The All Things Political Topic - A politician needs the ability to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month, and next year. And to have the ability afterwards to explain why it didn’t happen

[alanschu]

I know I'm hugely cynical about a lot of the SCOTUS stuff, but is my initial alarmist read of SCOTUS going to be addressing the responsibility of managing elections to states here overblown or a bit justified? Just that it could lead to some of the actions that some were calling for in 2020's election in terms of asking Legislatures to submit their votes in different ways.

 

It's tied to North Carolina's state supreme court rejecting a Gerrymandered map and a trial court rejecting another submissions and replacing it with a less gerrymandered one. This led to state Republicans claiming this violates the Elections Clause.
The linked article in the second post goes into detail, and makes it sound like if successful the appeal would give state legislatures increased powers over elections and prevent state courts from getting involved in election disputes.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/03/supreme-court-democracy-independent-state-legislature.html

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

16 minutes ago, alanschu said:

I know I'm hugely cynical about a lot of the SCOTUS stuff, but is my initial alarmist read of SCOTUS going to be addressing the responsibility of managing elections to states here overblown or a bit justified? Just that it could lead to some of the actions that some were calling for in 2020's election in terms of asking Legislatures to submit their votes in different ways.

 

It's tied to North Carolina's state supreme court rejecting a Gerrymandered map and a trial court rejecting another submissions and replacing it with a less gerrymandered one. This led to state Republicans claiming this violates the Elections Clause.
The linked article in the second post goes into detail, and makes it sound like if successful the appeal would give state legislatures increased powers over elections and prevent state courts from getting involved in election disputes.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/03/supreme-court-democracy-independent-state-legislature.html

I don't think you're overblowing it. The reactionary supreme court has been openly hostile to democracy for a while (nb4 not a democracy posts) and is attempting to restructure the electoral process in a way that marginalizes vast swathes of the population in order to favor Republicans. If the court does indeed decide in favor of state legislatures, stuff like Trump tried to pull in 2020 could very well work. It's kind of funny, Republicans already don't need to win the nationwide popular vote to win, but soon they won't even need to win statewide popular votes to win. While it's despicable it is undeniably a masterstroke of realpolitic, all while the do nothing democrats ask for fundraising.

I haven't had any faith in the US government for a long time, but even I'm surprised that the SC has managed to find just a little bit of credibility to burn through in the last few months.

[Gromnir]

@alanschuafter the 2020 election we mentioned (over and over and over again) how the people cheering the Courts for killing trump campaign frivolous cases would need face the harsh reality that those same "brave" and "heroic" judges and Justices would be antagonistic to liberal notions o' free, fair and open elections. we predicted future voting rights cases were gonna skew heavily in favour o' a state's capacity to place onerous limits on an individual's right to vote. nevertheless, future Court decisions is gonna shock and enrage even so. yet another chapter in our ongoing cassandra play. 

oh, and for @Guard Dog 

please be aware that you is trying to have both ways, which is actual ordinary and common.

the praying coach

J. Gorsuch and conservative media did an excellent job o' selective presenting the fact o' the case. the Court's decision were focusing on the very limited facts involving a small number o' voluntary post-game prayers. the reality o' the coach's behaviour were a bit more complex and is the reason why the libs were concerned-- not just over-protective democrats trying to suppress religious and personal liberties. this Court is promoting a position which has state and local governments needing to not only recognize personal religious freedom but to defer. 

am personal an ardent defender o' personal liberties, but am nevertheless surprised what courts and SCOTUS is doing to radical change the law o' the land.

when brown v. board of education were announced, one o' the Justices literal got off his death bed, left the hospital against doctor strenuous advice and made himself present so a 9-0 decision could be delivered to the nation. Jackson would return to the hospital and die a short time thereafter. the current Court is making similar extreme changes by the slimmest o' majorities and they is doing so with not but a hand wave to the textualism and judicial restraint they advocated for decades.

HA! Good Fun!

 

Edited June 30, 2022 by Gromnir

[Gromnir]

8 minutes ago, KP wants Blue Velvet said:

I don't think you're overblowing it. The reactionary supreme court has been openly hostile to democracy for a while (nb4 not a democracy posts) and is attempting to restructure the electoral process in a way that marginalizes vast swathes of the population in order to favor Republicans.

have this backwards. democracy is what the conservatives is defending and that is precise the problem. the minority position is getting the fuzzy end o' the lollipop.  'course the foundational problem is that gun-toting and democracy loving americans don't understand what democracy is. democracy is goodness and liberty and equality, right? nope.

the bill of rights and many o' the subsequent amendments is offering limits on democracy.

the state shall not...

Congress shall make no law...

no person shall be held...

local and state governments, through democratic voting and democratic elected representatives, create laws and schemes which favour the majority and handicap minorities. those disparate outcomes is predictable and normal in democracy. unfair is the ordinary outcome o' democracy and is precise why we got a Constitution to put limits on democracy. we got SCOTUS, a collection o' non democratic selected personages who sit on the bench for life, supposed insulated from the mob and acting as defenders o' the Constitution. so not democracy from an athenian pov. 

am not taking a dump on democracy, 'cause is better than the alternatives just so long as you got an educated public, but Americans got a horribly misguided notion o' democracy and the fact this Court is rolling over and playing dead for democracy when they should be defending against it is the problem.

HA! Good Fun!

[Gorth]

@alanschu now that Canada has a land border with Europe (with the end of the Whisky War), I'm sure Canada would qualify for EU membership, more so than some other countries

(come on, Australia is in the Eurovision Song Contest!)

 

 

[alanschu]

20 hours ago, Gorth said:

@alanschu now that Canada has a land border with Europe (with the end of the Whisky War), I'm sure Canada would qualify for EU membership, more so than some other countries

(come on, Australia is in the Eurovision Song Contest!)

 

 

I don't have any strong feelings for this one way or the other tbh so sure count me in

[majestic]

Sorry, one France is enough in the EU, we sure don't need the Wannabe-French of Quebec.

[alanschu]

I mean, I understand your reservations

[BruceVC]

7 hours ago, majestic said:

Sorry, one France is enough in the EU, we sure don't need the Wannabe-French of Quebec.

Why you opposed to Democracy? I thought we supported the will of the people and all that ?

[Guard Dog]

@GromnirThere is a distinction between what Coach Kennedy is doing and some of the other examples. In Lee v. Weisman for example the school graduation ceremony was opened and closed with prayer. That's a no-no. And I agree with them (the Court). It's a school function in progress with a captive audience. It is coercive. But in Kennedy's case the game is over. The official school function has ended. No one is obligated to return to the field once they have left it. The students that joined him chose to do so. And it was students from both teams often enough I understand. Certainly they could not have felt coerced. 

As I understand it he was giving motivational speeches with religious undertones. That MIGHT be questionable depending on when. If it was in practice or before a game or during a game that would be problematic. If it's after a game when the school function is ended and not in a place where the players are a captive audience (meaning not in the fieldhouse) then I don't see the problem. Anyone objecting is not compelled to participate. Go back to the bus or locker room and get cleaned up. Apparently one player felt he playing time would be cut if he didn't participate but that feeling was never put to the test. If it were and it was then that is a different story.

I think firing Kennedy was still appropriate though. Suing to defend his praying after a game was one thing. That is his right. He took it to the press, social media, etc and created an unnecessarily combative atmosphere. That led to the folks in the stands mobing the field in support and created a somewhat dangerous situation. That was all on him. He turned a private devotion worthy of protection into a public spectacle and yet another tedious "culture war" battle. Sorry Coach Kennedy but that is where you lost me. 

And besides: 

"And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. 6 But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you"

Matthew 6:5 ESV

[Azdeus]

On 6/29/2022 at 9:56 PM, Sarex said:

33 it seems like.

73 from Sweden now. Then watch as Erdogan denies our entry into nato again as we refuse to extradite Swedish citizens, journalists and publishers, because our courts rule against it.

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, Azdeus said:

73 from Sweden now. Then watch as Erdogan denies our entry into nato again as we refuse to extradite Swedish citizens, journalists and publishers, because our courts rule against it.

And I know how much you are looking forward to Sweden joining NATO so that must be a huge point of frustration  

[alanschu]

10 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

But in Kennedy's case the game is over. The official school function has ended. No one is obligated to return to the field once they have left it. The students that joined him chose to do so. And it was students from both teams often enough I understand. Certainly they could not have felt coerced.

Coach Kennedy originally agreed to the restriction on not praying, and considered it a post game team meeting that, for a brief moment, was secular in nature by his own acceptance of the initial ruling to not include any prayers - this meeting was happening even when prayers were not. https://usatodayhss.com/2015/bremerton-football-coach-says-he-plans-to-pray-at-game.

A parent of one of the players actually assumed that they were typical post game pep talks with the team https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/coach-kennedy-wins-supreme-court-case-praying-football-games-students-rcna35478 only to later realize that he was leading the team in a prayer as well.

I definitely would not say that "certainly they could not have felt coerced" to attend a post game team meeting with the coach. I'm not privy to the situation, but if this is a situation where the team goes with the coach to center of the field post game and includes a prayer in that meeting, then yeah I'd suggest it's very likely a captive audience as well. Unless you think teenage players are just going to go "oh wait, there's a prayer, sorry coach I'm out" to the person responsible for their high school football careers.

This isn't him going out to the 50 yard line and an entire team of kids all going "oh yeah, I want to join the coach for the prayer entirely of my own volition completely absent of any pressure from him as an authority figure and my peers that are also in attendance."

 

Imagine if he had also discussed that he's grateful that gay marriage was legal at that gathering!

 

 

EDIT:

Quote

I think firing Kennedy was still appropriate though. Suing to defend his praying after a game was one thing. That is his right. He took it to the press, social media, etc and created an unnecessarily combative atmosphere. That led to the folks in the stands mobing the field in support and created a somewhat dangerous situation. That was all on him. He turned a private devotion worthy of protection into a public spectacle and yet another tedious "culture war" battle. Sorry Coach Kennedy but that is where you lost me. 

His plan is to use this ruling to get his old job back.

https://www.fox6now.com/news/praying-coach-who-won-supreme-court-case-says-all-he-wants-is-his-job-back

In the words of his attorney: "In the fall, he'll be back on the field, and he'll be saying a prayer after the game."

Edited July 2, 2022 by alanschu

[Guard Dog]

When I said they could not have felt coerced I was referring to players from the opposing team. According to the Vox article linked opposing team players would frequently join him. 

[Gromnir]

2 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

When I said they could not have felt coerced I was referring to players from the opposing team. According to the Vox article linked opposing team players would frequently join him. 

they don't really matter though, do they? the fact christian kids from another school chose to join a post game prayer don't remove the possibility many o' his own players, high school kids facing an unavoidable power disparity with their coach, felt compelled to do so if they were to get playing time.  

now admitted, 'cause am suspecting many folks is unaware, a large % o' high school teams is gonna have a prayer before the game. coach, player and maybe even a local religious figure is invited to lead a prayer in the locker room while all the players hold hands... as a team. if we were told such happened at a majority o' schools in texas, utah and south carolina, to name a few states, we would hardly be surprised. happens all across america every friday eve in the fall. am suspecting almost nobody complains 'cause has been the way things has happened since before any o' the players involved were born. coach kennedy likely got himself in trouble for the simple fact he were doing so open and notorious and not 'cause what he were doing were different. 

that said, particular 'cause is high school kids and recognizing the disparate influence a coach has over impressionable minors, a coach using his influence to spread his particular brand o' faith through religious charged motivational speeches and to have team prayers which even a few students feel is coercive woulda' up 'til last week been enough to make Courts choose in favour o' protecting kids. 

"The people know that their value judgments are quite as good as those taught in any law school--maybe better. If, indeed, the "liberties" protected by the Constitution are, as the Court says, undefined and unbounded, then the people should demonstrate, to protest that we do not implement their values instead of ours. Not only that, but confirmation hearings for new Justices should deteriorate into question and answer sessions in which Senators go through a list of their constituents' most favored and most disfavored alleged constitutional rights, and seek the nominee's commitment to support or oppose them. Value judgments, after all, should be voted on, not dictated; and if our Constitution has somehow accidently committed them to the Supreme Court, at least we can have a sort of plebiscite each time a new nominee to that body is put forward." --J. Scalia, planned parenthood v. casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)

if comes down to nothing more than a balancing 'tween coach kennedy's religious freedoms and the potential for his actions to be intentional or unwitting coercive, then why have a Court decide at all? is no longer a legal argument but one o' social and community values.

but again, the Court were extreme selective with the facts, which should makes gd suspicious. 

HA! Good Fun!

ps keep in mind we observed already how as the Court presented the facts, it were utter not shocking the Gorsuch and the majority sided with the coach. if you describe relevant facts as a handful o' post game prayers which is complete voluntarily for players to join, then a coach win were no surprise. the problem is even gd seems to admit there were more going on than just the post game prayers and for lower Courts to ignore those other circumstances and for SCOTUS to pretend such didn't exist is curious. Court coulda' remanded and ordered lower courts to decide using their new rules but with a full accounting o' relevant facts. chose not to do so. why?

Edited July 2, 2022 by Gromnir

[Guard Dog]

10 year old girl denied abortion in Ohio

First off what the F--K is going on here? WHY is no one asking the obvious questions here? Namely who the F--K is having sex with 10 year old children??? And if this is a case of rape.... what am I even saying of COURSE it's rape, a 10 year old child can't give consent, WHY is this even an issue? Abortion is legal in Ohio in cases of rape. 

Seriously, Congress has had near 45 years to get their s--t together and not rely on a court ruling everyone KNEW was going to go down one day. The government is f-----g useless. So is the media. This story is all over with no one asking the relevant question.

 

[Gromnir]

the new ohio abortion ban which went into effect on wednesday does not have a rape exception. when the ohio bill were being debated, the hypothetical thirteen-year-old (admitted not ten, but would that make a difference?) victim o' rape were specific addressed and supporters o' the bill observed how the unborn child in such a case were innocent and deserved protection. the people o' ohio and mississippi and indiana and more states every day all has decided your ten-year-old's suffering is tragic, but that the murder o' an unborn child is a sin too great and as such the life o' the unborn outweighs the pain o' the ten year-old rape victim. people reached that conclusion.  people passed jim crow laws in the south. people passed the espionage act in the early 1900s and the patriot act in the early 2000s. 

one o' these days gd is gonna have an epiphany... or not. is weird 'cause am certain gd has seen first hand just how terrible people will be to each other if they believe they have a reason for their actions or if they is frightened or if... whatever. heck, in spite o' statistics which show unequivocable that carry a firearm endangers others around him as well as himself, gd nevertheless carries a concealed gun with him everywhere, and it ain't 'cause he needs protection from politicians he may meet at the local feed store. he recent spoke to a divorce lawyer who shared horror stories of people doing evil to each other for the most petty o' reasons. people. were no mystery the kinda pre roe nightmares pregnant women faced and we all knew what were coming if the Court overturned, 'cause the Court didn't make abortions illegal, but it did leave the problems up to the states and their individual representative democracies to come up with solutions. we all knew what were coming but somehow now gd is enraged? freaking muslim ban all over again. 

people are petty and selfish and violent. not all people is monstrous, at least not all of the time, but if they were even bad only 1% o' the time you would need recognize and take efforts to minimize the evil men do, yes? the founders recognized such and took efforts to put limits on the predictable excesses and transgressions o' the people. 

we got the Constitution to preserve representative democracy and simultaneous to place systemic and explicit checks on a majority which inevitable abandons wisdom in favour o' greed, fear, and intolerance. the tyranny o' the majority is what leads to ohio's new abortion law. unfortunate, not enough people cared 'bout your pre-teen rape victim in spite o' fact we knew her and others like her were gonna suffer. 

ohio didn't do anything sneaky. the people o' ohio broadcast what they were doing and americans sat torpid and waited for the Court to fix or break. stoopid people. ordinary and predictably stoopid people. 

[Pidesco]

https://joycearthur.com/abortion/the-only-moral-abortion-is-my-abortion/

[BruceVC]

16 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

10 year old girl denied abortion in Ohio

First off what the F--K is going on here? WHY is no one asking the obvious questions here? Namely who the F--K is having sex with 10 year old children??? And if this is a case of rape.... what am I even saying of COURSE it's rape, a 10 year old child can't give consent, WHY is this even an issue? Abortion is legal in Ohio in cases of rape. 

Seriously, Congress has had near 45 years to get their s--t together and not rely on a court ruling everyone KNEW was going to go down one day. The government is f-----g useless. So is the media. This story is all over with no one asking the relevant question.

 

Sometimes this unplanned underage pregnancies is with young boys age 12-15, its not considered rape because its consensual

We have  several thousand underage pregnancies a year  in SA from the age of 10-14 and its not grown men or rape who are responsible. To quote from  the link below

• Children will not be criminally charged if they have sex if both partners are between 12 and 16 years old.
• And it’s not criminal for a child under 16 to have sex with a partner less than 2 years older. 

 https://www.news24.com/parent/Teen_13-18/Development/the-age-of-consent-in-sa-and-around-the-world-20171116

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

17 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

10 year old girl denied abortion in Ohio

First off what the F--K is going on here? WHY is no one asking the obvious questions here? Namely who the F--K is having sex with 10 year old children??? And if this is a case of rape.... what am I even saying of COURSE it's rape, a 10 year old child can't give consent, WHY is this even an issue? Abortion is legal in Ohio in cases of rape. 

Seriously, Congress has had near 45 years to get their s--t together and not rely on a court ruling everyone KNEW was going to go down one day. The government is f-----g useless. So is the media. This story is all over with no one asking the relevant question.

 

A lot of the restrictions are designed to force abortion clinics to close, so even if there are cases exempt from the ban there isn't any place in the state able to provide an abortion. This is what happened in Texas before Roe v Wade was overturned, I think it caused over half of clinics over the last decade because they couldn't regularly meet standards imposed.

Congress didn't get it's **** together because until recently abortion was a fundraising issue for the supposed pro-choice crowd. Even now, Democrats are doing more to fleece donors than they are to protect the right to abortion. 

[Malcador]

Well, figures there'd be a shooting at a parade today

[HoonDing]

"First off what the F--K is going on here? WHY is no one asking the obvious questions here? Namely who the F--K is having sex with 10 year old children??? And if this is a case of rape.... what am I even saying of COURSE it's rape, a 10 year old child can't give consent, WHY is this even an issue? Abortion is legal in Ohio in cases of rape. 

Seriously, Congress has had near 45 years to get their s--t together and not rely on a court ruling everyone KNEW was going to go down one day. The government is f-----g useless. So is the media. This story is all over with no one asking the relevant question."

IIRC many an Old Testament guy married a 10 year old when they were 140 years old

[alanschu]

On 7/4/2022 at 5:04 AM, Pidesco said:

https://joycearthur.com/abortion/the-only-moral-abortion-is-my-abortion/

Classic.

[BruceVC]

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/u-k-finance-minister-and-health-secretary-both-resign-11657042088

Now its not looking good for Johnson. Both the finance and health minister have resigned and they are both effective and prominent members of his cabinet. I dont think he can weather this storm?

 

[Malcador]

30 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/u-k-finance-minister-and-health-secretary-both-resign-11657042088

Now its not looking good for Johnson. Both the finance and health minister have resigned and they are both effective and prominent members of his cabinet. I dont think he can weather this storm?

 

Guess he's off to Kiev again.