[News] Post a Political News Story

Ongoing discussion of the political news of the day. This thread is for 'smaller' stories that don't call for their own thread. If a story blows up, please start a new thread for it.

Case in point, Roberts was on the majority for this: Muslim Man Executed After Supreme Court Denies Plea to Have Imam Present

The Fifth Circuit decision was legally really bad, and Roberts does like proper procedure. In short, the 5C panel just flat-out ignored findings of fact from the district court that were inconvenient to their desired conclusion. Normally they're required to accept those facts unless they're "clearly erroneous" but in this case they just made up their own reality instead. I don't doubt Roberts is going to go after Roe directly or indirectly, but this case just might be a bridge too far for him.

I originally heard this on the "Opening Arguments" podcast but Rewire News has a good analysis.

If he's being purely partisan, I think it more likely they they'll just take enough of a chunk out of Casey for TRAP laws to create huge abortion deserts while still leaving the issue for forced-birthers to run on.

qaraq wrote:

The Fifth Circuit decision was legally really bad, and Roberts does like proper procedure. In short, the 5C panel just flat-out ignored findings of fact from the district court that were inconvenient to their desired conclusion. Normally they're required to accept those facts unless they're "clearly erroneous" but in this case they just made up their own reality instead. I don't doubt Roberts is going to go after Roe directly or indirectly, but this case just might be a bridge too far for him.

I originally heard this on the "Opening Arguments" podcast but Rewire News has a good analysis.

If he's being purely partisan, I think it more likely they they'll just take enough of a chunk out of Casey for TRAP laws to create huge abortion deserts while still leaving the issue for forced-birthers to run on.

I think i tend to agree with the OA analysis on this: This isn't 'no this is bad as a concept,' this is 'I need you to give me a case with better facts so this doesn't look like a farce'

ClockworkHouse wrote:

I'm going out on a limb and guessing the issue was that the mother was darker than the child, not the other way around.

100%... This happens to my wife all the time.. thankfully nothing as serious as a false trafficking accusation but she is mistaken for the nanny all the time. One day she will sock someone in the face because that person will be the one that finally puts her over the edge.

Chairman_Mao wrote:

Candace Owens: Hitler Was ‘OK’ Until He Tried to Go Global

Yeah, that's now how this works.

"Hitler: The Icarus of Fascism"

JUCHE 2020!

Let us eternally glorify the sacred revolutionary careers and immortal feats of the great God-Emperor Trump!

Let us take it as the lifeline and the key point to implement the behests of the great leaders!

Become the sparks setting fire to the hearts of the masses and detonators giving full play to their mental power!

(Watch, this will happen, but unironically.)

Also, gooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooodbye Justin Fairfax. Whew.

oilypenguin wrote:

Sandusky, Ohio rules.

Columbus would have wanted it that way.

Did James Gandolfini ever do anything icky? If not, just replace Columbus Day with James Gandolfini day.

(of course if there's a limited number of days off, make Election Day the observed holiday)

Chairman_Mao wrote:
oilypenguin wrote:

Sandusky, Ohio rules.

Columbus would have wanted it that way.

IMAGE(https://i.redd.it/ju38gacbdsqz.jpg)

Or we could just replace it with Gandalf Day and everyone could wear long white beards.

shalewa [sha-LAY-wah] sharpe (@silkyjumbo) Tweeted:
when we said more black faces in government, we should have been specific. https://twitter.com/silkyjumbo/statu...

I love the idea of replacing Columbus Day with Election day. Lets make that nationwide please. Thanks.

I wonder which genius on Virginia's Gov. Northam's team thought they could move beyond the whole blackface thing by having him talk about the 400th anniversary of black "indentured servants" in Virginia.

Perhaps he should have told the tale of John Castor, one of the handful of a black indentured servants in 1650ish Virginia, who--after suing his master (who was a former indentured servant himself) for violating his contract and keeping him in servitude for seven years beyond the agreed upon term--was deemed by the local courts to be the lifetime property of said master. Not his labor contract, but him personally.

How f*cking tone deaf can someone be (and what does that say about the people he's surrounded himself with)?

OG_slinger wrote:

I wonder which genius on Virginia's Gov. Northam's team thought they could move beyond the whole blackface thing by having him talk about the 400th anniversary of black "indentured servants" in Virginia.

Perhaps he should have told the tale of John Castor, one of the handful of a black indentured servants in 1650ish Virginia, who--after suing his master (who was a former indentured servant himself) for violating his contract and keeping him in servitude for seven years beyond the agreed upon term--was deemed by the local courts to be the lifetime property of said master. Not his labor contract, but him personally.

How f*cking tone deaf can someone be (and what does that say about the people he's surrounded himself with)?

He's just lining up on his own goal and taking free kicks at this point. i ran across a facebook post that paraphrased as basically "Republicans see Northam and think he represents the Democratic party and relish the comeuppance. The rest of the democratic party see Northam and realize he represents Virginia and wonder WTF is so wrong there" What's wrong is obviously deep seated racism, but I live in North Carolina and I still wonder how this guy ended up in a party supported leadership position. Did they not vet him AT ALL?!

They probably said, "Ooh, He's a doctor!" and ran with it

fangblackbone wrote:

They probably said, "Ooh, He's a doctor!" and ran with it :(

There's probably a lot of truth to that. It worked (and is sadly still working) for Micheal Crichton.

fangblackbone wrote:

They probably said, "Ooh, He's a doctor!" and ran with it :(

Doctor in the military no less. They considered it a twofer.

Not sure if this whole thing is better suited for this thread or the trolls-in-social-media one:

https://twitter.com/SpeakerPelosi/st...

Ilhan Omar said that AIPAC holds undue influence in Washington (the words that people took issue with were "It's all about the benjamins, baby"), and in a shocking display of that not being the case AT ALL, everyone in Washington flips out and predictably calls her an antisemite.
Pelosi's shameful statement is just the tip of the iceberg that bullied Omar into giving an apology in the end:
https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1...

Not only can you seemingly not criticize any policy of the Israeli government because that is their reaction every time, but what's even more remarkable is that the very transparent bad-faith accusations work every damn time! On top of that to even call someone antisemitic for attacking pro-Netanyahu lobbying groups you have to conflate the agenda of the Israeli government with the will of all Jewish people, which... one might even call a tad antisemitic. The hypocrisy of it all is astounding.

Lawmakers Say They’ve Reached Tentative Agreement To Prevent Government Shutdown

The agreement means 55 miles of new fencing — constructed through existing designs such as metal slats instead of a concrete wall — but far less than the 215 miles the White House demanded in December. The fencing would be built in the Rio Grande Valley in Texas.

The great negotiator - from "a wall", to a fence, from all the boarder to 55 miles....

farley3k wrote:

Lawmakers Say They’ve Reached Tentative Agreement To Prevent Government Shutdown

The agreement means 55 miles of new fencing — constructed through existing designs such as metal slats instead of a concrete wall — but far less than the 215 miles the White House demanded in December. The fencing would be built in the Rio Grande Valley in Texas.

The great negotiator - from "a wall", to a fence, from all the boarder to 55 miles....

There's probably a reason they agreed on $1.4 billion and 88km, but darned if I can figure it out.

nako wrote:

Ilhan Omar said that AIPAC holds undue influence in Washington (the words that people took issue with were "It's all about the benjamins, baby"), and in a shocking display of that not being the case AT ALL, everyone in Washington flips out and predictably calls her an antisemite.

Not only can you seemingly not criticize any policy of the Israeli government because that is their reaction every time, but what's even more remarkable is that the very transparent bad-faith accusations work every damn time! On top of that to even call someone antisemitic for attacking pro-Netanyahu lobbying groups you have to conflate the agenda of the Israeli government with the will of all Jewish people, which... one might even call a tad antisemitic. The hypocrisy of it all is astounding.

Thank you. This is exactly my reaction. It's quite clear that the AIPAC and other pro-Isreali lobbying efforts hold WAY too much power over our representatives. Why the hell is there a proliferation of anti-boycott laws (which by themselves are astoundingly insulting) if there isn't such undue influence?

They're attacking this person because she happens to be Muslim, and god-f*cking-forbid a MUSLIM WOMAN speak her mind about the atrocities Israel commits regularly.

The whole thing is insulting. They should also tread lightly: call wolf / anti-semite falsely too many times and people will stop worrying about it.

I just don't get this damned idea that any criticism of Israel is verboten and automatically anti-semitic.

EDIT: I'm not sure which should be bold, which italics: the Muslim or the woman bit? Probably I got it right.

firesloth wrote:

I just don't get this damned idea that any criticism of Israel is verboten and automatically anti-semitic.

I feel like this attitude is doubly damaging. Firstly, it gives cover for a particular government should they choose to pursue atrocious policies. Secondly, it gives cover to actual anti-semites who should be rightly shunned and hated by giving them a large group of reasonable rational people to hide among.

farley3k wrote:

Lawmakers Say They’ve Reached Tentative Agreement To Prevent Government Shutdown

The agreement means 55 miles of new fencing — constructed through existing designs such as metal slats instead of a concrete wall — but far less than the 215 miles the White House demanded in December. The fencing would be built in the Rio Grande Valley in Texas.

The great negotiator - from "a wall", to a fence, from all the boarder to 55 miles....

To be fair, Trump hasn't signed off on the deal yet and wasn't one of the negotiating parties - this was strictly between the House and the Senate. He could still very easily throw a tantrum, say "this isn't enough", and have the government shut down again and/or attempt to use his executive powers to get "his wall" built.

He'll sign it. He'll call it an important first step, still negotiating, yadda yadda. But even his base was blaming him for the shutdown last time, and I doubt he's willing to risk that eroding further with a second shutdown.

Thought I heard yesterday too that if he attempts to declare national emergency and build some other branch told him they would cancel it. Again, no source as I heard it while walking by the radio - Radio source MPR.

I think he'll sign it or not based on which path will personally enrich him and/or his cronies the most, base erosion be damned.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

He'll sign it. He'll call it an important first step, still negotiating, yadda yadda. But even his base was blaming him for the shutdown last time, and I doubt he's willing to risk that eroding further with a second shutdown.

I was curious what Hannity et al. thought about the latest legislation (anticipating another backlash calling Trump weak if he signs) so I visited the FoxNews website. I honestly can't tell the difference between it and a pure tabloid. The front page articles (intentionally not linking): "Hillary's FBI?" and an article on Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Notably absent from the headlines: A hard news article about the bill to prevent another shutdown.

JeffreyLSmith wrote:
ClockworkHouse wrote:

He'll sign it. He'll call it an important first step, still negotiating, yadda yadda. But even his base was blaming him for the shutdown last time, and I doubt he's willing to risk that eroding further with a second shutdown.

I was curious what Hannity et al. thought about the latest legislation (anticipating another backlash calling Trump weak if he signs) so I visited the FoxNews website. I honestly can't tell the difference between it and a pure tabloid. The front page articles (intentionally not linking): "Hillary's FBI?" and an article on Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Notably absent from the headlines: A hard news article about the bill to prevent another shutdown.

Edit: Found Hannity's response (again, not linking): “By the way, on this new so-called compromise,” Hannity said. “I’m getting details. $1.3 billion? That’s not even a wall, a barrier… We will get back into this tomorrow. Any Republican that supports this garbage compromise, you will have to explain—look at this crowd, look at the country.”

Edit2: Quote is not edit