All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Tami]

That is just despicable. The party that protects children, but only before they are born.



As I understand, early menstruation can be treated by puberty blockers. Yes, those that republicans want to ban because they are also used by transgender and nonbinary children. So they are actually obstructing the prevention of pregnancies like this.

I hit puberty at age 10, and I can't even find the right words. It gets a little personal when you are suddenly hit by the realization that, by the grace of god, street smarts, luck, and the protection of my family......

[Jack Dracula]

In his case he's pro first amendment but also anti-religion and wants to eliminate it from public discourse. I don't like a lot of the reasoning of the right, but I recognize that it exists and whether or not I agree with it that they're going to be part of the discussion and shaping of policy now and going forward, regardless of what I or others who tend to vote Team Blue wish. Religion, for those who hold those beliefs (and it's a good chunk of the country) can't really be separated from their morality and thus their decision making. For good or ill.

The bolded part explains why the Democratic leadership behaves the way it does with regard to civility in government. The Conservative philosophy isn't going away any time soon. Even if Dems win the majority of elections going forward, conservatives will still be present because a significant portion of the population is inclined to vote for those beliefs. While those people exist the GOP will exist and if we wish for the government to function as it should, they must be taken into account. People complain the Biden administration is too nice and plays too fairly, but the goal is to change hearts and minds so that the party will reject its own radical elements. Behaving like the bad guys and bullies the radicals in the GOP claim Democrats to be only reinforces their power with their electorate and within their party.

There's nothing wrong with having beliefs outside of your team's narrative, if you haven't seen my posts you might not know that I tend to speak up when I see things wrong with the way members of Team Blue (my chosen team) tends to do business (or not, in the case of conservative centrists) only to have a handful of regulars dogpile on me for stepping across the party line.

And in the end it's pretty common to have different beliefs that are contradictory (where the "weird" part comes in for me, but if you'd prefer bafflingly contradictory feel free to mentally substitute that) for all human beings. But it's worth pointing out, like the mistakes of Team Blue. As far as Huffpost, they often complain about the dirty tricks Republicans play only to be a mouthpiece for the same dirty tricks from centrist/conservative members of the Democratic Party.

I want to point out that the only reason liberals on this thread tend to get upset with criticism of Democrats is that right now none of us can afford to lose in November and it's frustrating when other people can't seem to help continuously bashing Democrats. The actual disagreement is more about timing than whether any complaints are valid. This is just the worst possible time to not have everyone on board and spreading negativity only helps the opposition. If not for the looming threat of the GOP, I think many of us would react differently. I know I would, but we don't have that luxury right now.

[Kirby101]

My problem with bashing the Dems is when people say they aren't doing something like addressing Climate Change or Taxes and it passes in the House but two Senators stop it in the Senate. They can't grasp what it means when they don't have the votes. With zero GOP support for anything, it is hard to get things done with a 50/50 Senate. Especially when it votes against the Dems 52/48. This is like bashing Obama for not passing things when McConnell was running the Senate.
The country is bipolar, they want the Biden agenda, but do not give him the Congress to pass it. And in their frustration they will give us a Republican Congress, who will stop Biden at every turn. Somehow voters think a change in Parties will mean action, without understanding it will mean complete gridlock.

[scourge]

The bolded part explains why the Democratic leadership behaves the way it does with regard to civility in government. The Conservative philosophy isn't going away any time soon. Even if Dems win the majority of elections going forward, conservatives will still be present because a significant portion of the population is inclined to vote for those beliefs. While those people exist the GOP will exist and if we wish for the government to function as it should, they must be taken into account. People complain the Biden administration is too nice and plays too fairly, but the goal is to change hearts and minds so that the party will reject its own radical elements. Behaving like the bad guys and bullies the radicals in the GOP claim Democrats to be only reinforces their power with their electorate and within their party.

I'm sorry but that's total BS. If there are any more non-'Radicals' in the GOP they've shown they're perfectly okay with voting for and supporting them no matter what as long as it keeps them in power.

"We have to play nice or the the people trying to kill us all and destroy the planet won't change their minds to help us instead of trying to kill us all and destroy the planet!"

[kidfresh512]

My problem with bashing the Dems is when people say they aren't doing something like addressing Climate Change or Taxes and it passes in the House but two Senators stop it in the Senate. They can't grasp what it means when they don't have the votes. With zero GOP support for anything, it is hard to get things done with a 50/50 Senate. Especially when it votes against the Dems 52/48. This is like bashing Obama for not passing things when McConnell was running the Senate.
The country is bipolar, they want the Biden agenda, but do not give him the Congress to pass it. And in their frustration they will give us a Republican Congress, who will stop Biden at every turn. Somehow voters think a change in Parties will mean action, without understanding it will mean complete gridlock.

Or they refuse to acknowledge how the needle moves toward what they are wanting in policy if you keep allowing the GOP to ever get a hand on the levers of power. They consistently are wanting to push us backward to "the good old days". Voting rights limited or gerrymandered to exclude or keep minorities in their places. They got Roe v Wade undone now they will continue until its abolished nationwide no matter how long it takes.

There were people saying we were piling on Manchin and Sinema. Well here we are again Manchin's latest. With absolutely no help from the GOP on climate, codifying abortion into law, voting rights all popular policies the obvious push would be for more votes that can get these passed.

With Less Democrats you are farther from any of these. And in the meantime, more judges being installed to rule against individual rights for decades. It lose/ lose for anyone who isn't the GOP base.

[shooshoomanjoe]

My problem with bashing the Dems is when people say they aren't doing something like addressing Climate Change or Taxes and it passes in the House but two Senators stop it in the Senate. They can't grasp what it means when they don't have the votes. With zero GOP support for anything, it is hard to get things done with a 50/50 Senate. Especially when it votes against the Dems 52/48. This is like bashing Obama for not passing things when McConnell was running the Senate.
The country is bipolar, they want the Biden agenda, but do not give him the Congress to pass it. And in their frustration they will give us a Republican Congress, who will stop Biden at every turn. Somehow voters think a change in Parties will mean action, without understanding it will mean complete gridlock.

That's when the dems should say "we'd love to give you what you're asking for but we can't because you keep voting this person in". The GOP does it all the time.

[Mister Mets]

Well my post was a joke, but otherwise no one has tried to say it's always or never malicious. When asked your best answer for why you thought it was malicious was that it seemed off to you to obey the letter of the law so strictly (Or so I understood), and when it was pointed out that the policy had no letter or anything set in stone yet so that it might just be your political preferences influencing your decision you never responded.

Teachers are being hounded out of towns for no real reason other than a hate of the CRT boogeyman, which has been reported on and shown in this thread if you chose to read the links. You also defended people shutting down Pride days and other ways to educate without any sort of indoctrination by comparing such to deadly diseases and a married politician cheating with a prostitute. As kids are shown heterosexual relationships in practically every cartoon and TV show ever, with showings of anything other than that being mocked far more than accepted (From classic Looney Toons to more modern day stuff) it's not like they aren't being exposed to this sort of stuff already.

It does seem that to refer to malicious compliance in a completely different situation, the joke only works if malicious compliance is never a problem.

I think I explained my position at the time. I could be wrong, which is why I use caveats. This is all that should be necessary, unless something is very obviously not malicious compliance.

It seems in political discourse there's a focus on sides rather than the specifics of the question being discussed. Whatever is done by a person's side should not be called out. There are no distinctions about degrees. To say that something is likely malicious compliance is seen as the equivalent of saying that it is certainly malicious compliance.

Right now, there seems to be an effort to use edge cases to argue why Dobbs was poorly decided. The point doesn't appear to be to convince legislatures to improve the laws.

But Huffpost is a centrist site. Arianna Huffington used to be a Republican who became a moderate Democrat.

Huffington may have been a Republican, but the website she started was not moderate and is not seen that way now. It was favorable to establishment Democrats, but that's center-left at best, rather than centrist.

A few reasons. One, Epstein had the perfect set-up for a conspiracy theory. He had potentially world-altering and at the very least career-ending information on a good number of elite world players and famous people, including Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, and Bill Gates. And he died in custody as a high profile prisoner who was under suicide watch, when conveniently the guards looked the other way and the cameras watching him were broken. It's the sort of thing that if you wrote it into a movie script the director would slap you for making it too unbelievably convenient.

On the other hand we have Ivana, who probably had juicy stories about Donald that she hadn't shared (though she'd shared plenty, including rape allegations) but also had a position of privilege from her time with Trump (likely the only reason she and other Eastern European import models are with him in the first place) and he's responsible for the livelihoods of her children. Also, conspiracy theorists largely are right-wing and this doesn't fit their preferred narrative. Epstein was a big enough and obvious enough potential conspiracy that it will likely live on with the JFK shooting as a suspicious incident.



In his case he's pro first amendment but also anti-religion and wants to eliminate it from public discourse. I don't like a lot of the reasoning of the right, but I recognize that it exists and whether or not I agree with it that they're going to be part of the discussion and shaping of policy now and going forward, regardless of what I or others who tend to vote Team Blue wish. Religion, for those who hold those beliefs (and it's a good chunk of the country) can't really be separated from their morality and thus their decision making. For good or ill.

There's nothing wrong with having beliefs outside of your team's narrative, if you haven't seen my posts you might not know that I tend to speak up when I see things wrong with the way members of Team Blue (my chosen team) tends to do business (or not, in the case of conservative centrists) only to have a handful of regulars dogpile on me for stepping across the party line.

And in the end it's pretty common to have different beliefs that are contradictory (where the "weird" part comes in for me, but if you'd prefer bafflingly contradictory feel free to mentally substitute that) for all human beings. But it's worth pointing out, like the mistakes of Team Blue. As far as Huffpost, they often complain about the dirty tricks Republicans play only to be a mouthpiece for the same dirty tricks from centrist/conservative members of the Democratic Party.

There are a few people who have expressed suspicions about how Ivana Trump died. We see them on this board, even if you and I would think it seems kind of ridiculous.

This does show that conspiracy theories aren't a left or right thing. Obviously Republicans are more likely to believe absurd stuff that fits their narrative, but we've got weird beliefs on the left.

I certainly agree on the need for honesty in discussions about specific topics regardless of which side comes across better.

That is just despicable. The party that protects children, but only before they are born.



As I understand, early menstruation can be treated by puberty blockers. Yes, those that republicans want to ban because they are also used by transgender and nonbinary children. So they are actually obstructing the prevention of pregnancies like this.

Are there efforts to ban the use of puberty blockers for their intended purpose?

The efforts to use them for trans and nonbinary minors are off-label (it is perfectly legal for doctors to recommend medication for off-label use.)

Or they refuse to acknowledge how the needle moves toward what they are wanting in policy if you keep allowing the GOP to ever get a hand on the levers of power. They consistently are wanting to push us backward to "the good old days". Voting rights limited or gerrymandered to exclude or keep minorities in their places. They got Roe v Wade undone now they will continue until its abolished nationwide no matter how long it takes.

There were people saying we were piling on Manchin and Sinema. Well here we are again Manchin's latest. With absolutely no help from the GOP on climate, codifying abortion into law, voting rights all popular policies the obvious push would be for more votes that can get these passed.

With Less Democrats you are farther from any of these. And in the meantime, more judges being installed to rule against individual rights for decades. It lose/ lose for anyone who isn't the GOP base.

The criticism of Manchin seems ridiculous. There is very little argument against him being one of the five most valuable members of Congress for Democrats, and the discussions tend to ignore that.

If you want radical votes like major expenditures, packing the court, or reversing the filibuster, the solution is to run better campaigns elsewhere rather than try to pressure a guy from a state Biden lost by 39 points.

[achilles]

So how long is the Dutch government going to stay in power...or indeed alive? That sounds like a pretty dicey thing to do...see Sri Lanka for the whys and wherefores on that. Which did the same thing...with their food production collapsing which among other things led to their current situation.

I should note that Netherlands is a huge food exporter to the rest of the world...

[Jack Dracula]

I'm sorry but that's total BS. If there are any more non-'Radicals' in the GOP they've shown they're perfectly okay with voting for and supporting them no matter what as long as it keeps them in power.

"We have to play nice or the the people trying to kill us all and destroy the planet won't change their minds to help us instead of trying to kill us all and destroy the planet!"

The Democrats aren’t likely to dominate politics to the degree and length of time necessary to eradicate conservative thought and conservatives aren’t going to disappear. A way forward needs to be found or the US will be reduced to having a barely functional government beset with wild idealogical fluctuations every four years and elections marked by violence and turmoil.
In many ways we’re at war.

[scourge]

The Democrats aren’t likely to dominate politics to the degree and length of time necessary to eradicate conservative thought and conservatives aren’t going to disappear. A way forward needs to be found or the US will be reduced to having a barely functional government beset with wild idealogical fluctuations every four years and elections marked by violence and turmoil.
In many ways we’re at war.

Here's the problem though...

THE CONSERVATIVES DON'T WANT A WAY FORWARD. And they're actively fighting against any way forward.

So Democrats ceding any ground to them is not going to change any hearts and minds. Its just going to make it worse for everyone that isn't part of the crazy conservative party.

[Malvolio]

Are there efforts to ban the use of puberty blockers for their intended purpose?

The efforts to use them for trans and nonbinary minors are off-label (it is perfectly legal for doctors to recommend medication for off-label use.).

The intended purpose of birth control pills is to prevent pregnancy, but many doctors prescribe them to patients who want to control their menstrual cycles. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to matter to the politicians who want to outlaw birth control pills.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Got an alert about a mass shooting in an Indiana mall with three people, including the shooter killed and more hurt.

Just another day in America. Unfortunately.

[Tendrin]

Are there efforts to ban the use of puberty blockers for their intended purpose?

The efforts to use them for trans and nonbinary minors are off-label (it is perfectly legal for doctors to recommend medication for off-label use.)

I mean, that is the standard of care for trans youth as decided by medical professionals. Your party only wants to get in the way because of a bigotry that prefers dead kids to trans ones.

That said, given the sheer disaster caused by the reversal of Roe for a vast variety of off label uses for meds that *might* cause an abortion, I'm not really sure you can plausibly suggest that anyone believe that there won't be consequences for others should the GOP get their way.

[useridgoeshere]

The Democrats aren’t likely to dominate politics to the degree and length of time necessary to eradicate conservative thought and conservatives aren’t going to disappear. A way forward needs to be found or the US will be reduced to having a barely functional government beset with wild idealogical fluctuations every four years and elections marked by violence and turmoil.
In many ways we’re at war.

I don’t see how the current US federal government can be described as anything other than barely functional government. When you look at all the significant issues facing the country, there hasn’t been any real movement on most, if not all, for over a decade.

[Jack Dracula]

Here's the problem though...

THE CONSERVATIVES DON'T WANT A WAY FORWARD. And they're actively fighting against any way forward.

So Democrats ceding any ground to them is not going to change any hearts and minds. Its just going to make it worse for everyone that isn't part of the crazy conservative party.

The Republican politicians are following what they believe to be the will of their constituents. The constituents are reacting to what they're being told on Fox News and social media. Since it's not possible to censor what's being said, the only option is to demonstrate how wrong the misinformation actually is by dialing back the aggressive political rhetoric and appealing to people's better natures.

If you or anyone here has a better more realistic option for restoring stability to government and society at large that doesn't involve forced censorship of conservative media or forced suppression of conservative policies I'd like to hear it.

I don’t see how the current US federal government can be described as anything other than barely functional government. When you look at all the significant issues facing the country, there hasn’t been any real movement on most, if not all, for over a decade.

It can get much, much worse. Consider Hungary, where the CPAC was held this year. Many Republicans have expressed admiration for the way Orban has clamped down on journalists and opposing politicians.