US Politics Thread

[Federberg]

I don't think I'm trolling. I think I have a place in the conversation, whether you think I do or not.

Who said you had no place in the conversation? Does having a place in the conversation mean that you respond in that way? I would be ok with it if you didn't incessantly whine just because people disagree with you. Have at it. But leave off with the whining. You had every opportunity to discuss the issue without getting in your feelings. Miss me with that

The California Democrats were not, apparently, as "deranged" as the tweet seemed to imply, if you read what I posted as additional information. So I guess that satisfied your interest? I'm not sure what you mean about "single" party rule? Do you mean in California...because there are plenty of Republicans out there. IMO, you're avoiding the point of what you posted. You were worried that the textbooks were promoting an LGBTQ agenda, and that wasn't it, at all. Or I thought you implied that. Now you say there's nothing to debate. Is that because the Temecula School Board is wrong, and now you're fine with that? You're OK with the fine imposed by the state? Or maybe, now that you see that it's not as crazy as you thought, you don't care anymore. I'm cool with that. It's just that something got your knickers in a twist, originally, and it wasn't something as vague and general as "single party rule," let's face it. Or if it was, that post was a less-than coherent way of expressing it. One might be forgiven for misunderstanding your intent.

I'm glad they weren't as deranged as the tweet seemed to imply. I was horrified because I'm still holding out hope that Democrats are mature enough to comprehend good politics. Implementing stupid policies that the majority of people wouldn't want is exactly the way to open the door to Republicans who support Trumpism. That's my concern.

I'm not sure what's so difficult to understand about the term single party rule. In the vast majority of States one party dominates. Where's the confusion?

With the greatest of respect, your opinion is wrong. How can I avoid the point of what I posted, I posted it! Perhaps you misunderstood my point of focus? It was incumbent on you to ask if you misunderstood. This is the problem, you think your assumptions are correct, when a simple question would be clarifying. You are not forgiven for misunderstanding my intent, because you do it all the time. It blows my mind that you keep making the same mistakes, and yet you keep thinking that you should be given a pass. The time for getting a pass has been and gone. Several years ago. I'm tired of it.

A governor fining a school for rejecting an ideology being promoted by a board of Governors strikes me as illiberal in a democracy. It implies that the State is also promoting that ideology. If you don't understand that I don't know what to say. But that would imply that you don't live in a country that's free anymore. That should concern anyone who claims to believe in democracy. Just because you agree with that ideology, doesn't mean that it's ok to impose it on others who have a different view. The only circumstance where something like that would be ok is if there was a scientific basis for it. Otherwise a board of Governors could impose sharia teachings in a Christian district and no one should be able to oppose it. Is that really what you want?

 

[Federberg]

The single best post I’ve ever read in the 15 or so years I‘ve been on tennis sites is still this jewel by @britbox :

“Debate the post, not the poster.”

I can’t think of a single example of someone changing their mind while being yelled at, insulted, treated condescendingly, or engaging in ad hominem attacks.

And I know you’re all fully capable of discussing topics without stooping to these levels — something, I think, many of us have done at some point, myself included.

exactly right! But this is something @Moxie in particular seems to have extreme difficulty doing. It's exhausting. I would expect that type of behaviour from Cali. But it's increasingly clear that Moxie is the same way as him, it only escaped me in the past because she agreed with me about Trump!

 

[Kieran]

A governor fining a school for rejecting an ideology being promoted by a board of Governors strikes me as illiberal in a democracy. It implies that the State is also promoting that ideology.

Yeah that’s a Trudeau-type move. The vacuous boy prince. That when you can’t convince by argument, you resort to freezing bank accounts, or whopping great fines. The school board are right to be wary of anything to do with gender or race that the Democrats want taught in school…

 

[Federberg]

Yeah that’s a Trudeau-type move. The vacuous boy prince. That when you can’t convince by argument, you resort to freezing bank accounts, or whopping great fines. The school board are right to be wary of anything to do with gender or race that the Democrats want taught in school…

exactly right. I can excuse those on the left for supporting these policies, but when they start trying to impose these policies in an anti-democratic way it can't be condoned. It blows my mind what Trudeau has been getting up to. If the right did things in the same way they would be screaming about it. I'm not as bothered by the policies as I am about the process these days. De-banking people is deep into fascist territory. This is the type of stuff going on in China now. How is it possible that people on the left don't understand the extreme damage they're doing to the democratic process?

 

[Kieran]

exactly right. I can excuse those on the left for supporting these policies, but when they start trying to impose these policies in an anti-democratic way it can't be condoned. It blows my mind what Trudeau has been getting up to. If the right doing things in the same way they would be screaming about it. I'm not as bothered by the policies as I am about the process these days. De-banking people is deep into fascist territory. This is the type of stuff going on in China now. How is it possible that people on the left don't understand the extreme damage they're doing to the democratic process?

Well there’s a sense among ever-expanding portions of the left that they’re the compassionate ones, they’re the good guys, and to even question them is not permissible, the others are evil bigots etc, so they’re probably blind to their excesses, thinking that actually these are all just necessary actions. Obama did something different but similar with Operation Choke Point, which targeted legal businesses but under the guise of stopping potential illegal financial activity..

 

[Federberg]

Well there’s a sense among ever-expanding portions of the left that they’re the compassionate ones, they’re the good guys, and to even question them is not permissible, the others are evil bigots etc, so they’re probably blind to their excesses, thinking that actually these are all just necessary actions. Obama did something different but similar with Operation Choke Point, which targeted legal businesses but under the guise of stopping potential illegal financial activity..

yes agreed. Here's the kicker, if they were to debate themselves from a decade before they would fiercely oppose themselves. Their core values have shifted over time. Whereas conservative folks have a more solid base which makes something like that less likely. Mark my words these same people will be advocating for Minor Attracted Persons (MAPs) in the coming years. I can't conceive of any value change within myself that will ever allow me to tolerate such an appalling thing. Right now I'm sure most of them can't either. But mark my words, they'll be fighting for this sooner rather than later. But we're the ones who are in the wrong?? Make it make sense!

 

[Kieran]

yes agreed. Here's the kicker, if they were to debate themselves from a decade before they would fiercely oppose themselves. Their core values have shifted over time. Whereas conservative folks have a more solid base which makes something like that less likely. Mark my words these same people will be advocating for Minor Attracted Persons (MAPs) in the coming years. I can't conceive of any value change within myself that will ever allow me to tolerate such an appalling thing. Right now I'm sure most of them can't either. But mark my words, they'll be fighting for this sooner rather than later. But we're the ones who are in the wrong?? Make it make sense!

Well this is always my argument against inherited politics. When we follow our parents political party, just because. A liberal in the 1980’s or 90’s would actually be to the right of many conservatives today. They wouldn’t recognise or agree with any of their kids modern day so-called liberal politics!

 

[Federberg]

Well this is always my argument against inherited politics. When we follow our parents political party, just because. A liberal in the 1980’s or 90’s would actually be to the right of many conservatives today. They wouldn’t recognise or agree with any of their kids modern day so-called liberal politics!

I've always likened politics to consumer goods in a shop. And the parties as the different supermarket chains. I'll pop into any supermarket to find what I need. I don't feel obligated to only buy stuff from one place. I don't understand folks that will only frequent one place if they don't get all they need from there. It makes no sense to me

 

[Kieran]

I've always likened politics to consumer goods in a shop. And the parties as the different supermarket chains. I'll pop into any supermarket to find what I need. I don't feel obligated to only buy stuff from one place. I don't understand folks that will only frequent one place if they don't get all they need from there. It makes no sense to me

Yeah and I think with politics, religion, it’s not reasonable or responsible to just accept belief systems without giving them a thorough shake. We might still end up in the same beliefs or non beliefs that we inherited, but we’ve come to accept them because we examined them and found we like them.

Full disclosure here, I’m not getting at anyone. I’m a Catholic, my parents were. But I went through an examination period of these beliefs that lasted decades because I looked at other beliefs and I subjected my parents beliefs, which I detested while still loving my folks, to viciously sceptical criticism…

 

[britbox]

yes agreed. Here's the kicker, if they were to debate themselves from a decade before they would fiercely oppose themselves. Their core values have shifted over time. Whereas conservative folks have a more solid base which makes something like that less likely. Mark my words these same people will be advocating for Minor Attracted Persons (MAPs) in the coming years. I can't conceive of any value change within myself that will ever allow me to tolerate such an appalling thing. Right now I'm sure most of them can't either. But mark my words, they'll be fighting for this sooner rather than later. But we're the ones who are in the wrong?? Make it make sense!

Incremental subversion basically...under the guise of "It's just....". I vaguely recall discussions about the gender stuff a couple of years ago when some of us pointed out the potential issues with prisons, sports, women's spaces... and it was met with a "No, no, no.. that will never happen". Yet here we are. It's all happened. Men know how other men are wired... even if they wear a dress.

 

[Federberg]

A friend of mine was telling me that Dianne Feinstein's daughter is using power of attorney to sue a trust to increase the money for the Senator's medical bills. What the absolute F?? How can she be competent enough to be a Senator, but not competent enough to advocate for her own healthcare??

 

[Moxie]

A governor fining a school for rejecting an ideology being promoted by a board of Governors strikes me as illiberal in a democracy. It implies that the State is also promoting that ideology. If you don't understand that I don't know what to say. But that would imply that you don't live in a country that's free anymore. That should concern anyone who claims to believe in democracy. Just because you agree with that ideology, doesn't mean that it's ok to impose it on others who have a different view. The only circumstance where something like that would be ok is if there was a scientific basis for it. Otherwise a board of Governors could impose sharia teachings in a Christian district and no one should be able to oppose it. Is that really what you want?

I didn't know anything about this until you posted, so I looked it up, and tried to find out a little more today. I found this article which tells a bit more about it all, from a website of education journalism, focused on education issues, mainly, but not exclusively, in California, from what I can glean. It's called Edsource.org, and seems to be considered fair-minded and reliable. (Also, quick google check.) It gets more into the nerdy weeds of what the FAIR act is in California, and how Temecula could be in violation of it. That 47 teachers in the district vetted the book, where the Harvey Milk reference is, (which is in supplemental material to the textbook)...that kind of detail. Personally, I found it interesting.

I do agree that the fine shocked me, too, and not just for its heftiness. I don't remember hearing of governors fining school boards. The article I mention above says that it is being investigated whether the school board is in violation of the FAIR act, so he can't fine them on that basis yet, but I don't know anything about California law. I was thinking that the fine can have to do with financial ramifications of the board rejecting the text, such as the decision stranding teachers without a prepared curriculum for the fall, (also mentioned in the article above,) but I read something from NBC that said Newsom has threatened to charge the district $1.6M for the shipping of the textbooks, if they don't use them. But that's ON TOP of the $1.5M fine, so that doesn't explain it, either. Again, not knowing anything about California law, it strikes me as grandstanding, and not likely something that Temecula will ever have to pay. That's a guess.

As you may know, the textbook issue has become hot-button in the US over that past few years, and local school districts are becoming battlegrounds in the culture wars.

 

[Federberg]

This is the issue for the GOP in 2024. Trump is not additive. I think he loses worse than in 2020. Every time his got less as a percentage... Dump crazy and get back to common sense policies. That way we can rid the world of this cultural marxism that's infesting the West...

 

[Moxie]

This is the issue for the GOP in 2024. Trump is not additive. I think he loses worse than in 2020. Every time his got less as a percentage... Dump crazy and get back to common sense policies. That way we can rid the world of this cultural marxism that's infesting the West...

We have the Republican debates in a 3 weeks. Trump says he won't participate. It will be interesting to see how much the others will (continue to, some cases) distance themselves from him. De Santis tried to position himself as "Trump without the crazy," but that doesn't seem to be working well for him. He seems to rival Ted Cruz for for being unlikeable.

I wonder what you mean by "cultural marxism." Serious question, because it's kind of a controversial phrase. Also, do you see it so much a by-product of anti-Trump sentiment that ridding ourselves of him in the political realm could eliminate it? Just asking for clarification, not being combative.

 

[tented]

Trump charged in probe of Jan. 6, efforts to overturn 2020 election

 

[the AntiPusher]

Trump charged in probe of Jan. 6, efforts to overturn 2020 election

This is extremely extraordinary disturbing. If it was anyone else it would be a trial for Treason against the United States. ( There's more to the classified documents that Trump had laying around in his sh#troom which I suspect is the DOJs "trump " card.) THIS set of indictments will stick. Some of Us knew all alone what a PO# this clown was while others felt he was a bit of an necessary "EVIL". The GOP got in bed with someone who had at best a Captain Kangaroo level understanding of World politics, Economy and military strategies. Even Mr Green Jeans can't assist them with all the debris their Teflon Don will leave in his aftermath.

 

[Federberg]

We have the Republican debates in a 3 weeks. Trump says he won't participate. It will be interesting to see how much the others will (continue to, some cases) distance themselves from him. De Santis tried to position himself as "Trump without the crazy," but that doesn't seem to be working well for him. He seems to rival Ted Cruz for for being unlikeable.

I wonder what you mean by "cultural marxism." Serious question, because it's kind of a controversial phrase. Also, do you see it so much a by-product of anti-Trump sentiment that ridding ourselves of him in the political realm could eliminate it? Just asking for clarification, not being combative.

lol! Asking a question isn't combative in any way. Bear with me, I've been running around today. I'll revert with a full response as soon as I can

 

[Moxie]

This is extremely extraordinary disturbing. If it was anyone else it would be a trial for Treason against the United States. ( There's more to the classified documents that Trump had laying around in his sh#troom which I suspect is the DOJs "trump " card.) THIS set of indictments will stick. Some of Us knew all alone what a PO# this clown was while others felt he was a bit of an necessary "EVIL". The GOP got in bed with someone who had at best a Captain Kangaroo level understanding of World politics, Economy and military strategies. Even Mr Green Jeans can't assist them with all the debris their Teflon Don will leave in his aftermath.

An important point is that it isn't "anyone else," it's a former President of the United States. Special counsel Jack Smith had to tread very carefully, and by many accounts he did a very good job. I haven't read it yet, but it's said to be very well-written, very clear. He was also careful to avoid any charges that could be argued against based on First Amendment, though that doesn't seem to stop Trump's lawyers from litigating it in the media on those grounds. It seems like that's what they were prepared for, so they're going with it, anyway.

The really important count, it seems to me, is "conspiracy against the people's right to have their vote counted." Obviously, this gets to the heart of our sacrosanct right in a democracy.

They avoided any sedition charge, which some are disappointed by, but it probably would have been hard to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt," which is the burden, as Trump was always careful to provide himself with verbal cover, such as telling the crowd to march peacefully on the Capitol...even though he knew they were armed, and he'd basically whipped them into a frenzy.

Who knows what will come of all these indictments, but it's important, I think, to be holding him accountable for these, in particular. They're very serious charges.

Don Jr. is saying it's all about Trump leveling the polls with Biden, which is rather ridiculous...as if the special counsel just started working on it last week. But the worrying thing is that they are calling this a machination of the Biden Administration. They, (and right-wing media, if not more than a few Republicans,) have been sowing the seeds that the DOJ and the FBI are only political arms of the President. This kind of distrust of the entire judicial system is very dangerous. Trump, and his stand-ins, have a long history of accusing others of what he himself is guilty of. Trump tried to involve the DOJ in helping him overturn the election, unsuccessfully. So now he assumes that Biden is just doing a better job of it?

If I'm being generous to Trump, I don't think he ever understood the difference between being a CEO in the private sector, and having the "top job" in the public sector. Even by CEO standards, he's always been a bully, and he assumed that, as President, everyone worked for him, and should just knuckle under to what he wants, no matter the rules, much less the laws. He played fast-and-loose with rules and norms, even as a candidate prior to his election, and got away with a lot that was pretty shocking. For what all of these indictments are worth, I do think it's important to set ourselves back on a course that even the President is subject to the laws of the land.

 

[Moxie]

Trump was arraigned in court in DC today. He pled not guilty to all counts. He was reminded by the judge that he cannot commit any crimes while awaiting trial. He was further reminded that it is a crime to try to influence a juror. Interesting she felt the need to say that, unless she says it to everyone who comes before her.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Trump was arraigned in court in DC today. He pled not guilty to all counts. He was reminded by the judge that he cannot commit any crimes while awaiting trial. He was further reminded that it is a crime to try to influence a juror. Interesting she felt the need to say that, unless she says it to everyone who comes before her.

I think she is was just covering the bases probably was told by the judge who will be presiding over the case due to historical activities of the defendant.