Page 76 of 140

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2021 7:29 am
by seacoaster
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/11/opin ... trump.html

"After Donald Trump’s defeat, there was a measure of hope among Republicans who opposed him that control of the G.O.P. would be up for grabs, and that conservative pragmatists could take back the party. But it’s become obvious that political extremists maintain a viselike grip on the national G.O.P., the state parties and the process for fielding and championing House and Senate candidates in next year’s elections.

Rational Republicans are losing the G.O.P. civil war. And the only near-term way to battle pro-Trump extremists is for all of us to team up on key races and overarching political goals with our longtime political opponents: the Democratic Party.

Earlier this year we joined more than 150 conservatives — including former governors, senators, congressmen, cabinet secretaries, and party leaders — in calling for the Republican Party to divorce itself from Trumpism or else lose our support, perhaps by forming a new political party. Rather than return to founding ideals, G.O.P. leaders in the House and in many states have now turned belief in conspiracy theories and lies about stolen elections into a litmus test for membership and running for office.

Breaking away from the G.O.P. and starting a new center-right party may prove in time to be the last resort if Trump-backed candidates continue to win Republican primaries. We and our allies have debated the option of starting a new party for months and will continue to explore its viability in the long run. Unfortunately, history is littered with examples of failed attempts at breaking the two-party system, and in most states today the laws do not lend themselves easily to the creation and success of third parties.

So for now, the best hope for the rational remnants of the G.O.P. is for us to form an alliance with Democrats to defend American institutions, defeat far-right candidates, and elect honorable representatives next year — including a strong contingent of moderate Democrats.

It’s a strategy that has worked. Mr. Trump lost re-election in large part because Republicans nationwide defected, with 7 percent who voted for Mr. Trump in 2016 flipping to support Joe Biden, a margin big enough to have made some difference in key swing states.

Even still, we don’t take this position lightly. Many of us have spent years battling the left over government’s role in society, and we will continue to have disagreements on fundamental issues like infrastructure spending, taxes and national security. Similarly, some Democrats will be wary of any pact with the political right.

But we agree on something more foundational — democracy. We cannot tolerate the continued hijacking of a major U.S. political party by those who seek to tear down our Republic’s guardrails or who are willing to put one man’s interests ahead of the country. We cannot tolerate the leaders of the G.O.P. — in 2022 or in the presidential election in 2024 — refusing to accept the results of elections or undermining the certification of those results should they lose.

To that end, concerned conservatives must join forces with Democrats on the most essential near-term imperative: blocking Republican leaders from regaining control of the U.S. House of Representatives. Some of us have worked in the past with the House Republican leader, Kevin McCarthy, but as long as he embraces Mr. Trump’s lies, he cannot be trusted to lead the chamber, especially in the run-up to the next presidential election.

And while many of us support and respect the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, it is far from clear that he can keep Mr. Trump’s allies at bay, which is why the Senate may be safer remaining as a divided body rather than under Republican control.

For these reasons, we will endorse and support bipartisan-oriented moderate Democrats in difficult races, like Representative Abigail Spanberger of Virginia and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan and Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, where they will undoubtedly be challenged by Trump-backed candidates. And we will defend a small nucleus of courageous Republicans, such as Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, Peter Meijer and others who are unafraid to speak the truth.

In addition to these leaders, this week we are coming together around a political idea — the Renew America Movement — and will release a slate of nearly two dozen Democratic, independent and Republican candidates we will support in 2022.

These “renewers” must be protected and elected if we want to restore a common-sense coalition in Washington. But merely holding the line will be insufficient. To defeat the extremist insurgency in our political system and pressure the Republican Party to reform, voters and candidates must be willing to form nontraditional alliances.

For disaffected Republicans, this means an openness to backing centrist Democrats. It will be difficult for lifelong G.O.P. members to do this — akin to rooting for the other team out of fear that your own is ruining the sport entirely — but democracy is not a game, which is why when push comes to shove, patriotic conservatives should put country over party.

One of those races is in Pennsylvania, where a bevy of pro-Trump candidates are vying to replace the outgoing Republican senator, Pat Toomey. The only prominent moderate in the G.O.P. primary, Craig Snyder, recently bowed out, and if no one takes his place, it will increase the urgency for Republican voters to stand behind a Democrat, such as centrist Representative Conor Lamb, who is running for the seat.

For Democrats, this similarly means being open to conceding that there are certain races where progressives simply cannot win and acknowledging that it makes more sense to throw their lot in with a center-right candidate who can take out a more radical conservative.

Utah is a prime example, where the best hope of defeating Senator Mike Lee, a Republican who defended Mr. Trump’s refusal to concede the election, is not a Democrat but an independent and former Republican, Evan McMullin, a member of our group, who announced last week that he was entering the race.

We need more candidates like him prepared to challenge politicians who have sought to subvert our Constitution from the comfort of their “safe seats” in Congress, and we are encouraged to note that additional independent-minded leaders are considering entering the fray in places like Texas, Arizona, and North Carolina, targeting seats that Trumpist Republicans think are secure.

More broadly, this experiment in “coalition campaigning” — uniting concerned conservatives and patriotic progressives — could remake American politics and serve as an antidote to hyper-partisanship and federal gridlock.

To work, it will require trust-building between both camps, especially while fighting side-by-side in the toughest races around the country by learning to collaborate on voter outreach, sharing sensitive polling data, and synchronizing campaign messaging.

A compact between the center-right and the left may seem like an unnatural fit, but in the battle for the soul of America’s political system, we cannot retreat to our ideological corners.

A great deal depends on our willingness to consider new paths of political reform. From the halls of Congress to our own communities, the fate of our Republic might well rest on forming alliances with those we least expected."

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2021 7:59 am
by CU88
seacoaster wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 7:29 am https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/11/opin ... trump.html

"After Donald Trump’s defeat, there was a measure of hope among Republicans who opposed him that control of the G.O.P. would be up for grabs, and that conservative pragmatists could take back the party. But it’s become obvious that political extremists maintain a viselike grip on the national G.O.P., the state parties and the process for fielding and championing House and Senate candidates in next year’s elections.

Rational Republicans are losing the G.O.P. civil war. And the only near-term way to battle pro-Trump extremists is for all of us to team up on key races and overarching political goals with our longtime political opponents: the Democratic Party.

Earlier this year we joined more than 150 conservatives — including former governors, senators, congressmen, cabinet secretaries, and party leaders — in calling for the Republican Party to divorce itself from Trumpism or else lose our support, perhaps by forming a new political party. Rather than return to founding ideals, G.O.P. leaders in the House and in many states have now turned belief in conspiracy theories and lies about stolen elections into a litmus test for membership and running for office.

Breaking away from the G.O.P. and starting a new center-right party may prove in time to be the last resort if Trump-backed candidates continue to win Republican primaries. We and our allies have debated the option of starting a new party for months and will continue to explore its viability in the long run. Unfortunately, history is littered with examples of failed attempts at breaking the two-party system, and in most states today the laws do not lend themselves easily to the creation and success of third parties.

So for now, the best hope for the rational remnants of the G.O.P. is for us to form an alliance with Democrats to defend American institutions, defeat far-right candidates, and elect honorable representatives next year — including a strong contingent of moderate Democrats.

It’s a strategy that has worked. Mr. Trump lost re-election in large part because Republicans nationwide defected, with 7 percent who voted for Mr. Trump in 2016 flipping to support Joe Biden, a margin big enough to have made some difference in key swing states.

Even still, we don’t take this position lightly. Many of us have spent years battling the left over government’s role in society, and we will continue to have disagreements on fundamental issues like infrastructure spending, taxes and national security. Similarly, some Democrats will be wary of any pact with the political right.

But we agree on something more foundational — democracy. We cannot tolerate the continued hijacking of a major U.S. political party by those who seek to tear down our Republic’s guardrails or who are willing to put one man’s interests ahead of the country. We cannot tolerate the leaders of the G.O.P. — in 2022 or in the presidential election in 2024 — refusing to accept the results of elections or undermining the certification of those results should they lose.

To that end, concerned conservatives must join forces with Democrats on the most essential near-term imperative: blocking Republican leaders from regaining control of the U.S. House of Representatives. Some of us have worked in the past with the House Republican leader, Kevin McCarthy, but as long as he embraces Mr. Trump’s lies, he cannot be trusted to lead the chamber, especially in the run-up to the next presidential election.

And while many of us support and respect the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, it is far from clear that he can keep Mr. Trump’s allies at bay, which is why the Senate may be safer remaining as a divided body rather than under Republican control.

For these reasons, we will endorse and support bipartisan-oriented moderate Democrats in difficult races, like Representative Abigail Spanberger of Virginia and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan and Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, where they will undoubtedly be challenged by Trump-backed candidates. And we will defend a small nucleus of courageous Republicans, such as Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, Peter Meijer and others who are unafraid to speak the truth.

In addition to these leaders, this week we are coming together around a political idea — the Renew America Movement — and will release a slate of nearly two dozen Democratic, independent and Republican candidates we will support in 2022.

These “renewers” must be protected and elected if we want to restore a common-sense coalition in Washington. But merely holding the line will be insufficient. To defeat the extremist insurgency in our political system and pressure the Republican Party to reform, voters and candidates must be willing to form nontraditional alliances.

For disaffected Republicans, this means an openness to backing centrist Democrats. It will be difficult for lifelong G.O.P. members to do this — akin to rooting for the other team out of fear that your own is ruining the sport entirely — but democracy is not a game, which is why when push comes to shove, patriotic conservatives should put country over party.

One of those races is in Pennsylvania, where a bevy of pro-Trump candidates are vying to replace the outgoing Republican senator, Pat Toomey. The only prominent moderate in the G.O.P. primary, Craig Snyder, recently bowed out, and if no one takes his place, it will increase the urgency for Republican voters to stand behind a Democrat, such as centrist Representative Conor Lamb, who is running for the seat.

For Democrats, this similarly means being open to conceding that there are certain races where progressives simply cannot win and acknowledging that it makes more sense to throw their lot in with a center-right candidate who can take out a more radical conservative.

Utah is a prime example, where the best hope of defeating Senator Mike Lee, a Republican who defended Mr. Trump’s refusal to concede the election, is not a Democrat but an independent and former Republican, Evan McMullin, a member of our group, who announced last week that he was entering the race.

We need more candidates like him prepared to challenge politicians who have sought to subvert our Constitution from the comfort of their “safe seats” in Congress, and we are encouraged to note that additional independent-minded leaders are considering entering the fray in places like Texas, Arizona, and North Carolina, targeting seats that Trumpist Republicans think are secure.

More broadly, this experiment in “coalition campaigning” — uniting concerned conservatives and patriotic progressives — could remake American politics and serve as an antidote to hyper-partisanship and federal gridlock.

To work, it will require trust-building between both camps, especially while fighting side-by-side in the toughest races around the country by learning to collaborate on voter outreach, sharing sensitive polling data, and synchronizing campaign messaging.

A compact between the center-right and the left may seem like an unnatural fit, but in the battle for the soul of America’s political system, we cannot retreat to our ideological corners.

A great deal depends on our willingness to consider new paths of political reform. From the halls of Congress to our own communities, the fate of our Republic might well rest on forming alliances with those we least expected."

October 10, 2021
Heather Cox Richardson
Oct 11

The fight over raising the debt ceiling reveals that the Trump wing has taken control of the Republican Party.

Defaulting on our debt for the first time in our history would have crushed our economy and forfeited our international standing. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen warned that a default would be “catastrophic,” creating “a permanently weaker nation.”

Financial analysts at Moody’s Analytics noted that when a problem with word-processing equipment at the Treasury led it inadvertently to miss payments on Treasury bills in 1979, the resulting jump in interest rates ultimately cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin warned that default would undermine our international reputation.

But when the House passed a bill to raise the debt ceiling, Senate Republicans killed the measure with the filibuster, the Senate rule that allows debate to continue without a vote until 60 members of the Senate vote to end debate—a rule that essentially means it takes 60 votes, rather than a simple majority, to pass any bill the minority wants to block.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) agreed that the ceiling must be raised. But then he insisted he would not allow Democrats to pass the bill with a simple majority. He told them they must pass a measure raising the debt ceiling in a reconciliation package, which cannot be filibustered but which would make it harder for Democrats to pass their popular infrastructure measures. Democrats noted that the Republicans ran up the debt and now should agree to pay it, and they refused to try to rush through a reconciliation package to shield the Republicans from their responsibility.

And then, as business leaders began to map out a pressure campaign to get McConnell to drop the filibuster, he backed down and agreed…not to allow a simple majority vote, but to find ten votes to break a filibuster.

As co-host of Pod Save America Dan Pfeiffer noted in his newsletter The Message Box, that approach suggested that McConnell has lost control of his caucus. Any senator can vote against allowing a simple majority, and it seems McConnell could not trust the other Republican senators to permit a vote and so had to try to force the Democrats to do things his way. But Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) called his bluff.

McConnell scrounged up the votes he needed but then wrote a scathing letter to President Joe Biden, announcing he would “not provide such assistance again if your all-Democrat government drifts into another avoidable crisis.” But the truth is that he is putting the best spin he can on the fact he can’t help even if he wanted to: he no longer controls the caucus.

Immediately, former president Trump issued a statement blaming McConnell for “folding to the Democrats, again. He’s got all of the cards with the debt ceiling, it’s time to play the hand. Don’t let them destroy our country!”

On September 22, Trump explained that to stop the Democrats, the Republicans might have to burn down the country: “The way I look at it,” he wrote, “what the Democrats are proposing, on so many different levels, will destroy our country. Therefore, Republicans have no choice but to do what they have to do, and the Democrats will have no choice but to concede all of the horror they are trying to inflict upon the future of the United States.”

Those who agree with Trump are now in charge of the Republican Party.

Today, on Fox News Sunday, the second-ranking Republican in the House, Steve Scalise (R-LA), refused repeatedly to say that Biden had won the 2020 election. Although then–attorney general and Trump loyalist Bill Barr said there was no evidence of widespread voter fraud, and state election officials and judges have all agreed there were no irregularities that would have changed the outcome, Scalise backed Trump’s Big Lie that he actually won the 2020 election.

He did so by arguing that certain states had not followed the Constitution when state judges, governors, and election officials expanded mail-in voting during the pandemic. There is no indication that those adjustments changed the outcome of the election, but in summer 2020 Trump became fixated on the idea that mail-in voting hurt his reelection campaign.

As soon as Trump lost the election, he began to try to get officials to cheat to say he won, and then to replace officials who refused with those he thought would help him keep the presidency. On January 2, he tried to browbeat Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger into “finding” 11,780 votes in Georgia—one more than Biden’s margin of victory. Then he fired the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, BJay Pak, because he would not produce evidence of fraud, replacing him with someone Trump hoped would.

Now, across Republican-dominated states, Trump Republicans are doing the same thing: attacking those Republican officials who refuse to say the 2020 election was stolen and replacing them with partisans who will. In Hood County, Texas, where Trump won 81% of the vote, his supporters are trying to get rid of the Republican elections official who is trying to preserve the security of elections by, for example, excluding from a private meeting a journalist from One America News.

At the local level, anti–mask mandate and anti-vaccine protesters are bullying school board members and town officials to demand that local leaders bow to their wishes, and they are threatening violence in a way that looks much like the rise of anti-socialist gangs in the 1930s that fed the rise of fascism.

Last week, Trump adviser Steve Bannon, who is currently defying a subpoena from the House select committee investigating the January 6th attack on the Capitol, told an audience that he would have 20,000 “shock troops” on hand to take over the government and deconstruct it as soon as Republicans again are in charge. “We control this country,” he said. “We have to start acting like it.”

Today, on the birthday of Ashli Babbitt, who was shot by an officer as she tried to break through a barricaded door to stop the counting of the ballots that would make Biden president, Trump recorded a video for a family event saying: “There was no reason Ashli should have lost her life that day. We must all demand justice for Ashli and her family.”

Last night, in Iowa, Trump held a “rally.” Mainstream Republican officials, including Senator Chuck Grassley, Governor Kim Reynolds, and Representatives Mariannette Miller-Meeks and Ashley Hinson, attended. Right on cue, a Trump supporter told a reporter: “We’re just sick of it, you know, and we’re not going to take it any more. I see a civil war coming….”

Today’s split in the Republican Party mirrors the split in the Democrats in 1860. The leadership is made up of extremists who consider their opponents illegitimate, maintain they alone understand the Constitution, and are skewing the mechanics of our electoral system to keep themselves in power. In 1860, the Democratic Party split, its moderates joining with the fledgling Republicans to defend the United States of America.

Then, as now, the radicals calling for the destruction of the nation were a shrinking minority desperate to cling to power. Then they took up arms to divide the nation in two and keep power in their part of it; now they are launching a quieter war simply by rigging future elections to conquer the whole nation.

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2021 10:01 am
by seacoaster
Another good, timely warning from HCR. But our national somnolence while Republicans actually talk about "shock troops," and the Big Lie, and a takeover of the country through distorted electoral norms will probably carry the day. We are on borrowed time, and in descent now. The GOP no longer values democracy; they value only one thing -- the exercise of power from the offices they either hold or covet.

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2021 10:13 am
by Farfromgeneva
Is she super hot or something because you sure like her stories?

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2021 11:23 am
by CU88
Farfromgeneva wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 10:13 am Is she super hot or something because you sure like her stories?
I confess that I have never seen nor meet the woman, I just find her commentary insightful and worth sharing.

Do I over share?

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2021 11:46 am
by Farfromgeneva
CU88 wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 11:23 am
Farfromgeneva wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 10:13 am Is she super hot or something because you sure like her stories?
I confess that I have never seen nor meet the woman, I just find her commentary insightful and worth sharing.

Do I over share?
No I Over share just try to use some diversity of sources here and there. I don’t mind her just see the same one a lot. I get most of the WSJ oped is trash these days-Holman Jenkins being one of the worst. Just curious but I suppose if George Will still wrote id pull his stuff a lot

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2021 11:47 am
by seacoaster
CU88 wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 11:23 am
Farfromgeneva wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 10:13 am Is she super hot or something because you sure like her stories?
I confess that I have never seen nor meet the woman, I just find her commentary insightful and worth sharing.

Do I over share?
She’s educated, deeply informed about the history of the country, and is an excellent writer.

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2021 12:06 pm
by Farfromgeneva
I think my point was more about having one source consistently but it doesn't really matter.

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2021 2:06 pm
by MDlaxfan76
Farfromgeneva wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 12:06 pm I think my point was more about having one source consistently but it doesn't really matter.
She's pretty darn cogent on these topics.

A lot of commentators aren't.

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2021 3:20 pm
by Farfromgeneva
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 2:06 pm
Farfromgeneva wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 12:06 pm I think my point was more about having one source consistently but it doesn't really matter.
She's pretty darn cogent on these topics.

A lot of commentators aren't.
Who you talking about willis? :)

I'm just projecting because I feel like I've turned the financial thread into my own little trips R TAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATS jr page and use WSJ a lot as a reference point so try to at least drop in some other sources there and elsewhere.

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2021 4:05 pm
by MDlaxfan76
Farfromgeneva wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 3:20 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 2:06 pm
Farfromgeneva wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 12:06 pm I think my point was more about having one source consistently but it doesn't really matter.
She's pretty darn cogent on these topics.

A lot of commentators aren't.
Who you talking about willis? :)

I'm just projecting because I feel like I've turned the financial thread into my own little trips R TAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATS jr page and use WSJ a lot as a reference point so try to at least drop in some other sources there and elsewhere.
:lol: not referring to you, though, let's just say that she's a professional writer.
As opposed to a professional, writing...

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2021 4:36 pm
by Farfromgeneva
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 4:05 pm
Farfromgeneva wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 3:20 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 2:06 pm
Farfromgeneva wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 12:06 pm I think my point was more about having one source consistently but it doesn't really matter.
She's pretty darn cogent on these topics.

A lot of commentators aren't.
Who you talking about willis? :)

I'm just projecting because I feel like I've turned the financial thread into my own little trips R TAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATS jr page and use WSJ a lot as a reference point so try to at least drop in some other sources there and elsewhere.
:lol: not referring to you, though, let's just say that she's a professional writer.
As opposed to a professional, writing...
I am a professional degenerate! I prefer to call is "savant".

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 7:12 am
by seacoaster
More performative stupidity from GOP Governor Abbott:

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/10/11 ... ce=twitter

"Texas Gov. Greg Abbott on Monday issued another executive order cracking down on COVID-19 vaccine mandates — this time banning any entity in Texas, including private businesses, from requiring vaccinations for employees or customers.

Abbott also called on the Legislature to pass a law with the same effect. The Legislature is in its third special legislative session, which ends Oct. 19.

"The COVID-19 vaccine is safe, effective, & our best defense against the virus, but should always remain voluntary & never forced," he said in a tweet announcing his latest order.

The order marks a significant reversal after Abbott previously gave private businesses the choice to mandate vaccines for workers. An Abbott spokesperson said in late August that "private businesses don't need government running their business."

For weeks, Abbott has been under pressure from some on his right to go further in prohibiting vaccine requirements, and one of his primary challengers, Don Huffines, celebrated the latest order.

COVID-19 vaccine requirements by government agencies, cities, counties and school districts were already banned by a previous executive order — which is currently being fought in court by the San Antonio Independent School District. The Legislature also already passed into law a ban on so-called vaccine passports — which would allow businesses to require proof of vaccination from customers.

The latest move appears to be at least partly motivated by President Joe Biden's actions in September that require all employers with more than 100 workers to mandate vaccines for workers or test weekly for the virus. Biden also required all federal government workers and contractors to get vaccinated, leading nearly all the major airlines — including American Airlines and Southwest Airlines headquartered in Texas — to announce they'd abide by the mandate.

"In yet another instance of federal government overreach, the Biden Administration is now bullying many private entities into imposing COVID-19 vaccine mandates, causing workforce disruptions that threaten Texas's continued recovery from the COVID-19 disaster," Abbott said in his order.

About 52% of Texans are fully vaccinated. Abbott was vaccinated on TV and has previously advocated for people to get the shot. But in recent months — as the delta variant caused another upswing in cases and hospitalizations — he has concentrated his political capital toward fighting vaccine and mask mandates from local school districts and governments.

Abbott has been navigating a political buzzsaw when it comes to pandemic rules — and his latest move is another concession to critics in his own party. Huffines, the primary opponent, has been calling on the governor to crack down on vaccine mandates issued from private businesses to their employees.

"I am very pleased to see that our campaign has forced Greg Abbott to reverse his position on this important issue," Huffines, a former Dallas state senator, said in a statement Monday evening.

While GOP officials are pushing back against COVID-19 vaccine mandates, the state has for years allowed other kinds of vaccine mandates in public schools and universities.

Texas public schools currently require K-12 students to get vaccinated for tetanus, polio, measles, mumps and rubella, hepatitis B, chickenpox, meningitis and hepatitis A. College students are required to receive a meningitis vaccination, too. Health care and veterinary students are required to get additional vaccines for rabies, tetanus-diphtheria and hepatitis B."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politi ... d_nn_tw_ma

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 9:42 am
by cradleandshoot
seacoaster wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 11:47 am
CU88 wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 11:23 am
Farfromgeneva wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 10:13 am Is she super hot or something because you sure like her stories?
I confess that I have never seen nor meet the woman, I just find her commentary insightful and worth sharing.

Do I over share?
She’s educated, deeply informed about the history of the country, and is an excellent writer.
🤮 And boring as hell and a strict FLP partisan hack. I prefer Leonard Pitts. At least he is strait up in your face and doesn't pretend to be an ideological snob. There is no nuance in his criticism of the Republicans.

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 11:17 am
by seacoaster
cradleandshoot wrote: Tue Oct 12, 2021 9:42 am
seacoaster wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 11:47 am
CU88 wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 11:23 am
Farfromgeneva wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 10:13 am Is she super hot or something because you sure like her stories?
I confess that I have never seen nor meet the woman, I just find her commentary insightful and worth sharing.

Do I over share?
She’s educated, deeply informed about the history of the country, and is an excellent writer.
🤮 And boring as hell and a strict FLP partisan hack. I prefer Leonard Pitts. At least he is strait up in your face and doesn't pretend to be an ideological snob. There is no nuance in his criticism of the Republicans.
I actually have come to feel really, earnestly sorry for you over the past few months. This response -- above -- is pretty much your standard reply to anyone who doesn't post something that synchs up with whatever it is you believe in or want to read. Just pretend you have the remote, and switch the channel. Most of us are trying to share, educate and learn. You just get shirty at everyone.

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 11:33 am
by Farfromgeneva
Image

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 12:55 pm
by cradleandshoot
seacoaster wrote: Tue Oct 12, 2021 11:17 am
cradleandshoot wrote: Tue Oct 12, 2021 9:42 am
seacoaster wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 11:47 am
CU88 wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 11:23 am
Farfromgeneva wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 10:13 am Is she super hot or something because you sure like her stories?
I confess that I have never seen nor meet the woman, I just find her commentary insightful and worth sharing.

Do I over share?
She’s educated, deeply informed about the history of the country, and is an excellent writer.
🤮 And boring as hell and a strict FLP partisan hack. I prefer Leonard Pitts. At least he is strait up in your face and doesn't pretend to be an ideological snob. There is no nuance in his criticism of the Republicans.
I actually have come to feel really, earnestly sorry for you over the past few months. This response -- above -- is pretty much your standard reply to anyone who doesn't post something that synchs up with whatever it is you believe in or want to read. Just pretend you have the remote, and switch the channel. Most of us are trying to share, educate and learn. You just get shirty at everyone.
No need to feel sorry for me. i actually use to read most of of her articles that you posted. At some point in time they just became very tedious, monotonous and sadly repetitive. When anybody writing any article regardless of their political perspective becomes boring to me, I'm done with them. That is why i prefer Mr Pitts. He is a FLP author who does not beat around the bush with philosophical political BS ideology. He just gets right in your face about what he thinks and why. FTR, i think that Right wing guy Cal Thomas is in the same league as your girl HCR. I am all for any author that wants to dazzle me with their brilliance. When they try and baffle with their BS... I'm out. I'm glad you enjoy reading HCR, she just is not my cup of joe.

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 8:10 pm
by seacoaster
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/12/opin ... emism.html

“Big business is overwhelmingly in favor of requiring that workers get vaccinated against Covid-19. A recent CNBC survey of chief financial officers found that 80 percent of them say they “totally support” the Biden administration’s plan to impose a vaccine-or-test mandate on companies with more than 100 workers, and many companies have already announced vaccination requirements for their employees.

Yet Greg Abbott, the governor of Texas, just issued an executive order banning vaccine mandates in his state. That is, he’s not just refusing to use his own powers to promote vaccination; he’s interfering in private decisions, trying to prevent businesses from requiring that their workers or customers be vaccinated.

And on Sunday, Senator Ted Cruz celebrated a wave of flight cancellations by Dallas-based Southwest Airlines, based on rumors — which both the airline and its union deny — that the problems were caused by a walkout of employees protesting the airline’s new vaccine requirements.

What’s going on here?

Republicans have been closely allied with big business since the Gilded Age, when a party originally based on opposition to slavery was in effect captured by the rising power of corporations. That alliance lost some of its force in the 1950s and 1960s, an era in which the G.O.P. largely accepted things like progressive taxation and strong labor unions, but came back in full with the rise of Ronald Reagan and his agenda of tax cuts and deregulation.

Indeed, it wasn’t that long ago that you could plausibly think of the Republican Party as basically a front for big-business interests, one that exploited social issues and appeals to racial hostility to win elections, only to turn immediately after each election to a pro-corporate agenda. That was basically the thesis of Thomas Frank’s 2004 book “What’s the Matter With Kansas,” and it seemed like a good model of the party until the rise of Trumpism.

Now, however, Republican politicians are at odds with corporate America on crucial issues. It’s not just vaccines. Corporate interests also want serious investment in infrastructure and find themselves on the outs with Republican leaders who don’t want to see Democrats achieve any policy successes. Basically, the G.O.P. is currently engaged in a major campaign of sabotage — its leaders want to see America do badly, because they believe this will redound to their political advantage — and if this hurts their corporate backers along the way, they don’t care.

Just to be clear, corporations aren’t being good guys. They support vaccine mandates and infrastructure investment because they believe that both would be good for their bottom lines. They’re still for the most part opposed to the rest of the Biden agenda, including — unforgivably — efforts to fight climate change, because they don’t want to pay higher taxes.

Still, the conflict between the G.O.P. and corporations is a striking new turn in American politics. And I wonder if some corporate leaders find themselves asking, in the privacy of their own minds, “My God, what have we done?”

For the truth is that the Republican Party has been growing increasingly radical — and decreasingly rational — for a long time. Where we are now is the culmination of a process that began in the 1990s, when Newt Gingrich became House speaker, if not earlier. Yet corporate interests continued to back the G.O.P. In fact, leading business organizations like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce leaned much further into partisanship even as Republicans became more radical, apparently believing that they could live with a bit of craziness so long as they got their tax cuts and deregulation.
Now they’re learning that they aren’t in control, and in fact have barely any voice in the party they bankrolled. They thought they were using the extremists; it turns out that the extremists were using them.

The question is, what are they going to do about it?”

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 8:23 pm
by Farfromgeneva
The GOP has largely been taken over by populists, the circle meets up-in some ways little difference between the Sanders and the extreme right.

The comment -corporations aren’t being good guys is problematic. The NYT author doesn’t know this and is making an accusation. It’s also pretty obvious bias to think that agendas can’t be aligned - rising tide. It’s easy to throw darts at a jacka** tied to a wooden fence. It’s harder to provide a more holistic and value neutral view. This my general disregard for the NYT (along for previously mentioned issue w Hobart-Anna story that I can say with first hand knowledge was wrong of them to write and not good journalism at all as a fact)

Re: Conservatives and Liberals

Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 7:04 am
by youthathletics
Farfromgeneva wrote: Tue Oct 12, 2021 8:23 pm The GOP has largely been taken over by populists, the circle meets up-in some ways little difference between the Sanders and the extreme right.

The comment -corporations aren’t being good guys is problematic. The NYT author doesn’t know this and is making an accusation. It’s also pretty obvious bias to think that agendas can’t be aligned - rising tide. It’s easy to throw darts at a jacka** tied to a wooden fence. It’s harder to provide a more holistic and value neutral view. This my general disregard for the NYT (along for previously mentioned issue w Hobart-Anna story that I can say with first hand knowledge was wrong of them to write and not good journalism at all as a fact)
Well said FFG......as dough boy puts it (4:45) " Why isn't their a NYT of the right". Certainly implicating the NYT is the left leaning reporting machine. He does a great job in the clip bringing the issue to the table, but cant help himself to cast blame at the other side.....thus proving why the divide at his own network.

@ 1:20, I think Matt Gertz highlights the real issue...but again, who is factual and who is not. Both sides are effing up the roux, which makes the stew taste like shiznit.