Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

What are the Republicans up to now?


  • Please log in to reply
73 replies to this topic

#21 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,447 posts

Posted 16 December 2016 - 08:37 PM

LoTS, just wondering how you are feeling about what your North Carolina Republican legislature did the other night to strip the incoming newly elected Dem Governor Cooper of his governing powers? Does that seem on the up and up to you? To pass bills with no notice or debate and get the outgoing lame duck Republican governor to sign this legislation? I know they are against Democrats, but this seems like a very undemocratic, unAmerican sort of action to me.

#22 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,624 posts

Posted 17 December 2016 - 11:04 AM

View Postyadda yadda, on 16 December 2016 - 08:37 PM, said:

LoTS, just wondering how you are feeling about what your North Carolina Republican legislature did the other night to strip the incoming newly elected Dem Governor Cooper of his governing powers? Does that seem on the up and up to you? To pass bills with no notice or debate and get the outgoing lame duck Republican governor to sign this legislation? I know they are against Democrats, but this seems like a very undemocratic, unAmerican sort of action to me.

LOL. OMG, this is actually scary, you're reading my mind....I was just about to start my own thread on this topic....because I most definitely have an opinion about this.

My thoughts on it are this: This is complete and utter BS! It is literally screwing over the voters. The voters cast their vote, made their choice clear...To come along at the 11th hour and pull this crap is just wrong. If the roles were reverse and a Democratic legislature did this to an incoming Republican Governor...the GOP would be loosing their minds and screaming bloody murder. Not to mention it is screwing the voters (or have I mentioned that already?) The Democrats in the Senate are already regretting their making the Senate nuclear, now that they are in the minority. That little gem of Reid has now come back to bite them in the a$$, same is going to happen to the GOP in NC. This WILL come back to bite them in the a$$, and they will so richly deserve it. Beside, it is literally bending over the voters and (or have I mentioned that already?)
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

The last republican leaning independent on this message board. All others have been silenced and driven off, or outright banned. Only ONE remains. I guess HighLander had it right all along....In the end, there can be only ONE.

#23 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 4,829 posts

Posted 17 December 2016 - 05:41 PM

By the time Trump gets done with his . . . er . . . "modifications" of the way in which government works, he'll no doubt fix things so that they can't be fixed.

Michele Obama said today that, "this is what it feels like to not have hope."

Coming from her, that's downright chilling.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#24 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,804 posts

Posted 03 January 2017 - 06:29 PM

Looked like the GOP was going to reduce their oversight by a Ethics Board, and looks now like they have back off pursuing that for now.

http://www.wsj.com/a...oard-1483459804

Quote

As criticism mounted Tuesday, Republicans decided midday to abandon the measure for now, though lawmakers said they would try to advance changes to the ethics watchdog later this year. Lawmakers have raised concerns over the board, including objections that it makes complaints against them public.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#25 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,804 posts

Posted 03 January 2017 - 09:49 PM

" Texas eyes 'women's privacy act' "

Republicans sure do know how to make things sound good when they blow that dog whistle. Like "family values". *sigh*
With that possible bill name people know it is not about general privacy, as it is for women, so what can it possibly be? The only ways I can think of that people with female organs need to be treated with different consideration by the law when it comes to rights is reproductive health and reproductive rights. I mean Roe v Wade posited partly on a right to privacy as I understand it. So what women's privacy right is being protected here?

Quote

Texas plans to introduce a measure next year aimed at protecting women in bathrooms and locker rooms, a move that has raised concerns of activists who say the legislation is really an attempt to discriminate against transgender people.

The office of Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick said on Tuesday that a state senator will file the so-called "Women's Privacy Act" for consideration in the session that starts in January.
Patrick's office did not have any details of the bill, but the Republican lieutenant governor has been a supporter of only allowing access to facilities such as bathrooms based on gender at birth rather than the gender with which a person identifies.

Well, I suppose women's rights does have *something* to do with bathroom access, as not having any facilities accessible to women, or providing women an exact copy of men's facilities (that is, with mostly urinals) would be be wrong, and the law does address bathroom equity in many places. (Though father's sometimes get the short end of the stick often not having a diaper changing station). But that is not what this is about. Have they learned nothing from N. Carolina, which has lost tons of money due to this bloviating on this?

ETA: Forgot the news link: http://www.reuters.c...s-idUSKBN13A2NR

Edited by sierraleone, 03 January 2017 - 11:17 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#26 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,624 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 12:33 PM

I posted this in the other thread, since it was brought up there as well, but I was originally planning on posting this here:


http://www.foxnews.c...ics-office.html

Alright, I'm going to skip over the actual part of the GOP originally going to gut this for a moment, but I will be returning to it shortly. Instead I want to first focus on Trump's response, which is as follows:

Quote

“With all that Congress has to work on, do they really have to make the weakening of the Independent Ethics Watchdog, as unfair as it … may be, their number one act and priority. Focus on tax reform, healthcare and so many other things of far greater importance!”

*Bolding is mine.

Maybe I'm becoming too cynical in my old age? Maybe it's just me being paranoid? But when I first heard Trump's response to the GOP trying to gut the ethics committee something just nagged at me. At first I couldn't figure it out, what was nagging me. Trump seemed to be blasting the GOP for trying to do this, and rightly so. So what was nagging me? I didn't realize what it was until I reread Trump's response. What was nagging at me is the part I bolded. Trump didn't blast the GOP for trying it so much as trying it right out of the gate, in secret. Trump wasn't even saying "Don't do it." He was just saying "Don't do it now" Sort of a....We will deal with this later, when nobody is paying attention type deal.

Which brings me back around to the GOP trying this in the first place.

I mean...WTF!? Come on. I get that Congress would LOVE not to have the ethics committee, just like criminals would LOVE for there to be no police. But what makes the GOP think that this would be a smart thing to do? It's about the single most idiotic thing they could've tried, and that is saying something. And the heavyset congressman reporters questioned in the hall, who shrugged his shoulders and screeched: It's not that big of a deal" (Don't know his name) just came across as the cliched child caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

The GOP really needs to stop this stupid sh*t.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

The last republican leaning independent on this message board. All others have been silenced and driven off, or outright banned. Only ONE remains. I guess HighLander had it right all along....In the end, there can be only ONE.

#27 Omega

Omega

    Nous sommes tous Franšais

  • Moderator
  • 3,985 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 01:22 PM

They saw that Trump got elected and they all got re-elected despite all the frankly evil BS they've collectively been pushing. They know that because of their propaganda machine victory they can get away with literally anything, so they're going to. Simple as that.

#28 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,772 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 02:05 PM

View PostOmega, on 04 January 2017 - 01:22 PM, said:

They saw that Trump got elected and they all got re-elected despite all the frankly evil BS they've collectively been pushing. They know that because of their propaganda machine victory they can get away with literally anything, so they're going to. Simple as that.

Yep.  And quite frankly, that propaganda machine is really effective.  They're not afraid of the next elections at all

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#29 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,804 posts

Posted 05 January 2017 - 05:53 PM

So, if the GOP can get ACA (Affordable Care Act) repealed, they may very well be successful in defunding Planned Parenthood at the same time as they plan to tie them together. And reminder, federal funds don't go towards abortion, even those carried out at Planned Parenthood. And the GOP scoff at liberals saying there is a war against women…..

https://www.washingt...m=.234d2d35a977
Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#30 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,624 posts

Posted 06 January 2017 - 08:34 AM

View Postsierraleone, on 05 January 2017 - 05:53 PM, said:

So, if the GOP can get ACA (Affordable Care Act) repealed, they may very well be successful in defunding Planned Parenthood at the same time as they plan to tie them together. And reminder, federal funds don't go towards abortion, even those carried out at Planned Parenthood. And the GOP scoff at liberals saying there is a war against women…..

https://www.washingt...m=.234d2d35a977

Actually, the Federal Funds DO help with the abortions, in a round about way. While PP might not use the Federal dollars directly for abortions, PP is able to not use their own money for other women's health services by using the Federal money. If they didn't have the Federal money those other services would have to be paid for out of the money PP is using for abortions, which would cut the available money available to do abortions.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

The last republican leaning independent on this message board. All others have been silenced and driven off, or outright banned. Only ONE remains. I guess HighLander had it right all along....In the end, there can be only ONE.

#31 Omega

Omega

    Nous sommes tous Franšais

  • Moderator
  • 3,985 posts

Posted 06 January 2017 - 09:38 AM

...in which case, cutting funding still hurts non-abortion medical services...

#32 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,804 posts

Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:26 PM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 06 January 2017 - 08:34 AM, said:

Actually, the Federal Funds DO help with the abortions, in a round about way. While PP might not use the Federal dollars directly for abortions, PP is able to not use their own money for other women's health services by using the Federal money. If they didn't have the Federal money those other services would have to be paid for out of the money PP is using for abortions, which would cut the available money available to do abortions.

Any reading about times/places that abortions were banned one will find that the abortion rate was not drastically changed. How does an absolutionist with regards to fetus rights do about the fact that 10-30% of people who have uteruses will procure or attempt to procure an abortion in their life time?

(Not saying you are an absolutionist, I don't know your position. I am just commenting because it seems really easy for some anti-choice to try to ban abortion, but what is their next step after it is banned? How do they propose to regulate/enforce an abortion ban without seeming like tyrants?).

Even attacking it from just a my-taxes(!) stance doesn't work well. Taxes will be involved regardless, you can't fence off abortion from the rest of life. What Government might and could do with regards to abortion:


1) Sharing/Disseminate Abortion-related Info (Educate / promote / deter / advertise / propagandize)

- Publicize what/where/when/how reproductive services are available, and real/imagined risks/side-effects.
Note: Many Anti-choice/Crisis Pregnancy Centres already do this, while abortion is legal, and some of these CPCs gets government funding. It is just that they often scare/manipulate pregnant women with misinformation.


2) Prevention / Monitoring

- Legal Abortion:
Ensure accurate/comprehensive sex-ed widely available/accessible.
Provide contraceptives/condoms. Happening spottily.
There are people that fight even this of course, as the court cases against the contraception mandate in the ACA show. A success story: The state of Colorado has drastically reduce the number of teen pregnancies by providing teen girls and poor women long-lasting contraceptives.

- Abortion Illegal:
Could monitor people/activity that may lead to abortion.
The easiest way would be to not let women hide that they are pregnant. The cheapest way for government to do that would be not allow pregnancy tests to be sold over the counter. There could be government bureaucracy to monitor reports on new pregnancies, and tracking them for outcomes.
Miscarriages/stillbirth are reported by health care workers to law enforcement authorities in El Salvador.


3) Providing abortions:

- Legal Abortion:
Is typically standardized, effective and safe due to government-set standards and compliance monitoring. Accessibility varies. At this time it is also sometimes U.S. taxpayer-funded through public health plans or services, but restricted to narrow exceptions.

- Abortion Illegal:
Still, some 10-30% of women will have an abortion. No abortions directly funded by the government, except in narrowly accepted exceptions, if any. Though banning abortion costs in other ways.

Note: Some doctors will provide safe black-market abortions, labelled it something else on the billing of it. They will offered it at a premium price, which will exclude most middle class/poor/young women. Those women are left to butchers/poisoners, or dangerous home-remedies, or to carrying to term against their will.


The next categories are really only become a regular concern for resource allocation if abortion is illegal, IMO.


4) Enforcement (If Abortion Illegal):

- Law Enforcement (Cops/CSI/Staff) to investigate suspected abortion crimes.
- Lawyers/staff to prosecute the court case.
- Lawyers/staff to defend the accused (the only one which might not be tax-payer funded in this list).
- Judge/Staff to manage court proceedings to ensure due process.
- Juries (less taxable earnings, and what little income they get during Jury duty is government-funded).
- Wardens/other prison staff to manage those convicted (assuming wasn't jailed prior to conviction).
- Probation Officers to monitor that convicts meet the conditions of their parole.

This means less resources for law enforcement and the criminal court system to tackle other issues.


5) Health Care Costs (If Abortion Illegal)

- More urgent emergency care due to botched abortions.
- More long-term health-problems for women, and possibly child.
- More complications in intended/wanted pregnancies due to lack of trust/loss of patient-doctor privilege.
- More health care issues in general due to increased poverty & related issues
- Less doctors being able to practice because they are in prison for abortion-related crimes.

Again, this means less resources for a sector of society, in this case health care, to tackle other issues.


6) Labour Costs/Lost Tax Revenue (If Abortion Illegal)

- more unpaid sick days from women trying to tough out complications to avoid the law.
- some severe complications could cause long-term disabilities interfering with their employability.
- if access to contraception is an issue some women may have to take maternity leave with regularity.
- complications could cause infertility/sterility for some, which may mean less taxpayers willingly borne.
- also less taxpayers willing borne into this world by those jailed due to an abortion-related convictions.
- former convicts (with abortion-related convictions) having trouble finding work.
- less tax revenue due to more poverty


7) Social Services overly-taxed (If Abortion Illegal - due to women carrying to term against their will)

- More teenage parents
- More poverty
- More abandoned/abused/neglected children
- More families under monitoring by social services
- More strain on orphanages/foster care/adoption & the proper oversight there of
- More dysfunction adults (when those children grow up)

Again, this means less resources for a sector of society, in this case social-services, to tackle other issues.


And lastly,
8) Funeral Costs

- A person might flippantly say that all people pass away eventually, but life insurance probably won't cover a death resulting from the insured's criminal activity. And if they are indigent their funeral may be partly/fully covered by the government. She may gotten out of poverty had she lived longer. Oh, and it is not a stretch to imagine mandatory funerals for miscarried/aborted fetus if abortion is illegal, when a couple states are already proposing this idea when abortion is still legal.

Edited by sierraleone, 06 January 2017 - 11:59 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#33 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,804 posts

Posted 07 January 2017 - 11:12 AM

Apparently 2017 isn't the first time the GOP has tried to gut ethic rules. They did so 12 years go too.

http://www.slate.com..._and_trump.html

Quote

And with that opportunity on the table, congressional Republicans surfaced a play last used in 2005, when they had unified control under President George W. Bush—they attacked ethics rules.

Edited by sierraleone, 07 January 2017 - 11:12 AM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#34 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,447 posts

Posted 07 January 2017 - 01:25 PM

Well who needs ethics when you're so close to Jesus like they all are?

#35 Omega

Omega

    Nous sommes tous Franšais

  • Moderator
  • 3,985 posts

Posted 07 January 2017 - 03:04 PM

Rules requiring them to uphold their oaths of office prevent them from implementing religious law.

#36 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,447 posts

Posted 07 January 2017 - 04:02 PM

View PostOmega, on 07 January 2017 - 03:04 PM, said:

Rules requiring them to uphold their oaths of office prevent them from implementing religious law.

Was being facetious, because they're as far away from Jesus as the Devil himself. But I don't see ethics restraint slowing down Republicans from implementing "religious" laws all across the country where they're in power. That is laws curtailing civil liberties and rights in the name of their religion. Nothing holy or Godly about it, just a power grab to subjugate others to their will, like any other fascist authoritarian.

#37 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,804 posts

Posted 07 January 2017 - 04:31 PM

Something that got lost in the shuffle of news this week:

Republicans passed something this week. They have made it easier to sell off federal lands, and ignore the issues this might cause with reconciling federal budgets (which they pretend to be of the utmost importance). Very little reporting on this.

http://www.statesman...lands/96263014/

Quote

The change treats such transfers as cost free to the federal government even if they reduce federal revenue from mining, grazing rights and other sources. Without the change, members of Congress could have blocked a land transfer by requiring proponents to show how the lost revenue would be made up through budget cuts or increasing revenue from other sources. These so-called “pay-as-you go” rules have been in effect since 2010.
...
It was part of a larger package of changes that set the rules the 115th Congress will operate under for the next two years. A proposed rule to scuttle the Office of Congressional Ethics was part of the same package but it was withdrawn before the vote.

How many of these kind of stories going to slip by the people's notice until it is too late….

Edited by sierraleone, 07 January 2017 - 04:31 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#38 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,447 posts

Posted 07 January 2017 - 04:50 PM

Well you have to admit sierraleone, that a story about selling off federal lands without reconciling it to the budget is far less compelling or attention worthy than Trump's boast tweets about him beating Schwarzenegger's Celebrity Apprentice ratings. You know, real news.

#39 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,804 posts

Posted 07 January 2017 - 05:02 PM

^ Yadda Yadda, I totally see your point! All those headlines links that I have been skipping (such as the one you point out) are the ones I should be paying attention to! I am being a bad consumer for the news media, gotta be a good little brainless viewer right? ;)
Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#40 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,804 posts

Posted 08 January 2017 - 09:29 AM

Kentucky state house is under the GOP for first time since 1921, and have passed two bills this week. The bills contain an emergency clause which mean they take effect immediately. I also read that these bills moved so quickly reporters/journalists were not able to obtain copies of some of the bills before they received a reading and were headed to committee for a vote.


1) One is a right-to-work bill, weakening unions.

(It seems Kentucky is one of the few rural, generally conservative, states that historically had stronger unions. IIUC. In fact there were *fairly* reliably for Democratic Presidents until 1956. After that and before Bush, during the next 11 elections they voted for democrats 4 times. The last 5 elections, 2000 forward, they voted for republican Presidents).

I assume Kentucky was a pretty strong state for unions previous due to the strength of the blue-collar workers, especially in mining. I assume part of this electoral trend is due to the the role of strength of coal weakening in their state, which has undoubtedly weakened their unions and caused middle class voters economic anxiety.


2) Of course, another abortion-related ban. At 20 weeks, no exception for Rape or Incest.

So expect 20 week bans to become the norm. Whatever one's feelings about abortion at the stage it is fairly obvious most of these state legislators would like to pass more strict abortion bans, and many in fact would like to ban abortions all together.

http://www.washingto...ting-unions-ab/


After ~24 weeks, if the mother's life is at risk and the baby does not have severe defects, what happens is very rarely an abortion; it is almost always an emergency c-section, with intensive care for the premie. Which is why I find 3 trimester abortion bans disingenuous. They are largely only done if severe abnormalities are found, and they generally can't be found out until the 20 week scan/tests.

I remember saying earlier that people might not be bothered by a lack of rape or incest exception because they figure most women would know if they are pregnancy by 20 weeks. That doesn't take into consideration the trauma they have been through. If the violation done on them has disturbed their mental health and habits (ex: depression, anxiety, PTSD, over-eating), they may mistake the pregnancy symptoms for something else (as some healthy women do), or they may simply be unable to process it with everything else going on and are in subconscious denial. There is no right or wrong to that, just like there is no right or wrong way to deal with grief. So some rape/incest victims may not figure out their pregnant for longer, especially if they are more ignorant of pregnancy symptoms, whether due to being very young (as most incest victims start out) or ignorance (perhaps from lack of comprehensive sex-ed).

Edited by sierraleone, 08 January 2017 - 09:29 AM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users