Friday Open Thread

“It is so hot, my butt crack is like an oasis!”

— Steven Magee


26 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. PseudonymousPseudonymous says:

    This fucking squad has to go.  They're killing our legislative agenda!

    …it has been House moderates — not Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib, or AOC — who have prevented House Democrats from advancing several of their most compelling messaging bills. Nancy Pelosi’s caucus finally passed a $15 federal minimum wage Thursday. But Pelosi had promised to pass that (popular) policy within 100 hours after assuming the speakership. Instead, it has taken seven months for her to grind down moderate opposition.

    Meanwhile, centrist Democrats have blocked their party from passing a bill that would allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices, a measure that would effectively transfer large sums of money out of Big Pharma’s profit margins and into seniors’ pockets. This a winning issue in every district in the country (at least, if you value the approval of voters more than lobbyists)…

    If your mission in politics is to cower from controversy — even on issues where your party has a clear advantage, and your constituents have a vital interest — then you shouldn’t be surprised when people aren’t interested in all of the nothing that you have to say.

    Moderate Democrats Warn That AOC Is Distracting From Their Nonexistent Message

    • MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

      Ugh. They have over 100 bills sitting in the Senate. Whether it’s SCOTUS nominations or bills from the people’s house Grandpa Mitch sure knows how to bring our founding fathers’s blueprint to a grinding halt. 

      • PseudonymousPseudonymous says:

        Honestly, I think Mitch is doing what the founders intended.  Senators weren't elected and the body isn't intended to be representative of the population or democratic, it represents states, and that level of representation is the one thing the Constitution forbids changing; .  The Senate has always been intended as a check on the people in favor of the monied interests, Mitch is just the best at doing that.

        • VoyageurVoyageur says:

          Precisely.  It was a saucer, intended to cool things down — wasn't that Jefferson's term?

          Sadly, it works all too well.  As with the electoral college some of our problems are baked into the system.

        • The Constitution does not forbid changing that. The Constitution has mechanisms for changing it. Mechanisms we've employed twenty seven times, now, and have even been used to change the Senate in particular.

          • VoyageurVoyageur says:

            That mechanism requires three fourths of the state legislatures to ratify such amendments, DP. As a practical matter that gives small states like Wyoming the power to veto changes that would weaken the power of small states like Wyoming.  The change to electing senators did not change the power of small states.

            I will admit the electoral college compact is an intriguing way to outflank that system.  But while the constitution fixes the ratio of electoral votes, it provides that legislatures have the power to award the electoral votes as they see fit.


          • PseudonymousPseudonymous says:

            it represents states, and that level of representation is the one thing the Constitution forbids changing

            Article V:

            The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

      • Genghis says:

        Speaking of the Senate's advice-and-consent role, here's a joyous thought for ya: by the time Trump's first term ends, it's entirely possible that he'll have appointed more than 25% of all Article III judges. 

  2. PseudonymousPseudonymous says:

    This fucking squad and its allies are trying to destroy Democrats by targeting incumbents!

    House Democratic leadership crafts its entire political and legislative strategy around protecting front-liners like Hill, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently chastised the caucus for criticizing vulnerable front-liners, suggesting they hit her instead. 

    That makes the support for a Republican challenger from the For Country Caucus, which includes at least 10 Democrats, fairly remarkable, particularly as House incumbents have launched a full-blown counterrevolution against the so-called Squad and the organization that backs them, Justice Democrats, accusing them of undermining the party by targeting incumbents. 

    Justice Democrats, which became a prominent actor in Democratic politics after helping elect Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, however, has so far not endorsed a single challenger to a front-line Democrat, even as a new centrist caucus backs a Republican against Hill. The caucus is co-chaired by California Democrat Jimmy Panetta, a freshman and the son of longtime Democratic operative and former Rep. Leon Panetta. The caucus also includes Democratic Reps. Seth Moulton, Mass., Chrissy Houlahan, Pa., Gil Cisneros, Calif., Jason Crow, Colo., Jared Golden, Maine, Conor Lamb, Pa., Elaine Luria, Va., Max Rose, N.Y., and Mikie Sherrill of N.J. None of the caucus members responded to a request for comment.

    PAC Linked to Democrat Jimmy Panetta’s For Country Caucus Is Targeting a Vulnerable House Democrat

  3. harrydobyharrydoby says:

    It's good to be King…  Trump skates on felony charges related to his hush money payoffs to the porn star and the Playmate even though the crimes were committed before he was elected.  Perhaps the statute of limitations will not kick in until well after Jan 20, 2021.


  4. Genghis says:

    Just as there are Puritans among us who are deeply distressed by the idea that someone, somewhere might be having fun, there is a certain kind of conservative obsessed with the idea that some malingering worker somewhere might be getting away with something.

    So wrote the late, great Molly Ivins back in 2003 regarding Eugene Scalia, who's soon to be our next Secretary of Labor. Scalia, who as a partner in one of D.C.'s most prestigious silk stocking law firms has tirelessly championed the rights of poor, downtrodden global corporations against their vicious workers, is indeed the spawn of THAT Scalia.

  5. Duke CoxDuke Cox says:

    Great quotation today, by the way, Alva…

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.