Good Morning, All!
1 Derangement test! As I write this, Washington, D.C. is on high anxiety alert over whether there will be a government shutdown due to Senate Democrats staging a tantrum over DACA. Previous shutdowns, stupid all, and all ultimately a disaster for the party that triggered them, the Republicans, at least involved a dispute over the budget, which we call a “nexus.” In this one, however, the triggering party is the Democrats, who are grandstanding to their increasingly radical base, declaring the interests of about 800,000 illegal immigrants as a higher priority than the interests of the law-abiding citizens of this country who are not obsessed with “Think of the children!” and the imaginary right of foreigners to cross into the country illegally and stay here as long as they don’t rape someone and blow their “good illegal immigrant” status.
Essentially the Democratic leadership has decided to test the question of how many Americans have had their brains and values scrambled by the emotion-based pro-illegal immigration argument battered into their heads by the progressive/maintsteam news media coalition. Oh…there’s also their collateral justification of “We can’t make a deal with the President because he used a bad word in a private meeting, or so some say.”
Since both Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer have their unequivocal condemnation of the very same tactic they are now engaging in on videotape, they must really be convinced that social justice warrior cant now infests the population. Well, maybe they are right. Maybe they aren’t as incompetent as I think they are, and their flip-flop won’t strike anyone else as cynical and proof of an integrity deficit.
If a party is successful, even once, using this extortion tactic to pass legislation, then the legislative process will have officially collapsed. Democrats—this shut-down is a unilateral offense, not another “everyone is to blame” fiasco—signaled their emergence as a protest organization rather than a responsible party in 2016 when they held a sit-down strike in the House to try to force the unconstitutional measure of banning gun ownership for citizens placed without due process on FBI no-fly lists. If Republicans allow such a tactic to succeed now, however, they will share the Ethics Dunce honors.
And, of course, will use the tactic themselves when the time is ripe.
Let’s see if sufficient numbers of Democrats have their brain cells and values in sufficient good health to tell their representative that those DACA kids have their sentimental support, but not THAT much support, you idiots, don’t be ridiculous!
It should be interesting.
2. Reality test! It really does appear that California has the worst poverty rate in the country. I assumed that story this week was right-wing media spin, but then left-wing media fact-checker Politifact pronounced it true.
Really? Poorer than Mississippi? Poorer than Maine, or Arkansas, or Maine, or D.C, none of whom have a fraction of California’s advantages and resources?
Really.
An Ethics Alarms maxim is that allegedly ethical values have to work, as in making society healthier more prosperous, more free, happier and more productive. If they don’t accomplish those goals,no matter how good they sound or appear on paper, they aren’t ethical after all. California is the laboratory for all the progressive principles that Democrats are trying to have adopted by the whole country. Legalized drugs. Open borders. No deportations. Entitlements galore. Rampant political correctness. Leftist schools. Restrictions on free speech. Green regulations. Anti-climate change measures. High minimum wages. California has developed a parallel, substantially counter-American culture, culminating in a landslide preference for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election that all by itself made her the popular vote winner.
And it doesn’t work. The Golden State, with its coastline and beaches and dominant industries in entertainment and high tech, its gleaming, iconic cities and its diverse national resources, and, of course, its one party government, is failing. Doesn’t this at least demand serious critical analysis, or a cogent explanation from the state’s politicians and activists?
2. Integrity test! Woody Allen’s adopted daughter, Dylan Farrow, emboldened by #MeToo and the Harvey Weinstein Ethics Train Wreck, did a full interview on CBS accusing her father, once again, of sexually molesting her. Asked by Gayle King about Allen’s defense that Dylan was coached by her mother, Mia Farrow, because Farrow was furious over Allen’s sexual affair with another adopted daughter, Soon Yi, whom Allen eventually married, Dylan said.
FARROW: And what I don’t understand is how is this crazy story of me being brainwashed and coached more believable than what I’m saying about being sexually assaulted by my father?
KING: Because your mother was very angry, so that she would try to coach you, and try to get you to turn against your father.
FARROW: Except every step of the way, my mother has only encouraged me to tell the truth. She has never coached me.
While so many power figures in so many industries have found themselves shunned and shamed over the last few months after one or more women have accused them of sexual misconduct, how has Woody Allen escaped the same fate? Yes, it’s another “he said/ she said,” and the same due process and fairness arguments apply to Allen as to the other accused, not that the requirements of due process have stopped those men from being destroyed. On the other hand, this situation is materially different in ways that support the accuser. Farrow wasn’t an ambitious actress who stayed quiet about a sexual assault in order to advance her career, nor did she accept hush money. She was not a spurned fan or date who decided long after the fact to level a public attack on a celebrity. She was a child, he was her father, and she did try to blow the whistle in a timely fashion, only to be disbelieved.
Moreover, what she accuses Allen of doing is worse conduct than what was deemed sufficiently unacceptable to bring other Hollywood figures down. Her story also seems unusually believable, given Allen’s documented, creepy obsession with under-age sex objects in his films (Like “Manhattan”) , and the fact that he had an admitted sexual affair with his older adopted daughter, now wife. (Ick.) What Dylan Farrow claims is at least as credible as the accusations against Roy Moore, and, again, far worse, but that didn’t stop the Woody-worshiping Hollywood elite from pronouncing Republicans monsters for supporting Moore. But that Woody: what a genius!
When I wrote about this topic in 2014, I noted,
A culture is defined by what it tolerates and will not tolerate. Honoring a child molester and incestuous rapist says “This culture tolerates such conduct, and we won’t think less of anyone who indulges in it if they are talented, successful and lucrative.” In fact, I think this is a fairly accurate description of how Hollywood (and the music industry too, which has also lionized a lot of pedophile stars) thinks and feels. The community that honors child molesters in that community has made a statement that it doesn’t think child molesting is all that bad…
Over the past two weeks, several celebrities have declared their regret for working with Allen, including actresses Jessica Chastain, Natalie Portman, and Reese Witherspoon. (Nothing yet from Meryl Streep..). Perhaps the culture is really changing, and all of the grandstanding and finger-pointing hasn’t been a cynical exercise in selective virtue-signalling by a lot of women who would have been perfectly happy to keep getting plum roles from the likes of Harvey and Woody if they thought they could get away with it.
I’ll be convinced when I hear that Woody is spending his days playing charades with Weinstein, Kevin Spacey, Louie C.K. and Matt Lauer.
Ethics Alarms 
Interesting – what’s your opinion on the dividing line between “coaching” and “encouragement every step of the way”?
You don’t see the distinction? A ethical lawyer encourages a client to go forward with a matter, offering assistance and encouragement. Coaching, however, is suborning perjury, unethical, and grounds for disbarment. Same here.
Soon Yi was never Allen’s adopted daughter. She is the adopted daughter of his ex-girlfriend and her ex-husband.
If we are not a nation of laws, but emotions, we are not a genuine country.
DACA was a cruel hoax of a promise intentionally perpetrated on vulnerable people for, ultimately, political purposes (votes in the future). This policy depends on principled, opposed, but nice people, rolling over on emotion. It is the worst kind of cruelty, disrespect, and offense to all involved.
Additionally, if we have no national border worth controlling, we must also have one not worth defending. Again, we are not a genuine country.
Aside from DACA and other immigration issues, we have seen Justices of the US Supreme Court (Anthony Kennedy) introduce utilizing non-US laws to inform US Constitutional cases. I’m not a lawyer, but it seems this too is cruelty to citizens acting on good faith based on US laws and, potentially, finding themselves not being judged by them. Yet again, not a genuinely independent country.
What a mess.
That is a lot to unpack. Well done cramming a cornucopia of heavy topics into a concise easily readable piece.
”That is a lot to unpack.”
Speaking of unpacking, a lot MORE well-heeled CA émigrés will be unpacking in the Lone Star State in the very near future.
Ugh.
C’mon you don’t expect them to come to America’s Dairyland, or the surrounding area, do you?
A certain CA resident, (the talented Melinda Byerley) whose credentials (founder of a Silicon Valley-based tech startup that does ‘free-range, artisanal, organic, customized marketing’ with ‘Birkenstocks-on-the-ground expertise’) are the stuff of Lefty Royalty, wouldn’t.
She: (Middle America needs to realize) “no educated person wants to live in a SHIT-HOLE with stupid people. Those towns have nothing going for them […] no infrastructure, just a few bars and a terrible school system.” (bolds/caps mine)
Shithole? But, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, hasn’t that entered the lexicon of raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaacism?
Anywho, to her I say: “Piss up a Rope, you arrogant Lefty Witch!”
Description of Ms. Byerley’s company: ‘Two days earlier Melinda Byerley, founder of a Silicon Valley-based tech startup that does “free-range, artisanal, organic, customized marketing” with “Birkenstocks-on-the-ground expertise,” tweeted her expert opinion on Middle America’s jobs-`attraction problem.’
Is this from The Onion?
”Is this from The Onion?”
The Onion is a fine Wesconsin incubated concern & now located in the same town as the source I used (NYPost) but I don’t think even they’d go there.
Seriously, that’s like holding yer hands back and begging to get pasted, am I right?
And that’s the kind of…um…content I post in town when I’m trying to poke fun at Madison Lefties and their legendary inclination to take themselves far too seriously.
While this may come as a surprise, apparently some readers aren’t particularly fond of my observations. They let me know, in no uncertain terms, where to go, how to get there, and what to do upon my arrival…with anatomical specificity.
What kidders!
Anywho, I’ve used additional intentionally demeaning, I mean all-in-good-fun descriptive adjectives, like fair trade/locally derived/humanely dispatched/sustainable/Mother Gaia friendly/diversity promoting.
Then there’s the catch-all-end-all, the kill shot, the coup de grâce, & the pierced-nipple-stimulating: GREEN!
But I’m just trying to get a laugh (or a crusty harrumph), she’s dead serious!
Lack of sense of humor seems to be endemic on the Left.
OB;
A sense of humor ought be “organized ahead of experience” (H/T Dr. Jonathan Haidt)
”Ugh.”
Don’t shoot the messenger, but the Great Migration may be picking up steam.
“California Democrats want businesses to give half their tax-cut savings to state”
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/California-democrats-want-businesses-to-give-half-12508742.php
Leave your looney politics in CA, and welcome to Texas. We institutionalize those who do not leave the looney policies behind: we send them to Austin.
I wonder whether Woody Allen is getting a pass because he’s essentially washed up? As much as I really like it, I think his shtick grew old and stale decades ago. My personal favorite line of his is “I want to become immortal by living forever.” That’s his whole oeuvre in a few words. But decades ago he was great.
Good thing this blog is typed rather than hadwritten
Have always been enthralled by Woody Allen’s masterpiece ‘Manhattan’. The script, acting and music as emotional themes are all brilliant. Though it does presage his creepy and all too real interest in too young women.
No one else was better at doing Woody Allen movies.
Re: No. 1:
Jack wrote,
“In this one, however, the triggering party is the Democrats, who are grandstanding to their increasingly radical base, declaring the interests of about 800,000 illegal immigrants as a higher priority than the interests of the law-abiding citizens of this country . . .”
That has me scratching my head. CNN, MSNBC, and the other alphabets seem to be laying this shutdown at the feet of congressional Republicans for not striking deal with Pelosi, Schumer, and crew over DACA recipients. The news media outlets, the internet, Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc., have been running non-stop tear-jerking stories about ICE officials tearing loving families apart because one or more of the parents is being deported. Where were they when this was happening during the past two administrations? Enforcing immigration laws is nothing new to this county, or any other country, for that matter. Ask Canada or Mexico how they deal with immigrants who don’t have legal status in their respective countries.
Yet, I don’t understand why the Democrats would invest so much political capital. DACA is an executive order (which most people agree is questionably constitutional) rescinded by the president (which is his prerogative) with instructions to Congress to present him with a bill that incorporates DACA and reforms immigration. The Administration stated that immigration reform must include border security, ending chain immigration, and other measures. Yet, Democrats howled like Donald Sutherland in “The Body Snatchers” that the such demands are inherently racist and discriminatory. Then, Pres. Trump had the unmitigated audacity to declare that Haiti, some African countries, and El Salvador are shitholes, causing them to run screaming into the night. (Ed. Note: They might not have heard the recent reports coming from El Salvador that returning a bunch of El Salvadoran citizens to that paradise will likely increase the already-awful gang violence problem there. But, wait, . . . I thought such immigrants were scholars, inventors, people of letters, model citizens, and downright honorable people who make our country better now that they are here.) I suspect they were looking for a reason to back out of any deals and Pres. Trump’s purported comments gave them a perfect opportunity to do so, so that they could grandstand for their future constituents.
jvb
America is… I think… The only country on Earth where Congress passing a budget doesn’t inherently pass the measures with which to fund that budget. It’s so stupid… If someone can think of a good rationale for that, I’d be willing to listen, but in the meantime, these quarterly crises are exhausting.
It’s a essentially a non event when it happens, HT.
http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/19/politics/congress-shutdown-government-funding-who-is-affected/index.html
Who’s effected? Virtually no one. Weird Kabuki theater. Total non-event.
2- Reality Test.
You see problem, I see possibility.
Once the Bull(sh)it Train is completed, all the multi-millionaires chased out by confiscatory taxation, ~ 2,000,000 MORE asylum seekers take up residence, ALL post HS education is gratis, and the secession is complete, the Land of Fruits-n-Nuts will have turned the corner.
“Doesn’t this at least demand serious critical analysis, or a cogent explanation from the state’s politicians and activists?”
You talking accountability? What kinda crazy secular blasphemy is that???
Didn’t Californians recently argue that they had a huge economy and could manage on their own as the C.S.S.R should they secede from a country that elected Donald Trump?
Yes—the same Californians who got the state into this mess.
Hell, they just wish they wuz Texas… who could survive (and once did) 😉
Where is Cali gonna get their oil or their power? Seems they have chased energy production out of the state. And Water? Them boys is down stream without no bucket, since they stopped making reservoirs.
Something tells me you always play the Legion ending in New Vegas.
heh… too old for PS4 (never got the hang of the damned controllers) and who has time to play on the PC? I got kids to raise… who play New Vegas such that I got the reference.
+2 for quasi obscure cultural reference, though 🙂
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/more-blame-republicans-than-democrats-for-potential-government-shutdown-post-abc-poll-finds/2018/01/19/c4fce2f6-fd32-11e7-ad8c-ecbb62019393_story.html
48% of Americans blame Republicans for the potential shutdown, vs 28% who blame Democrats. Among the news media, of course, it’s about 97%-3%. People are being told 24/7 that Trump’s racism is preventing a deal, and they’re believing it.
This is why it is accurate to characterize the Leftwing Media as an Enemy of the People.
We are intentionally misinformed, outright lied to, and we are being led to draw conclusions and convictions that will lead to push for policy changes that would probably NOT occur if the people were shown the truth, but policy changes that the Leftwing Media wants to occur.
This isn’t journalism, it is propaganda.
Enemy
of
the
People
I wouldn’t put much stock in that poll. Most people haven’t been paying attention.
Most people should not pay attention: it has no impact on their lives.
The real loser is Military families, many of whom live paycheck to paycheck. I understand this is one shortfall during a shutdown.
As i thought: if you ask the question a different way, you get this: http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/19/politics/cnn-poll-shutdown-trump-immigration-daca/
DACA I certainly have mixed emotions since the vast number have no nefarious track record. A game of political football does everyone a disservice.
The in-your-face attitude of those the media have portrayed have certainly soured many against them.
How would such circumstances be handled in Mexico? Jail/deportation/ probable abuse. Incredible how we are held to such a standard the rest of the world is not.
Should Americans not hold their country to a higher standard than we hold other countries?
*our
Are open borders a core American value?
“Should Americans not hold their country to a higher standard than we hold other countries?”
Not when it places us at a disadvantage, or when it causes real problems for our citizens. And note that I hold the damn GOP business interests just as culpable as the bleeding heart ‘lets make new voters’ progressives.
Start jailing the business owners who hire illegals, and this shit STOPS! And many would then go home by themselves, just like they did in 2008 and 2009.
I’ve got $5 that says California will attempt to solve their poverty problem by growing government and raising taxes! Anyone take that bet? Anyone? Bueller?
You assert Jack “And it doesn’t work. The Golden State, with its coastline and beaches and dominant industries in entertainment and high tech, its gleaming, iconic cities and its diverse national resources, and, of course, its one party government, is failing.”
Blatant cherry picking and confirmation bias. And even good support for your ‘bias makes you stupid’ line. The Politifact note you linked to provides quite sufficient explanation.
No, PolitiFact, as always, is spinning. There is no justification for California to have so much poverty. My statement isn’t cherry picking: it’s a rich state. If a rich state with such resources has more poverty than less week-off states, then the fault is management—that is, government.
Even the stats that show California with the 17th worst rates show the state’s policy approach doesn’t work. No state has California’s advantages. Look at the states below California, If you know history and the states, they are obvious, almost exactly the states I’d expect, and we could easily explain the factors that have kept these states historically poor.
California
Oklahoma
Florida
Texas
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Arizona
West Virginia
Georgia
District of Columbia
Arkansas
Kentucky
Alabama
Louisiana
New Mexico
Mississipi
Jack, you say : “There is no justification for California to have so much poverty. ………. If a rich state with resources has more poverty than less well-off states, then the fault is management—that is, government.”
Some would assert this replacing ‘California’ with ‘the US’ and that would be similarly controversial. On this measure plenty of countries have less poverty than the US, but we (and certainly you) don’t accept this as showing the US government to be at fault.
Our definitions of poverty differ, Andrew. The ‘poor’ in the USA are very well off in most of the world.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/06/01/astonishing-numbers-americas-poor-still-live-better-than-most-of-the-rest-of-humanity/#1e8b963054ef
Yes of course. I only make the point in connection with Jack’s assertion (1) that California has a lot of poverty, and (2) that this reflects badly on California’s government. Re (1) this depends on how you measure ‘poverty’ and (2) this conclusion depends on your political view. It is just as easy to argue that California is very prosperous, and that this reflects well on its government. In my view neither argument in isolation should carry much weight, other than to be suggestive of the proponent’s bias.
California has a lot of rich people. It has tremendous debt. It has homeless people and panhandlers choking the major cities. You almost have to be rich to live there. By almost every standards, the State has declined in prosperity and economic vitality. From the excellent citylab site:
Between 2003 and 2007, California state and local government spending grew 31 percent, even as the state’s population grew just 5 percent. The overall tax burden as a percentage of state income, once middling among the states, has risen to the sixth-highest in the nation, says the Tax Foundation. Since 1990, according to an analysis by California Lutheran University, the state’s share of overall U.S. employment has dropped a remarkable 10 percent. When the state economy has done well, it has usually been the result of asset inflation—first during the dot-com bubble of the late 1990s, and then during the housing boom, which was responsible for nearly half of all jobs created earlier in this decade.
Since the financial crisis began in 2008, the state has fared even worse. Last year, California personal income fell 2.5 percent, the first such fall since the Great Depression and well below the 1.7 percent drop for the rest of the country. Unemployment may be starting to ebb nationwide, but not in California, where it approaches 13 percent, among the highest rates in the nation. Between 2008 and 2009, not one of California’s biggest cities outperformed such traditional laggards as New York, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia in employment growth, and four cities—Los Angeles, Oakland, Santa Ana, and San Bernardino–Riverside—sit very close to the bottom among the nation’s largest metro areas, just slightly ahead of basket cases like Detroit. Long a global exemplar, California is in danger of becoming, as historian Kevin Starr has warned, a “failed state.”
What went so wrong? The answer lies in a change in the nature of progressive politics in California. During the second half of the twentieth century, the state shifted from an older progressivism, which emphasized infrastructure investment and business growth, to a newer version, which views the private sector much the way the Huns viewed a city—as something to be sacked and plundered. The result is two separate California realities: a lucrative one for the wealthy and for government workers, who are largely insulated from economic decline; and a grim one for the private-sector middle and working classes, who are fleeing the state.
But keep spinning, Andrew. Clearly California’s doing GREAT…
Spin THIS, for example.
No, no! I’m not playing that game. For these purposes I don’t have a view on whether California is well or badly run and I’m certainly not getting drawn into the arguments for and against ‘fast rail’. I am simply suggesting, in contrast, that you do have a firm view ( that California is badly run) and you have seized on a particular measurement (this cost of living adjusted poverty measure) to support your view. This is textbook ‘confirmation bias’ and of course we all do it.
I agree, there are plenty of things to worry about in California. I lean with you for instance in thinking that progressive ideas promoted from academia may have been pushed too far. There look to be big challenges concerning decaying public infrastructure. Powerful public service unions can run amok. And what about water?
But if we were playing that ‘game’, and I was for ‘California is wonderful’ and you were for ‘No, it’s a disaster’ then I would only need 5 minutes with Google to prepare my opening. See https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/economy being the latest 2017 McKinsey study of ‘best US States’ as published in US News. California comes third overall behind Colorado and North Dakota, and quite surprisingly first for ‘business environment’.
But please, I emphasise, I don’t draw any conclusions from this. I remain completely agnostic as to how California is progressing. And I don’t work for McKinsey.
I don’t know of what game you speak. My bias is that I assume California should be the #1, most prosperous state in the nation, as it has the biggest economy, the most potential, and the most assets. Even with its crazy government and whacked out policies, I was surprised that it’s as bad off as it is. When places with great resources under-perform, then that means mismanagement, as in Venezuela, or Nigeria.
“When places with great resources under-perform, then that means mismanagement, as in Venezuela, or Nigeria.”
Might the Hillary Clinton 2008 & 2016 POTUS campaigns fit in there somewheres?
Damn, son.
Regarding the poverty rates:
This is a link to the source material:
Click to access p60-258.pdf
for those wondering: the top of the SPM:
1. California at 20%
2. D.C at 22%
3. Florida at 19% (Yay home state pride!)
2- Reality test:
Las vacas son felices. ¿Por qué la gente no está feliz?
Check out the delusional answers here.
https://www.quora.com/What-would-the-US-look-like-if-liberals-were-allowed-to-enact-all-of-their-policies-without-opposition-Are-there-any-existing-countries-like-that-to-help-us-judge-its-term-impact
This is a dead link… could you repost?
The question must have been deleted.
I recommend checking out Quora.com.
” If a party is successful, even once, using this extortion tactic to pass legislation, then the legislative process will have officially collapsed”
The question these days is, does it work? See the Gorsuch situation.
The process collapsed and time ago, what you see is not even the first fruits of that poisonous tree.
As I understand it – and I’m open to correction here – a compromise was reached back in the 90s regarding minors brought illegally into the country by their parents.
In exchange for never being able to become citizens under any circumstances whatsoer, never qualifying for a visa if they ever left the country, and reporting annually to immigration with proof of perfect conduct, they would be permitted to remain, until Congress passed new laws that would provide some path to citizenship that wouldn’t cause unconscionable treatment, yet still enforce the US’s right to say who’s allowed in. If such a thing could exist.
Obama changed that in a cynical attempt to court hardliners, then reversed course when they remained obdurate, now the Trump regime has gone full bore, being deliberately sadistic in its enforcement of the law. Obama at least mostly went after hard targets, actual criminal gangs, but Trump’s regime finds it easier to make examples of soft targets to encourage others to self deport. The difference between the two is the degree of sadism,with the previous regime not exactly covering itself with glory either.
Plus there’s much ignorance about the situation, many saying they deserve deportation because they’ve taken no action to get a green card or citizenship in the decades since arrival – when by the time they were of age to do so, that path was denied then, unlike other illegal stayers.
Maybe a compromise would be to treat them no worse than others illegally remaining in the country, visa overstayers and the like?
1. In law, promises to make promises are not enforceable. Promises not to enforce the law aren’t ethical. I’m not aware of that “compromise,” but its not government. Have a law and a transparent policy, or you have nothing. In truth, a devil’s bargain was made between GOP business interests, who wanted cheap labor, and Democrats, who wanted minority votes, long before the 90s to ignore illegal immigrants. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
2. Garland’s rejection was unethical and despicable, but it wasn’t extortion, nor was it a breach of process. It was a breach of “norms”…and yes, I agree that the it is a dangerous one, though really a sub-breach of the Democrats rejecting Bork because of his politics rather than his abilities. That was terrible, and led to Garland, Thomas, all of it,
And which senator led the campaign against Bork?
TED!!!!!
The Lion of the Senate™®
“,i>the Trump regime has gone full bore, being deliberately sadistic in its enforcement of the law.
This is otherwise known as ‘enforcing the laws on the books’ and if progressive don’t like that, change the laws.
Is it ‘sadistic’ to enforce statutory rape laws against teachers? How about female teachers?
Is it sadistic to send a robber to jail, if he has kids he was supporting?
Is it sadistic to jail the Mendez brothers, who were self described (and self created) ‘orphans?’
😉
By illegally I mean by civil not criminal law.
2- Reality Test
Frank Lloyd Wright once said: “Tip the world over on its side and everything loose will land in Los Angeles,”
Were he alive today, he might amend that location to be 384 miles (698 KM) NNW…Sacramento.
In this one, however, the triggering party is the Democrats, who are grandstanding to their increasingly radical base, declaring the interests of about 800,000 illegal immigrants as a higher priority than the interests of the law-abiding citizens of this country who are not obsessed with “Think of the children!” and the imaginary right of foreigners to cross into the country illegally and stay here as long as they don’t rape someone and blow their “good illegal immigrant” status.
If a party is successful, even once, using this extortion tactic to pass legislation, then the legislative process will have officially collapsed. Democrats—this shut-down is a unilateral offense, not another “everyone is to blame” fiasco—
Absurd. Republicans control every branch of government, and could not even reach an agreement within their own party.
You embarrass yourself by parroting this dishonest talking point, Chris. And it is dishonest, as well as civically ignorant.The system is not supposed to require one party to govern without bi-partisan cooperation.
It’s dishonest that Republicans control every branch of government? No, that’s a fact. The system should not require one party to govern without bipartisan cooperation, but neither party is ethically required to vote for policies it doesn’t agree with, and if a good portion within one party can’t even be convinced that policies pushed by their party are for the good of the country, then how can the other party be blamed?
None of which is relevant to the Government shutdown.
….Of course it is. Multiple Republicans didn’t vote for the bill that would have avoided the shutdown.
Keep spinning, Chris. Always the GOP’s fault, even when Obama did the same thing (and deliberately made it worse to boot)
Note: I think it IS the GOP’s fault, for playing the game by progressive rules. The Democrats had no problem rewriting the rules when it suited them, and now is the time to pass a budget.
But we will not see that from the limp wristed (I almost named another part of the male anatomy, but there are females in Congress) RINO GOPe.
“Multiple Republicans didn’t vote for the bill that would have avoided the shutdown.”
…and you know damn well that they never had the votes in the Senate, needing 60 in this case. Or are YOU saying we should change the rules (again) to go around the Democrat obstructionists?
In fairness, Chris was relying too heavily on the twitter feeds and talking points memos that Leftist acolytes share, or relying to heavily on the media outlets that rely on them. He essentially admitted that he was in gross error on this topic in another thread.
I can’t blame him for being completely misinformed on this. As I follow several reliably leftist information distributors, all I’ve seen are outright lies regarding the situation in the Senate and how the Senate operates. It’s easy for someone to be misled in that environment of information dissemination.
You should read Facebook, which is brimming over with the jaw-droppingly stupid “The GOP control both houses and couldn’t keep the government open!” crap.
What is exceptionally terrifying about it, is that the premise is that parties in power shouldn’t seek accord across the aisle, but that, if they CAN, they SHOULD ram-rod their own agenda down the throats of the opposing party.
What a terrifying vision of politics.
And the knee jerk assumption of the Left.
I think this is projection.
Are you saying the Right doesn’t ram-rod their agenda down the throats of the opposing party when they can? Did you sleep through the debate over the Republican tax bill?
I’m not sure that has anything to do with the knee jerk *assumption* that that is the *way* politics *ought* to operate.
Abstract your meta by one level for this, Chris.
Your “projection” comment suggested to me that the only reason Democrats would assume Republicans would force their agenda through without seeking accord across the aisle is because that’s what they would do. But Republicans do that too. I don’t know if they assume that’s the way politics ought to be, because I’m not a mind-reader, but it is exactly how both parties have behaved since at least the mid-90s.
“…I don’t know if they assume that’s the way politics ought to be, because I’m not a mind-reader, but it is exactly how both parties have behaved since at least the mid-90s.”
Chris is perfectly correct. (They are ALL crooks, as my pappy says) About the time the GOP started to forgo conservatism in favor of power for its own sake. (CALEA? Patriot Act, anyone?)
And how it got that way aside, I don’t see this getting better. If this is the game, then the alt-right is watching and learning. Trump is the reaction to this system, and he has no principles upon which to take the high road, which has degenerated to a washed out goat track since the time of Reagan.
I’m not so confident. This actually seems like something “testable”. But first, let’s discuss what such a test should look like.
Should we consider ONLY years in which one party theoretically controls all three law-passing components of the government? Or should we consider ALL the years in question, even the ones with split governments?
What does Ram-Rodding look like? Can that appearance be judged purely on vote counts or would we also need to review the pre-vote rhetoric by both parties?
If it can be based on a review of the vote break downs for particular legislation, then what markers are we looking for? Does a perfect party line vote imply ram-rodding? Does the victorious party, voting party line, with a few cross-overs from the opposing party constitute ram-rodding? Or would it be ram-rodding if the victorious party wins with NO support of the opposing party, even if a few of its own crossed over to vote with the losers?
What legislation should be part of this survey? Major legislation? Or all legislation?
Or, would legislation that fits the classification of “ram-rodded” simply display the same visible characteristics as legislation that is not, and therefore cannot really be tested outside of “gut notions”?
I don’t pay attention to facebook at all except for 2 reasons:
1) one of the guys I’m friends with aggregates hilarious images and memes.
2) to see if anyone has posted those neat DIY videos of artisan and master craftsman work.
You could do an entire Ethics Alarms post on this guy.
http://www.facebook.com/chris.kelly.7315720