|
Post by Don on Nov 19, 2016 3:04:57 GMT -5
“The civil libertarians among us would rather defend the constitution than protect our nation’s security.” - Jeff Sessions 2007 Duh. Apparently being a civil libertarian also makes you not a "good people." Based on Trump's selections so far, I'm ready to call the election. The State won, The People lost. But you always say that. No one can accuse Don of flip-flopping. True. He is consistent. Annoyingly... I mean, unhelpfully... I mean, admirably so. I'm not "being consistent," I'm reporting the facts. Tell me the last election where The People gained power and The State lost. (Pssssst. It's a trick question. The answer is a null set.)
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Nov 19, 2016 6:54:52 GMT -5
I don't want the state to lose, I want it to work. It's not a battle for power, for many people.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Nov 19, 2016 12:16:28 GMT -5
Which basically amounts to more status quo, no? I mean, there's some variance in the quo, but not much.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Nov 19, 2016 12:59:49 GMT -5
Which basically amounts to more status quo, no? I mean, there's some variance in the quo, but not much. Precisely. So much for the Republican Brand's version of "Hope and Change." And I bet Republicans will be fully as forgiving of Trump as Democrats were of Obama.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Nov 19, 2016 17:08:38 GMT -5
Status quo for whom?
Taxes went up on the wealthy during Obama's tenure. Millions of people got health insurance. Gay marriage became legal.
What are we looking at now? I have yet to create a post on it, but taxes, they are a'changing. Nothing concrete yet of course, but the Trump plan, if enacted, will significantly reduce taxes on the wealthy and (as an example) for myself as a middle class single parent, I'll be paying more (I did some rough math, about $2,000) because at least some head of household benefits are going to be redacted.
Healthcare is up in the air, I guess, as is the future of gay marriage if more conservative Scalia-type judges are appointed. (Or, maybe it will be like Roe v. Wade, and no one will bother. One can hope.)
Syrian refugees. Status quo for them too?
Not sure what this status quo spiel is about.
ETA: As much as I agree with folks here calling for a dial back on "the sky is falling," "same ol', same ol'" seems equally exaggerated.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Nov 19, 2016 19:03:32 GMT -5
Status quo for whom? Taxes went up on the wealthy during Obama's tenure. Millions of people got health insurance. Gay marriage became legal. What are we looking at now? I have yet to create a post on it, but taxes, they are a'changing. Nothing concrete yet of course, but the Trump plan, if enacted, will significantly reduce taxes on the wealthy and (as an example) for myself as a middle class single parent, I'll be paying more (I did some rough math, about $2,000) because at least some head of household benefits are going to be redacted. Healthcare is up in the air, I guess, as is the future of gay marriage if more conservative Scalia-type judges are appointed. (Or, maybe it will be like Roe v. Wade, and no one will bother. One can hope.) Syrian refugees. Status quo for them too? Not sure what this status quo spiel is about. ETA: As much as I agree with folks here calling for a dial back on "the sky is falling," "same ol', same ol'" seems equally exaggerated. Well, I'm not sure how taxes going up for "the wealthy" (whatever that term means this weak) is either a significant change or a positive change, especially when real median household income is basically holding the line, at best. As for millions getting health insurance, millions more--who aren't rich--are now getting shafted in their premiums. Not sure how that can be called an absolute net benefit yet, either. Gay marriage? Great. It's a good thing, imo. But the Obama admin isn't responsible for that. The general population is, and very obviously so. It was a sea change that occurred under Obama and he deserves credit for seeing it happening and helping it happen, no doubt, because he opposed gay marriage when he took office. Regardless, the "status quo spiel" is about Trump's appointments making it seem like it will be business as usual in DC. That means a bloated federal budget, lots of pork, corruption, and protection for favored industries (banking, energy, etc.) as opposed to protection for the little guys and gals. Of course, maybe it won't work out that way. "But gay marriage!" is missing the forest in favor of a few trees. Imo.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Nov 19, 2016 20:04:11 GMT -5
Regardless, the "status quo spiel" is about Trump's appointments making it seem like it will be business as usual in DC. That means a bloated federal budget, lots of pork, corruption, and protection for favored industries (banking, energy, etc.) as opposed to protection for the little guys and gals. Of course, maybe it won't work out that way. "But gay marriage!" is missing the forest in favor of a few trees. Imo. Great, so Don will have lots of material for the next... forever. I'm just saying it's not 'the status quo' for everyone.
|
|
|
Post by Angie on Nov 21, 2016 2:43:48 GMT -5
There's also this, which paints a much more encouraging picture than I thought when I first heard the news. Uhhhhh.... Accusations of racism have dogged Sessions's career: Actually, they almost derailed it. In 1986, a Senate committee denied Sessions, then a 39-year-old U.S. attorney in Alabama, a federal judgeship. His former colleagues testified Sessions used the n-word and joked about the Ku Klux Klan, saying he thought they were “okay, until he learned that they smoked marijuana.”
By the time the testimony was finished, Sessions's “reputation was in tatters,” wrote Isaac Stanley-Becker in The Post this July, on the eve of Sessions delivering a prime-time speech at the Republican National Convention for Trump.
In 1986, Sessions defended himself against accusations of racism. “I am not the Jeff Sessions my detractors have tried to create,” he told the very same Senate Judiciary Committee he now sits on. “I am not a racist. I am not insensitive to blacks.”
And he told Stanley-Becker this summer: “Racism is totally unacceptable in America. Everybody needs to be treated fairly and objectively.”
But the Southern Poverty Law Center's Heidi Beirich, who tracks hate speech, said Sessions is guilty of it, and that his mere presence in Trump's inner circle is “a tragedy for American politics.” What about that is any way "encouraging" to you? Sorry, I should have been clear - I was a little less discouraged after reading that article because it called out his history of working across the aisle. I do not like the guy, and I think the overall picture of Trump's new administration is cause for serious concern. But if Trump can pick more people with a track record of working across party lines, that's a little less scary, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Nov 21, 2016 6:54:31 GMT -5
Working across party lines isn't necessarily a good thing.
"Working across party lines" can also mean "convincing people blacks should be second-class citizens again."
Harry Anslinger "worked across party lines" and all we got was this friggin' drug war.
It is my sincerest hope that Sessions has no luck whatsoever "working across party lines."
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Nov 21, 2016 13:28:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Nov 21, 2016 13:30:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Angie on Nov 21, 2016 17:49:44 GMT -5
Working across party lines isn't necessarily a good thing. "Working across party lines" can also mean "convincing people blacks should be second-class citizens again." Harry Anslinger "worked across party lines" and all we got was this friggin' drug war. It is my sincerest hope that Sessions has no luck whatsoever "working across party lines." Well, yeah, that's an excellent point. And I'll be first in line to protest racist or otherwise discriminatory policy suggestions. Hell, I've already called my senators to voice my opposition to both Bannon AND Sessions, just to quell any notions that I'm okay with either of them (though, since my freaking senators are Grassley and Ernst, I have little hope my words will fall on anything but deaf ears). I guess I'm just trying to be cautiously optimistic about a shitty situation. Call it a holdover from the coping mechanisms I was taught to counter my anxiety disorder.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Nov 21, 2016 18:55:17 GMT -5
I like the idea of being cautiously optimistic while primed and ready to unleash hell at a moment's notice.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Nov 22, 2016 2:48:30 GMT -5
Regarding Sessions being racist -- we've got hearsay from 30 years ago, and we've got decades of his work and words since then. And that work includes prosecuting the KKK to the full extent of the law including insisting on the death penalty for a klansman (who was the son of the Alabama KKK leader) who killed a black man, acknowledging and working to address bias against blacks in policing as early as 2001, filing several cases for desegregation in Alabama schools as a U.S. Attorney, spearheading giving Rosa Parks the Congressional Gold Medal. And he is on record many times speaking against racism and discrimination such as in housing.
If we're trying to be unbiased here, for just a moment, can anyone imagine knowing the KKK well enough during his time prosecuting them for murder, that he could make a sarcastic comment such as "I thought the KKK was OK until I found out they smoked pot." I mean SARCASM. Please. It's like saying, "I liked ISIS until they destroyed that library." Come on, folks.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Nov 22, 2016 6:11:11 GMT -5
I don't want the state to lose, I want it to work. It's not a battle for power, for many people. Sad to say, but what you want is immaterial. It most definitely is a battle for power among those who chase the One Ring, regardless of what those who are affected by those decisions want, or those who battle over the One Ring tell you they want. Government is working; it's working exactly the way those who hold the One Ring want it to work, and those people are incentivized by the system to do exactly what they have been doing for decades. It's always a shock to hear that someone you think has your best interests at heart is really just using you, I know. But yours is not the first heart that Uncle Sam has broken. Try a little politics without the romance.
|
|