Plus: SCOTUS spanks Trump.
I stand corrected, lol
lol, of course Clarence Thomas Seditionist wife forced him to be the only dissent: I believe every word of his accuser of sexual malfeseance then and now even more, disgraceful!
I love you Mona, but inflation is because workers at McDonalds went from $10 to $15 in one year: If you give everybody $10,000, the only thing that happens is bananas go from $1 to $5. If small business owners kept up with wage increases. Then the problem would not have gotten out of hand. This was bound to happen, covid just exposed its immediacy.
You will not get legal immigration back so easy: We ran them out in entire communities because the rural areas where they work have treated them with disdain and disgust, our policies treated them with outright vitriol, and the most desperate of our immigrants had their children snatched. That is just it, we quit treating them as our immigrants, as one of us, like us, of us, and treated every single one as illegal. Entire droves walk out of the small town meat packing plant, pass the bar with all white patrons and neither group talks to the other, cynical ships in the night.
Biden used the word major: So What. Park some NATO troops there and call it a day. Why are we even discussing this? Putin is a dog. Dogs only understand the boot (don't give him the actual boot, make him earn it).
BIDEN'S BIGGEST MISTAKE IS SPEAKING FOR 2 HOURS WITH NO MESSAGE. What are they for? The President of Gafs and Zingers asked a question? A country with half its population not above a 7th grade reading level, and you ask us to think? Tell me what they are Joe! Make it truthful but tell me! They are the Pretenders. Make a cartoon out of these clowns, literally, The G.O.P. is P.O.P. The Party of Pretenders. Pretend Climate Change doesn't exist. Pretend Covid isn't a threat. Pretend Guns don't kill people. Pretend Urban cops aren't undertrained and overworked. Pretend school curriculum isn't outdated. Pretend homelessness is criminal and is from socialist choices, not capitalist greed. Pretend the election was rigged. Pretend there was no Sedition. Pretend there are not White Nationalist in your midst. Pretend you are not Fascist. Pretend you are a millionaire from care and not greed. Pretend we don't need a child tax credit. Pretend the XL pipeline was good idea. Pretend politics doesn't matter. P.O.P.
1) Overcoming determined opposition for opposition's sake is not something that is overcome with skill. I don't care how skillful a politician you are.
2) We have gone from an occasional politics where politicians would sometimes cooperate to legislate necessary or desirable things to a politics where negotiation and compromise do not actually happen in the vast majority of cases. There is no desire for it, there is no real attempt at it. Our institutions and politics do not actually reward it.. especially on the Right.
3) The Right is basically uninterested in change. There is no real upside for a Rightist politician to actually change things. Taking any action other than obstruction will, by and large, be punished during the primary. Gotta win a primary to win the general.
4) Buckley characterized Conservatism as standing in the path of history and yelling STOP. This is, indeed, the essence of conservatism. The only problem is that history does not stop... and as it continues to change (usually to the detriment of the people yelling stop, which is why they were yelling stop ITFP) the resistance becomes more extreme, the anger becomes more extreme, the actions taken become more extreme. Conservatism turns to reaction--we are no longer yelling stop, we are trying to reverse history.
4a) This is why conservatism usually finds itself allied with the less savory things in a nation. This is why American conservatism finds itself mired in racism and sexism, in systematic mistreatment of minorities, of the persecution of the different. In the "good old days" we didn't have any of these problems with women or with those other people--because we made sure that nothing was heard from them and that they had little or no power, no voice, that they got stepped on when they got out of line. Those sentiments are still alive and well.
5) I am hard pressed to find anything good in conservatism--in ANY form of it. I have NEVER identified as conservative and never will. It is often an evil we must put up with.
There is NOTHING uniquely conservative about fiscal probity. It is a general characteristic of the smart and sane. There is nothing inherently conservative about supporting reasonable and strong national defense. It is merely smart and sane.
Are there things from the past that should be "conserved?" If you can come up with a smart and sane reason for it, I am all ears. Because we always did it that way doesn't fall into that category. Because I like it doesn't fall into that category. because it makes ME richer and more powerful also does not fall into that category... but those are usually the reasons put forward... or variations thereof.
I am reminded of that because of the sign I saw on the TV broadcast during the filibuster bit yesterday that said: The US Senate has NEVER been able to end debate on simple majority vote.
Guess what, that ISN'T actually an argument. That is a historical observation (and I am not even sure it is actually accurate--and it doesn't matter). That says nothing other than this is what we did.. It may have been good or bad. It may have worked or not... but those are actual (and different) arguments.
That was the way things worked... and my response is, so what? What kind of policies did it result in? Oh wait, we had an actual Civil War, we had Jim Crow. We had the monstrosities of the Gilded Age, the mistreatment of workers, the use of federal troops to put down labor unrest and crush labor movements. Monopolies. Credit Mobilier. Good times!
If you think the past was a Golden Age you do not know the past... or you are a member of a group that that past privileged.
I believe in the basic principles of America. Reasonable personal freedom, freedom of conscience, Republican government (meaning a form of government that is legitimate, that respects the general will of the people, that they participate in, but that works to avoid the transient desires of the mob).
NONE of this is inherently conservative.
Sorry for the rant.
There is now a strong argument against term limits for federal judges.
As Don Gates put it in another comment "I can only imagine Trump's rage at the three "disloyal" Justices he appointed to SCOTUS."
If any federally appointed judge handling an issue dear to the heart of the person who appointed him/her knew that (s)he was up for re-election, how many would recuse themselves? Even if (s)he did, would that merely postpone a decision, potentially kicking the can down the road long enough for POTUS to do a work-around on what the issue is? Only if term limits were long enough for sensible judicial work, and coupled with a no-run-again clause could they be effective.
I give no credence to polls. I have lived at the same address and had the same phone number since 1994. Guess how many times I have been polled? Zero. Who are they polling? Is it the same cast of characters? For all these polls that are being done coming up with similar results can beg the question of which database are they using to conduct these polls. If this is supposed to be a cross section of America, it seems to me relying on a few thousand is ludicrous.
I'm happy to hear that Will Saletan will be joining The Bulwark. Congratulations!
Could you look for a non-white center-left person next? I think having a non-white perspective here would be nice.
I don't think it is stupid to primary Sinema. She doesn't represent most Democrats in Arizona. Emily's List is threatening to revoke their support. She has betrayed the people who voted for her. Let's remember that she even voted not to increase the minimum wage!
The key is winning in PA and somewhere else so Sinema and Manchin don't matter. It's odd that The Dems still have anti-Black racists like them in the coalition, but they still exist
So, the GA leg can overturn elections and that's fine with Charlie?
"This poll would have to be described as bleak, discouraging and TRULY TERRIBLE" says Republican pollster who was probably quite silent when Trump polled 2 points lower than Biden at his one year anniversary. Granted, this is not good, but the hyperbole and handwringing is ridiculous. Obama was just marginally better at one year, yet had no problem with winning a second term 3 years later. Not that I think Biden should run for a second term, but this is not the death sentence both sides act like it is.
The Supreme Court is in a pretty dismal place, isn't it?
We've got mask-gate (or maybe not), with Gorsuch allegedly refusing to mask up around Sotomayor, a scandal bad enough - and real enough - to merit a non-denial denial followed by an actual denial.
We've got three Trump-appointed justices who seem to go off the reservation every once in awhile, but oddly enough, still stand up to the guy who appointed them (phew).
Then we've got Clarence Thomas, whose conflicts of interest and judicial philosophy are a huge stain on the court unto their own. In my fantasy world where Democrats had a 67-seat majority, he'd be the first I impeach and replace.
Sanders is clearly that stupid to support a primary challenge to Manchin. Wish he wasn’t that obtuse-but, it is what it is. He should be sending flowers to Manchin thanking him for being a Democrat- the only one that could possibly win in WVa. The Republicans must be giddy to have Sanders spouting his nonsense.
I would like to give you the opportunity to clean up some of your mess from yesterdays podcast (or not).
Will talked about his thoughts that Biden was losing his ability and you seemed to agree and talked about how you didn't really believe the R talking points during the election and now you are wondering. Will, after your "agreement", came back and clarified he did not mean what you were agreeing to and simply meant Biden is losing his communication ability to broadcast his decision making process. You never accepted his second point and seemed to hold on your original "agreement".
I hope you clean this up and stop the disgusting attacks on Biden's "cognitive decline". You are better than this - even if you disagree 100% on policy and his methods, going this route is dangerous and simply wrong.
There's something about being President that - go figure - makes you think the people who disagree with you are just... wrong.
Especially if you owe your presidency to this guy:
*Rep. Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., on Sunday asked his colleagues in the Senate who are set to vote on voting rights legislation Tuesday: "Which side are you on?" referencing the iconic union organizing song often sung during the civil rights era....
Clyburn told Raddatz he would support overhauling the Electoral Count Act but thinks voting rights is a more pressing issue given the immediacy of the 2022 midterm elections....
Raddatz pressed. "Senator Dick Durbin said he took it 'a little too far' by comparing current voting restrictions to Jim Crow. Mitch McConnell called Biden 'profoundly unpresidential' for this divisive language. So, was that fierce tone counterproductive?"
Clyburn responded, "Absolutely not. I disagree with both of those statements. I know Dick; I like Dick a whole lot. But let me tell you something, that was what Jim Crow was all about...."
Thirty-four new laws that restrict voting rights have been enacted in 19 states across the country in 2021, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.
"These are Jim Crow 2.0. That is one of the strongest points of the president's speech that I agree with," he added....
Where will Biden be if he throws his most loyal, pivotal constituency under the bus? Or should I say, makes them sit at the back of the bus? Even if it's not actually a bus, they're not going to sit at the back, and the whole analogy is objectively absurd and even trivializes what it supposedly evokes?
"If Biden been more skilled ...."
There are no 'skills' that any human has that will work with a Trumpified GOP. None. After all this time, its delusional to think so.
Here's one thought, though. If he can't win their participation - maybe he could buy it? Bring back earmarks....??
I can only imagine Trump's rage at the three "disloyal" Justices he appointed to SCOTUS. There is a perception, based on high-profile cases, that the SCOTUS is hopelessly tainted and politicized by partisan ideology, and no doubt Trump bought into this himself. And, while the court is not entirely apolitical, it's not as bad as the public imagines, as the vast majority of decisions, the ones no one hears about, are unanimous or close to it, and they always have been.
As far as Biden's shock at the general recalcitrance of the GOP when it comes to getting anything done, I know he was Vice President during Obama's two terms, and nothing he's seeing now is worse than it was then. Which makes me wonder, when Obama was having his own issues with the GOP and getting a legislative agenda passed, did Biden secretly think the problem was that Obama was too incompetent to overcome the partisanship? I'm just trying to understand how he can preside over the Senate for 8 years, see how things went with Obama, and see the same stuff now and be surprised. Really, considering the Senate passed the infrastructure bill, Biden is seeing a less recalcitrant GOP than Obama had to deal with.