N.E. Brigand wrote: ↑Tue Apr 27, 2021 3:59 am
There were lots of outraged responses, but the funny thing is, buried deep in the Epicurious announcement, it says that the site actually stopped adding new beef recipes a year ago -- and nobody noticed.
Broadly people don't care if a thing is being done or not, they just care if "someone made the decision" that something is being done or not.
I guess it's only okay if absolutely nobody at all was involved in this process??
The dumbest thing I've ever bought
was a 2020 planner.
"Does anyone ever think about Denethor, the guy driven to madness by staying up late into the night alone in the dark staring at a flickering device he believed revealed unvarnished truth about the outside word, but which in fact showed mostly manipulated media created by a hostile power committed to portraying nothing but bad news framed in the worst possible way in order to sap hope, courage, and the will to go on? Seems like he's someone we should think about." - Dave_LF
On Friday the New York Postreported that detained migrant children were being given "welcome kits" by the federal government that included a children's book Kamala Harris wrote before becoming Vice President. Many Republican politicians and conservative commentators repeated this story over the next three days, and White House Press Secretary was asked about this supposed misuse of government funds during Monday's briefing.
But earlier today, the story was revealed to be false. The children are able to select from a variety of books donated to a shelter where they are housed, and apparently someone (who probably since Friday has been laughing hysterically every time she turns on the news) had donated a copy of Harris's book to the shelter, which *one* of the children picked up and had at his or her cot.
And then tonight, the Post reporter who wrote the story resigned and said that her editors forced her to write it.
Glad to see Colin Kahl get confirmed as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. In 2018, it was reported that President Donald Trump had directed his team to hire an Israeli private intelligence firm, Black Cube (also known for trying to dig up dirt on Harvey Weinstein's accusers), to spy on Kahl (and another former Obama staffer, Ben Rhodes). This apparently included making a weird employment offer to Kahl's wife, either as a way to get more information on the Kahls or to somehow discredit them. The ultimate goal was to undermine Kahl's and Rhodes's reputations, thus making it easier for Trump to pull the U.S. out of the Iran nuclear deal (which he ultimately did in 2020), of which Kahl and Rhodes were the chief U.S. architects.
That act alone should have been enough to get Trump removed from office, by the way. Hiring a private firm to spy on a U.S. citizen?
Republicans had attacked Kahl over the past couple months for his work on the Iran deal, but he was confirmed 49-44.
While that is certainly true, and while I have not listened to Carville's interview (nor do I intend to do so), I find the statement as stated to be too simplistic. Yes, it is true that in most cases in order to pass legislation Manchin needs to vote for it (and even then, in most cases it won't pass except for the rare cases that budget reconciliation can be used or at least 10 Senate Republicans sign on). But "Democrats" (whatever the heck that even means) are not defined solely by what legislation they are able to pass, and there are some cases in which Manchin can be convinced to vote for something that is more "progressive" then his usual posture. So on the whole I don't think the statement has much value (but then, I rarely think that anything that Carville says has much value).
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
Let us suppose, now that Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, a state created from another state, has said that the people of D.C. do not deserve statehood and thus should continue to be disenfranchised forever (or combined into another state, which D.C. resident oppose), that this happens:
Joe Biden signs an executive order declaring that D.C. is a state.
D.C. then holds its Congressional elections.
Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi seat the two Senators and one Representative thus elected.
Congress passes a bunch of stuff without Manchin and ignores the Supreme Court when they claim this is all unconstitutional.
Also Congress votes to retrocede West Virginia into Virginia.
Better still: that stuff Congress passes includes expanding the Supreme Court to 15, and the new Biden-appointed members naturally don't declare that their own appointments are unconstitutional, which they'd have to be if they found that the new D.C. members of Congress don't count.
- - - - - - - - - -
Once the Supreme Court says it's constitutional, it is, right?
Yes, I have argued before that the Supreme Court violated the Constitution with their votes on Dred Scot, Plessy v. Fergusson, and Korematsu. But my understanding is that it's generally agreed that I'm wrong about that, and that the Supreme Court by definition can't violate the Constitution. So what if Democrats pack it and let the arms race begin? The route I imagine above is entirely legal, isn't it? In the end, does this path I've outlined lead to more democracy?
- - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - -
OK, the above is me speaking from outraged frustration, but I'm wondering:
Does Joe Manchin oppose statehood for Puerto Rico?
D.C. is only larger than two states and has its weird history of being created (sort of) in the Constitution.
Puerto Rico is just another territory like lots of U.S. states were, and even having lost 25% of its population in the past few years, it's still bigger than 20 U.S. states.
If that argument works for Manchin, let's make P.R. statehood happen right away, and then those two new Senators (plus four Representatives) can vote for D.C. statehood over his objections next year.
Don't bite, as I'm an outsider looking in, but wasn't the whole point of Washington D C to have the seat of federal power not located in any state, thus depriving any state of undue federal influence?
In a society built on deceit, telling truth is a seditious act
Beorhtnoth wrote: ↑Sat May 01, 2021 12:45 am
Don't bite, as I'm an outsider looking in, but wasn't the whole point of Washington D C to have the seat of federal power not located in any state, thus depriving any state of undue federal influence?
Yes, and to that end, the law that just passed the House of Representatives maintains a much smaller federal district consisting almost entirely of federal property like the White House, Congress, the Supreme Court, etc.
While this article is more than six years old, it explains the situation quite well:
Again, I am observing from a distance, so I am fully aware of my limitations.
The reference to the Boston Tea Party; does that only apply because of the peculiarities of the electoral college procedure to elect a President? If the President was elected off an open ballot and directly by the people on a majority vote, residents of Washington DC, though stateless, would not be disenfranchised. Is that correct?
I take it there is elected local governance in Washington DC?
To that end, how are residents of Washington DC disenfranchised presently?
(Apologies if this is politics 101...)
In a society built on deceit, telling truth is a seditious act
It kinda is, for the US politics. Other places do it differently.
DC residents are not represented in Congress, which is the legislative branch. Therefore, they have no input into making laws that affect them, or the checks and balances that the congress is supposed to enact, such as confirming the appointments made by the president (executive branch) including to Supreme Court (judicial branch). Even if the president were elected by popular vote, those things would still be true.
The original complaint the colonists had against King George was taxation without representation, which is the motto on the DC license plates.
@N.E. Brigand - better yet, let's make DC a state and move the capital to Puerto Rico. (I meant it as a joke, but it would actually solve a lot of problems)
If there was anything that depressed him more than his own cynicism, it was that quite often it still wasn't as cynical as real life.
Beorhtnoth wrote: ↑Sat May 01, 2021 1:44 am
Again, I am observing from a distance, so I am fully aware of my limitations.
The reference to the Boston Tea Party; does that only apply because of the peculiarities of the electoral college procedure to elect a President? If the President was elected off an open ballot and directly by the people on a majority vote, residents of Washington DC, though stateless, would not be disenfranchised. Is that correct?
I take it there is elected local governance in Washington DC?
To that end, how are residents of Washington DC disenfranchised presently?
(Apologies if this is politics 101...)
What Frelga says and also this:
(1) D.C. hasn't even had "home rule" for my entire lifetime: its residents were only allowed to elect their own mayor, city council, etc. starting in 1973; and
(2) Even since that change was made, Congress can overrule the local authorities, and has done so on several occasions.
N.E. Brigand wrote: ↑Sat May 01, 2021 12:21 am
Let us suppose, now that Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, a state created from another state, has said that the people of D.C. do not deserve statehood and thus should continue to be disenfranchised forever (or combined into another state, which D.C. resident oppose), that this happens:
...
Also Congress votes to retrocede West Virginia into Virginia.
Susan Collins, the Republican senator from Maine, says that if the people of D.C. want representation in Congress, they should agree to be retroceded into Maryland.
Maine was created out of territory that was part of Massachusetts. Is she volunteering to have her state retrocede too?
Republicans are no longer pretending to be interested in the democratic system of government and it's time for the rest of Americans to stop pretending not to see it.
If there was anything that depressed him more than his own cynicism, it was that quite often it still wasn't as cynical as real life.
Frelga wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 6:49 pm
No, she isn't. It is not a good faith argument.
Republicans are no longer pretending to be interested in the democratic system of government and it's time for the rest of Americans to stop pretending not to see it.
I am reminded of two quotes.
Churchill - "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others."
Gandhi (reputedly) on being asked what he thought of Western civilization - "It would be a good idea."
In a society built on deceit, telling truth is a seditious act
The U.S. Dept. of Labor reports that 266,000 jobs were added in April.
That's FAR short of the 1,000,000 jobs that had been predicted.
Which suggests that the COVID relief bill passed in March, decried by a fair number of people on the right and center for being too large, was probably too small.
Another factor may be vaccine hesitancy. If you're not sure it's safe to reopen, you're not hiring.
- - - - - - - - -
I'm not an economist, and wouldn't be surprised if what I wrote above is oversimplifying. There are lots of theories flying around today. One reporter noted that of the the average number of hours worked in leisure and hospitality went up in April. That would suggest that companies can't find people willing to work for them. At least not at the wages they're offering. One reason could be that unemployment insurance is too generous. (Although it's less generous that it was originally going to be: Joe Manchin cut it from $400/week to $300/week.) But I would posit that another reason is that people may not feel safe going to work in those industries. In my industry, for example, the actors union is making a lot of demands for costly safety measures as a condition of employment.
Healthcare saw a decrease in jobs driven by a reduction in nursing home staff. (Because so many nursing home residents have died over the past year?)
Another point that's being made is that men dominated among those 266,000 people who returned to work. Women are still often the primary parent of children, and many children are still not back in school.
- - - - - - - - - -
Also this from the Washington Post:
"[M]ore affluent Americans say they are retiring early because their retirement portfolios have surged in the past year and the pandemic has taught them that life is short."
The Office of Special Counsel has found that Marcia Fudge, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under Joe Biden, violated the Hatch Act at a press briefing in March. At that event, reporters asked her to comment on the race to succeed her in the Congressional seat she vacated to become HUD Secretary. She declined. Then reporters asked her to comment on the Senate race to succeed Rob Portman, who had lately announced he wasn't running for reelection in 2022. She mentioned that two friends, Dayton's mayor Nan Whaley and Congressman Tim Ryan, were both considering running and that either would be a good senator. She added that she felt Democrats had a decent chance of winning. (I'm not so sure about that.) The next day, Fudge apologized for these comments.
The Hatch Act forbids Executive Branch employees (except the President and Vice President) from engaging in political activity. The OSC issued Fudge a warning letter, counseled her on what she had done wrong, and closed the file. This is the normal response for the first time by a high ranking official and has happened in prior administrations. In the Trump administration, there were more egregious cases. The OSC advised Donald Trump to fire one repeat offender, Kellyanne Conway, for violating the Hatch Act multiple times even after being warned about her behavior. But he declined to do so, and there was no other enforcement available to the OSC.
Members of the conservative "dark money" group named Heritage Action were recorded boasting about how they got multiple Republican-controlled state legislatures to pass laws restricting voting in the past few months:
"In some cases, we actually draft them [i.e., the legislation] for them, or we have a sentinel on our behalf give them the model legislation so it has that grassroots, from-the-bottom-up type of vibe ... We did it quickly and we did it quietly." The recordings include an acknowledgement that the organization spent millions to "create this echo chamber" in which claims of voter fraud are amplified. The director of the organization says that they work with more visible activist conservative groups: "We literally give marching orders for the week ahead, all so we’re singing from the same song sheet of the goals for that week and where the state bills are across the country." And she says that she told Georgia's governor, Brian Kemp, that he needed to sign the state's new voter restriction law as soon as it passed from the state legislature, and he did so.
Caught red-handed. And it won't make a fuckin' bit of difference.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
It might be worth having a separate thread related to voting rights and voter suppression, but I'll put this here at least for now.
Joe Manchin (of all people) has adopted my suggestion (not that he got it from me) of restoring the Voting Rights Act preclearance provisions but applying them to all 50 states. Of course even with Manchin's support this will never pass the Senate while the filibuster is still intact, but maybe when it fails he will rethink his opposition to filibuster reform.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
