[Chas_P]

Winstonm, on 2022-May-17, 11:21, said:

And, oh yeah, you also can't fix stupid.

The world will little note, nor long remember, what you say here. But please do carry on. You truly are a legend in your own mind.

[pilowsky]

A new game for the whole family: 'Guess the news source'

Quote

As Ukraine remains in a life-and-death struggle for its existence, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., took to the Senate floor last week to temporarily block U.S. aid to this embattled nation.

The bill up for passage would provide immediate military and humanitarian assistance – some $40 billion to Ukraine.

The timing is critical as numerous cities remain under Russian siege, and as Ukraine is finally gaining momentum in repulsing Russian President Vladimir Putin's savage invasion.

Paul is indifferent to the emergency situation and makes the fantastical claim that the aid package would "doom the U.S. economy."

It would do nothing of the sort.

[y66]

Heather Cox Richardson, American historian said:

May 18, 2022 https://heathercoxri...mbnrntTV1yg&s=r

There was big news today from a quarter that made it easily overlooked. In a decision about the power of the Securities and Exchange Commission to judge those accused of engaging in securities fraud, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that “Congress unconstitutionally delegated legislative power to the SEC by failing to provide an intelligible principle by which the SEC would exercise the delegated power, in violation of Article I’s vesting of ‘all’ legislative power in Congress….”

Congress created the Securities and Exchange Commission in 1934, after the Great Crash of 1929 revealed illegal shenanigans on Wall Street. The SEC is supposed to enforce the law against manipulating financial markets. The Fifth Circuit covers Louisiana, Texas, and Mississippi, and its judges lean to the right. Today’s decision suggests that the leaked draft of the decision that would overturn Roe v. Wade has empowered other judges to challenge other established precedents.

What is at stake with this decision is something called the “nondelegation doctrine,” which says that Congress, which constitutes the legislative branch of the government, cannot delegate legislative authority to the executive branch. Most of the regulatory bodies in our government since the New Deal have been housed in the executive branch. So the nondelegation doctrine would hamstring the modern regulatory state.

According to an article in the Columbia Law Review by Julian Davis Mortenson and Nicholas Bagley, the idea of nondelegation was invented in 1935 to undercut the business regulation of the New Deal. In the first 100 days of his term, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt set out to regulate the economy to combat the Great Depression. Under his leadership, Congress established a number of new agencies to regulate everything from banking to agricultural production.

While the new rules were hugely popular among ordinary Americans, they infuriated business leaders. The Supreme Court stepped in and, in two decisions, said that Congress could not delegate its authority to administrative agencies. But FDR’s threat of increasing the size of the court and the justices’ recognition that they were on the wrong side of public opinion undercut their opposition to the New Deal. The nondelegation theory was ignored until the 1980s, when conservative lawyers began to look for ways to rein in the federal government.

In 2001, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the argument in a decision written by Justice Antonin Scalia, who said the court must trust Congress to take care of its own power. But after Justice Clarence Thomas suggested that he might be open to the argument, conservative scholars began to say that the framers of the Constitution did not want Congress to delegate authority. Mortenson and Bagley say that argument “can’t stand…. It’s just making stuff up and calling it constitutional law.” Nonetheless, Republican appointees on the court have come to embrace the doctrine.

In November 2019, Justice Brett Kavanaugh sided with Justice Neil Gorsuch-—Trump appointees both—to say the Court should reexamine whether or not Congress can delegate authority to administrative agencies. Along with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Thomas, they appear to believe that the Constitution forbids such delegation. If Justice Amy Coney Barrett sides with them, the resurrection of that doctrine will curtail the modern administrative state that since the 1930s has regulated business, provided a basic social safety net, and promoted infrastructure.

As Justice Elena Kagan pointed out, the nondelegation doctrine would mean that “most of Government is unconstitutional.”

In today’s decision, it is no accident that Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod's majority opinion recalls what President Ronald Reagan, at a press conference in 1986, called the “nine most terrifying words in the English language”: “I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.” Reagan began the process of dismantling the New Deal government, and its achievement seems now to be at hand.

The decision will almost certainly be appealed.

[pilowsky]

Australian election Saturday - wish us luck.

[Winstonm]

That’s like a Jew appealing to Hans Frank.

To clarify, this was a response to the post of y66 that the verdict wii be appealed.

[kenberg]

pilowsky, on 2022-May-20, 05:03, said:

Australian election Saturday - wish us luck.

I am guessing I am not the only one who was at best only slightly aware, or perhaps aware but unable to say more than aware, of the upcoming elections in Australia. So I browsed a bit. one source:

https://www.theguard...-climate-change

Yes, it occurs to me that maybe I should find an Australian source. Yes, I should.

But it's something.

And wish you luck? Yep.

Good luck. A good result for you is good for you and good for us.

[pilowsky]

kenberg, on 2022-May-20, 07:21, said:

I am guessing I am not the only one who was at best only slightly aware, or perhaps aware but unable to say more than aware, of the upcoming elections in Australia. So I browsed a bit. one source:

https://www.theguard...-climate-change

Yes, it occurs to me that maybe I should find an Australian source. Yes, I should.

But it's something.

And wish you luck? Yep.

Good luck. A good result for you is good for you and good for us.

You chose a good source - The Guardian (Australian Edition) is an excellent addition to our fourth estate - although I commonly find myself in the fifth estate.
Here's a quote from them:

Quote

The prime minister, Scott Morrison, denied he was a "buffoon", courting controversy as he again hardened his position against the type of federal anti-corruption body Labor wants set up.

Opinions differ on the matter of SM.

[pilowsky]

A lecture from the University of Chicago entitled: "Why So Many Americans Believe in So Many “Crazy” Things".
I think it probably applies in other countries as well.

[y66]

WaPo said:

https://www.washingt...56121755a881339

GRIFFIN, Ga. — When the Spalding County Board of Elections eliminated early voting on Sundays, Democrats blamed a new state law and accused the Republican-controlled board of intentionally thwarting “Souls to the Polls,” a get-out-the-vote program among Black churches to urge their congregations to cast ballots after religious services.

But after three weeks of early voting ahead of Tuesday’s primary, record-breaking turnout is undercutting predictions that the Georgia Election Integrity Act of 2021 would lead to a falloff in voting. By the end of Friday, the final day of early in-person voting, nearly 800,000 Georgians had cast ballots — more than three times the number in 2018, and higher even than in 2020, a presidential year.

[y66]

WaPo said:

How Elise Stefanik, ‘bright light’ of a generation, chose a dark path

It’s a story told a thousand times: Ambitious Republican official abandons principle to advance in Trump’s GOP. But perhaps nobody’s fall from promise, and integrity, has been as spectacular as the 37-year-old Stefanik’s. “I was just so shocked she would go down such a dark path,” said her former champion, Bridgeland. “No power, no position is worth the complete loss of your integrity. It was just completely alarming to me to watch this transformation. I got a lot of notes saying, ‘What happened to her?’ ”

“Once you give up your integrity, the rest is a piece of cake.” - JR Ewing

[Winstonm]

y66, on 2022-May-21, 11:13, said:

“Once you give up your integrity, the rest is a piece of cake.” - JR Ewing

Prior to losing something there is the ownership requisite to address.

[y66]

From David Leaonhardt's review of "21st CENTURY MONETARY POLICY: The Federal Reserve From the Great Inflation to Covid-19" by former fed chair and former Republican Ben Bernanke:

Quote

Even in his restrained style, Bernanke offers criticisms. The book’s antiheroes are Arthur F. Burns (the Fed chair who did not confront rising inflation in the 1970s); Donald J. Trump and Richard Nixon (presidents who tried to intimidate Fed leaders); and modern-day congressional Republicans (some of whom he views as more concerned with partisan advantage than the country’s well-being). Bernanke offers a mixed judgment on Alan Greenspan, who presided over a 1990s boom but also missed the gathering signs of crisis in the early 2000s and, unlike Bernanke, aggressively pushed his personal preference for low taxes. The policymakers who come off best are Paul A. Volcker, the Fed chair who crushed inflation after Burns, as well as Obama and Janet Yellen, Bernanke’s successor and the current Treasury secretary. That these three all are or were Democrats (Volcker is deceased) is a sign of how far today’s Republican Party has moved from restrained conservatives like Bernanke.

It says something that Bernanke no longer identifies with the Republican party. The dude abides with integrity.

[y66]

Good read: LBJ's remarks to the University of Michigan graduating class of 1964.

[y66]

WaPo said:

https://www.washingt...perdue-georgia/

Republican governors hatched the plan months ago. Meeting at the desert Biltmore resort in Phoenix in mid-November, they agreed to confront a new threat to their incumbents: Former president Donald Trump was ramping up support for primary challengers as part of what one former governor called “a personal vendetta tour.”

To protect incumbents up for reelection this year, the Republican Governors Association decided to spend millions of dollars in primaries, an unusual step for an organization that typically reserves its cash for general election matchups against Democrats.

“The focus is on 2022. I don’t believe we should spend one more moment talking about 2020,” Republican Governors Association Co-Chairman Doug Ducey said in an interview with The Washington Post. Asked if Trump’s help for his preferred candidates was worth much, the Arizona governor, who pointed to states where GOP governors avoided or defeated Trump challengers, replied: “It hasn’t been to date.”

The gambit is set to culminate Tuesday in Georgia, where Republican Gov. Brian Kemp is heavily favored to defeat former senator David Perdue in a closely-watched primary. Trump recruited Perdue and made him his marquee candidate in a larger crusade against GOP officeholders who opposed his fight to overturn the 2020 election, which was rooted in false claims about fraud.

The RGA invested some $5 million in Georgia, according to a person familiar with the group’s outlays, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive details. A parade of Republican governors and luminaries have lined up to protect Kemp. And former vice president Mike Pence, who once served as governor of Indiana, will appear with Kemp on Monday — setting the stage for Pence’s most direct confrontation yet against Trump in the midterms.

The influx of RGA money in Georgia, according to strategists on both sides of the governor’s race, has dealt a devastating blow to Perdue, who has struggled to raise funds to compete.

“This is just not the best use of our money. We would much rather use it just in races against Democrats,” said former New Jersey governor Chris Christie, who is the co-chair of a 2022 fundraising arm for the RGA and described the November meeting in Phoenix to The Post. “But it was made necessary because Donald Trump decided on the vendetta tour this year and so we need to make sure we protect these folks who are the objects of his vengeance.”

[Winstonm]

https://www.washingt...x-abuse-report/

From the WaPo:

Quote

Leaders in the Southern Baptist Convention on Sunday released a major third-party investigation that found that sex abuse survivors were often ignored, minimized and "even vilified" by top clergy in the nation's largest Protestant denomination.

The findings of nearly 300 pages include shocking new details about specific abuse cases and shine a light on how denominational leaders for decades actively resisted calls for abuse prevention and reform. They also lied to Southern Baptists over whether they could maintain a database of offenders to prevent more abuse when top leaders were secretly keeping a private list for years.

The report — the first investigation of its kind in a massive Protestant denomination like the SBC — is expected to send shock waves into a conservative Christian community that has had intense internal battles over how to handle sex abuse.

my emphasis

I beg to differ. There will be no shockwaves, only a concerted effort to justify the unjustifiable, just like support of Donald Trump.

[Chas_P]

barmar, on 2022-May-17, 10:59, said:

What do you think about the sanity of R's who believe, and make legislative policy based on:

- The "big lie"
- Replacement Theory
- Critical race theory teaches that we're all racists, and grade schools are teaching it
- Abortion should be banned when the majority of the country believes that it should be available in some form.
- Gun ownership isn't a serious problem

These people just ignore reality.

1. Proving that what’s old is new again, here is how the late William Safire began his New York Times column of Jan. 8, 1996:
“Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our First Lady — a woman of undoubted talents who was a role model for many in her generation — is a congenital liar.
“Drip by drip, like Whitewater torture, the case is being made that she is compelled to mislead, and to ensnare her subordinates and friends in a web of deceit.” With that said I am convinced that the "big lie" was exactly that.....a big lie.

2. I'm really not sure what "Replacement Theory" is. I've read little about it.

3. CRT, in my opinion, is bullshit. And parents at the local level should have a say about what's being taught in the government schools.

4. Abortion should be available, but the cutoff (or cut out if you prefer) date should be left to local governments. No woman should have to endure an unwanted pregnancy. But she should be sensible enough to end it early on. Fifteen weeks seems reasonable to me.

5. We don't need more gun control. We need more idiot control.

[kenberg]

barmar, on 2022-May-17, 10:59, said:

What do you think about the sanity of R's who believe, and make legislative policy based on:

- The "big lie"
- Replacement Theory
- Critical race theory teaches that we're all racists, and grade schools are teaching it
- Abortion should be banned when the majority of the country believes that it should be available in some form.
- Gun ownership isn't a serious problem

These people just ignore reality.

I will weigh in on this as well. The first three items are not issues for the Supreme Court, the last two are. So the last two have an extra layer of complication.

I saw something a bit ago noting that Ben Franklin had published something for the general population about practical matters including "the three Rs" and practica instructions for providing abortion. My general impression has always been that abortion was common back then. What that says about legal arguments in RvW I don't know. And by "don't know" I mean don't know. The situation is somewhat similar with gun control. The Founders should have been clearer with the well-regulated militia clause but I think a more important issues is that what they meant by arms and what we today mean by arms are two very different things. I think the difference is substantial enough to say that the Second Amendment does not apply the way it is now being applied. Presumably a person cannot install anti-aircraft weapons in their backyard, or maybe they can as things now are since a militia might need them, but whatever the case with anti-aircraft weapons I think it should be within the Constitution to exercise substantial control over personal weaponry. We left the Wild West behind long ago, and even then some control was exercised. But again, I acknowledge I am not a lawyer. Legal arguments often seem to be to be just nuts. Lawyers are paid to make legal arguments, so we cannot really blame them for doing their job, but we don't have to like it.

What I want for these two issues is some reasonable common sense approach. People are going to keep having sex, sometimes it will be spontaneous and unwise, sometimes that will lead to a very unwanted pregnancy and I favor having very little interference with just what a woman does when that happens. Of course an abortion should be done early on if it is to be done at all, and I can see having some laws governing it, but mostly I think there are so many variations that I would like to butt out as much as is reasonable. As to guns, some reasonable level of self-defense can be allowed. A story I have told before: I was 8 or so when we took in a woman with two kids who had left her abusive husband. It was summer so there was just a locked screen door to the outside. The husband, or maybe former husband, came around drunk demanding to be let in. My father was out, my mother had my father's double-barreled 12 gauge pointed at the door, explaining to the man that he was not coming in. He left. These things happen. But in the other direction I was speaking with someone the other day who had put up "No Trespassing" signs and said that if someone cuts across his yard he would be going out with his gun to protect his property. I suggested that calling the police would be better although even that seems extreme to me.

I'll maybe hit on the other three issues later, for now I will just say that the 2020 election is over. Recounts can, in some cases, be justified. I understand that the R primary in Pennsylvania might need one. But at some point an election is over.

[hrothgar]

With respect to the abortion debate, last week there was a good podcast on the Ezra Klein show focusing on ethical debates around abortion.

Worth a listen

[pilowsky]

There is a certain structural insanity about a society that believes it is an inalienable right to punctuate everyday discourse by waving around a lethal weapon.

Some ideas are stupid on their face.

[Winstonm]

pilowsky, on 2022-May-23, 15:26, said:

There is a certain structural insanity about a society that believes it is an inalienable right to punctuate everyday discourse by waving around a lethal weapon.

Some ideas are stupid on their face.

Btw, if I understand correctly , congrats on a sane election and sane choices made, and a sane loser who conceded honorably.