What's new

Donald Fires FBI Director who's investigating Russian Election Hacking

Democrats had a filibuster proof majority and basically got Lilly Ledbetter (which apparently did nothing because they still complain about the issue) and Obamacare. They got Obamacare, but it almost destroyed the Democrat party. Seems like "effective leadership" should mean more than forcing people to drink poisoned koolaide.

Obamacare alone is no small accomplishment, given how many red state Dems she successfully corralled to vote for it. Same goes for the Iran deal after she lost her status as majority leader.

There's a reason she's one of the most hated figures on the right, she's damn good at her job.

Oh, and Filibusters don't take place in the House. They had a filibuster proof majority in the Senate for a hot minute, but that has nothing to do with Pelosi.
 
Why didn't you guys get along?

Who knows, we were just kids. He was a smart ***, and I was quiet and kept to myself. So I made for an easy target. Kids being kids. You know, everyone forms cliques at that age. We weren't enemies, just had our moments. We were in a lot of the same classes. It's funny, a lot of times when I saw him in films years later, I'd think "He's not acting, that's just Jimmy being Jimmy".

He claims he's blacklisted in Hollywood now because of his politics. I don't think it helps anyone to spend that much time on Twitter spewing anger, but maybe I shouldn't talk, although I don't have a Twitter account. Good thing, lol.

He and his younger brother, who I never knew, used to drive all over the country entering poker tournaments. It was like a second career for him. When his brother died of a heart attack, they were very close, and he sued the hospital in RI where they took him, because Woods felt the ER did not perform up to snuff. Woods won, after a protracted legal battle.
 
Obamacare alone is no small accomplishment, given how many red state Dems she successfully corralled to vote for it. Same goes for the Iran deal after she lost her status as majority leader.

There's a reason she's one of the most hated figures on the right, she's damn good at her job.

Oh, and Filibusters don't take place in the House. They had a filibuster proof majority in the Senate for a hot minute, but that has nothing to do with Pelosi.

A Filibuster free majority in the senate allows you to pass almost anything you want into law. Those laws are generally introduced in the House. You could have "solved" immigration, legal reform, imposed higher taxes, passed all kinds of things Democrats scream about now. Nancy didn't. Either she didn't care, or couldn't "corral" those votes.

The "Iran Deal" was imposed by executive order.

I mean, sure, support Pelosi to "own the cons!" but don't think she is some sort of highly capable, female Mitch McConnel. She ain't that, not at all.
 
A Filibuster free majority in the senate allows you to pass almost anything you want into law. Those laws are generally introduced in the House. You could have "solved" immigration, legal reform, imposed higher taxes, passed all kinds of things Democrats scream about now. Nancy didn't. Either she didn't care, or couldn't "corral" those votes.

The "Iran Deal" was imposed by executive order.

I mean, sure, support Pelosi to "own the cons!" but don't think she is some sort of highly capable, female Mitch McConnel. She ain't that, not at all.

She was able to get enough votes to stop legislation that would kill the Iran deal.

There are political realities that limit wat can be accomplished, even with a filibuster proof majority in the Senate, especially when it comes to the famously difficult to manage Democratic party. The idea that Democrats could have enacted sweeping changes with the tax code, immigration, and health care all while working to dig the US out of the great recession just isn't grounded in reality.

As for Pelosi not being a female Mitch McConnell, thank ****ing christ for that.
 
So far McConnel has accomplished about the same as Pelosi. One major legislative victory and seats in the S.C.
 
Sorry folks, I have to be very brief.

When Clinton was elected, I was married to a democrat who was in a position to know all about Clinton. I got to listen to her dad decry all the crap people were digging up about him first hand.

It was not the same kind of organized, determined campaign that has been run against Trump, but no doubt there was a sort of organized opposition doing it. But it was a series of charges, and imo based on actual information, not just made up.

I don't call it "progress" that we have developed the art to the extent now deployed.

I never liked Bush much, either. I did not want Kavanaugh nominated. I know he represents "interests" which more or less are affluent, but he is more dedicated to integrity and principle derived from the Constitution, and he does part company with those "interests" on some independent, conscientious differences on a high intellectual plane..

More or less, he is like having Mitt Romney in the SCOTUS, which is not all just peachy.

Trump has been smarter than most people can understand from the Press. He is working to consolidate a new view of the US for the future, a view that does not do away with globalism, just does not sell us down the river outright.

Just a bit of brief follow up here.....

The US Supreme Court has not been moved by the two Trump nominations.....both essentially just replaced the departing or deceased seat holders. Trump has succeeded in uniting the GOP.... nah.... I won't say the Dems did that. Trump did it by being even-handed, balanced, and reasonable every step of the way. He gave the "NeverTrumpers GOP division" good reason to think it over. He has drawn voters into the GOP ranks precisely because he thinks in terms of what is good for the people, not the elites.

He is riding on a wave of facts. The globalist "reality" or vision of an ideological/Marxist mankind has failed, and failed decisively. If the Bigs wanna fight that, they lose. The fact is, markets really do the best job for us..... far better than bureaucracies or planned economies or futurist think-tank elites will ever do.

Just seeing the folks in front of him, and reading the crowds, Trump has discovered a better way forward.
 
At least give him props for donating the salary, thats cool right?
 
So far McConnel has accomplished about the same as Pelosi. One major legislative victory and seats in the S.C.

The House doesn’t confirm justices for the Supreme Court, the Senate does, so former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi hasn’t had anything to do with seats in the SC. Did you mean former Majority Leader Harry Reid?
 
Last edited:
Ok so a few things:

@Zombie and @Red Have you guys read the book "How Democracies Die" by Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt? It's a fantastic read.

Amazon product ASIN 1524762938
Basically, these two authors explain that democracy depends on both liberals and conservatives tolerating each other and respecting the rules of the game. When one side views compromise or losing an election as a zero sum game, then democracy begins to unravel and abuse of the rules begin to occur. They point out to Newt Gingrich in the 1990s and the inflammatory language he used (and encouraged republicans to use) which made democrats and liberals out to be "enemies/traitors" of the country. Throughout the 90s, Gingrich and republicans dedicated their very existence to impeaching Clinton. Impeachment was once considered a "last resort" politically and far too heavy for Congress to carry unless under dire circumstances (like Johnson or Nixon or potentially against a Russian colluder) not under something ridiculous like what happened under Clinton.

As Fox News and AM radio adopted Newt's language, polarization continued.

Under Bush, Democrats fought back by being slow to approve his judges. He fought back with executive orders.
Under Obama, Republicans just flat out refused to work with him. From day 1 they were determined to make Obama a one term president. Reid responded with the nuclear option and Obama responded with executive orders.

But clearly, republicans were the primary party halting democracy. This included outrages of:
  • Shutting the government down and downgrading our credit rating
  • Writing a letter to Iran discouraging them from working with the Obama administration
  • Using the filibuster more under Obama than all other presidents combined
  • Refusing to give Garland even a hearing.
As a result, democracy is grinding to a halt. This creates a perfect environment for authoritarians. Trump might not be it. But if respecting traditions, norms, and rules (both implicit and explicit) is not restored, then our democracy will continue to fail and we will reap its consequences.

I read this the other day and found it very interesting:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/5/17940610/trump-hitler-history-historian

If the US has someone whom historians will look back on as the gravedigger of American democracy, it is Mitch McConnell. He stoked the hyperpolarization of American politics to make the Obama presidency as dysfunctional and paralyzed as he possibly could. As with parliamentary gridlock in Weimar, congressional gridlock in the US has diminished respect for democratic norms, allowing McConnell to trample them even more. Nowhere is this vicious circle clearer than in the obliteration of traditional precedents concerning judicial appointments. Systematic obstruction of nominations in Obama’s first term provoked Democrats to scrap the filibuster for all but Supreme Court nominations. Then McConnell’s unprecedented blocking of the Merrick Garland nomination required him in turn to scrap the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations in order to complete the “steal” of Antonin Scalia’s seat and confirm Neil Gorsuch. The extreme politicization of the judicial nomination process is once again on display in the current Kavanaugh hearings. ...

Whatever secret reservations McConnell and other traditional Republican leaders have about Trump’s character, governing style, and possible criminality, they openly rejoice in the payoff they have received from their alliance with him and his base: huge tax cuts for the wealthy, financial and environmental deregulation, the nominations of two conservative Supreme Court justices (so far) and a host of other conservative judicial appointments, and a significant reduction in government-sponsored health care (though not yet the total abolition of Obamacare they hope for). Like Hitler’s conservative allies, McConnell and the Republicans have prided themselves on the early returns on their investment in Trump.

This is the key point that people often miss when talking about Hitler’s rise. The breakdown of German democracy started well before Hitler: Hyperpolarization led Hindenburg to strip away constraints on executive power as well as conclude that his left-wing opponents were a greater threat than fascism. The result, then, was a degradation of the everyday practice of democracy, to the point where the system was vulnerable to a Hitler-style figure.

At this point, comparing McConnell to Pelosi or Reid is just plain ridiculous. McConnell is one of the most divisive characters in American political history. However, unlike Trump he's very competent. His "scorched earth" policy might be what triggers the end of American democracy.
 
I read this the other day and found it very interesting

Yes, I did read that. It's a synopsis of Christopher Browning's essay in the New York Review of Books, which I posted a link to a few pages ago in this thread. I have not read "How Democracies Die", but it sounds like the authors are on the same page as Browning.
 
Dumb and Dumber:



I'm not saying it's right, but during the election, wasn't Kanye whining about being bankrupt? His wife having money, but he doesn't have ****?

If I remember that correctly, his buddiness with donnie and revival from mental breakdown(not throwing stones, just identifying what exists) do seem to coincide.
 
Top