The Political Discussion Thread

[Annoyed]

And Trump signs another excellent executive order.

Trump signs executive order on campus free speech

President Trump on Thursday signed an executive order aimed at protecting free speech on college campuses, in an event attended by students who say their conservative views have been infringed upon.

The new order will require higher education institutions to certify that they are enforcing free speech standards in order to receive grants through the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services (HHS) and Defense, among other agencies.

"Under the guise of speech codes, and safe spaces, and trigger warnings, these universities have tried to restrict free thought, impose total conformity and shut down the voices of great young Americans," Trump said at a signing ceremony.

"All of that changes, starting right now,” he added. “We’re dealing with billions and billions and billions of dollars."

[Chaka-Z0]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mike-po...CNM-00-10aab4i

"Could it be that President Trump right now has been sort of raised for such a time as this, just like Queen Esther, to help save the Jewish people from the Iranian menace?" CBN's Jerusalem bureau chief Chris Mitchell asked the secretary of state.

Hallelujah!

(This sounds like one of those history channel voice-over of Ancient Aliens or something)

[Annoyed]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mike-po...CNM-00-10aab4i



Hallelujah!

(This sounds like one of those history channel voice-over of Ancient Aliens or something)

That's absurd. If he's speaking as himself, a private person, I don't care what religious tripe he spouts. But that's out of line if he's speaking as Secretary of State.

[Annoyed]

Ah, yes, the Democrats. The Party that represents the voter.

Dems seek to stifle primary challenges to incumbents

House Democrats' campaign arm on Friday took an official step to protect sitting lawmakers, warning would-be campaign vendors that the party won't award contracts to political firms working for primary challengers.

With its new policy, posted Friday morning, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) said its "core mission" is to keep and grow the party's newly won House majority, "which includes supporting and protecting incumbents."

"To that end, the DCCC will not conduct business with, nor recommend to any of its targeted campaigns, any consultant that works with an opponent of a sitting Member of the House Democratic Caucus," the policy reads.

The effort is an attempt to pre-empt a short but growing list of potential primary hopefuls, as well as the groups supporting them, from retaining the help of top-tier polling and consulting firms in bids to oust sitting lawmakers.

I think they just blew the fuse on my hypocrisy meter.

[Gatefan1976]

Ah, yes, the Democrats. The Party that represents the voter.

Dems seek to stifle primary challenges to incumbents



I think they just blew the fuse on my hypocrisy meter.

What about that do you find so distasteful?
It's nothing the republican party has not done on a far more aggressive level since 2000 with gerrymandering and voter suppression.
Now THAT is real voter manipulation. All the DCCC is saying is it won't support other challengers, has nothing to do with the voting public.

[Gatefan1976]

That's absurd. If he's speaking as himself, a private person, I don't care what religious tripe he spouts. But that's out of line if he's speaking as Secretary of State.

Of course he was speaking as SOC, how is that even in question.

[Annoyed]

What about that do you find so distasteful?
It's nothing the republican party has not done on a far more aggressive level since 2000 with gerrymandering and voter suppression.
Now THAT is real voter manipulation. All the DCCC is saying is it won't support other challengers, has nothing to do with the voting public.

Bzzzt! Wrong Answer. But I'll forgive you, because you don't live here.

Gerrymandering has been practiced and raised to an art form by BOTH parties. The most egregious example I can think of was the late Louise Slaughter's (D) former district in Western NY.

She had her district drawn in the shape of two large balls about 70 Mi. apart, encircling Buffalo and Rochester, two of the larger cities in WNY, both on the southern shore of Lake Ontario with a very thin strip of sparsely populated land along the lakeshore connecting the two.

This district was bulletproof for her. In fact, as I recall, she died in office.

As to what I find distasteful?

Ok, suppose next congresscritter hunting season, people in the Kindergartner's district decide that her efforts in forcing Amazon to cancel their project in NYC weren't such a good idea. After all, that was a lot of jobs.

This would cause someone else to oppose her in the primaries. Today's announcement means that the national party will not assist such opponents.

Hey, in reality, I like the idea. This is just a different flavor of the national party calling the shots from their seats on Mt. Olympus. Just like 2016.

How did that work out?

[Gatefan1976]

Bzzzt! Wrong Answer. But I'll forgive you, because you don't live here.

Gerrymandering has been practiced and raised to an art form by BOTH parties. The most egregious example I can think of was the late Louise Slaughter's (D) former district in Western NY.

When are districts drawn annoyed?
I know, do you?

She had her district drawn in the shape of two large balls about 70 Mi. apart, encircling Buffalo and Rochester, two of the larger cities in WNY, both on the southern shore of Lake Ontario with a very thin strip of sparsely populated land along the lakeshore connecting the two.

This district was bulletproof for her. In fact, as I recall, she died in office.

She did.

As to what I find distasteful?

Ok, suppose next congresscritter hunting season, people in the Kindergartner's district decide that her efforts in forcing Amazon to cancel their project in NYC weren't such a good idea. After all, that was a lot of jobs.

Then it can happen.

This would cause someone else to oppose her in the primaries. Today's announcement means that the national party will not assist such opponents.

Correct.
What does that have to do with the VOTERS?

Hey, in reality, I like the idea. This is just a different flavor of the national party calling the shots from their seats on Mt. Olympus. Just like 2016.

How did that work out?

National party?
I see.

[Annoyed]

When are districts drawn annoyed?
I know, do you?

After the 10 year census, by the party that controls that particular state.

What does that have to do with the VOTERS?

Without and in opposition to the the wishes of the national party, a challenger can't get his message out. Remember, broadcast time here is purchased.

National party?
I see.

Of course, The leadership of the national Democratic party.

[Gatefan1976]

After the 10 year census, by the party that controls that particular state.

Correct.
When was slaughter put into power?

Without and in opposition to the the wishes of the national party, a challenger can't get his message out. Remember, broadcast time here is purchased.

So, you are saying without party approval, people cannot speak?
Or more importantly, effectively?
What does that say about your system?

Of course, The leadership of the national Democratic party.

And how do you feel about your party doing the same?
Surely you would be just as offended by that, yeah?
Yeah?

[Annoyed]

Correct.
When was slaughter put into power?

I forget, but I clearly remember her wanting to screw me back in the early eighties.

So, you are saying without party approval, people cannot speak?
Or more importantly, effectively?
What does that say about your system?

They can speak till the cows come home. But today, without financial backing, or some other highly unusual circumstance, no one will hear them. Yes, that is a problem. I would like to see FCC broadcast licenses require all valid (petition count?) candidates to be given air/media time. But I don't think there's a legal way to make that stick. Don't even think about cable/internet, no FCC lic. involved.

And how do you feel about your party doing the same?
Surely you would be just as offended by that, yeah?
Yeah?

Maybe I'm not getting you, but if you're talking about Trump, he told the national party to GFI* when he got into this game.

* Does NOT stand for "ground fault interrupter"

[Womble]

The whole Israeli elections thing has me irritated.

Blue&White party is... not what it promised to be. Benny Gantz's people and Lapid's people can't agree on a damn thing, so they are avoiding taking a clear public position on the more divisive issues- which, as it happens, are the most important issues. It's basically what happens when people decide they want to be in power and only THEN begin to look for what they actually plan to do if and when they get there. Come to think of it, that describes most major parties right now. Right and Left in the old sense survive mainly on the fringes right now, and the center is filled to the brim with opportunists.

Speaking of opportunists, there's a new player in the elections game that no one saw coming. Moshe Feiglin, ultra-right wing religious nationalist convicted for sedition against the State of Israel in 1997, founded a party called Zehut that is proving something of a sensation due to its libertarian stance. Libertarian ideas never had much traction in Israel before (in large part due to the socialist roots of most of the major Zionist movements which founded the country), but right now a political platform of free market, personal freedoms, small government and legalization of pot is proving quite appealing - surprisingly so since much of the support comes from the young Tel Avivian upper middle class - traditional core electorate of far Left parties like Meretz.

Feiglin's libertarianism is a thin cover for a disturbing agenda once you read deeper into the particulars. He wants religious Jewish law to be state law in parallel to existing civil law, and to have it be autonomous of state legislation. He wants the Law of Return amended to exclude those who do not qualify as Jewish under the most restrictive Orthodox criteria, and to empower the Chief Rabbinate to exclusively decide who qualifies. He wants to impose strict religious observance upon the Israeli army, to the point of soldiers having the right to refuse Sabbath-violating orders as illegal. He wants an explicitely two-tier legal system, with non-Jews under a "separate civil status". He wants to annex the West Bank without granting citizenship or land ownership rights to Palestinian Arabs. It's basically a version of Dominionism, theocracy through the back door, couched in libertarian terms. And it might ride into the Knesset on the votes of potheads.

And on top of it all we have Trump meddling in our elections, trying to boost Netanyahu with the Golan Heights recognition thing. US President playing favorites in Israeli politics never ends well for their chosen candidates; Clinton tried to manipulate our elections in 1996 on Peres' behalf, and Obama financed a whole campaign against Netanyahu in 2015, and in both cases the candidates supported from America lost. The Israeli voters tend to be turned off by obvious foreign meddling. The Golan Heights being used in this manner may actually be harmful to Israel's security interests because up until now, there was little pressure to surrender them to Syria. The hornet nest did not need stirring - but here we are.

[aretood2]

The whole Israeli elections thing has me irritated.

Blue&White party is... not what it promised to be. Benny Gantz's people and Lapid's people can't agree on a damn thing, so they are avoiding taking a clear public position on the more divisive issues- which, as it happens, are the most important issues. It's basically what happens when people decide they want to be in power and only THEN begin to look for what they actually plan to do if and when they get there. Come to think of it, that describes most major parties right now. Right and Left in the old sense survive mainly on the fringes right now, and the center is filled to the brim with opportunists.

Speaking of opportunists, there's a new player in the elections game that no one saw coming. Moshe Feiglin, ultra-right wing religious nationalist convicted for sedition against the State of Israel in 1997, founded a party called Zehut that is proving something of a sensation due to its libertarian stance. Libertarian ideas never had much traction in Israel before (in large part due to the socialist roots of most of the major Zionist movements which founded the country), but right now a political platform of free market, personal freedoms, small government and legalization of pot is proving quite appealing - surprisingly so since much of the support comes from the young Tel Avivian upper middle class - traditional core electorate of far Left parties like Meretz.

Feiglin's libertarianism is a thin cover for a disturbing agenda once you read deeper into the particulars. He wants religious Jewish law to be state law in parallel to existing civil law, and to have it be autonomous of state legislation. He wants the Law of Return amended to exclude those who do not qualify as Jewish under the most restrictive Orthodox criteria, and to empower the Chief Rabbinate to exclusively decide who qualifies. He wants to impose strict religious observance upon the Israeli army, to the point of soldiers having the right to refuse Sabbath-violating orders as illegal. He wants an explicitely two-tier legal system, with non-Jews under a "separate civil status". He wants to annex the West Bank without granting citizenship or land ownership rights to Palestinian Arabs. It's basically a version of Dominionism, theocracy through the back door, couched in libertarian terms. And it might ride into the Knesset on the votes of potheads.

And on top of it all we have Trump meddling in our elections, trying to boost Netanyahu with the Golan Heights recognition thing. US President playing favorites in Israeli politics never ends well for their chosen candidates; Clinton tried to manipulate our elections in 1996 on Peres' behalf, and Obama financed a whole campaign against Netanyahu in 2015, and in both cases the candidates supported from America lost. The Israeli voters tend to be turned off by obvious foreign meddling. The Golan Heights being used in this manner may actually be harmful to Israel's security interests because up until now, there was little pressure to surrender them to Syria. The hornet nest did not need stirring - but here we are.

And I thought Latin American politics were crazy...

[Chaka-Z0]

And I thought Netanyahou was in the midst of a huge tax fraud scandal?

[Womble]

And I thought Netanyahou was in the midst of a huge tax fraud scandal?

Not tax fraud, bribery. The trial is quite far away still, though.