[evilgenius]

You gotta wonder if the impasse in Washington is the result of two parties that can't work with each other, or two parties that can't be seen working with each other? The difference is subtle.

[Newfie]

It is 2 parties in existential war with one another.

Like 2 ant hills warring for the same turf. The other must DIE.

[JuanP]

So, a Democratic President is just a figurehead.

All presidents are figureheads. I, personally, refer to them as puppets or marionettes.

[Newfie]

People need to review basic civics.
Three branches
Congress - Legislative - makes laws
President - Executive - enforces laws
Supreme Court - interprets the Constitution

What has been evolving is that Congress becomes increasingly dysfunctional due to stupid politics. The President then makes mandates to move stuff forward. SCOTUS rulings are pushing back.

For example (provided I have it right) they did not say the EPA can not control lower plants, but that Congress has not given them that authority and the President lacks the power to.

I been extremely busy and have not followed this closely. My apologies if I made a mistake.

[C8]

You gotta wonder if the impasse in Washington is the result of two parties that can't work with each other, or two parties that can't be seen working with each other? The difference is subtle.

Probably both. There are issues they agree on and disagree on. But they can't risk their constituents seeing them work with "the enemy" so the charade of principled opposition is staged with public votes that were decided in back room deals- "I want this to pass but I have to vote against it in public for my voters to see- do we have enough votes to pass anyway so I can safely vote against it?"

[vtsnowedin]

My oldest daughter is home for the Holiday and when the supreme court is mentioned she goes off like a Grizzly bear Momma with a crying cub. I have let the subject drop for the sake of family tranquility but the GOP might want to watch out for the women of her generation as to say they are now motivated is the understatement of the year.

[Newfie]

I think the term is “weaponized.”

I am seeing it as well.

[Nefarious]

It is 2 parties in existential war with one another.

Like 2 ant hills warring for the same turf. The other must DIE.

Sir John Glubb
Fate of Empires

Another remarkable and unexpected symptom of national decline is the intensi- fication of internal political hatreds. One would have expected that, when the survival of the nation became precarious, political factions would drop their rivalry and stand shoulder-to-shoulder to save their country.

In the fourteenth century, the weakening empire of Byzantium was threatened, and indeed dominated, by the Ottoman Turks. The situation was so serious that one would have expected every subject of Byzantium to abandon his personal interests and to stand with his compatriots in a last desperate attempt to save the country. The reverse occurred. The Byzantines spent the last fifty years of their history in fighting one another in repeated civil wars, until the Ottomans moved in and administered the coup de grâce.

Britain has been governed by an elected parliament for many centuries. In former years, however, the rival parties observed many unwritten laws. Neither party wished to eliminate the other. All the members referred to one another as honourable gentlemen. But such courtesies have now lapsed. Booing, shouting and loud noises have undermined the dignity of the House, and angry exchanges are more frequent. We are fortunate if these rivalries are fought out in Parliament, but sometimes such hatreds are carried into the streets, or into industry in the form of strikes, demonstrations, boycotts and similar activities. True to the normal course followed by nations in decline, internal differences are not reconciled in an attempt to save the nation. On the contrary, internal rivalries become more acute, as the nation becomes weaker.

[Newfie]

The fall of Byzantium was much on my mind when I wrote that.

But there are many other examples above that, throughout history.

Pettiness.

[C8]

The fall of Byzantium was much on my mind when I wrote that.

But there are many other examples above that, throughout history.

Pettiness.

I read that Byzantium was very invested into sports to divert anger- it almost fell apart due to one team almost winning a match. Theodora solved the crisis by creating a new team.

[Newfie]

Yeah, I think 4 teams (red, blue, white, green or some such). The Emperor got involved and at one point, so I have read, some 4,000 of an opposing color were in the aren, and they Imperial Guards slaughtered them.

But also it went to religion. Leavened vs unleavened bread for the host.

Ad nauseaum.

If you think about it the REAL problem is not abortion but unwanted pregnancies. And both sides should he able to work together to improve that situation.

Now I have said and I believe it is a religious matter and there should he NO legislation.

Baring that, it makes no sense to force a woman to have a baby and then raise it and cherish it. A reluctant Mom is no Mom.

So if the state does stop the abortion then the STATE should assume fiscal responsibility for properly raising the child. Making the reluctant mother do it will only create resentment against the child. Now the state can attach the Mothers wages or estate to recoup the costs, but the baby is the states charge and responsibility.

Only makes sense.

These seem to me to be nonpartisan questions. Why can’t we deal with them?

Because we are not concerned with the children, just the political outcome.

Red or Blue.

[AdamB]

OK for today's bold prediction!!!
Expect all the blue states to remain pro choice and even strengthen their laws to that end and supporting and funding women coming in from pro life states to get around their states rules.

Sounds solid. Too bad the social-economically challenged women in the non-blue states will be forced to carry their rapists babies through gestation because they don't live in solid Bernie supporting states like yours. Never thought of America as two different America's, but I guess that reality is creeping up on us fast.

That leaves just five states, give or take a few, where really restrictive anti abortion laws remain in place past the next two or three election cycles and these states will become unimportant backwaters to American society.

Oh come on VT, 5 states? This isn't calculus VT, this is simple counting them up. Could you even be 21 short? Want to bet the number will be closer to one than the other, and the one it is closer to won't be yours?

Out of curiosity, you might be a hyper reverse partisanship type, but you haven't ever struck me as an enthusiast of depriving other Americans of something they had for generations just out of general malice.

Republicans in red states that try to shovel against this tide will find themselves looking for paying work.

Or will be heavily favored in all elections in the Bible belt (or those 26 states previouosly mentioned) and other conservative areas wher they are doing.... THE WORK OF GOD!!!! I wonder why the religious nutters are generally Republicrats? And no VT, half the states in the union aren't going to become backwaters just because they are fine white, Christian and gun owning folks. Hell, sounds like they might be like Vermont doesn't it?

[evilgenius]

The reality is that democracy has a fatal flaw seldom taught in our schools- it exacerbates internal conflict.

Thats not a fatal flaw.......that is a strength. By having open debate and contention over political issues, democracies allow all sides of every issue to be explored and debated and fought over and then resolved.

It is dictatorships that have an innate fatal flaw. Countries like Russia under the dictator Putin or China under Xi or Germany under the Nazis are totally under the control of their great dictator, and when that dictator goes crazy, or even just makes a bad policy decision, there is no way for the system to correct it. People in Russia who are smart and brave and honest enough to oppose the Ukraine war, for example, are being arrested and harassed and beaten and jailed by Putin's toadies to suppress their views and opinions. The result is a country utterly ruled by the wishes of one lone madman....a country forced to pursue Putin's crazy policies without debate or discussion or dissent until crazy Putin leads Russia to disaster.




Consider crazy Putin's war in Ukraine and its effects on Russia. Already Putin has created an economic schism with Europe and instead turned his country into essentially a colony of China. Russia is now selling its coal, oil and other commodities to China at steep discounts to the actual world price for these items.....thats exactly what a colony does. A colony supplies cheap natural resources to its colonial masters, just as Russia is doing for China.

Cheers!

Exactly right. Democracy does, however, have historical criticism. Historically, democracy was avoided because it was thought it would devolve into mob rule. The checks and balances in the US system were, I think, meant to address that. Mostly, I believe, they came about because of memories of what it meant for Oliver Cromwell to ride so roughshod over English politics. His impact wasn't that much different than the American right is to us today. There can be no doubt the founding fathers didn't accept that criticism. They may have considered the threat to be real, but, nonetheless, went forward. Seems like the cure for such situations, the suppressed voices, wasn't very likely to be heard under the other systems. Yeah, maybe, but only if we accept a role for luck.

[vtsnowedin]

OK for today's bold prediction!!!
Expect all the blue states to remain pro choice and even strengthen their laws to that end and supporting and funding women coming in from pro life states to get around their states rules.

Sounds solid. Too bad the social-economically challenged women in the non-blue states will be forced to carry their rapists babies through gestation because they don't live in solid Bernie supporting states like yours. Never thought of America as two different America's, but I guess that reality is creeping up on us fast.

That leaves just five states, give or take a few, where really restrictive anti abortion laws remain in place past the next two or three election cycles and these states will become unimportant backwaters to American society.

Oh come on VT, 5 states? This isn't calculus VT, this is simple counting them up. Could you even be 21 short? Want to bet the number will be closer to one than the other, and the one it is closer to won't be yours?

Out of curiosity, you might be a hyper reverse partisanship type, but you haven't ever struck me as an enthusiast of depriving other Americans of something they had for generations just out of general malice.

Republicans in red states that try to shovel against this tide will find themselves looking for paying work.

Or will be heavily favored in all elections in the Bible belt (or those 26 states previouosly mentioned) and other conservative areas wher they are doing.... THE WORK OF GOD!!!! I wonder why the religious nutters are generally Republicrats? And no VT, half the states in the union aren't going to become backwaters just because they are fine white, Christian and gun owning folks. Hell, sounds like they might be like Vermont doesn't it?

This thread is about BOLD PREDICTIONS so there is no reason to be precise or timid in my prediction. My prediction is that most of the red states will have more moderate Republicans win in upcoming elections and the far right religious groups will have to give way to leaders that actually represent the majority of public opinion. Of course my guess of five states being held by the far far right is of course just a guess as I have no state by state polling data that breaks down party membership by religion.
Feel free to make your own bold predictions but I think mine is as plausible as any.

[AdamB]

This thread is about BOLD PREDICTIONS so there is no reason to be precise or timid in my prediction.

True. Your prediction is allowed to be heavily influenced by your innate inability to have empathy for the people who's lives may be destroyed by our partisan Supreme Court.

My prediction is that most of the red states will have more moderate Republicans win in upcoming elections and the far right religious groups will have to give way to leaders that actually represent the majority of public opinion. Of course my guess of five states being held by the far far right is of course just a guess as I have no state by state polling data that breaks down party membership by religion.
Feel free to make your own bold predictions but I think mine is as plausible as any.

There are no facts in the future, so nearly any prediction involving it is plausible. I must admit I was more struck by your seemingly non-concern for the millions of women who are going to have the consequences of the Supreme's decision inflicted upon them in real time, and perhaps catastrophically.

And I don't believe in red and blue states any more than I do any categorization of an area or people by some grand simplification as silly as political affiliation. There are folks of both political parties in all states, both have some good, both have some bad, they occasionally have things in common, and sometimes not even among one political affiliation or another. When one group uses power to inflict real life damage and life long consequences on another, knowing full well they are doing it, well, since when is that even American? And who cares if it is a Democan or Republicrat doing it to each other, or the other gang?

[vtsnowedin]

I have a wife and three grown daughters, one of which lives and works in a red state. She being well paid could just fly home to Vermont if needed.
My prediction has nothing to do with my empathy or lack of it for the poor women involved as my feelings will have no impact on the outcome.
About half of the women in America live in Congressional districts that will continue to offer abortion on demand. Many others live just one state away and a doable car ride from a clinic. Many others have currently access to plan "B drugs.
So despite all the outrage and furor there will be very few babies brought to term and delivered by mothers that wished to abort it.

[Newfie]

There is a vocal contingent of women who are pro-choice.
There is also a contingent of women who are anti-abortion.

I believe the abortion issue will be important but not completely decisive.

[AdamB]

I have a wife and three grown daughters, one of which lives and works in a red state. She being well paid could just fly home to Vermont if needed.

Plus, you are in a state that won't be taking any rights away from them, Bernie has their back on your behalf.

My prediction has nothing to do with my empathy or lack of it for the poor women involved as my feelings will have no impact on the outcome.

Of course your feelings on the outcome are meaningless. I was talking about your feelings towards women in general, and whether or not you can equate for an instant the screaming and horror you would be feeling and vocalizing if someone made your guns illegal, but you appear blase on it happening to ANOTHER AMERICAN.....because... A) it isn't you and B) involves primarily women of a certain socio-economic status and racial background. Certainly not the well off from a fine Democan state like yours!

So you have another reason other than a lack of empathy for...you know...them poor folks trapped in their Republicrat dominated area by circumstance and you not giving a hoot?

About half of the women in America live in Congressional districts that will continue to offer abortion on demand. Many others live just one state away and a doable car ride from a clinic. Many others have currently access to plan "B drugs.
So despite all the outrage and furor there will be very few babies brought to term and delivered by mothers that wished to abort it.

Says you. I say if we make all ammunition illegal in all Democan dominated states, the 2nd Amendment still stands, as fine folks can have all the guns they want. Just no ammo. And you'll come unglued, because really, banning ammunition won't bother but a insignificant fraction of the population, and most of them will be old white gun nut cranks and who cares if they need to drive 500 miles to buy some? Which, if the abortion analogy holds, might itself still be illegal once you get home!

Tell me how you won't bitch like a stuck pig if someone applied the same logic to a right you thought you had for most of your life. And that it is something other than a lack of empathy for poor woman (and we know what color plenty of them will be, don't we?) when you try and weasel around the logic.

[vtsnowedin]

Banning the sale of ammunition would certainly be considered as "abridging the right to bear arms" and would not stand a test with this Supreme court.
It would not matter anyway as there is about a twenty year supply in civilian hands right now and if used sparingly, Not just shot up for practice, could last a hundred years.

[mousepad]

but you appear blase on it happening to ANOTHER AMERICAN.....because... A) it isn't you and

No. The argument is much simpler. It's the question at what point is an unborn child a human with corresponding rights.
I believe TX draws the line when heart beat can be detected, which seems sensible to me. That allows for enough time to handle incest/rape cases and to test for hereditary diseases.
Aborting a 9th month pregnancy is murder in my eyes, no matter how much "my body, my rights" you scream.
But that's my moral compass. Yours might be different.

involves primarily women of a certain socio-economic status and racial background

don't pull the race card. It's been overused.