No, not the book. Although I could understand if you might think that, since I do like to read. No, I am talking about what happened on September 11, 2001. On that day the world was witness to both great evil and greater good.
Hijackers at the behest of Osama bin Laden took over four American planes with the intent of killing as many people and destroying as many symbols of United States existence as they could. Two planes were flown into the World Trade Center towers in New York, both north and south. A third plane was flown into the Pentagon in Washington D.C. The fourth plane was flown into the ground in a field in Pennsylvania. That fourth plane was retaken by a group of brave, steadfast, loyal Americans. Due to the amazing technology of cell phones they knew about the earlier planes crashing into buildings and killing innocent civilians. They were determined that they would not be used as a weapon, they were determined that they would do what they could to protect and defend our people and our country. Because of them that plane never reached its goal.
If Osama bin Laden's minions were the epitome of evil those who responded to their actions were the epitome of good, from those passengers of Flight 93, to the first responders who ran up the stairs of the World Trade Center towers to help those in need and to those on the ground who gave of themselves to help in some way shape or form. Too many to count.
As I sit here and listen to some of the speakers in Pennsylvania I was struck by the remarks made by Gordon Felt, whose brother was a passenger on Flight 93. His words embody my thoughts and I cannot see where I could improve upon them. I assume they will eventually show up on YouTube, everything does. I will watch and add that to this post if I run across a video of his remarks. Because they are important. Meanwhile, here is a written version of some of his thoughts:
I too wish for a September 12th moment, when we were all unified, intent on standing together as one. I too wonder, as I watch the pitiful behavior of some who would not even consider putting the well being of others before their “rights” as Americans, are we worthy of the sacrifice made by all of those on 9/11?
Update:
I have not been able to find a video yet of Gordon Felt. However, I do have one of President George W. Bush in Pennsylvania on 9/11. As Lee pointed out in the comments section Dubya has something to say that we should listen to.
88 comments:
Dubya's speech given at Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where that flight 93 reached Earth once again, is also worth viewing, and it's up on YouTube already. (Just barely over nine minutes.)
I missed his remarks. I was outside watering stuff at that time. But I did hear that many people were talking about his speech. I have always felt that Dubya was rather under rated. Even if you didn't support his choices I always thought he did really care about our country.
I don't know if his point about domestic terrorism will be taken to heart or if it will fall on deaf ears. But he was spot on in his reasoning.
Others are making the comparison between the unity and sense of common purpose then and the whining about wearing masks and taking a shot now. Really what have we become as a nation?
"I have always felt that Dubya was rather under rated."
I'm not sure I recognize your rating system. "Car[ing] about our country" doesn't seem like anything more than a minimal basic job requirement (or, at least, it didn't until Trump came along and the dedicated Trumpkins suddenly enthused prolifically at their new found freedom to not give a damn about the majority of the country).
But, I will grant that Dubya "cared about our country". What's more, he cared about doing a good job for our country. (He didn't do a good job, but he tried; he just wasn't up to it for several reasons, none of which had anything to do with him not caring enough).
I will go even further and say that, unlike too many among the American right-wing, Dubya doesn't seem to have a racist bone in his body, nor is he notably bigoted in any other respects.
In fact, I think I'd enjoy sittin' down and gettin' loose with Dubya, discussing whatever came up from pouring a few beers together, except that he apparently couldn't handle his liquor and had to swear off. (Not something I'd hold against him; I understand Biden's a teetotaler as well--although he never drank enough to discover whether he could handle it or not--he had alcoholics in his family tree and that was enough of a warning to prompt him to make that choice preëmptively. And I voted for Biden--'course the alternative was Trump.)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"I don't know if his point about domestic terrorism will be taken to
heart or…"
Safe bet is on the "or" option, and not on the 'taken to heart' option. At least, not taken to heart by the dedicated Trumpkins who still enthusiastically support those domestic terrorists (and in some cases, in way too many cases, who are those domestic terrorists). "Or" is the only safe bet, at least until Trump loses his first bid to return to the White House in 2024. And that means Trump both loses the election again and that he fails in his second attempt to incite a violent insurrection after he loses the election again. (Trump's still a wuss-bully, so, 'yeah', he could easily screw the insurrection up twice in a row.)
Besides, Dubya only briefly feigned to touch on the subject and then fluttered away as quickly as he could. Not the sort of thing to cause them to "take it to heart". But, he did say plenty that was worth hearing, even as he so quickly danced on past that one.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"Really what have we become as a nation?"
That one's still up for grabs. We're approaching a tipping point. It'll soon become apparent to the dedicated Trumpkins that they can't build a winning electoral majority, ever. Not with the policies they're insisting on promoting; they'll never win with that, and their new Jim Crow voter suppression tactics won't be enough to carry them to national electoral victories either--they'll never again win with that, not again.
When they figure out the "never" part, then we'll find out fer sure what we have become. They will not take the revelation well.
...Dubya doesn't seem to have a racist bone in his body, nor is he notably bigoted in any other respects.
No, he doesn't seem to. I give him credit for that. But it is even more than that, while people seemed to write him off as not too smart, I don't think that. Yes, he did really take his eye off the ball, jumping into Iraq while we were still fighting in Afghanistan. But there is a strength of character that you don't find in a Trump, although I will allow that is a low bar. He understands the danger that Trump and his ilk pose and is at least speaking out to some degree about that. I credit his Mother. Somehow I don't think you'd want to mess with Barbara.
When they figure out the "never" part, then we'll find out fer sure what we have become. They will not take the revelation well.
I hope you are right about the first part of that statement, that they won't win a majority at the ballot box.
I hope you are wrong about the second part of that statement, but fear you are right.
Btw, did you see that they have disciplined 6 Capitol Hill police officers?
I was talking to someone the other day who expressed concern about the continuing spread of, for want of a better word, Trumpism. I use that as a catchall term for all of the far right beliefs that are becoming more mainstream, I guess. In this case she was referring to her daughter-in-law who was supportive of the "heart beat law" in Texas.
I've been watching the numbers of new cases in my county. Last week they had reached 100 a day. For the last couple of days they are around 80. I don't know if this will be a trend going down. our schools just opened last week so I think the next few weeks will be telling.
I've been listening to a piece on CNN about the subversive election laws and machinations in some Republican states, such as removing the Secretary of State as the person who runs the election and giving that power to the legislature. Which, of course is controlled by Repiblicans.
How can you be so sure that their plans to rig future elections won't work?
I doubt that the US Congress will pass the voting bill that some have been working on in an effort to retain fair elections. Manchin will throw a wrench in that.
"I hope you are right about the first part of that statement…"
Don't get me wrong, they may very well win congressional majorities. They have a structural advantage from the two senators per state rule, and they have been approved by the Supreme Court for aggressive gerrymandering. Add in equally aggressive and increasingly blatant voter suppression in states where they control the state government and they're quite likely to win back majorities in one or both Houses of Congress. But, the only national elective offices we have are President and Vice-President.
"… did you see that they have disciplined 6 Capitol Hill police
officers?"
I had seen the headline. I marked the subject down to get back to later, but I haven't had the opportunity yet.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"I've been watching the numbers of new cases in my county."
I don't believe we've seen any let up at all locally. Hospitals still running consistently short on beds--patients being kept for hours on gurnies in hallways while they try to clear another room.
The county school board has decreed a comprehensive mask mandate on all school property for everybody, no exceptions save for medical necessity and any religious doctrine that anybody can prove actually existed prior to the pandemic (so far nobody's been able to clear that hurdle). We're about ready to find out if the policy has provided the necessary protection for the kids in school--they been there almost two weeks now.
Lots of bitchin' 'bout that policy but none of it is organized enough to make a difference. Local politicians are in no hurry to get involved in making the school board members adopt stupid policies. Glad to give stupidity their verbal support, but they don't wanna step up and decide it. They don't want to be in a position to catch the rap for kids gettin' sick.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"How can you be so sure that their plans to rig future
elections won't work?"
I'm not sure that rigging the elections of the future to bypass losing the states' popular votes won't work. I consider such 'rigging' of the election after the fact, by throwing out the actual vote and declaring the election for Trump instead to be 'not taking the revelation well'.
What I said was "they can't build a winning electoral majority". And that "their new Jim Crow voter suppression tactics won't be enough to carry them to national electoral victories either".
Throwing out the popular vote and having the state legislatures declare the states' electoral votes for Trump in defiance of his loss of the popular vote in that state just might work. And they just might do it too. That move would have to be sustained by our newly Federalist Society dominated Supreme Court majority, but they just might go along with that as well.
Storming the Congress, repeating the Jan 6ᵗʰ putsch except with a little better organization next time, also just might work (I'm remembering Mussolini's march on Rome here) though probably not with Trump as the eventual new 'President'.
Trump's still a wuss. He won't lead the insurrection next time either; he ain't got the cahones. He's always depended on someone else bailing him out of his troubles in the end. I can't see him changing that pattern (a successful pattern in his view) this late in his life. And I likewise can't see anybody else leading a violent insurrection and then meekly turning that power over to Trump instead of keeping it for himself. Could be that the next 'President' to be approved by our new Federalist Society Justices will not have been actually on the ballot in any of the fifty states.
Then again, it could be our newest Federalist Society approved "Leader" will be someone who keeps Trump on in a ceremonial 'Presidency' status, with the actual governing power still held by the new 'Emergency Leader'.
"Manchin will throw a wrench in that."
Supposedly Manchin has accepted the role as sherpa for 10 Republican votes in favor of a more "centrist" federal democracy (voting rights) bill. He says he's gonna take the plan produced by himself and Senators Amy Klobuchar and Raphael Warnock (Ga.) among others, and he's gonna get 10 Republicans to vote for it.
They may roll out their new, Manchin approved, plan as early as this week. Then we'll see what kind of credibility he's got among the Republicans. (My guess is, not much.)
Then Manchin and Sinema will have to decide whether or not they want to continue their fiction and fantasy of compromise or bipartisanship from the Party of Trump.
Collateral damage
A heart patient died after he couldn't get a cardiac ICU bed in 43 hospitals. Now his family is pleading for people to get vaccinated
I think the title says it all.
continue their fiction and fantasy of compromise or bipartisanship from the Party of Trump.
It always comes down to that.
I bought The Reckoning by Mary Trump. I haven't started it yet, but I am interested to see what she thinks about the aftermath of Trump's loss.
And I also wonder if we will be given the chance to heal or if we will slide further down the dark road of Trumpism.
Looks like the Capitol Police Department is keeping a fairly tight rein on the exact details of those six disciplinary proceedings you mentioned. Doesn't seem to be top secret stuff, more like "sensitive" information (as in "embarrassing"). May have to do with the officers being in a union--police unions are pretty much committed to demanding (and getting) absolute silence from everybody when it comes time to discuss possible officer misconduct.
"…I also wonder…if we will slide further down the dark road
of Trumpism…"
I don't s'pect Mary Trump's book will be the place to look for an answer to that question.
The 2ⁿᵈ generation federal elections bill I mentioned earlier (Lee C. @ Mon Sept 13, 07:45 am ↑↑) has been unveiled as of this morning. Politico. Still looks like it'll get zero Republican votes. Manchin and Sinema appear to remain unmoved.
Today is the recall election in California for Governor Newsom. It looks like it will be Covid on the ballot.
"There was a growing sense amongst political insiders that the anti-recall campaign's focus on Donald Trump as the evil force we had to defeat was losing traction," said Democratic strategist Darry Sragow, who is the publisher of the California Target Book, which tracks election and campaign finance data in the state. "Then his alter ego shows up in a state where Donald Trump got about a third of the vote. ... Somebody smiled on Gavin Newsom and presented California voters with the opportunity to listen to Larry Elder."
We will see who prevails, those who would mask and take the vaccine or those who won't.
I don't s'pect Mary Trump's book will be the place to look for an answer to that question.
No, probably not. She is not in that loop. But she may have insights into the psychology, given her close relationship to The Donald. We'll see...
"Then [Trump's] alter ego shows up…"
Lynnette @ Tue Sept 14, 10:57 am ↑↑
AP Headline: "…Newsom stays in power as recall fails"
If the Democrats are able to avoid losing their majorities in the House, or the Senate, or both, come 2022, that'll be what saves them. Wannabe Trump types winning in the Trumpkin/Republican primaries and making it on to the general election where they have to face independent voters and Democrats and the few remaining non-Trumpkin Republicans--it could conceivably cost the Trumpkin/Republicans races they should otherwise win. I ain't holdin' my breath on that one, but it's an outside possibility.
(Okay, it wasn't a primary nor a general election in California, but the idea translates across with nothing lost in the translation.)
I found the election in California interesting. It might be the canary in the coal mine for 2022. It is starting to sink in with more people that Covid is nothing to mess with. The majority are not supportive of the anti-mask or anti-vax positions of candidates. While Californians may not be okay with Newsom in general they are even less okay with Elder's position with regard to those issues.
And it appears that a majority of Americans are concerned with the continuation of our democracy as well, according to a new poll. At least I'm not the only one.
If the Democrats are able to avoid losing their majorities in the House, or the Senate, or both, come 2022, that'll be what saves them.
That will be what saves us.
"That will be what saves us."
Actually, I meant the pronoun "them" to refer to the Democrats' very much threatened majorities in both the House and the Senate, not to the Democrats proper. But, I suppose your response is equally accurate in both cases, under either interpretation.
_________________________
I noticed that John Durham, ex-United States Attorney for some district I forget up in the northeast Atlantic Coast, Bill Barr appointed Special Prosecutor, and the last best hope for Trump and his dedicated Trumpkins finding some connection between Hillary and the FBI investigation of Trump's many connections to Russians of dubious repute, Durham has come up empty.
(He's filed a felony complaint against a Washington D.C. lawyer of no particular fame accusing the lawyer of making a "false statement" to FBI investigators--not about anything to do with any actual facts being investigated, but about who he worked for. Durham says he worked for Hillary, and lied about that. The lawyer says he didn't work for Hillary, and they never asked him about that anyway. I'm guessing this criminal charge will get dismissed, disappear with a nary a notice after the 2022 elections. But Durham has to give them something to wave as a bloody shirt on all those dedicated Trumpkin shows on FoxNews, at least until the 2022 elections are safely behind us.)
Chickens coming home to roost
I think the title says it all.
More than 100 part-timers at Indiana University Health left jobless for refusing Covid-19 vaccine
I don't have any sympathy. This is a health crisis that needs all hands on deck to resolve.
Speaking of His Orangeness. Apparently there was a rally in DC in support of the Jan. 6th insurrections. I haven't heard of any violence this time around. But I have heard of idiocy. One of the rally goers was speaking to a CNN reporter saying the Capitol was a public building and there was no reason the people there could not enter. He had not seen any video of the police being attacked and the CNN reporter showed him video of the police officer being crushed in the door by the crowd. He merely said that the officer could have simply backed out of the door. Obviously the man had never experienced that type of unruly crowd and the officer's screams of pain fell on deaf ears. Idiocy.
Btw, I have experienced the crush of a crowd that is intent on getting somewhere. It is not pleasant. Although in my case it wasn't violent, so no one was crushed, but we were squished pretty good.
"I don't have any sympathy."
I'll take it a step further. I'm pleased to see responsible parties taking action against them. More of that would be better.
If they want to reject their social responsibilities in favor of an imaginary "Leave it to Beaver" circa 1950s world, then let them withdraw from the real world like the Amish do, and thereby reduce the threat they pose to the health and safety of the rest of us.
I have no special objection to them taking stupid risks, but I do object to them subjecting me to those stupid risks which they're willing to take merely to celebrate their political loyalties. I don't celebrate their political loyalties; I don't want them exposing me to the unnecessary risks they embrace for themselves as a declaration of loyalty. ________________________________
"Apparently there was a rally in DC…."
It would appear that the Capitol Police were somewhat over prepared this time, as much as they were under prepared last time.
________________________________
I have never been subjected to a crushing crowd. (I have climbed up out of that sort of situation once, some time ago. I can climb, or could then.)
Local morning news is still working the story on our local surge in covid-19 infections and hospitalizations. This morning they reported a study by the Kaiser Family Foundation (presumably affiliated with or subsidiary to Kaiser Permanente the west coast based health insurance company). It seems that last year the deductibles and co-pays that went along with treatment for covid-19 were typically being waived, either by the hospital or by the insurers. Starting a few months ago those costs are typically being charged to the patients. Out-of-pocket costs to patients are now running in the same rather substantial range as would be the case with a life threatening cancer or heart attack.
I think I'm okay with that. In fact, 'more of that would be better." ↑↑
Is this the beginning of an implosion in China?
Is this what we have all been speculating about for so long with China's ghost cities? Will the Chinese government have to intervene? Will this effect the rest of the world to the extent that the Lehman collapse did?
I think I'm okay with that. In fact, 'more of that would be better." ↑↑
Yeah, I saw that this morning. This has gone on too long and the insurance companies aren't going to be the fall guys forever. It is likely we will be living with Covid for a long time.
"Will the Chinese government have to intervene?"
Probably. And I expect that intervention to be successful (this time). I expect they'll be able to paper over this little problem and go on to build more and bigger ghost cities.
Evergrande is probably a harbinger of things to come rather than the leading edge of the wave itself.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"It is likely we will be living with Covid for a long time."
Likely. Likely forever. It'll become 'endemic' as some level of natural immunity builds among the survivors.
Gonna be a lotta dead people, lot more dead people that is, before it finally turns into that 'nasty flu' that Marcus kept insisting it already was, but eventually the anti-vaxxers will be responsible for enough deaths, and the surviving remainder of the population will then have a significant natural immunity to the by-then-no-longer-novel coronavirus. (Meantime I got my shots so I'm reasonably safe so long as I pay attention to heightened local infection level and take the appropriate precautions against it.)
This morning's reviews on the lack of any cross party negotiations on the debt ceiling lookin' kinda ominous. I think that's gonna be a bigger deal than the dire Evergrande financial straights.
Trump is suing Mary Trump and the NYT with regard to his tax returns.
I have started Mary Trump's new book The Reckoning. She is basically saying that America has never come to terms with its race issues and that is part of the source of what we are seeing now. She kind of reminds me of you. I haven't read enough to see how she thinks we will progress, or not.
I don't know if she delves into other causes, but I have to think that the massive changes we are experiencing due to climate change will play a role in our "reckoning".
I rather like her, she is honest and blunt.
Evergrande is probably a harbinger of things to come rather than the leading edge of the wave itself.
I am not sure if I find that comforting or ominous. I just hope we don't see a massive implosion on our side of the pond.
(Meantime I got my shots so I'm reasonably safe so long as I pay attention to heightened local infection level and take the appropriate precautions against it.)
I've gotten a call to remind me to get a flu shot and another letting me know the clinic will have booster shots for Covid. I don't qualify for the booster shots yet, though. Plus Moderna hasn't finished all of their testing regarding their vaccine's rate of decline.
Crazy and dangerous
The most stunning aspect of these reports is that Trump and some people around him actually believed that a US election could simply be disregarded if the President didn't like the result -- the very antithesis of democracy.
Sad to know that so many people can just walk away from our democracy to further their own greed for power and money. It's not a country I know anymore.
This morning's reviews on the lack of any cross party negotiations on the debt ceiling lookin' kinda ominous. I think that's gonna be a bigger deal than the dire Evergrande financial straights.
And this is just part of the selfishness of some of our elected leaders. They would torpedo our economy to further their agendas.
"Trump is suing Mary Trump and the NYT with regard to his
tax returns."
I get the impression she is unlikely to be intimidated by that. He probably knows that too. So, probably his primary reason for adding her on was to draw attention to his lawsuit, get clicks, get mentions on the news--like that. (And, there is the remote chance she'll bluff easy, so why not try it? Wuss-bully.)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"They would torpedo our economy to further their agendas."
If I were Schumer, or Biden, I get with Biden, (or Schumer, as the case may be--they'd need to coöperate on this) and plot out a schedule for holding votes to raise the debt ceiling until after the mid-term elections. I'd make it a clean bill. Nothing else on it--raise the debt ceiling enough to get past November 2022, and then I'd call it up for a vote. (They'd filibuster that.) Then, I'd schedule it for a vote again next week--make them announce another filibuster. Then I'd do it for the week after--etc. Then, every time, I'd go out to the press corps' early morning assembly at the White House and announce that Moscow Mitch was fully prepared to tank the American economy in the service of Donald Trump and of his Russian patrons, and there seemingly aren't even ten Republican Senators who'll vote to stop him. "They WILL torpedo our economy folks; get that through your heads!". So, we're gonna be doing this every damn week until everybody understands what they're willing to do to this country.
And then, when the debt ceiling hit, Biden should declare a national emergency and direct the Fed and the Treasury Department to keep paying on America's debts anyway, as an emergency measure, until Schumer can put together a reconciliation bill that can pass with only Democratic votes. (If Trump can get away with diverting funds from other departments of government to finance an imaginary wall against the express will of the Congress, and contrary to their purposeful denial of funds for that wall then Biden ought to be able to pull off an emergency declaration long enough for the Democrats to put together another 'reconciliation' bill focused on the debt ceiling; even with our very partisan, Federalist Society dominated, Supreme Court; he ought to be able to hold it together long enough to get a 'Democrats only' debt ceiling solution.)
They're not doing that. I presume there's a good reason they're not doing that. Biden and Schumer both know their Democratic Senators better than I do.
But, that's where my head's at on the matter at the moment.
Make 'em actually do it; make them try to crash the economy, big and bold for all to see, and then very publicly overrule their sorry, squalling asses and fix the problem anyway.
I get the impression she is unlikely to be intimidated by that.
I get the impression that, in true Trump fashion, she will relish the fight. She has a lot of anger toward The Donald, I am thinking.
I'd make it a clean bill.
They were talking about that on CNN last night. Yes, it would probably be wise to split the debt ceiling out of the regular funding bill.
So, we're gonna be doing this every damn week until everybody understands what they're willing to do to this country.
I like this idea. The American people are clueless for the most part. Many don't pay attention. Personally, I don't know why there is even a debt ceiling now. They can't agree on anything, let alone spending. All this does is lead to more political infighting and trauma to the economy, with just the suggestion of a default.
And then, when the debt ceiling hit, Biden should declare a national emergency and direct the Fed and the Treasury Department to keep paying on America's debts anyway, as an emergency measure, until Schumer can put together a reconciliation bill that can pass with only Democratic votes.
That would be appropriate, as it is an emergency.
I can only hope the Dems have some kind of plan to deal with this. Because confidence is sinking fast. Those on the Democratic side have to realize that they risk losing what we have if the Republicans regain the majority. That includes our democracy.
An essay by Robert Kagan (the name might be familiar). Too long to be called an Op-Ed, they've named it an 'opinion essay'.
"As the two Trump impeachments showed, if members of
Congress are willing to defend or ignore the president’s
actions simply because he is their party leader, then
conviction and removal become all but impossible. In such
circumstances, the Framers left no other check against
usurpation by the executive…"
Robert Kagan writing in the WashingtonPost
Worth the time though, if you find yourself with time on your hands over the weekend. Might be good to also read this (shorter) Op-Ed from Kagan from last September (2020), warning that Trump was already planning to foment an insurrection if he lost his reëlection bid.
Kagan's salient point now is that Trump is pushing the "Big Lie" about his 2020 reëlection being stolen, not because he can't accept the loss, but rather because his dedicated Trumpkins don't accept it. And he plans to exploit that in the future. His plan is to take the government by force and guile next time (or, by force alone, if guile don't work out for him). He's not looking back; he's looking forward to 2024, looking forward to leading his followers to power in 2024 in spite of the actual results of the vote.
Can't say we've not been warned.*
_________________________
* Kagan was what ya might call 'a founding neo-con', an originator and early apologist for the neo-con theory of international relations. He's still unreconstructed, unrepentant about that, so far as I know anyway. But, he does seem to have Trump tagged correctly.
Yeah, I remember Kagan from the Iraq war.
I'll have to check out the essay later. I have to finish mowing after dinner. I fertalized the lawn last Sunday and then we got almost 3 inches of rain. Long is an understatement!
I tried the WaPo article last night, but it wanted me to log in. I will try again.
So it looks like the Cyber Ninja's are done with the Maricopa Co audit. Trump said on Friday the review had "uncovered significant and undeniable evidence of FRAUD! Until we know how and why this happened, our elections will never be secure."
If true it would have been on the part of Republicans, because the audit actually found fewer votes for Trump and more for Biden. ROFL!
It was a waste of someone's $6.7M.
"I tried the WaPo article last night, but it wanted me
to log in."
Disable scripting for WaPo on that page, or for all of WaPo's site if that's how your browser works.
Then try again.
(My browser does this automatically, so I forgot to mention that part. Then save the page as a PDF file if your browser has that option, and you can take your time reading it in stages without going through that process again.)
If you can't save is as a PDF, try saving it as an MHTML or MHT format. That'll usually get all the extras that go with the HTML formatting. (Just suggestions; likely you already know the best way to save web pages on your own setup.)
Disabling Java worked. Thank you. That was an extraordinarily scary essay.
One wonders whether modern American politicians, in either party, have it in them to make such bold moves, whether they have the insight to see where events are going and the courage to do whatever is necessary to save the democratic system. If that means political suicide for this handful of Republicans, wouldn’t it be better to go out fighting for democracy than to slink off quietly into the night?
The last paragraph says it all.
But he doesn't answer the question I would pose, what can average un-elected Americans do to combat the creeping fascism of Trump & Co.?
"…what can average un-elected Americans do to combat
the creeping fascism of Trump & Co.?"
I have guns, in case it comes to that. (I'll have fresh ammo too, come fall of 2024--I'll have cleared out the stuff's been sittin' maybe too long on shelves in the cellar, in favor of fresh restock.)
Meantime, I keep an eye open for my opportunities to get word of the danger to those who maybe ain't been payin' sufficient attention (hopefully without turning myself into a Cassandra figure in the process, so far as I can strike that balance correctly).
Meantime, I keep an eye open for my opportunities to get word of the danger to those who maybe ain't been payin' sufficient attention (hopefully without turning myself into a Cassandra figure in the process, so far as I can strike that balance correctly).
Yes, I may have found an opportunity for that. I've got to get to writing...
You know, it's kind of odd, but I probably wouldn't have had the courage to put myself out there if it hadn't been for Zeyad. His blog was a learning experience.
"That was an extraordinarily scary essay."
Well, I didn't find it all that scarey. But then again, I been sayin' for months now that Trump considered the Jan 6ᵗʰ putsch to have been a learning experience. He chickened out the first time (expecting, as always, that somebody else was gonna come save his bacon--turns out he was counting on Mike Pence, not the mob). But he also learned from that first time--next time he'll go with the mob--that's why he's still pounding in the idea that they were robbed last time--so they come at next time already pissed off. He intends to take dictatorial powers to himself after the 2024 elections, by force and guile if he doesn't win outright (whether or not only as the result of the new election laws adopted in some semi-red states), or by force alone if guile ain't helpin' him. He's always intended to seize dictatorial powers during his second term and refuse to go away at the end of that term. (He thought he was going to win a second term.) Now he knows the Republican Party will back him on that Now he's gonna just blow off his second loss, if he loses, and go ahead and try to seize (and hold) the office irrespective of the loss. (He'll figure to go back to Plan A--seize power from his perch within the Oval Office before 2028 if he's lucky enough to win next time. But, whether legitimately or by hook and by crook, he fully intends to make a move to seize dictatorial powers next time a chance at it comes around.)
I told told ya all of this back in May. (Lee C. @ Sun May 23, 07:10 am) This is not a new idea to me, and I'm not much frightened to discover that Robert Kagan has come around to agreeing with me. But, he's not subject to that 4,096 character limit (obviously), so I thought I'd bring that link to his essay here for ya'll to consider the argument in more depth. (Including anybody else might be lurkin', if anybody's still lurkin')
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"I may have found an opportunity for that."
?? Bit of a tease going on there. Long on intrigue; short on information.
I told told ya all of this back in May.
Yes you did. Maybe it just seemed scarier seeing it written in a major media outlet instead of an obscure blog.
Which may seem strange because Chris Cuomo has also been saying similar things too.
I think there are still too many people out there who do not believe it could happen here or who are not paying attention.
Long on intrigue; short on information.
It's no big deal. Sometimes a letter pops up in my local paper that encourages a response.
Just a small aside. I think Gabby Petito's fiance is not in that nature reserve and never was. That was a red herring. He's probably in Mexico. Just saying...
What are the odds the Dems pass anything?
"… in a major media outlet instead of an obscure blog."
Well, there is that. Plus you get fairly regular exposure to how many of my predictions don't quite pan out.
Also, it occurs to me that the reminder would have worked out better if I'd simply left out that one sentence: "I told told ya all of this back in May."
Nobody wants to hear that "I told you so" stuff. Woulda been a much better reminder if I'd just had the presence of mind to edit out that one sentence.
Maybe next time.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"What are the odds the Dems pass anything?"
Hard to say. Ain't lookin' good. If I had to bet, I'd bet against any of it passing--hope I'm wrong (and I don't have to bet on it).
After a good early start--lookin' good the first six months--Biden's first year agenda looks to be falling apart as it approaches the final votes. Manchin wins.
Pelosi caved (damn rare event) and she's gonna put the "bi-partisan" hard-assets infrastructure bill up for a vote without it being already irrevocably tied to the "Democrats Only" human-assets infrastructure bill. That may very well mean that the "bi-partisan" hard-assets infrastructure bill will fail to pass on its own.
And (bigger deal here), the Republicans didn't cave when presented with the joined debt ceiling and government funding bill. That got voted down. The Democrats can separate the two and bring the debt ceiling authorization back as a solo act, but it might fail to pass even then. That would be bad. (Failing to fund the government would also be bad, but it's not near as big a deal as an intentional government default on its already outstanding debts.)
Lotta playin' "chicken" goin' on in D.C. this week.
I hope to Hell Biden knows what he's doing. (I had a backup plan in mind for the debt ceiling/default problem that I've already outlined on this thread--Thu Sept 23, 10:54 am ↑↑; but I don't know what Biden's got in mind--I sure hope he's got something in mind for a backup plan. 'Cause it looks like the Republicans will vote to crash the economy if given a clear shot at it.)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"I think Gabby Petito's fiance is not in that nature
reserve and never was."
I guess is that if he's in there, it's as a suicide. And he went in figurin' the gators'd find his corpse first, and the mystery would never be solved.
Yeah, I wondered about suicide too. Law enforcement probably had the same thought, calling in divers and asking for some of his DNA.
He might go the way of DB Cooper.
The county health department says that as of sometime yesterday we have 50% of the eligible population "fully vaccinated". That means pre-booster--two shots for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines and one shot for the Johnson & Johnson version, and above age 11. Finally. It's been a slog.
That's still not enough, given the transmission ratio of the dominant Delta variant of the virus.
No, that's not enough. I think we are at around 67% fully vaccinated for the state. My county is at 71% with at least one shot. We still have a large number of cases, but the positivity rate has dropped. Still too high, though.
Maybe we have seen the peak here. I hope so.
Nope, it's not looking good for the infrastructure bills or the debt ceiling.
I don't understand the progressives' stance. They basically are supporting all or nothing. That's not how our government was supposed to work. They might as well call themselves Republicans, with that kind of intransigence. They risk losing what little power they have.
Maybe if they delivered on something now they might have had a chance to pass something more later, if they gained a proper majority in the mid-terms. Not looking good.
"I don't understand the progressives' stance."
Well, I understand their stance. (Doesn't mean I necessarily agree with it.) I shall try to explain.
From their point of view, they were asked to support a "bi-partisan" infrastructure bill that Republicans (some Republicans) could vote for, mostly so the moderate and (so-called) "centrist" Democrats could claim to be "reaching across the aisle" and pursuing old fashioned "compromises" with the Republicans.
Theoretically this make the moderate Democrats look better with their more conservative constituencies. (Also makes Biden look better--makes him look like he's delivered on some of his campaign talk.)
The 'progressive' Democrats would really rather have added all that road and bridges stuff into the bigger 'infrastructure' bill and then they'd have gotten credit for the stuff everybody likes and they'd get credit for the stuff their people like best.
But, they were asked to give that advantage up, to give valuable political chits to people like Manchin and Sinema (just to name a couple of them). And they went along with that, on the agreement that Manchin and Sinema et al. would let them have their goodies for their people in a separate bill. Biden would get his political chits. Manchin and Sinema would get their political chits, and the 'progressives' would eventually get their stuff (but they had to give up any ability to claim victory for the "hard-assets" expenditures as part of their product--they gave that stuff away for no more than the promise that Manchin and Sinema would vote to let them, help them, do the other stuff via reconciliation.)
So now Manchin and Sinema have publicly and royally screwed them over. Refused to go through with the deal and vote to do other stuff via reconciliation--and refuse to lift the filibuster, and well, just generally went back on their word and screwed the 'progressives' big time. Seemed to think they'd get away with that. (Done it before and got away with it, why not this time too?)
Now the 'progressives' are saying, " You won't keep your end of the deal; we don't have to keep our end either." You want that roads and bridges stuff--you add it back into the bigger 'reconciliation' bill--we like roads and bridges too; so we'll vote for those, and we blow off the Republicans entirely and we do all of it Democrats only (we don't really give a damn about you basking in your "bipartisanship"; that was supposed to be an outright gift to you, and then you screwed us once you thought you had the gift already firmly in hand--and guess what--you ain't got it in hand yet) and so now we pass the whole damn thing via the reconciliation package, roads and bridges too, and then we 'progressives' get to claim credit for the roads and bridges part of this spending package right along with the other good stuff. Ain't never been any real good reason for you to be giving that stuff as wins to those damn fascists who're gonna try to reinstall Trump in 2024 anyway. We, Democrats, 'progressive' Democrats, we might as well get the credit for roads and bridges too, better than letting those bastards have it.
That's the gist of it.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"Not looking good."
Nope, not lookin' good. As I said before. Manchin won. Killing the whole package means he goes back to West Virginia and tells his very Republican voter block that he single handedly killed off Biden's "liberal" tax and spend agenda, and he gets another six years outta the deal. (Sinema probably gets primaried; she's not quite as clever as Manchin. Both are up for reëlection in the 2024 cycle when Trump's running against Biden again.)
And that's why people like me don't like politics. It's a dirty business.
"…politics. It's a dirty business."
Yeah, well, that's not news here. More to the point, it looks to me like Manchin is pulling an old McConnell trick--endless negotiation going nowhere, 'cause that's a fine place to be so far as Manchin is concerned. It'll probably get him reëlected in West Virginia, and, like many Washington pols, getting reëlected seems to be Manchin's primary motivation. But, 'probably' ain't 'definitely'.
I'm thinking Manchin may have miscalculated his ability to abuse his position as the necessary 50ᵗʰ vote this time, and he end up crashing both infrastructure bills. That could turn out to be a threat to that reëlection in 2024 that he's seemingly got in his center gaze.
Meantime, back at the ranch….
Couple of financial deadline are quickly approaching.
Needs more coffee…
It has occurred to me this morning that you accused the 'progressive' Democrats of acting like Republicans but you exempted Manchin, who's holding out for exactly what he wants (or, at least that's what he says he's holding out for), but who is simultaneously refusing to actually tell anybody exactly what he wants.
Him you're not accusing of 'acting Republican'.
I find that somewhat curious.
Quick drive-by. Still fulminating about a Trump-led insurrection??? Surely y'all have more to worry about by now than Orange Man Bad? Such as out-of-control deficit spending. Or Biden's vaccination target for July 4th still not hit, three months later. Or his foreign policy catastrophe in Afghanistan. Or his migration fiasco at the southern border. He has a tough act to follow, but could Biden go down as worst US preznit of all time? Though no doubt he will be surpassed in awfulness if his VP has any say in the matter.
It looks like saner heads have prevailed and Congess has chosen not to shoot themselves in the financial foot, finding an agreement to fund the government. I have not heard details.
There was no deep meaning in my not including Manchin, or Sinema, in my Republican comparison, just an oversight. Although I am hearing now that Manchin had at least made clear to Schumer a while ago what he was looking for. I don't what's up with that.
It appears that they have put off voting on the infrastructure bill and will resume negotiations tomorrow.
Well, hey Petes! Happy to see you are still alive and well.
Yeah, well, insurrections tend to live a long time in people's memories, especially when their causes are still running around running off their mouths.
As for the vaccine target not being met that has more to do with the Great Unvaccinated. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.
Deficit spending is not exclusive to Democrats. The Republicans have their pet projects they do mot hesitate to support regardless of cost.
I do feel that Afghanistan and the border were poorly handled. However I doubt that Trump would have done any better.
In any case I feel we have no better choice than Biden, given the Republican party's subservience to Trump. Yup, I still think Orange Man, and what he represents, is very, very bad.
How are things going with Brexit? I hear there have been some issues with getting goods delivered?
"Quick drive-by. Still fulminating about a Trump-led
insurrection??? "
(emphasis in original)
Fat fool Irishman seems to think Trump has gone away, to be harmless evermore--a sort of fat, Orange Jimmy Carter type of existence. He's in for one Hell of a surprise down the road. (The fat Irishman that is, not Trump--nor Jimmy Carter.)
But then, Fat Boy doesn't seem to absorb much these days that don't fit his already considerable prejudices. For instance: I've specifically noted that the Trump didn't lead the Jan 6ᵗʰ insurrection (he wussed out) and that he would not lead the next one either. (Lee C. @ Mon Sept 13, 06:57 am ↑↑). Sailed right over Fat Boy's thoroughly prejudiced head.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"Manchin had at least made clear to Schumer a while ago
what he was looking for. I don't what's up with that."
What's up with that is just more stalling I still think. (Lee C. @ Thu Sept 30, 05:05 am ↑↑) He'd had enough of the articles raggin' on him for keeping his "asks" a secret unto himself, and so he decided to publish an outrageous demand that nobody, including Manchin, expects the 'progressives' to take seriously. It's just a gambit to get the headlines off of his own intransigence. Might work for that; they're not going to negotiate with that; it's therefore more likely to also work to kill off the 'bi-partisan' infrastructure bill just as completely as it's now tolling the death knell of the 'human-resources' infrastructure bill. And, there's a reasonable probability that's exactly what Manchin was trying to achieve (but achieve indirectly, so he can shuck the blame for it off on the 'progressives'.)
I'm afraid we just saw the end of the Biden economic initiatives. Probably irrevocably (unless, against the odds, the Democrats can hold their slim majorities after the 2022 mid-term elections). Perhaps it'd be wisest for them to mourn only briefly and get to movin' right along to the also important issue of a federal voting rights bill.
And, of course, there's the debt ceiling to deal with rather more immediately.
Word out of the Democratic Senate Caucus last night was that the self-proclaimed 'moderate' Democrats are now upset at Biden for not cracking the whip over the 'progressive' wing in the House of Representatives, and demanding that they knuckle under and vote for the Trumpkin/Republican-friendly version of the 'bi-partisan' infrastructure bill.
So, like Lynnette, their first instinct is to blame the 'progressives' for the fact that Manchin and Sinema backed away from the Democrats' "dual-track" deal at the last minute.
I am thinking that part of the problem with these infrastructure bills is that they have not been explained in detail to the American public. There are too many people, me included, that have only been looking at the dollars and not what they would buy. So instead of saying $3.5 trillion this or $1.5 trillion that, it should be made clear what they are buying with our money. It should also be made clear on the time frame in which this money will be spent. If it is over 10 years, then it would be less than our military budget for the same period.
Maybe that is why I focused on the progressives, rather than Manchin, whom I don't like btw, and Sinema. It was the price tag. But it is true that we are badly lagging other countries in our physical infrastructure and our societal infrastructure, not to mention starting to ramp up spending on climate change. Playing catch costs more in the long run and the price tag will be higher.
"…these infrastructure bills…have not been explained…to
the American public…looking at the dollars and not what
they would buy."
That seems to be a reoccurring problem for the Democrats. Happened with Obamacare as well. They don't seem to "get" the need to go out and campaign for passage of their current programs--especially after they get polling back that says what they've included is already broadly popular with the public--they seem to think it's already fixed with the public--they forget that their public isn't putting it all together on their own--that the popular stuff is in this particular Democratic-led bill in Congress which is in dire need of public support. (Part of that problem may be that the Democrats don't have a dedicated propaganda arm like FoxNews which serves the Trumpkin/Republican agenda. They seem to forget that they have to do that legwork themselves.)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"Maybe that is why I focused on the progressives…"
Perhaps you focus on the progressives because because the 'mainstream' media focused on the progressives.
But, that media focus comes about because the progressives make up such a small percentage of the overall Democratic vote that they always lose these stare-downs, so they always fold. That's what the media expects. It's suddenly news when the progressives don't fold under pressure and the media don't get what they expected there.
Now, with the almost zero Democratic numerical advantage in the Congress--the 'progressives' have discovered they have enough clout that they don't have to fold this time. They're still the smaller bloc, but they are big enough to insist on things this time 'cause the margins are so tight. So, now the reporters are flabbergasted, and talkin' all 'bout the 'progressives', as if they're suddenly a new problem.
Real problem is Joe Manchin didn't get Biden elected. Nor did Kyrsten Sinema. Neither of them seem to recognize that fact yet, nor recognize that it's important. But it seems that Biden does.
Biden's tenuous majority didn't happen in West Virginia, nor in those retirement communities in Arizona (old white folks--voting for Trump) where they supported Kyrsten Sinema along with supporting Trump.
Instead, Bernie Sanders and his "Bernie's Bro's" recognized that they made a mistake withholding support from Hillary Clinton last round. So, this time they fell in behind Joe Biden after they lost the primary to him. That was enough for Biden to win the election--he'd have lost without Bernie Sanders falling in line this time. Biden knows that; Biden remembers that. Manchin did him no good at all in 2016; neither did Sinema. Bernie and the 'progressives' did him some good; small good, but enough to help carry the day.
All that's gonna stay the same in 2024. So, the media needs to get used to that idea.
"Playing catch [up] costs more in the long run…."
Yep.
"…Manchin, whom I don't like btw…"
I probably like Manchin more than you do. But, even so, I don't trust a damn thing he says in public. He's not a Democrat. He's a moderate Republican who runs as a nominal Democrat because he'd never survive a Republican primary in the highly Trumpkin state of West Virginia. So, his opening statement is bullshit; he starts out lying, right off the git-go; lying about who he is and what he thinks is good government.
But, I don't want McConnell to be Senate Majority Leader, so I don't object to Manchin pretending to be a Democrat. That's the trade we make. I'm perfectly willing to accept that trade; I can't blame Manchin for that. But, I also don't forget that most of what Manchin says in public is complete and utter bullshit.
Sinema, by the way, seized the opportunity these last couple of days to blast the 'progressives' and blast the Democratic leadership for the fact that the progressives didn't fold this time. That was very likely a mistake she'll not be able to paper over in the future. (Manchin knew enough to slink quietly out of the spotlight for now; don't be wantin' your name in the news unnecessarily when shit's flyin' all about.)
Perhaps you focus on the progressives because because the 'mainstream' media focused on the progressives.
Yes, this could be so. But I know they do mention Manchin and Sinema as well. Both of whom are throwing a wrench in the works.
While I am not done with Mary Trump's book yet, the gist seems to be that a lot of the racial bias that is still present in our country is at the heart of the reluctance of some people to share a piece of the pie with others. My words, not hers, but that is the idea. So perhaps there is a reason besides the expense that the "societal infrastructure" bill is unpopular with some law makers?
As I mentioned to Petes Republicans have no problem spending money on their pet projects.
But, I don't want McConnell to be Senate Majority Leader, so I don't object to Manchin pretending to be a Democrat. That's the trade we make.
I do understand and tend to agree there. While I don't care for Manchin there are worse out there.
"…the gist seems to be that a lot of the racial bias that is still
present in our country is at the heart…"
The FoxNews propaganda machine is definitely inclined to try to paint the recipients of government largess as predominantly non-white. There's not much doubt 'bout that. I can only suppose you don't watch much FoxNews, or you'd know that already. (This in spite of the clear real numbers--low income, rural white folks make up the overwhelming majority of "welfare" recipients.)
It's been this way ever since Ronald Reagan made major inroads into what had been the Democratic voter base by fairly blatant appeals to rural whites' racial resentments. The so-called "Reagan Democrats" were largely (not exclusively, but largely) bigots who'd gotten used to being Democrats when the Democrats were still the party of Strom Thurmond and George Wallace.
However, that's not really the case we have before us today (no matter how much the FoxNews propaganda machine and the Trump organization wishes to paint it so). In fact, the agenda the 'progressives' are supporting and fighting to maintain is clearly the program Biden ran on and won with. They'd given up on getting Bernie's programs adopted (so had Bernie) and are trying instead to just hold the line on the Biden agenda that they got behind after Bernie lost to Biden in the primary. That's why Biden went up to the Capitol on Friday and told the assembled Democratic caucus that he was still on board with his own agenda there.
The 'moderates' didn't wanna hear that; seriously didn't wanna hear that; by and large they wanted to take a quick win on the supposedly 'bi-partisan' infrastructure bill, and then let Manchin and Sinema take the blame for the rest of it collapsing. They thought that would absolve them and so they wanted the 'progressives' to fold like they've always done, and do it quick, get it over with.
Biden dropped a surprise on them Friday when it turned out he still supported his own agenda, and now they're kinda pissed at Biden for surprising them. (They apparently had convinced themselves that Biden would opt for the cheap win too, but they can't actually say that in public.) Difference seems to be, Biden's not running again until 2024, when he runs against Trump again. Fourteen Senate Democrats (not including Manchin and Sinema), and all the House Democrats gotta run again in 2022--so they're considerably more eager for the cheap and easy 'win' than Biden turned out to be. (I gotta admit; Biden surprised me too on Friday; I also thought he'd go for easy win, especially after the several weeks of bad press he's been having.)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Surprisingly, I stumbled upon a 'commentary' that agrees with my analysis, in Salon, a generally 'pro-liberal' publication. (Although, the writer seems much more favorably inclined to the 'progressive' wing of the Democratic Party than am I.)
I can only suppose you don't watch much FoxNews, or you'd know that already.
You would suppose right. I did try, in the interest of fairness, a while back but I couldn't stand all the B.S. they were shoveling so haven't been back since.
I think there are some things in that bill that pertain to mental health and LGBTQ issues as well. Also not real popular with some on the right.
Biden has come out and bluntly blamed the Republicans for the debt ceiling crisis. He made it clear that the debt ceiling being raised has more to do with past spending, not the current proposed spending. Although, obviously, if they don't pay for the new infrastructure bills that will increase the debt. He also made clear that this will affect Social Security recipients, interest rates, retirement accounts etc. The Dems do really need to get this message across to put pressure on the Republicans. And even if they are forced to use reconciliation, like McConnell wants, the Dems need to hammer home this point about Republican reluctance to help keep the American economy on track.
"Biden has come out and bluntly blamed the Republicans
for the debt ceiling crisis."
Practically zero chance any of that will get any air time on FoxNews, or Breitbart, or OAN, or any of the news sources that our right-winger compatriots will consult (probably not even QAnon..) However, I suppose picking up support there isn't the point--the point is rather to pick up support among the few remaining 'independent' swing voters, and to energize those already in the #NeverTrump camp.
I notice Schumer has tentatively scheduled a third vote on breaking that filibuster for Friday of this week. Can't hurt. Need to be already talking about the fourth attempt I think, the timing of it anyway.
Well, and as one article said, shaming McConnell doesn't work. So the Dems may have to use reconciliation.
But I would be readying my commercials to make it clear that the Republicans basically voted to tank the American, and possibly the world economy, for their own political gain.
No that news won't reach the near right, right or far right. Because they don't want it to.
And I am sure there is nothing that Biden could say to McConnell that would alter his course. It there were, that would be real news.
"…shaming McConnell doesn't work."
No, but it remains possible that they might be able to pry loose some less adamant Republican Senators, one or two maybe, maybe even a couple more. (Not likely, rather unlikely in fact, but, nevertheless, possible--conceivable at least.) Failing that, then it's good to paint them all with the colors of that fiscal irresponsibility (there is good political reason to make it abundantly clear that there are no Republican Senators who're willing to avoid a debt default; zero; none).
And,….
I'm beginning to think that Biden may have outmaneuvered McConnell on this one. There's talk that the Democrats may just throw out the filibuster over this--or, at least, impose some serious further limitations on what matters are subject to filibuster--like, for instance, not including the debt ceiling. They just might create another 'carve out' for getting the recurring debt ceiling problem free of the filibuster complications--finally--and none too soon either. (There are other options under discussion, but this exception from the filibuster would probably be the most straightforward.)
That possibility regarding the Fillibuster is probably why McConnell has come up with a couple of options. Both probably advantageous for Republicans, I am sure.
I didn't even notice that Facebook was down the other dsy. And I'm fine with that.
"I didn't even notice that Facebook was down the other dsy."
I heard about it from the evening news. They said it was back online by then.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch….
There were headlines all about yesterday proclaiming a breakthrough agreement to put off the debt ceiling crisis until sometime in December. Supposedly this was based, in large part, on one of those proffered "options" that you mentioned. Politico tells us that McConnell was actually negotiating that offer with rogue Democratic Senators Manchin and Sinema first, before going to Schumer with it. Apparently the headlines proclaiming a "breakthrough" were somewhat premature. Nothin' seemed to come of it in the end. They didn't vote Wednesday; they were still working on the language overnight. They may (or may not) get to a vote on it today.
(I think McConnell's gettin' twitchy, maybe not, but I think so. I guess we'll see soon 'nuff.)
It's still just wallpapering over the problem, even if they go that route. We will be in the same boat in December, right before Christmas.
"We will be in the same boat in December."
Yeah. Pretty much. With the addition of whatever new plottin' the two sides can add to their repertoire in the next couple of months.
Current conventional wisdom seems to be that McConnell had to back down this time. I tend to agree with that analysis, but he didn't back far. And he'll try to make that ground back up come December. (Word is also that McConnell had one Hell of a time getting eleven Republicans lined up to vote to allow the bill to come up for a vote--to avoid the filibuster. All eleven subsequently voted against passage of the bill.)
If only those Republicans could feel the consequences of what they are doing without harming the rest of us. But they will never be the ones to suffer for their actions.
"But they will never be the ones to suffer…"
It ain't just the politicians who declare themselves free of the blame for the clear consequences. Petes, in the last thread, was ready and willing, eager even, to overlook the very worst of Trump's political sins. And it ain't like he don't know better.
Unbound malice is what's behind that.
McConnell felt some of that malice turned on himself after backing down from his threat to crash the economy. Now he says he'll damn well do it next time. That may be true; it's hard to say what extremes they'll take things to in the era of their Trumpification.
Politico tells us that the House Select Committee investigating the Jan 6ᵗʰ putsch are now taking preliminary steps to investigate a half dozen or more Republican Congressmen who are suspected of perhaps facilitating and coördinating contact in real time between the insurrectionist mob as they breached the Capitol Building and Trump himself back in the White House.
It seems that the Congressmen in question may not be entirely coöperative.
McConnell felt some of that malice turned on himself after backing down from his threat to crash the economy.
Frankenstein's monster will not be put back in his box easily.
It seems that the Congressmen in question may not be entirely coöperative.
LOL!
Post a Comment