The all things Political topic -In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie

[Bartimaeus]

From political discussion I've seen, it's not clear whether or not statehood bills are subject to the filibuster rules. The filibuster rules did not exist as they currently do the last time a state was admitted to the Union. They most likely are (probably to be determined by the Parliamentarian?), but also, if Senators Sinema and Manchin so desired, they could also easily pass an exemption specifically for statehood bills in the same way that cabinet/judge nominations are exempted. How likely that is...depends on the senators in question, and that is difficult indeed to project.

[Guard Dog]

So Washington DC will have a governor and the mayor. It will also have a state legislature, a department of agriculture, Department of natural resources, the Secretary of State, a state police force, a state insurance commission, and all the other things that are required for the functioning of a state. All for  a state of just 68 mi.²  How do you sign up for some of those jobs? They sound like they are going to be extremely easy! Either the mayor or the governor will be entirely useless. 
 

personally I don’t give a damn. Join the union don’t join the union whatever. I’m long past caring about crap like this. But if you think about it the entire notion is pretty absurd.

I will say one thing. If Washington DC was a hick town with a bunch of gun toting Trump voting rednecks this vote would not be happening.

Edited April 22, 2021 by Guard Dog

[ShadySands]

2 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

I will say one thing. If Washington DC was a hick town with a bunch of gun toting Trump voting rednecks this vote would not be happening.

I think it would have in Trump's first 2 years but since I don't think we have any territories that are Republican leaning it was never on the menu. 

[Gromnir]

16 minutes ago, ShadySands said:

I think it would have in Trump's first 2 years but since I don't think we have any territories that are Republican leaning it was never on the menu. 

1) dc statehood clearly benefits democrats

2) dc statehood is the right thing to do

is not as if 1 being true precludes possibility o' 2 being true.

in 1889, north dakota and south dakota were added to the US as 2 states and only reason the dakota territory were split in twain is 'cause doing so would give republicans 4 senators instead of two.

of course statehood is a political issue, but annexation is an obvious instafail 'cause neither dc nor any adjacent state want such... is no room for the fed to arbitrate a compromise when there is already a consensus. 

is political and benefits one side, and is still right that dc citizens should get fed representation.

HA! Good Fun!

ps we see no way to get around filibuster. is no obvious exception. is not gonna happen. however, the issue will be pushed hard to force republicans to make increasing bad arguments to deny statehood to a geographical area where +46% o' the population is black. democrats know they won't win, but is no good legal or practical reason they should lose, which is gonna force the gop to be the bad guys once again, solidifying democrat base before midterms.  is all politics.

Edited April 22, 2021 by Gromnir

[Guard Dog]

15 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

1) dc statehood clearly benefits democrats

2) dc statehood is the right thing to do

is not as if 1 being true precludes possibility o' 2 being true.

in 1889, north dakota and south dakota were added to the US as 2 states and only reason the dakota territory were split in twain is 'cause doing so would give republicans 4 senators instead of two.

of course statehood is a political issue, but annexation is an obvious instafail 'cause neither dc nor any adjacent state want such... is no room for the fed to arbitrate a compromise when there is already a consensus. 

is political and benefits one side, and is still right that dc citizens should get fed representation.

HA! Good Fun!

ps we see no way to get around filibuster. is no obvious exception. is not gonna happen. however, the issue will be pushed hard to force republicans to make increasing bad arguments to deny statehood to a geographical area where +46% o' the population is black. democrats know they won't win, but is no good legal or practical reason they should lose, which is gonna force the gop to be the bad guys once again, solidifying democrat base before midterms.  is all politics.

Well I for one would love to be the secretary of agriculture in a state that has no agriculture. I could sit at my desk and play computer games all day and get paid princely sum to do it. 

[Zoraptor]

8 hours ago, Gorth said:

After all the sable rattling, time to let some of the air out of the balloon again. Biden's phone call seems to have provided an opening for de-escalation. At least a bit. Putin deciding that the 100.000 Russian troops at Ukraine's borders are better off in their barracks somewhere else in Russia. Ukraine seems to be less in a hurry to change status quo on the battlefield too. Maybe time for something as mundane as talking?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56842763

"After weeks of tension over a build-up of Russian troops close to Ukraine's border, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu has ordered a number of units in the area back to their bases."

And we'll get to do the whole thing again next year in six months time when the next lot of exercises leads to another round of 'imminent invasion!!!111one!!!' headlines. Guess it's appropriate that Pavlov was Russian.

Ironically the almost completely unreported meeting with Lukashenko from Belarus might well turn out to be of far more long term significance, now that he's permanently alienated from the west and has nothing to play off against Russia progress on the much delayed Union State seems a lot more likely.

[Guard Dog]

49 minutes ago, ShadySands said:

I think it would have in Trump's first 2 years but since I don't think we have any territories that are Republican leaning it was never on the menu. 

On that note the Democrats are fighting l to keep the folks from North California from breaking away to form Jefferson, or whatever it was they were going to call it. Not because California loves those folks. Quite the opposite. They don’t want to see two more Republican senators.

i’m telling you guys the 17th amendment was a big freaking mistake.

[Gromnir]

24 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

Well I for one would love to be the secretary of agriculture in a state that has no agriculture. I could sit at my desk and play computer games all day and get paid princely sum to do it. 

you are being serious? am increasing convinced you are.

new states may be admitted by the Congress into this union, but no new state shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state, nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress.

(am not placing in quotes 'cause may have slight misremembered punctuations or a word and am admitted too embarrassed to look up 'cause am realizing we need to look up... which am prefect aware makes no sense.)

we got some familiarity with the constitution, and am at a loss to identify the state secretary of agriculture requirement. there were the enabling acts, and some pre Constitution stuff which might be suggestive but not dispositive? anything you hear regarding supposed requirements o' statehood ain't actual a requirements and numerous states has been admitted w/o a Constitution, which is the document wherein necessary state offices would likely be described.

even if dc state secretary o' agriculture were a requirement, which it isn't, would it be enough to convince you that hundreds o' thousands o' americans, many o' whom is veterans, do not deserve federal representation? and let's be grownups 'bout this yes? even if there were some kinda requirement that a landlocked territory have a secretary of the navy or some such silliness, all that would happen from a practical matter is that a government official would have an extra and meaningless job title. is not difficult to envision that the woman who is deputy secretary of state for dc gets additional and meaningless job title: dc state secretary of agriculture. no additional pay or responsibilities. *gasp*

this is NOT a real thing to be concerned 'bout.

and if you claim to be joking, am gonna note you has now made this observation multiple times, which undercuts the i was keeding bit.

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

Edited April 22, 2021 by Gromnir

[Guard Dog]

LOL no, I wasn’t. Before I left my last job I had to do quite a bit of work for a number of state cabinet members and their staff. They have a hell of a lot of work to do it I didn’t envy them that.

[Gromnir]

5 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

LOL no, I wasn’t. Before I left my last job I had to do quite a bit of work for a number of state cabinet members and their staff. They have a hell of a lot of work to do it I didn’t envy them that.

were hopeful you were joking... first time. second?

*shrug*

regardless, am genuine at a loss to come up with a good argument to deny statehood. 

Federal Judge Orders Los Angeles To Offer Shelter To Skid Row Residents

judge concern for the endemic la homelessness problem: good

am nevertheless at a loss to identify the legal basis for demanding compliance with such orders... and how is such orders enforced?  

...

(add another shrug here)

HA! Good Fun!

[ShadySands]

Just now, Guard Dog said:

On that note the Democrats are fighting l to keep the folks from North California from breaking away to form Jefferson, or whatever it was they were going to call it. Not because California loves those folks. Quite the opposite. They don’t want to see two more Republican senators.

i’m telling you guys the 17th amendment was a big freaking mistake.

Are they really fighting it though? From what little I've read there isn't a whole lot of support for it. We had something similar here in CO but I don't think they were getting the support they were hoping for because even though a few counties approved it the total numbers were against it. And that's in the areas that were pushing for it.

[Gromnir]

Just now, ShadySands said:

Are they really fighting it though? From what little I've read there isn't a whole lot of support for it. We had something similar here in CO but I don't think they were getting the support they were hoping for because even though a few counties approved it the total numbers were against it. And that's in the areas that were pushing for it.

comes up every couple o' years but maybe gets a 1:30 story on a few local news broadcasts and perhaps an article in sacbee and la times... then most people go back to their daily lives realizing they has heard the same story get repeated for literal decades.

is less a democrat v. republican thing anyways. is water. farmers, who ordinary vote republican, is most interested in the issue, but there is many powerful so cal farmers who would gut you in an alley if you threatened their water and they thought they would get away with the deed. much o' socal would be indistinguishable from arakis w/o water from elsewhere.

water is serious business and is getting more serious each year.

HA! Good Fun!

[Guard Dog]

Actually the one state in the entire country that has the absolute right to subdivide was Texas. If I remember correctly that was actually part of their admittance to the union. I can’t see them hammering down the door to do that kind of a thing but maybe someone would think it’s advantageous somewhere down the road.

[Gromnir]

is actual surprising common.

one o' the more dramatic examples, but hardly unique, is georgia. look online for boundaries of georgia from colonial, to articles o' confederation to 1783, to... hmm 1826 is when georgia kinda final looked like it does today, but as recent as 2008ish there were a push to change borders with tennessee, and the core issue were water.

HA! Good Fun!

ps virginia may win the prize for most dramatic border changes post statehood. ceded land to fed and other states and all kinda extreme alterations which make sense only if you is a serious historian.

Edited April 22, 2021 by Gromnir

[Amentep]

I always liked Georgia's war with North Carolina, personally for weird border changes.

[BruceVC]

6 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

And we'll get to do the whole thing again next year in six months time when the next lot of exercises leads to another round of 'imminent invasion!!!111one!!!' headlines. Guess it's appropriate that Pavlov was Russian.

Ironically the almost completely unreported meeting with Lukashenko from Belarus might well turn out to be of far more long term significance, now that he's permanently alienated from the west and has nothing to play off against Russia progress on the much delayed Union State seems a lot more likely.

I  am sorry your Russian economic alliance is dissolving Zora, I know you had high hopes it would replace the EU as a option  that countries like Serbia should join....but I assumed by now you would have realized that rhetoric and grandstanding dont translate to viable and sustainable  economic polices and that includes the Union State and EEU ( to be honest I hadnt even heard of the Union State so thanks for that  )

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_Economic_Union

I tell you what why dont you petition NZ to join either of these unions? Their is no reason NZ cant especially when they offer such advantageous  trade and economic benefits, its not like you dont have time on your hands....you can protest everyday outside the NZ parliament, this could be like BLM but a NZ protest with a different objective ?

Sometimes  its better to act in RL and not just be an armchair, Internet activist 

[Gorth]

8 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

So Washington DC will have a governor and the mayor. It will also have a state legislature, a department of agriculture, Department of natural resources, the Secretary of State, a state police force, a state insurance commission, and all the other things that are required for the functioning of a state. All for  a state of just 68 mi.²  How do you sign up for some of those jobs? They sound like they are going to be extremely easy! Either the mayor or the governor will be entirely useless.

You guys are going to need a new flag too, aren't you? Like one with the 53 states of America. Where the heck will you fit in the new star?

[Zoraptor]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

I tell you what why dont you petition NZ to join either of these unions?

Don't need to, we're years ahead.

Honestly, we'd consider a Free Trade Agreement with Narnia if we could find someone to negotiate one with.

[Gorth]

@BruceVCDid you know that Gorbachev wanted to join Nato when they were negotiating German unification, but Baker, the US secretary of state just laughed at him. Putin was keen to join in 2000, but Bill Clinton's response was very similar. It's not like they didn't try to work closer with western security interests in the past, but were flat out rejected. Hence the "if they don't like us and don't want us in their club, they might as well fear us" thing when realizing that Nato always was and always still was a thing aimed at Russia specifically.

[Gromnir]

12 minutes ago, Gorth said:

You guys are going to need a new flag too, aren't you? Like one with the 53 states of America. Where the heck will you fit in the new star?

don't need to add more stars. in 2021 and beyond, claim new stars has been added is better. 

sure, somebody is gonna be a smartypants and count 50 stars and show scientific there is only 50 stars, 'cause let's be honest, is tough to make 50 actual be 53 even with quantum silliness.

so what? prove is still only 50 is just "alternative facts." 

...

russia hoax, perfect call, stolen election, manafort and stone were treated unfair and the doj intervened independent o' trump, sharpiegate, etc. half the country has been convincing themselves o' equal improbable alternative facts for better than four years.

so go ahead and pretend you is picard if you want, but in 2021, there is as many stars as there needs be, regardless o' whether the stars is representing votes in georgia or map decorations.

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

1 minute ago, Gorth said:

@BruceVCDid you know that Gorbachev wanted to join Nato when they were negotiating German unification, but Baker, the US secretary of state just laughed at him. Putin was keen to join in 2000, but Bill Clinton's response was very similar. It's not like they didn't try to work closer with western security interests in the past, but were flat out rejected. Hence the "if they don't like us and don't want us in their club, they might as well fear us" thing when realizing that Nato always was and always still was a thing aimed at Russia specifically.

I didnt know that, I wonder how different things would be if Russia had joined NATO at the end of the Cold War...I dont think it would have been sustainable  but you never know ?

But Gorthfuscious do you not think Putins jingoism  has also contributed towards the current distrust many countries have towards Russia? Just the  numerous examples of Russia's involvement in Cyber-warfare would be enough to concern most countries and I am going to ignore Putins attempts to create a new " USSR  border " to address perceived NATO encroachment 

Look at the numerous examples of Russian Cyber-warfare in  cases like the 2016 US elections, targeting Georgia ( the country not the state ), Ukraine  and the SolarWinds hacking attack

https://jsis.washington.edu/news/cyberattack-critical-infrastructure-russia-ukrainian-power-grid-attacks/

So its not NATO that is primarily  responsible for the sanctions and mistrust around Russia...its self-inflicted 

 

 

[Gromnir]

one year ago

on more than one occasion trump claimed the rest o' the world were laughing at the US.  a faceplant which will take decades to be forgotten were a bold move to guarantee he were correct 'bout the laughter bit.

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

27 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

one year ago

on more than one occasion trump claimed the rest o' the world were laughing at the US.  a faceplant which will take decades to be forgotten were a bold move to guarantee he were correct 'bout the laughter bit.

HA! Good Fun!

But Gromnir to be honest far too much attention was placed on Trumps studious and blatant lack of understanding of the virus and things like vaccines

Almost every time we had to watch Trump bumble along with his own interpretation of science their were always informed scientists like Fauci and Birx who would dispute what he said albeit diplomatically. Yet much of the media seemed fixated on what Trump understood about the virus and I never understood why that seemed more important than the informed people who followed the global understanding 

[Gromnir]

you got it reversed. trump were let off the hook. his impact on his base, and republicans in general, while implausible, unreasonable and at times genuine unbelievable, were nevertheless real.

Most Republicans Don't Trust Fauci or CDC's COVID Advice—but Nearly 70% Believe Trump: Poll

trump were aware o' the Faith o' his parishioners. trump knew disinfectant poisonings increased after his observations just as he knew many people demanded hydroxy therapies even when reputable doctors said there were no reason to believe such a treatment could be effective. 

trump were more responsible then you suggest.

just consider the antivax folks in this country. has been two groups driving antivax for decades: minorities; granola moms. is understandable a few minority groups has a hard time forgetting the us military using minority soldiers as guinea pigs. even so, as we pointed out in the covid thread, recent polls show minorities is getting vaccinated at rates similar to population at large. am pleasant surprised. the current holdouts for the vaccine is republican males. huh? pre trump it were hippie moms who were responsible for those stoopid measles outbreaks in +90% white counties and school districts in so cal and oregon. trump singlehanded complete flipped the identity o' the antivax movement in a matter o' months after years o' enduring stoopid.

more responsible.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[Gorth]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

But Gorthfuscious do you not think Putins jingoism  has also contributed towards the current distrust many countries have towards Russia? Just the  numerous examples of Russia's involvement in Cyber-warfare would be enough to concern most countries and I am going to ignore Putins attempts to create a new " USSR  border " to address perceived NATO encroachment

But Bruce, aren't you asking some very leading and loaded questions???

The simplistic answer is yes. But you can't really debate it out of context. Ask, how did it get to this in the first place? Plus, any conversation about the subject is going to be full of whatif's (what if Russia had joined Nato, what if Ukraine hadn't invaded Crimea, what if the EU had agree to open trade etc.) or whataboutisms (but the US does it big time, the Chinese does and the Israelis are probably the most active in cyber espionage and sabotage these days).

I prefer the whatif "What if Putin hadn't picked up the pieces of the collapse of the Soviet Union?". Try to imagine a failed state like Libya or Somalia with the worlds largest nuclear arsenal and ICBM's... people may not like Putin and distrust his nationalist motives, but for all his faults, he is "rational", unlike say the Iranian leadership (or the late US leadership). Did the world get the lesser of multiple evils and should adapt and learn to live with it?