Politics 2021

[Buster's Uncle]

I think he could probably be convicted of a felony for approximately each week he was president-elect.  -And that's just the crimes he bragged about committing.

Wish anyone had the guts.

[Rusty Edge]

  He started Nazi Wednesday, basically.

Well in terms of personal experience, thinking back to the influx of people to the party after he secured the nomination..... True. That was a turning point or a starting point.

Now I'll have to contemplate if the Reaganites really stood FOR anything then, or if it was all ANTI. ANTI-Commi, tax, gov, abortion..

So far FOR prayer in school is all that comes to mind.

Not FOR funding school, though.

You put a finger on what I've always thought.  Those people are against all KINDS of things, but FOR almost nothing.  Shabby lip-service to Jesus, maybe, that doesn't understand his teachings.  At all.  They are the textbook definition of -not conservative but- reactionary.

I blame Reagan for SO many crapulent things - and that's not poo-slinging.  Well not just poo-slinging...

I'd thought its hardly possible to let a kettle bubble for 30 years before it woul boil?
Would it even be possible for young radicals of the eighties to remain more or less low key before coming to a head now?

It was a turning point for the Republican party. A re-alignment, a new coalition. A new direction.


The GOP of Eisenhauer and Nixon  had political principles, and things they wanted to achieve. Eisenhauer started the interstate highway system and curtailed spy plane flyovers with the Soviets. Nixon ( who lacked ethics) opened relations with China, ended the Viet Nam war, signed strategic arms treaties with the Soviets, started the Environmental Protection Agency and started revenue sharing with the cities.

Even though they incorporated the Dixiecrats ( a sort of segregationist bunch of former Democrats who had a party for a few years ) they did purge the John Birch Society from being office holders.

Well, my memory being fuzzy I looked them up ...
The current Wikipedia page seems to trace JB Society through Goldwater and [Sleezebag]. I had no idea. I did know that Reagan was a Goldwater Republican. Worth a look because it's relevant-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society

Anyway, I tended to see the Dixiecrat Republicans as a regional thing. They fit with Lee Atwater's big tent approach. Broaden the base of the party and we could compete, and get the 70% of the stuff we agree on passed.

BUT  Reagan was a turning point in large point because he brought in Catholic Anti-abortion Democrats who had voted for Kennedy, and Evangelical Fundamentalist Christians who watched guys like Jerry Falwell on TV. People who weren't much involved in politics at the time, and it happened nationwide. Oh sure, he was an actual National Rifle Association member, and attracted Ku Klux Klan Imperial Wizard David Duke as well. I have a feeling I'm overlooking a group. This is a good point to pause.

[Buster's Uncle]

Pause and read at least three times.

-A genuine conservative said it, folks.

[Rusty Edge]

Yeah, it's a lot to take in.

I continue to be shocked , NOT by [Sleezebag], but by the lack of personal conviction in the GOP. Where was the outrage? Why didn't they make him toe the line? Rein him in? There were so many opportunities lost.

Where did it go wrong? Reagan. He brought in the ANTIs. I keep thinking of that truism that if you don't stand for something , you'll fall for anything. The end result is [Sleezebag].  Reagan brought back those people that got repudiated with Goldwater's crushing defeat. As Reagan faded into the sunset, Roger Ailes followed on his heals with Rush Limbaugh, conservative talk radio, and then FOX news. All of which thrived on ANTI and outrage. As the years went buy, Republicans needed those outlets to get elected, and became dependent.

I guess that's fine if you're content to simply be a critic from the outside. Maybe you can help keep power in check.
But if you actually get elected you should then honor your oath of office, accept some responsibility, govern and lead.

At least the John Birch page gave me a lot of insight into self-described libertarians who mysteriously support [Sleezebag] and authoritarians like him.

[Buster's Uncle]

I put [Sleezebag] in the swear filter instead, as that looks a lot less stupid in a post...

Also?  I suspect search engines could read our smilie code as text, and the whole point, besides I want to never hear or see that name -or face- again, is to not be part of the problem SAYing it constantly.

[Rusty Edge]

He's been in the news every day since 2016. Someday soon I'll have a revelation: That I didn't give the fellow a thought for the entirety of the previous day.  Then I'll know that my life is normalizing. I might have to crack a cork to commemorate the occasion.

[Buster's Uncle]

He was on my [poop]-list of obnoxious celebrities back in the nineties.

I been in Hell for five years.

[Unorthodox]

I'mma just drop this here.

https://www.deseret.com/utah/2021/2/8/22273204/legislature-nix-idea-requiring-consent-part-sex-education-curriculum

[Rusty Edge]

Rumor has it that 16 Senators cut class today at the impeachment hearings. 15 were Republicans.
They are supposed to be sworn jurors. Now if those 16 were kicked out of the jury, it would only take...
 100 - 16 = 84 x 2/3 = 56.  So assuming one lost Democrat, it would only take one more senator to convict.

Kicking them out sounds like something Mitch McConnel would do. Well, now I've heard a lot of scholarly analysis on the matter, and maybe there's nothing much to do in that regard. Same with Cruz, Hawley and Mike Lee spending the afternoon in a strategy session with [Sleezebag]'s legal team. Yes, they were 3 of the 16. Comes down to" looks terrible, so what?"

[Geo]

Rumor? Are journalists not allowed in the Congress chambers during deliberations?

[Rusty Edge]

Rumor? Are journalists not allowed in the Congress chambers during deliberations?

What an excellent question! They are. But you need some background.

Back in the 1980s they began live coverage of Congress on cable tv. People watched because of the novelty of it all. They could see their senators standing up for them and making impassioned speeches.
All well and good.

The trouble was when the camera crew panned around the room and the public got to see what was really going on. Lots of those impassioned speeches were delivered to an empty, or nearly empty room. The only people there were the camera crew, the official stenographer, the acting presiding officer, and maybe the Senator whose turn it was next. These speeches were only for the official historical record, or to be used for a fund raising video, or a campaign ad. They weren't  convincing other legislators. It was all a show!

Disappointing as that may have been, it gets worse. When there were actually legislators in the chamber, the tv audiences could see if their guy was at work or not. They could see who was absent, asleep or joking  or rolling their eyes during a serious discussion.

Suddenly the legislators didn't get the respect and deference they felt entitled to. The people wanted their money's worth from their public servants!  SO THINGS CHANGED. Cameras were forbidden from showing the room. Now their are fixed cameras focused on the lecterns, and reporters are reluctant to name absentees for fear of losing their credentials. In the long run the truth comes out with the voting records, but in the short term the public doesn't really know who's doing what. 

It was confirmed that 16 were absent, but few were named.

[Geo]

Ah, I see.
I asked because camera's do pan around the 'public' in at least our Chamber of Representatives. I can't remember if I ever saw a camera pan of the Senate.
But as far as I know its less a hassle here if you're absent because there's less public interest in the discussions in the chambers.


Of course, with Corona, there's a strict limit to the number of seats that may be occupied during a given time.

[Rusty Edge]

57 voted guilty, 43 not guilty. Didn't meet the 2/3rds requirement to convict.

[Buster's Uncle]

[Rusty Edge]

McConnel is making what would be a principled speech condemning [Sleezebag]'s criminal behavior and explaining the Constitution doesn't apply to ex officeholders... EXCEPT that he is the man who delayed the trial until now, rather than hold it immediately while [Sleezebag] was still a sitting president.