[Discussion] Welcome to the Biden Administration!

Anything related to Biden and his upcoming administration. May this thread be less active and controversial as that last guys thread.

OG_slinger wrote:

...or if the newly installed Acting Defense Secretary is purposefully gimping the transition because his boss--who hasn't worked a gd day for the American people since November 3rd--

1946?

Maybe he did something constructive in those first few months, anyway.

OG_slinger wrote:

Pentagon halts Biden transition briefings

Axios wrote:

Acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller ordered a Pentagon-wide halt to cooperation with the transition of President-elect Biden, shocking officials across the Defense Department, senior administration officials tell Axios.

Behind the scenes: A top Biden official was unaware of the directive. Administration officials left open the possibility cooperation would resume after a holiday pause. The officials were unsure what prompted Miller's action, or whether President Trump approved.

Why it matters: Miller's move, which stunned officials throughout the Pentagon, was the biggest eruption yet of animus and mistrust toward the Biden team from the top level of the Trump administration.

What happened: Meetings between President Trump's team and the Biden team are going on throughout the government, after a delayed start as the administration dragged its feet on officially recognizing Biden as president-elect.

Then on Thursday night, Miller — who was appointed Nov. 9, when Trump fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper right after the election — ordered officials throughout the building to cancel scheduled transition meetings.

Pentagon official response: A senior Defense Department official sought to downplay the move, calling it "a simple delay of the last few scheduled meetings until after the new year."

-- "We had fewer than two dozen remaining meetings on the schedule today and next week," the official said, adding that "the DoD staff working the meetings were overwhelmed by the number of meetings."

-- "These same senior leaders needed to do their day jobs and were being consumed by transition activities. ... With the holidays we are taking a knee for two weeks. We are still committed to a productive transition."

Hmmm, I'm not sure if I should believe that our top military leaders are too overwhelmed by having a few meetings with someone who in a month's time is going to be their boss for the next four years or if the newly installed Acting Defense Secretary is purposefully gimping the transition because his boss--who hasn't worked a gd day for the American people since November 3rd--is mad and likes to be a petty, vindictive f*ck.

Glad the Werwolf Gauleiters at the Pentagon are prioritizing political enemies and not actual enemies, like those who hacked our supply networks and other installations.

Democracy Now!
Longtime Head of EPA's Environmental Justice Program: Biden's Climate Picks Show Power of Movements

Climate Change and COVID are two things where there should be little compromise and if compromise is necessary, it should be heavily weighted towards progress at the cost of status quo.

I find that my movements are powerful when I eat plenty of fiber.

fangblackbone wrote:

Climate Change and COVID are two things where there should be little compromise and if compromise is necessary, it should be heavily weighted towards progress at the cost of status quo.

Should be, but the GOP will block all of that, because that's what they do (while being first in line to get the vaccine).

BadKen wrote:

I find that my movements are powerful when I eat plenty of fiber.

fangblackbone wrote:

Climate Change and COVID are two things where there should be little compromise and if compromise is necessary, it should be heavily weighted towards progress at the cost of status quo.

Natus wrote:

Should be, but the GOP will block all of that, because that's what they do (while being first in line to get the vaccine).

The GOP is the extra cheese of powerful movements.

There’s a Way Biden Can Raise More From the Rich Without Higher Taxes

Increased spending to enforce the existing tax code would pay for itself and then some.
Chairman_Mao wrote:

There’s a Way Biden Can Raise More From the Rich Without Higher Taxes

Increased spending to enforce the existing tax code would pay for itself and then some.

Isn't it true that the IRS increases its ROI for every dollar we put into its budget? Seems somewhat insane that we don't give that Agency as much money as it needs since it probably almost pays for itself.

Less than 2% of Americans get audited. That's silly.

Vrikk wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

There’s a Way Biden Can Raise More From the Rich Without Higher Taxes

Increased spending to enforce the existing tax code would pay for itself and then some.

Isn't is true that the IRS increases its ROI for every dollar we put into its budget? Seems somewhat insane that we don't give that Agency as much money as it needs since it probably almost pays for itself.

Less than 2% of Americans get audited. That's silly.

Republicans: You're not tough on crime.
Obama: Ok.
Republicans: We meant black people crime!

Biden to nominate Merrick Garland as attorney general

President-elect Joe Biden has decided to nominate Judge Merrick Garland as attorney general, people familiar with the matter tell CNN, a long-awaited decision that was moved toward completion Wednesday as it became apparent that Democrats were on the brink of winning control of the Senate.

The announcement of the attorney general, along with other senior leaders of the Justice Department, is expected to be made as soon as Thursday as Biden moves closer to filling the remaining seats in his Cabinet before assuming power on January 20.

While Garland has been a top contender for weeks, concerns about the vacancy his selection would create on the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia raised alarm bells among Biden and many advisers who believed Senate Republicans would block any nomination to that seat. But with Democrats poised to control the Senate after two Georgia runoff races, those concerns were allayed.
"Judge Garland will be viewed in a whole new light now," a top Biden ally tells CNN.

Will there be like lightning bolts and stuff if he's gotta argue something to Gorsuch?

Democrats you will be in control of both houses and the presidency.

Obligatory Hamilton:

Do something with the power the people gave you.

Nimcosi wrote:

Democrats you will be in control of both houses and the presidency.

(Obligatory Hamilton)

Do something with the power the people gave you.

Ha ha. oh god. please don't f*ck this up and entertain reaching across aisles, democrats. Please use the power for good.

Forgive me for being cynical, but...

IMAGE(https://media.giphy.com/media/hvq8ONQhQ1XLq/giphy.gif)

Regarding the events of yesterday, I find Machiavelli in his Discourses On Livy to provide some sage advice if the incoming administration and current law enforcement will listen:

"for when the entire safety of our country is at stake, no consideration of what is just or unjust, merciful or cruel, praiseworthy or shameful, must intervene. On the contrary, every other consideration being set aside, that course alone must be taken which preserves the existence of the country and maintains its liberty."

--Book III, Chapter XLI

"The severity used by Brutus in preserving for Rome the freedom he had won for her, was not less necessary than useful. The spectacle of a father sitting on the judgment, and not merely sentencing his own sons to death, but being himself present at their execution, affords an example rare in history. But those who study the records of ancient times will understand, that after a change in the form of a government, whether it be from a commonwealth to a tyranny or from a tyranny to a commonwealth, those who are hostile to the new order of things must always be visited with signal punishment."

--Book III, Chapter III

"But most carefully should we avoid, as of all courses the most pernicious, such half-measures as were followed by the Samnites when they had the Romans shut up in the Caudine Forks, and would not listen to the counsels of the old man who urged them either to send their captives away with every honourable attention, or else put them all to death; but adopted a middle course, and after disarming them and making them pass under the yoke, suffered them to depart at once disgraced and angered. And no long time after, they found to their sorrow that the old man's warning was true, and that the course they had themselves chosen was calamitous; as shall, hereafter, in its place be shown."

--Book II, Chapter XXIII

We could also just look at our own failure of Reconstruction that led to Jim Crow, all these goddamn statues of traitors, the KKK, and still infects our current politics.

Ban the f*cking confederate flag for starters. Germany doesn't mess around with symbols, and they are a lot smarter than us right now.

Stele wrote:

We could also just look at our own failure of Reconstruction that led to Jim Crow, all these goddamn statues of traitors, the KKK, and still infects our current politics.

Ban the f*cking confederate flag for starters. Germany doesn't mess around with symbols, and they are a lot smarter than us right now.

But, but, but...with Germany banning all statues and memorials to Hitler/nazis, how will they even know what he/they did? Because everyone knows it is from street signs and random statues that all kids learn history.

Stele wrote:

Ban the f*cking confederate flag for starters. Germany doesn't mess around with symbols, and they are a lot smarter than us right now.

I agree with this idea, but it would actually take a constitution amendment, and that just isn't going to happen.

Atras wrote:
Stele wrote:

Ban the f*cking confederate flag for starters. Germany doesn't mess around with symbols, and they are a lot smarter than us right now.

I agree with this idea, but it would actually take a constitution amendment, and that just isn't going to happen.

It's a national security threat at this point. Banning the Stars and Bars should have been done ages ago. The entire MAGA/KKK/neo-Nazi/QAnon side of the GOP needs to be suppressed, violently if need be.

The next coup is already scheduled, and it will be a lot bloodier and cause a lot more damage.

Natus wrote:

Regarding the events of yesterday, I find Machiavelli in his Discourses On Livy to provide some sage advice if the incoming administration and current law enforcement will listen:

"for when the entire safety of our country is at stake, no consideration of what is just or unjust, merciful or cruel, praiseworthy or shameful, must intervene. On the contrary, every other consideration being set aside, that course alone must be taken which preserves the existence of the country and maintains its liberty."

--Book III, Chapter XLI

Umm so which side are you using this for? I am pretty sure the rioters felt that no consideration for what was just, or shameful was important. They felt - heck feel - that all must be set aside to preserve their country. And I am pretty sure they feel their liberty is being trampled by losing elections.

So from their point of view they are acting completely correctly. Maybe that is what you meant but my sense of this group/board is that is not true but I don't know you personally so I could be wrong

That is why Jefferson spoke of hoping for a mistaken rebellion by the misinformed every generation or so, in which a few people die, but the leaders are apprehended and their followers are re-educated away from their errors. Political beliefs that don't align with reality result in pain, one way or another, and these folks, while they may *believe* they were acting correctly, will eventually be (at a minimum) prevented from taking similar actions. One way or another.

Remember, determining the correctness of a belief involves comparing the belief to actual, verifiable facts. Conspiracy theories are not facts, and they tend to fall apart once one element is undeniably contradicted. (Unlike *actual* conspiracies which often will continue to function after the loss of one or more major elements.) The trick is that the rest of society has to allow these folks to be educated, which initially takes the form of punishment and ostracization. Otherwise, if the authorities allow the conspiracy theorists to operate without repercussions, then the lies and illusions just grow. And that means that either their conflict with reality becomes more damaging with time, or - worst case - they simply eradicate the truth and the Stalinists come out to play...

There’s a thought experiment going on over at Quora about whether the US should adopt war on terror tactics against the right wing, up to and including striking Proud Boy weddings and “madrasas” like Covington Catholic. I think it’s a rather scary idea at this point but if we’re looking at pure Machivellianism, heavy handedness has more or less worked. Maybe we need to not give up those tactics but rather switch them to a more appropriate threat in the 2020s.

Also, I figure it might be time for a Boogaloo catch all thread.

jdzappa wrote:

There’s a thought experiment going on over at Quora about whether the US should adopt war on terror tactics against the right wing, up to and including striking Proud Boy weddings and “madrasas” like Covington Catholic. I think it’s a rather scary idea at this point but if we’re looking at pure Machivellianism, heavy handedness has more or less worked. Maybe we need to not give up those tactics but rather switch them to a more appropriate threat in the 2020s.

Also, I figure it might be time for a Boogaloo catch all thread.

(boldface mine)

Do you mean drone strikes?

Personally, I consider those to be mechanized death squads, and one of the greatest crimes we've inflicted on the world in the last thirty years or so. I really hope that's not what you're arguing for.

Death squads are probably the central hallmark of evil governments.

edit to add: from my perspective, that idea would ruin America as a concept much more thoroughly than any riot ever could. "We had to destroy the country in order to save it" is not an especially compelling argument.

Malor wrote:
jdzappa wrote:

There’s a thought experiment going on over at Quora about whether the US should adopt war on terror tactics against the right wing, up to and including striking Proud Boy weddings and “madrasas” like Covington Catholic. I think it’s a rather scary idea at this point but if we’re looking at pure Machivellianism, heavy handedness has more or less worked. Maybe we need to not give up those tactics but rather switch them to a more appropriate threat in the 2020s.

Also, I figure it might be time for a Boogaloo catch all thread.

(boldface mine)

Do you mean drone strikes?

Personally, I consider those to be mechanized death squads, and one of the greatest crimes we've inflicted on the world in the last thirty years or so. I really hope that's not what you're arguing for.

Death squads are probably the central hallmark of evil governments.

edit to add: from my perspective, that idea would ruin America as a concept much more thoroughly than any riot ever could. "We had to destroy the country in order to save it" is not an especially compelling argument.

Except we've been doing that to black and left wing Americans for the better part of all of America's existence, so why is it qualitatively different when right wing, white Americans are on the receiving end?

Tanglebones wrote:
Malor wrote:
jdzappa wrote:

There’s a thought experiment going on over at Quora about whether the US should adopt war on terror tactics against the right wing, up to and including striking Proud Boy weddings and “madrasas” like Covington Catholic. I think it’s a rather scary idea at this point but if we’re looking at pure Machivellianism, heavy handedness has more or less worked. Maybe we need to not give up those tactics but rather switch them to a more appropriate threat in the 2020s.

Also, I figure it might be time for a Boogaloo catch all thread.

(boldface mine)

Do you mean drone strikes?

Personally, I consider those to be mechanized death squads, and one of the greatest crimes we've inflicted on the world in the last thirty years or so. I really hope that's not what you're arguing for.

Death squads are probably the central hallmark of evil governments.

edit to add: from my perspective, that idea would ruin America as a concept much more thoroughly than any riot ever could. "We had to destroy the country in order to save it" is not an especially compelling argument.

Except we've been doing that to black and left wing Americans for the better part of all of America's existence, so why is it qualitatively different when right wing, white Americans are on the receiving end?

Cause it's always wrong? Also it will be more abused when the fascists regain control of the government.

Tanglebones wrote:
Malor wrote:
jdzappa wrote:

There’s a thought experiment going on over at Quora about whether the US should adopt war on terror tactics against the right wing, up to and including striking Proud Boy weddings and “madrasas” like Covington Catholic. I think it’s a rather scary idea at this point but if we’re looking at pure Machivellianism, heavy handedness has more or less worked. Maybe we need to not give up those tactics but rather switch them to a more appropriate threat in the 2020s.

Also, I figure it might be time for a Boogaloo catch all thread.

(boldface mine)

Do you mean drone strikes?

Personally, I consider those to be mechanized death squads, and one of the greatest crimes we've inflicted on the world in the last thirty years or so. I really hope that's not what you're arguing for.

Death squads are probably the central hallmark of evil governments.

edit to add: from my perspective, that idea would ruin America as a concept much more thoroughly than any riot ever could. "We had to destroy the country in order to save it" is not an especially compelling argument.

Except we've been doing that to black and left wing Americans for the better part of all of America's existence, so why is it qualitatively different when right wing, white Americans are on the receiving end?

I'm not advocating that short of an out-of-control insurrection. At this point we know who most of these folks are and can snap them up at any time. I'm just saying that maybe my privilege blinds me to the fact that drastic measures are required.

I will say that upon further reading, it's obvious that the talk of bombing whole conservative communities and/or schools is blatant trolling. So if we were to talk ethics, I would say focus on the need for surgical strikes.

Tanglebones wrote:

Except we've been doing that to black and left wing Americans for the better part of all of America's existence, so why is it qualitatively different when right wing, white Americans are on the receiving end?

So the solution is just to admit the evil and lean into it?

Malor wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:

Except we've been doing that to black and left wing Americans for the better part of all of America's existence, so why is it qualitatively different when right wing, white Americans are on the receiving end?

So the solution is just to admit the evil and lean into it?

Maybe in the same way there's micro and macro economics, there's micro and macro morality. I don't think it's ever morally wrong to kill someone in self defense. Full stop. And if you need to kill thousands to save millions, then there's a philosophical argument that's the right decision.

But I'm only proposing this as a last ditch, worst case scenario against a clear enemy that we could surgically strike. I'm not talking about attacking uninvolved countries or carpet bombing.

EDIT: probably time to start a Civil War/Insurrection thread unless the mods tell me not to.

I am not a mod but can we please just not?