US Politics
- Thread starter Nick 0208 Ldn
- Start date
Gym Jordan at it again....
I love reading the mainstream media and their balanced, unslanted, coverage of the issues
https://www.newsweek.com/69-percent...-46-percent-republicans-new-poll-says-1500187
https://www.newsweek.com/69-percent...-46-percent-republicans-new-poll-says-1500187
DHS tracking American journalists in Portland!!! Democracy, feck yeah!!
https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/01/poli...eassigned-intelligence-journalists/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/01/poli...eassigned-intelligence-journalists/index.html
In GOP plan, you can't sue your employers for giving you COVID — but they can sue you
"It would absolve employers of responsibility for taking any but the most minimal steps to make their workplaces safe. It would preempt tough state workplace safety laws (not that there are very many of them).
And while shutting the courthouse door to workers, it would allow employers to sue workers for demanding safer conditions.
The proposal would supersede such federal worker safeguards as the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, among others.
In plain English, the Republicans are proposing to eviscerate almost all workplace protections at the moment when the threat to workers' health may be at its highest in a century. Let's not overlook that federal enforcement of workplace safety is anything but strong to begin with. The maximum OSHA penalty is $13,494 per violation."
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/column-gop-plan-cant-sue-172938487.html?soc_src=community
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2020-07-29/covid-employer-liability
"It would absolve employers of responsibility for taking any but the most minimal steps to make their workplaces safe. It would preempt tough state workplace safety laws (not that there are very many of them).
And while shutting the courthouse door to workers, it would allow employers to sue workers for demanding safer conditions.
The proposal would supersede such federal worker safeguards as the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, among others.
In plain English, the Republicans are proposing to eviscerate almost all workplace protections at the moment when the threat to workers' health may be at its highest in a century. Let's not overlook that federal enforcement of workplace safety is anything but strong to begin with. The maximum OSHA penalty is $13,494 per violation."
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/column-gop-plan-cant-sue-172938487.html?soc_src=community
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2020-07-29/covid-employer-liability
Reminded me of this.
Thought this was quite good/terrifying: https://art19.com/shows/why-is-this...episodes/05b8b733-f841-453f-ad6a-e279e6a03928
OMG. For the sake of everyone...I hope this is fake.
I mean, honestly it is a perfect reflection of the trump "christian" supporter:
1) Unashamed flaunting of wealth - check (bonus point for being on a yacht)
2) Married man with woman not spouse with unbuttoned pants? - check (bonus point for trolling the hell out of Pence)
3) Lying about drinking? check
4) Punchable face? Hell yah
Hasn't been the first time.
Exclusive: Trump fixer Cohen says he helped Falwell handle racy photos
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...lped-falwell-handle-racy-photos-idUSKCN1SD2JG
Exclusive: Trump fixer Cohen says he helped Falwell handle racy photos
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...lped-falwell-handle-racy-photos-idUSKCN1SD2JG
That article sounds eerily like a Righteous Gemstones episode, minus the main person in the photos killing people and then later showing the video to everyone in his inner circle.
Would fit right in here:
https://old.reddit.com/r/ABoringDystopia/
You mentioned it, so I am within my rights to post this smashing hit.
A book about the Never Trump Republicans was reivewed here: https://newrepublic.com/article/158703/never-trumpers-already-won-review-saldin-teles-book
Basically what I've been screaming about - they're taking over the Dem party and moving it further right. It's written about 400 times better than my posts.
And then two of them confirm it:
1st
If Democrats Take the Senate, Our Democracy Is in a New Kind of Danger
(basically complaining that some Dems have said the filibuster might fall. that drivel is behind a paywall so I'm spared gnashing my teeth for 2 extra minutes).
2nd
Basically what I've been screaming about - they're taking over the Dem party and moving it further right. It's written about 400 times better than my posts.
And then two of them confirm it:
1st
If Democrats Take the Senate, Our Democracy Is in a New Kind of Danger
(basically complaining that some Dems have said the filibuster might fall. that drivel is behind a paywall so I'm spared gnashing my teeth for 2 extra minutes).
2nd
I'm confused. Are you saying you are unmoved? Is Ed Asante someone I should know? This was a weird repost.
it was the top reply under the tweet, im always fascinated by psycopaths like that.
"Analytically grounded opinionated, political junkie American" he cares about the facts not feelings!
It's a perfect thread. I still can't get over the Ubereats gift card bit.
Ok, thanks. This makes sense now. I would agree that a surprising number of people lack even basic empathy.
Corporate Lobbyists Vote To Keep Corporate Lobbyists In the DNC
https://readsludge.com/2020/08/05/corporate-lobbyists-vote-to-keep-corporate-lobbyists-in-the-dnc/
https://readsludge.com/2020/08/05/corporate-lobbyists-vote-to-keep-corporate-lobbyists-in-the-dnc/
As if this will make a difference. I lived in Bama during the last election. It took the republicans running a psychopathic pedophile to get a Dem win and it was STILL a close thing. That state is a lost cause.
https://sirota.substack.com/p/john-roberts-is-following-corporate
John Roberts Is Following Corporate America’s Long-Term Plan
When Roberts was nominated in '05, few focused on his business fealty, but he was appointed because he represented corporate clients aiming to transform the court — which is exactly what he's doing.
John Roberts Is Following Corporate America’s Long-Term Plan
When Roberts was nominated in '05, few focused on his business fealty, but he was appointed because he represented corporate clients aiming to transform the court — which is exactly what he's doing.
If Roberts is getting attacked from both fringes then he's probably doing a fairly decent job.
you can read the article, it explains why he is attacked by both sides.
otoh, both the communist party and some generals disliked hitler, probably he was doing a god job.
A more pertinent example is Mitch McConnell who has low approval ratings from Republicans and was booed at the 2016 RNC, and who a lot of liberals and leftists don't like. I am going to be very bold and say that does not mean he is doing a centrist balancing act.
Only if you consider consolidating more power and wealth into the hangs of the largest corporations and richest individuals, stripping the social safety net even further, granting employers more legal recourse than employees, increasing the economic inequalities, and creating a platform for more social conservative changes and subverting the more pluralistic economic values of the 60s-70s as "fairly decent job".
I did read the article. It's the left wing view, which I expected when I saw Sriracha was the author. The fact that most Republicans are disappointed with him tells us all we need to know on him. He's clearly not a reliable rubber stamp for them, which can be regarded as a small win in terms of a Republican SCOTUS selection not going down the Scalia/Thomas route.
Except most Republicans are not disappointed with him. The corporatists that want to increase income inequality and strip the social safety have been delighted with him. Even the most extreme social conservative activists are getting more of what they want than they realize:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/social-conservatives-roberts-trump/613660/
Scalia voted against the republican view on free speech a few times.
Regardless, there are multiple examples where opposition from your own party doesn't mean you aren't doing a job for them, and Mitch is the closest example. He is doing an exemplary partisan job but gets no mass support for it. A lower-profile example is trump's NLRB, which has voted to reduce free speech for workers (like James Damore and more recent cases involving racism and sexism) since it can eventually be used to destroy unionisation.
Roberts and Mitch are thinking long-term, on the distribution of power how difficult a change to minority rule will be. It is not glamorous work, and for Roberts it means going on the wrong side of the culture war sometimes. But it is far more important and meaningful; in 20 years if there is a Dem president and majority that's when these obstacles will become apparent. The main things propping up the GOP are Citizens United, the gutting of the VRA, and the lack of legal ways to check employer power (like the almost total ban on class-acton employee lawsuits). Striking down Roe v Wade directly could provoke a backlash which the party would not enjoy. So Roberts can take a few punches from movement conservatives for the long-term goal of maintaining corporate power.
e - the article contains a graph of the proportion of cases won by the Chamber of Commerce, it is higher now than under Rehnquist, who also enjoyed a 5-4 conservative majority like Roberts.
Last edited:
Trump is currently the power structure of the Republican Party. Ask any Trumper what they think about Roberts and you will see how popular he is with Republicans at the moment.
I've already done that and they weren't disappointed at all. It's only a handful of activists that don't grasp legal theory that are unhappy. Read that article and you'll see why. You can't just make statements like 'most republicans" without backing that up, since its just not true that most Republicans are unhappy with him.
And for the record, as Berba illustrated that measure of whether someone is doing a good, that would mean Hitler was doing a bang-up job. To claim he is "doing fairly decent" simply because some people on both sides are not happy rather than what he is actually doing with legal rulings is an absurd standard to judge a justice, especially a Chief Justice. And if your barometer for decent job is "not Scalia" then you have an extremely low bar.
We know he's a conservative, so we can rule that out as a point of criticism since we knew what we were getting. He is probably the least conservative of the Republican nominees and routinely can't be relied on to give them favorable rulings in their most important cases - Obamacare being the most, but also on abortion and has likewise sided with conservatives on a lot of things. He's basically the new Kennedy and only people on either political fringes seem to have a problem with him. To most normal people, he's a standard milk toast Republican nominee who generally votes with the conservatives and occasionally with the libs.
As you see above - He's nearly as close to Kagan and Breyer as he is the nearest conservative on the Judicial Common Space rating of SCOTUS ideological decisions.
Last edited: