses, including more than $1 million in renovations to their individual offices, and not maintaining policies over matters such as working lunches and the use of state vehicles and office computers at home.
Walker had dodged impeachment earlier Monday night when lawmakers decided to overlook her $131,000 in spending on office renovations. A short time later, another article was withdrawn against Chief Justice Margaret Workman, who spent $111,000 in renovations.
Justice Robin Davis was impeached for $500,000 in office renovations. And lawmakers approved articles against Loughry for spending $363,000 in renovations to his office; having a $42,000 antique desk and computers, all owned by the state, at his home; lying to the House Finance Committee about taking home the desk and a $32,000 suede leather couch; and for his personal use of state vehicles.
Loughry, Workman and Davis also were impeached for their roles in allowing senior status judges to be paid higher than allowed wages. Lawmakers say the overpayments violated state law and stopped when they were challenged by the Internal Revenue Service.
...
Republican Gov. Jim Justice will be allowed to appoint new justices to replace any who are impeached — with no requirement that they be from the same party as the incumbent.
Democrats have accused Republicans of attempting to wrest the court away from voters, who elected the current justices in nonpartisan elections.
Delegate Barbara Evans Fleischauer of Monongalia County said Democrats agreed all along there was enough to recommend Loughry's impeachment. But she said going after the other justices "was a power grab, was a takeover of the court and using the impeachment process to take over another branch of government."
A North Carolina court issued a preliminary injunction on Monday blocking the General Assembly’s attempt to throw a state Supreme Court race to the Republican incumbent. The court found that the GOP-dominated legislature likely violated the state constitution by stripping a Republican candidate of his party affiliation. Its ruling, if upheld on appeal, will thwart legislators’ efforts to protect the GOP incumbent from Republican challengers in the November election.
The mayhem in North Carolina began in 2017 when the legislature abolished judicial primaries over the veto of Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper. Republicans hoped to shield Republican Justice Barbara Jackson from competitors and hoped that several Democrats would run against each other in the general election. That didn’t happen. Instead, civil rights lawyer Anita Earls filed as the sole Democratic candidate, while Chris Anglin, a Raleigh attorney, filed as a Republican. Anglin was a registered Democrat until just before he joined the race. But he insisted he was running as a “constitutional Republican” to “stand up for the independence of the judiciary”—not as a Democratic plant. (There is no evidence that he colluded with the Democratic Party to spoil Jackson’s candidacy.)
In response, the General Assembly passed a new law that bars Supreme Court candidates from running with a party affiliation unless they were registered with that party at least 90 days before filing. The measure, pushed through during a special session in July, is clearly aimed at Anglin, who filed a lawsuit to preserve his GOP affiliation on the ballot, alleging the law infringed on his rights under the state constitution.
Wake County Superior Court Judge Rebecca Holt agreed in a forceful ruling handed down Monday afternoon. Holt explained that Anglin has “a vested right to have his party affiliation listed on the ballot”—a right the legislature infringed upon by changing the rules and applying them retroactively. This switcheroo “violates fundamental principles of fairness,” Holt found, “thereby violating [Anglin’s] right to due process” under the North Carolina constitution. She also held that the new law “severely burdens” Anglin’s “associational rights” under the state constitution by preventing him from affiliating with his chosen party. And because the law is justified by no compelling or legitimate state interest, she concluded, it must be set aside
Jimmy Carter finishes his Saturday night dinner, salmon and broccoli casserole on a paper plate, flashes his famous toothy grin and calls playfully to his wife of 72 years, Rosalynn: “C’mon, kid.”
She laughs and takes his hand, and they walk carefully through a neighbor’s kitchen filled with 1976 campaign buttons, photos of world leaders and a couple of unopened cans of Billy Beer, then out the back door, where three Secret Service agents wait.
They do this just about every weekend in this tiny town where they were born — he almost 94 years ago, she almost 91. Dinner at their friend Jill Stuckey’s house, with plastic Solo cups of ice water and one glass each of bargain-brand chardonnay, then the half-mile walk home to the ranch house they built in 1961.
Isn't West Virginia's impeachments based on misappropriation of funds re: office renovations and home furniture paid for by their offices? It's pure coincidence that all the Judges are democratic appointments.
I mean, on the surface the impeachments sounded legit to me, it's only the timing that seems politically motivated.
GreenGoo wrote: ↑Fri Aug 17, 2018 1:02 pm
Isn't West Virginia's impeachments based on misappropriation of funds re: office renovations and home furniture paid for by their offices? It's pure coincidence that all the Judges are democratic appointments.
I mean, on the surface the impeachments sounded legit to me, it's only the timing that seems politically motivated.
They're not all Democratic appointments. Actually none of them are appointed - they were all elected - but it's a 3-2 democratic majority at the moment.
My understanding is that there's one justice who went way over the line, with the others acting badly but not insanely so. But yeah, in general the impeachments seem at least defensible, it's just the timing that seems shady and corrupt.
I also now realize just how far the bar has dropped for adult behaviour after going back and reading some of G W Bush's responses to criticism. Even a president I disagreed with a lot still acted with grace and humility in trying times. Never stooping to overly divisive rhetoric.
I fear Trump has single handedly destroyed the concept of we the people in this nation. No matter how well our economy is doing, he's a failure for that alone.
hepcat wrote: ↑Mon Aug 20, 2018 2:59 pm
I also now realize just how far the bar has dropped for adult behaviour after going back and reading some of G W Bush's responses to criticism. Even a president I disagreed with a lot still acted with grace and humility in trying times. Never stooping to overly divisive rhetoric.
Drumpf is the best thing that ever happened to Bush's PR.
Also Bush made real effort to combat Islamophobia after 9/11. He gets HUGE props for that. Of course then Iraq happened but before that? Major integrity and leadership.
I like to believe that post-Trump, we will return to some manner of civility and decency in the White House. It takes a special kind of narcissistic moron to be as unhinged as Trump, and I just don't see a "normal" person acting that way just because a precedent has been set. That doesn't mean we won't feel the scars from this administration for many years to come, but I don't think his behavior will necessarily be replicated just because he got away with it.
