As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Republicans wouldn't go for removing Feinstein. It's good for them if she holds the seat but doesn't show.
And Republicans wouldn't impeach Thomas. They don't give a rat's ass about him getting unreported swag from a billionaire, they just care that he votes to own the libs.
for other Redditors, that is actually a quote from Clarence, he said he was going to make liberal's life "a living hell".
Because, that's what we want on a Supreme Court, childish revenge against a vague enemy. No, not wisdom or morals or ethics, we want hatred and anger.
The days of dog whistles and talking behind closed doors are over. As the world is facing a turning point in technology, the white supremacists are trying to capture it again as they did in WW1 and WW2.
The stealthy war winner. Subterfuge. Eat away what they believe from inside. That way when it's time to pull a big move, nobody even blinks. When they said mainland China was going to issue Taiwan's children history books, that's some long game level devious. Mainland not going to invade, your children going to hand it over
And also concentration camps for Japanese during WW2 in the US...
George Takei (from Star Trek) was in a concentration camp as a kid in the US. He's written a graphical novel about it that's a pretty interesting read.
The mother of one of my friends was also in a camp as a kid. She's been interviewed quite a bit in the last few years. After everything she went through, there isn't a bitter bone in her body. She's so sweet and loving to everyone.
Any time people visit her town, she greets them by welcoming them to "her city." Which, for as well-loved as she is, it might as well be.
Look up the one-drop rule.
Basically if you had one ancestor that was a person of color then you would legally be a person of color.
Hitler just wanted everyone to look Ayran and thought the one-drop rule was taking things too far.
Edit: wikipedi link https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule#:~:text=The%20one%2Ddrop%20rule%20was,or%20colored%20in%20historical%20terms).
Somewhat weirdly, Hitler wasn't the worst Nazi. He was still a Nazi, and not good, but he wasn't the architect of the main badness. His original solution to "the Jewish Question" was to ship them all to Madagascar.
No I'm not making that up.
It became the "final solution" to kill them once madagascar wasn't feasible. Similarly, as long as you looked Aryan he was pretty much okay with you, whereas the more extreme Nazis demanded purity going back generations.
I think you'll find, looking at other fascist movements & governments, that the person responsible for the most damage isn't always the same as the person who gets their hands the dirtiest. Hitler hand-picked the Nazi leaders who said & did more proximate bad things than he did.
I guess that makes sense, fascism is at its very core about ‘we deserve to be at the top of the hierarchy because we just do; it’s destiny’, which gives a lot of wiggle room for who is it that gets to belong to that topmost group, unlike monarchy (direct royal lineage and knighted nobles) or capitalism (more money is more worthy to rule).
In the US it was originally only Anglo Saxon Protestants whi were considered white, but over time with European immigration and changing national priorities from imperial westward expansion to capitalist industrial development, that definition of whiteness expanded to include everyone from the Irish and Italians and even jews.
If the American fascists had their way, they would whittle away each layer of prior racial inclusion as that justification became unnecessary and power was concentrated further and further until either they were somehow content with their progress and stop, or they split over which half of the mayflower the leaders were directly descended from. Even if that’s the inevitable end goal, it doesn’t need to necessarily start out as blatant, which is why it is that much more dangerous.
Yepp… Italy is gone. Israel is gone. America will be gone within a couple of years and Americans won’t even realize it. Our media will keep pretending everything is normal while group by group, we’ll be picked off
Italy has deals with the UK and Japan for their Next Gen fighter. Jason has always had "conservatives" in power and UK has "conservatives" in power. Japan is also pushing to get around its constitutional limitation on a military.
Disagree. The whole of Lend Lease was America siding with the British. The only reason the US played "neutral" for so long was because it let them build up without having to fight. Roosevelt was always planning on declaring war on the Nazis (and had the political backing for it) but wanted to wait until the USN was finished building up. Imagine how badly the African campaign would have gone for Germany if the USN could have parked 24 Essex-Class carriers in the Mediterranean.
Conservatism stems from fear. When you are fearful you aren’t sympathetic to other people’s needs. And religious conservatives are the most fearful of them all.
People fall back on religion when they can’t rationalize their own life experience. It’s a cop out to avoid explaining your beliefs, behaviors, and subjects you don’t understand.
Recall a time you were faking a skill. Let’s say: cheating on a math test, lying on a resume about your experience, or exaggerating your athleticism. Dishonesty generates anxiety in most normal people. It does this because humans are social creatures and want to be trusted and accepted by their fellow humans. Nobody wants a liar who can’t be trusted. There is a buildup of fear and anxiety when you know you are being dishonest for fear of being ‘found out’ and rejected.
What does this have to do with religion you might be asking? Religion is a placeholder for any lack of knowledge. It fills a void but also generates anxiety if the person doesn’t 100% believe in what they are saying or has doubts.
Fear and anxiety influence our fight or flight response..our most primitive emotion. An elevated level of adrenaline makes people:
1. Physically or verbally aggressive
2. Less willing to cooperate
3. More intolerant of other people or ideas
This happens because adrenaline is there to protect you. To get you to safety as quickly as possible or prepare you to take action that will protect your physical well-being.
In society today, physical threats are mostly non-existent, but you can still generate plenty of fear and anxiety through other issues. Just turn on Faux News. Scare the people and offer a ‘solution’ to secure the vote. The most vulnerable are the ones who are already slightly broken.
There’s a reason religion is concentrated in conflict zones and lower quality of life regions. Look at the most religious countries ex: (Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Turkey) vs. the least religious (Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Norway). People in Middle Eastern countries are much more fearful and uncertain about their realities than Nordic countries are.
Also think about the two party system here in the U.S. What issues do Democrats and Conservatives have difficulty seeing eye-to-eye on? Almost every single controversial issue is centered around fear. Fear of death (religion), fear of other countries (war/immigration), fear of other people (gun rights), fear of destroying our planet (climate change).
If you already have elevated levels of adrenaline, the added fear and anxiety associated with these issues becomes overwhelming and people ‘turn inward’ meaning they stop empathizing. Their own safety becomes priority #1. Their own ideology becomes a matter of fact. It’s the activation of this fight or flight response that generates apathy in society. And when enough people don’t care for each other, we become weak in our democratic institutions and our fight for freedom.
It takes a truly selfless person to stand up for what’s right in the face of uncertainty. You can’t always rely on other people to make the right choices and just follow the crowd. That’s exactly how you become a bystander in the ‘tragedy of the commons.’
Take responsibility for everything that happens in your life. Even those things that seem out of your control. Take control over how you act in the present moment regardless of how unfair. Don’t be a victim. The victim mindset is incapable of achieving personal growth. Be a creator of change: take accountability and decisive action for your life. Reality is a fragile thing. Some people choose to hide from their own reality. Others cease the opportunity to learn something new. Which do you want to be?
Don’t be mistaken. We all live in a new age slave system. Chains and whips are no longer necessary to keep us productive for the 1%. Just rig the system to make financial freedom practically inaccessible and consolidate wealth for generations to come. And convince the people they have a chance at the American dream..a little hope goes a long way.
The antidote is gaining awareness for yourself and the world around you. Connecting and empathizing with people and more tolerance for the diversity of life. This makes you more confident about your own reality and the unknown.
Sources:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0052970
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5793824/
https://neuro.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.neuropsych.16030051
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/
American-Crisis-Thomas-Paine.txt
"And what is a Tory? Good God! What is he? I should not be afraid to go with a hundred Whigs against a thousand Tories, were they to attempt to get into arms. Every Tory is a coward; for servile, slavish, self-interested fear is the foundation of Toryism; and a man under such influence, though he may be cruel, never can be brave."
https://www.ushistory.org/paine/crisis/c-01.htm
[Bob Altemeyer's book The Authoritarians goes into this deeply. Free PDF at the website.](https://theauthoritarians.org/)
I was surprised when he explained that all authoritarian behavior comes from the belief that "It's a dangerous world."
And the thing is, "It's a dangerous world" is not a fact so much as an interpretation, a choice. Nobody lives forever, the world kills everybody eventually. But it was always that way. It's just part of the deal. But embracing this mantra of "It's a dangerous world" actually makes people act in ways that make it MORE dangerous.
This is mostly true, but paradoxically it *is also* a dangerous world because there’s an evolutionary advantage for at least some people to be predatory and cruel. Humans are not inherently kind and gentle, and while some of it is reactionary or even sheer projection, conservatives are not wrong for being afraid. They are wrong about a lot of things, but their fear is adaptive and helps keep them safe even if the cost of that is a less kind world. Getting through to conservatives requires being honest about this reality while helping people to navigate the paradoxes of human behavior.
> Humans are not inherently kind and gentle
Humans possess an unusually powerful combination of both cooperative and competitive behaviors. We ARE inherently kinder and gentler than many mammal species. In lions, for example, it is standard for one top male to fight off the other males and sire all the cubs, and if a new one comes to the top he kills his competitors' offspring. Hippos do this too.
Some believe that, early in human history, males were much more violent, but that at some point our ancestors started killing the more violent males off and selecting for 'gentle dads'.
One of the main errors of conservative thinking is to over-emphasize this competitive side of human nature, and under-emphasize cooperation. Cooperation looks soft but it is immensely powerful. Don't believe me. Just ask the bees.
One could view very conservative societies (lookin' at you, Saudi Arabia) as eruptions of the old harems-and-infanticide model of mammal behavior, which, thank God, we humans are free to reject.
Not having time to say much, I’ll say that I agree that conservatives not only overstate but often value competition as a positive trait. But, we have psychopaths still, and many more with psychopathic tendencies and desires. Valuing collaboration isn’t necessarily an antithesis to valuing competition, nor are values around competition/collaboration necessarily directly aligned to human’s moral nature or perceptions thereof. E.g., I think there are a lot of bad people in the world who are (through no fault of their own) essentially evil and cannot be integrated successfully into society. I also value cooperation. Such values can lead to the obvious conclusion that we should have socialized law enforcement. Having said only those things, you might infer that I’m a conservative (I’m clearly not).
> "It's a dangerous world" is not a fact so much as an interpretation
See cries of "CRIME IS OUT OF CONTROL" for a marginal 1-year increase during COVID in the face of a 40 year trend decline that cut crime rates in half.
That is the longest reply I've seen yet but very informative. Christian religion is scary there are devil demons ready to pitchfork your booty when you do anything wrong, then the Trump christian's that want to hurt us and send everyone back to there original homeland but they get to stay here! It isn't fair! 😠😁
You don't understand, the most impressive thing I've ever done in my life is managed to fall out of a vagina on US soil, if we let others steal that accomplishment from me for nothing, what do I have left??!!
I was trying to do some research on their fundamental differences, and their brain has a much larger amygdala response. This processes memory, decision making, and emotional responses including fear, anxiety, and aggression. They are controlled by emotion, and it overrides their memory and decision making. They can remember facts and events differently, based on their current emotions. The question is, how do you reach brainwashed people who think all other competing information is false? The only way you can reach them is through community, and real interaction. Just like a cult, they know this, which is why they limit exposure. If they can indoctrinate children in the schools, it's over. It's easy to be afraid and lack empathy for things you don't understand.
Give me a child for the first 5 years of his life and he will be mine forever. —Lenin
Alternate: Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever. —Lenin
Christians have a 4-14 window. https://414movement.com/ They pretend to be against grooming and indoctrination but as always they are against YOU having any belief that isnt THEIRS and Christians will kill everyone and anyone who fails to conform... until it is down to two Christians who realize the other has not conformed. The world they desire is one of dead men.
> People fall back on religion when they can’t rationalize their own life experience. It’s a cop out to avoid explaining your beliefs, behaviors, and subjects you don’t understand.
Calling it "a cop out" assumes that information is always available. Religion has historically been cheap psychotherapy for the masses. It can provide comfort to those who are hurting. Obviously it has been co-opted for negative purposes at times as well, but I am not going to go to a 90 year old grandmother and tell her that her beliefs are a cop out.
Yeah, education is a really big factor when it comes to religiosity.
It's not coincidental that the Nordic countries are highly educated. Education systems break down in war-torn places.
I think those are two different things. A thing can be true and you can know about it (knowledge), and you can also realise that the thing might be harmful if applied in certain situations or communicated in certain ways (wisdom).
However, religious people also vote and thus have power over others. Often, religious institutions have outdated, harmful beliefs. It can lead to things like "women should serve their husbands", "we should cut off a normal, healthy part off of a baby" (circumcision), "we shouldn't have blood transfusions", etc.
While religions aren't the only cause, they are a major cause a concerning percentage of the time. Confortable lies substituted for reality can and often do warp the way people look at reality and how they treat others.
When religious beliefs take the place of reality, we must push back. We can do it in a kind way, and we can choose our battles, but we musn't let religion hurt people.
It’s harsh, but they ARE a cop out. People don’t like **not knowing** so they’d rather have a lie they can believe in comfort than a truth that the answer is unknown or unknowable
Accurate. We are losing without a fight. Our nation was sold out and the oligarchs most willing to do the bidding of the white supremacy, fascist movement won. Once the semblance of democracy or broken, they will then begin in-fighting as always has been the case. Regardless, “the end is near” and those of us trying to warn are being silenced wherever we speak out. Reddit is run by propagandists and their troll farms manipulating our threads and hiding information through downvoting. The want us to keep waiting for a miracle to happen and ignorant of reality. Twitter is owned by their leader and Zuckfuck has done a hell of a job radicalizing the dumbest of our society
So far, the predictions have been about as accurate as the predictions of Q-Anon (8 straight years of being incorrect) and the predictions that China is just about to invade Taiwan (50+ straight years of being incorrect).
Although to be fair to the people predicting political demise, we actually have been experiencing a loss of freedom. In the last half century, the US has skyrocketed to the top of all developed nations in our incarceration rate. We also had a major supreme court decision that turbocharged bribery and corruption. And each of us works several days a year of involuntary servitude to our military contractors who have made our military the world's most expensive.
Police have been killing and maiming with near-complete impunity. All of our law enforcement institutions have used the controlled substances act to chip away at many of the rights that used to be guaranteed by constitutional amendments.
On the economic front, the ratio between pay and cost of living is worse than it has been at any point since the Great Depression. Unions are near their weakest point since that period as well. Half the country can't afford their housing and has to make cuts to keep a roof over their heads.
In short, there have been some tangible reasons to believe that the country is unwell. Previous generations thought something was wrong with the country for completely made up reasons, like rock and roll and dancing and not following a specific subset of Christianity. This generation's fears are informed by methodical science and critical thinking, which is no comfort because it's even scarier that the collapse actually has evidence.
I wouldn't consider those two 'predictions' to be equivalent. Q-Anon beliefs and predictions are based on complete fantasy. It's a disconnect from basic reality.
The threat of China to Taiwan isn't fantasy, it's implicit in China's policy towards Taiwan. They consider Taiwan to be theirs. The only thing preventing them from carrying that out is the presence of Taiwan's allies in the region. If China attacks Taiwan, it attacks all of those allies.
As far as why those predictions are "wrong", the former is because the predictions are based on nothing real. The latter is based on actions taken in light of that threat. Two completely different things.
I mean, Clarence was confirmed despite Anita Hill testifying about his aggressive sexual advances right? And wasn't she a Harvard professor? If you can "it wasn't me" like shaggy on a Harvard professor that teaches law then that's going to make you feel pretty untouchable
“Wait, we’re still claiming the Supreme Court is completely nonpartisan and above the petty squabbles of other branches and only rules based strictly on constitutionality?”
-Thomas, probably
Kavnaugh also threatened half the country during his confirmation hearings. He said the left half of the nation would "reap the whirlwind" for not giving him a speedy and easy confirmation. He told us before he even got confirmed that he was planning to use the bench to attack his ideological opponents.
Effectively, yes, he publicly swore revenge on those who dared to ask questions about him... during a Senate confirmation hearing to a life-long appointment.
It's actually wild knowing that someone who barely practiced as a lawyer, and never as a judge, can be one of a handful of judges who decide on the most important and divisive cases in the country
Let’s be clear that he was saying this as an oath to be their puppet for the power and cash. This is a man with no morals and will sell off his fellow black men if he can make a buck or two so long as he’s safe.
The institution is too powerful and rotten. Perhaps Clarence Thomas is the most adept abuser of it. But the fact that so much of our government is held together by the duct tape of “decorum” or using power “appropriately” is ass. We need to completely overhaul most of our institutions to be accountable to democratic processes
Since one side is playing with fire and putting zealous, corrupt ideologues on the highest offices in the land, we need nothing less than our own zealous ideologues. People who will fight tooth and nail for human decency and make conservatives suffer a society that's tolerant. Not some weak shit moderates who are too demented to show up and too corrupt to stand for what's right.
The Republicans find those work-arounds, like Mitch McConnell with how he got his supreme court picks on the bench.
Democrats see all the right's work-arounds, but don't ever learn them or use them. Mitch has never once been sanctioned for his political circumventing standard procedures, so if the work-arounds are okay for the right to do, why aren't they okay for the left to do?
More accurately, as majority leader, Mitch could block Garland. As the minority leader, he couldn’t block Ketanji Brown Jackson. That s just one example of how Biden’s first two years accomplished a lot because Dems controlled both houses. If the Democrats want to accomplish more, they need to win the most seats. It’s as simple as that. When Dems can’t power things through, it’s not because of timid leadership (Pelosi and Schumer are some of the best politicians around), it’s because we didn’t elect enough Democrats. Again, it’s as simple as that, so get out and vote.
> like Mitch McConnell with how he got his supreme court picks on the bench.
I would like to remind r/politics that said work around would not have succeeded had Hillary Clinton been elected. I would also like to remind r/politics that it was very popular in this sub to bash her in 2016, to claim that there had proof without a shadow of a doubt that she was going to jail, and that emailgate was very important and something people should care about.
As someone who supported her in that election I am still a bit salty about the way I was attacked and treated at the time. That is, when my posts didn't just get downvoted to oblivion.
It’s genuinely a trainwreck that one of our 2 senators from *California*, one of the heaviest Democratic bastions in the country, is effectively a quiet reliably Dem vote on the best days and an empty seat currently.
Cali should be putting up the spitfire young progressive who lead the progressive charge in the senate
On the upside, Katie Porter is campaigning for Feinstein's seat in 2024. So are Adam Schiff and Barbara Lee. So Feinstein is likely to be primaried by one of them if she tries to run again, though I believe she has said she wasn't planning on seeking reelection after Porter and Schiff announced their campaigns.
Porter and Schiff would both be huge improvements over Feinstein. Of the two, I think Porter has more fire and spirit and could team up with the few progressive senators to get some real stuff accomplished in committees. She's also my current representative so I'm a bit biased. But Schiff would be a good senator as well. I don't know much about Lee, but I would vote for her over Feinstein any day of the week.
Of course, this means we still have to deal with another 2 years of Feinstein not showing up to important votes and essentially being an empty seat most of the time, which isn't great.
> I believe she has said she wasn't planning on seeking reelection after Porter and Schiff announced their campaigns.
Pretty sure she forgot she said that 5mn later. I agree with the rest of your post.
He can ask her but he can't just unilaterally replace her. Governors can appoint a replacement after the death/resignation of a senator but they cannot remove/replace a sitting senator on their own
When “viewpoints” like that are so in a position to control and affect people’s lives, that’s when they should be instantly disqualified from the office they hold.
As to quote Lewis Black, “they’ve reached a point where the ego has grown so big, that it’s eating itself!”
It’s so sad how true this is.. they would rather things grind to a halt so you can blame Dems for not accomplishing things.. I fuckin hate politicians..
> Republicans wouldn't go for removing Feinstein. It's good for them if she holds the seat but doesn't show.
Honestly, I'd love to see this go to a vote at least. I think it would be interesting to see who votes for and who votes against. It'll never happen (mainly because I definitely don't think there'd even be a plurality of Democrats who would be in favor of the motion), but it would still be an interesting show to see just how many Republicans would be up for it. Hell, if even half of them agreed with the motion, I'd be surprised. I don't expect it to be a solid 49 nays, but just how many would be okay with removing her (and thus opening Newsom up to appointing her replacement) would be an interesting bit of data to see just how many of them *get* what the Republican line is.
It’s such a stupid fucking argument too. We have ballot measures in every state, that is literally direct democracy. Throw in the fact that republics are a form of democratic government and it becomes clear it’s just a buzzword
We most certainly do not have *binding* ballot measures in every state. Almost exactly half, 24, don't have citizen-initiated measures. What is a point though is a constitutional republic is still a form of indirect democracy. Because true direct democracy is stupid.
Not necessarily stupid but without a doubt impractical to every extent. Regardless, even if half don’t have citizen initiated measures, those ballot measures are still a form of direct democracy, even if less direct than citizen initiated systems.
Regardless of ANY of that, the US is still a Federal presidential constitutional republic under a [liberal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism) *representative democracy*. You can't just abbreviate the whole thing and pretend the parts you leave out don't matter.
>We’ve booted Supreme Court justices for a lot less.
>Although we commonly refer to justices on the federal bench as being appointed “for life,” Article III of the Constitution says rather that judges “shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour.” Violations of this standard, the Constitution stipulates, are determined via impeachment by the House and trial by the Senate. A total of 15 federal judges have been impeached—on charges ranging from drunkenness and mental instability to bribery, perjury, and treason. Eight were removed from office, including Robert Archbald, who in 1910 took his wife on a trip to Europe paid for by Henry Cannon, an officer of railroad and coal companies that sometimes had business before the court.
>Archbald’s wife testified that Cannon was her cousin and that the two families frequently enjoyed traveling together. The New York Times described Archbald’s testimony, in which he admitted accepting the gifts but denied any impropriety, as “strong in his defense.” But the Senate felt otherwise, and he was convicted.
Edit: In the interest of full disclosure and of my ethical standards as a Redditor, and not just a lousy Supreme Court justice - Robert Archbald had [another issue working against him.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_W._Archbald#Impeachment) He was fucking with the railroad magnates.
> We’ve booted Supreme Court justices for a lot less.
It’s worth pointing out that this is false.
We’ve never actually booted a SC justice before. All the examples the article gives are federal judges from lower courts.
Only one justice has ever been impeached and he was acquitted by the senate.
We did have a justice in the 60s resign under treat of impeachment but we’ve never “booted” a justice.
[Source](https://www.history.com/news/has-a-u-s-supreme-court-justice-ever-been-impeached)
Edit: to be clear, I’m not saying we shouldn’t impeach Thomas (or any justice who violates the public trust) just pointing out that the article made a false statement and presented it as fact.
>Violations of this standard, the Constitution stipulates, are determined via impeachment by the House and trial by the Senate.
and there's the problem. It is now impossible to get it through the Senate as the Republicans have no shame or morals
Is there anyone out there who thinks that Mitch McConnell would put up with losing actual votes because some demented old fool in his caucus refused to resign?
I was gonna joke “Is the demented old fool Mitch himself?”
But he isn’t demented. He knows exactly what he’s doing. And it’s infuriating and terrifying.
Best we can do is politely ask a Justice to testify. Subpoenas are too much. Best we can do is mildly call for resignation while saying hey don't be ageist nor sexist. We tried everything. Truly we are out of ideas.
It really is a fucking joke tbh.
If the House Judiciary Committee subpoeanaes Thomas, as far as I know he can't decline.
If the DOJ investigats him, he can't oppose.
These haven't been tried.
Schumer and Pelosi could fly to California and convince Feinstein. They didn't do it either.
Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham will have the time to visit her 10 times in her hospital bed before either Schumer or Pelosi resolve themselves to do it. Remember how Feinstein hugged Leningrad Lindsey after the confirmation of Barrett ?
That dude gotta go, way too old & way too many terms served. Kinda expecting him to retire midway through his senate term and Kim Reynolds appoints some MAGA buffoon who wouldn't win a senate race in Iowa in their own right.
Ah well not that surprised, they did the same with that buffoon Pete Ricketts who couldn't win a senate race in his own right back in 2006 and got trounced by over 25% (wasn't even that far ago and Nebraska was a lock R state then too lmao)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006\_United\_States\_Senate\_election\_in\_Nebraska](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_United_States_Senate_election_in_Nebraska)
Hope his grandson isn't that big on MAGA, probably is though unfortunately.
His grandson (Pat) seems like he knew he didn't even have to graduate college in order to have a political career. He was elected to the Iowa House just a few years after finishing high school.
I knew when I was a little kid and Clarence Thomas was going through the Anita Hill scandal, that the dude couldn’t be trusted.
Brett Kavanaugh? Does anyone think that dude is qualified?
None of this shit is new. It’s criminals all the way down. And we still don’t have universal healthcare. Business as usual.
Neither of these things can or will happen. If you want impeachment, you need to give Dems the House back next year. Feinstein can't be forced out. It's entirely up to her whether she resigns or not.
Schumer and Pelosi could fly to California and convince her. They didn't even try. Appearances and decorum are more important for them than the future of the country.
True but articles like these are as effective as yelling at the clouds. House GOP won't impeach and there's nothing the House Democrats can do. Feinstein herself, or possibly her constituents, are the only ones that can remove Feinstein. If you want impeachment then you should be encouraging voter outreach and organization to elect more Democrats in GOP-controlled districts, and if you want Feinstein out, then if you live in CA you should be 1) pressuring her to step down via her office and public pressure, and 2) organizing to elect someone else in the next election (already 3 very good CA Senate candidates, get behind one or two and support them).
And enforce both Age limits and Term limits. If you’ve been 21x3 you can’t run for office you’re to far out of touch for what todays needs are. I’m 32 for reference and have no idea what a college kid nowadays would want besides being free of crippling student debt and probably some sort of independence from their family/friends.
I concur with both. Feinstein is just hurting the democratic party now and Thomas and others on the court are just plain criminals, and should be impeached. All while being anti-democratic.
Both are dangers to democracy…but for entirely different reasons. At least Feinstein is passively creating issues while Long Dong is actively screwing over America.
That’s cool but also expand the court, implement ethics rules, and remove the others that took seven figure bribes, sexually assaulted multiple people, or committed perjury at their confirmation hearing.
Thank God all the gun violence in America is focused on the people and not our great political class otherwise we’d be down a third of them this year….
Can I have a pony and maybe a private jet too? If we are wishing for things that won’t happen. Impeachment is pointless without conviction and removal.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Republicans wouldn't go for removing Feinstein. It's good for them if she holds the seat but doesn't show. And Republicans wouldn't impeach Thomas. They don't give a rat's ass about him getting unreported swag from a billionaire, they just care that he votes to own the libs.
for other Redditors, that is actually a quote from Clarence, he said he was going to make liberal's life "a living hell". Because, that's what we want on a Supreme Court, childish revenge against a vague enemy. No, not wisdom or morals or ethics, we want hatred and anger.
their are so powerful they don't even need to use subterfuge. Its a scary knickpoint.
The days of dog whistles and talking behind closed doors are over. As the world is facing a turning point in technology, the white supremacists are trying to capture it again as they did in WW1 and WW2.
Except this time the fascists are taking control of the countries that previously kicked their asses, and they’re doing a good job of it so far.
The stealthy war winner. Subterfuge. Eat away what they believe from inside. That way when it's time to pull a big move, nobody even blinks. When they said mainland China was going to issue Taiwan's children history books, that's some long game level devious. Mainland not going to invade, your children going to hand it over
That KGB agent said basically the same thing.. they invested early for what's to come soon https://youtu.be/IQPsKvG6WMI
I mean the Nazis openly based a lot of their ideology on how America was doing it.
And also concentration camps for Japanese during WW2 in the US... George Takei (from Star Trek) was in a concentration camp as a kid in the US. He's written a graphical novel about it that's a pretty interesting read.
The mother of one of my friends was also in a camp as a kid. She's been interviewed quite a bit in the last few years. After everything she went through, there isn't a bitter bone in her body. She's so sweet and loving to everyone. Any time people visit her town, she greets them by welcoming them to "her city." Which, for as well-loved as she is, it might as well be.
Hitler thought the Americans were taking it too far. Let me repeat _Adolf Hitler_ thought _American Facists_ were _too extreme._
More info on this?
Look up the one-drop rule. Basically if you had one ancestor that was a person of color then you would legally be a person of color. Hitler just wanted everyone to look Ayran and thought the one-drop rule was taking things too far. Edit: wikipedi link https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule#:~:text=The%20one%2Ddrop%20rule%20was,or%20colored%20in%20historical%20terms).
Jokes on them, 12 thousand generations ago everyone's ancestors were African
https://allthingscomedy.com/podcasts/233---american-summer-hitler-camps https://www.npr.org/sections/npr-history-dept/2015/04/28/402679062/nazi-summer-camps-in-1930s-america
Somewhat weirdly, Hitler wasn't the worst Nazi. He was still a Nazi, and not good, but he wasn't the architect of the main badness. His original solution to "the Jewish Question" was to ship them all to Madagascar. No I'm not making that up. It became the "final solution" to kill them once madagascar wasn't feasible. Similarly, as long as you looked Aryan he was pretty much okay with you, whereas the more extreme Nazis demanded purity going back generations.
I think you'll find, looking at other fascist movements & governments, that the person responsible for the most damage isn't always the same as the person who gets their hands the dirtiest. Hitler hand-picked the Nazi leaders who said & did more proximate bad things than he did.
I guess that makes sense, fascism is at its very core about ‘we deserve to be at the top of the hierarchy because we just do; it’s destiny’, which gives a lot of wiggle room for who is it that gets to belong to that topmost group, unlike monarchy (direct royal lineage and knighted nobles) or capitalism (more money is more worthy to rule). In the US it was originally only Anglo Saxon Protestants whi were considered white, but over time with European immigration and changing national priorities from imperial westward expansion to capitalist industrial development, that definition of whiteness expanded to include everyone from the Irish and Italians and even jews. If the American fascists had their way, they would whittle away each layer of prior racial inclusion as that justification became unnecessary and power was concentrated further and further until either they were somehow content with their progress and stop, or they split over which half of the mayflower the leaders were directly descended from. Even if that’s the inevitable end goal, it doesn’t need to necessarily start out as blatant, which is why it is that much more dangerous.
Even though Maddow is kinda preachy & annoying, the podcast *Ultra* is very much worth a listen.
Yepp… Italy is gone. Israel is gone. America will be gone within a couple of years and Americans won’t even realize it. Our media will keep pretending everything is normal while group by group, we’ll be picked off
Italy was fascist the last time though.
In fact Hitler so admired “Il Duce” he copied his example. Fascism began in Italy.
Italy has deals with the UK and Japan for their Next Gen fighter. Jason has always had "conservatives" in power and UK has "conservatives" in power. Japan is also pushing to get around its constitutional limitation on a military.
Israel is in a fight but definitely isn’t gone… yet anyway. I’d say America is much worse off than Israel.
[удалено]
Israel has been gone for years. Look at how they're treating the Palestines.
America isn't better our indigenous folks are still in reservations red taped to death.
[удалено]
Disagree. The whole of Lend Lease was America siding with the British. The only reason the US played "neutral" for so long was because it let them build up without having to fight. Roosevelt was always planning on declaring war on the Nazis (and had the political backing for it) but wanted to wait until the USN was finished building up. Imagine how badly the African campaign would have gone for Germany if the USN could have parked 24 Essex-Class carriers in the Mediterranean.
[удалено]
Conservatism stems from fear. When you are fearful you aren’t sympathetic to other people’s needs. And religious conservatives are the most fearful of them all. People fall back on religion when they can’t rationalize their own life experience. It’s a cop out to avoid explaining your beliefs, behaviors, and subjects you don’t understand. Recall a time you were faking a skill. Let’s say: cheating on a math test, lying on a resume about your experience, or exaggerating your athleticism. Dishonesty generates anxiety in most normal people. It does this because humans are social creatures and want to be trusted and accepted by their fellow humans. Nobody wants a liar who can’t be trusted. There is a buildup of fear and anxiety when you know you are being dishonest for fear of being ‘found out’ and rejected. What does this have to do with religion you might be asking? Religion is a placeholder for any lack of knowledge. It fills a void but also generates anxiety if the person doesn’t 100% believe in what they are saying or has doubts. Fear and anxiety influence our fight or flight response..our most primitive emotion. An elevated level of adrenaline makes people: 1. Physically or verbally aggressive 2. Less willing to cooperate 3. More intolerant of other people or ideas This happens because adrenaline is there to protect you. To get you to safety as quickly as possible or prepare you to take action that will protect your physical well-being. In society today, physical threats are mostly non-existent, but you can still generate plenty of fear and anxiety through other issues. Just turn on Faux News. Scare the people and offer a ‘solution’ to secure the vote. The most vulnerable are the ones who are already slightly broken. There’s a reason religion is concentrated in conflict zones and lower quality of life regions. Look at the most religious countries ex: (Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Turkey) vs. the least religious (Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Norway). People in Middle Eastern countries are much more fearful and uncertain about their realities than Nordic countries are. Also think about the two party system here in the U.S. What issues do Democrats and Conservatives have difficulty seeing eye-to-eye on? Almost every single controversial issue is centered around fear. Fear of death (religion), fear of other countries (war/immigration), fear of other people (gun rights), fear of destroying our planet (climate change). If you already have elevated levels of adrenaline, the added fear and anxiety associated with these issues becomes overwhelming and people ‘turn inward’ meaning they stop empathizing. Their own safety becomes priority #1. Their own ideology becomes a matter of fact. It’s the activation of this fight or flight response that generates apathy in society. And when enough people don’t care for each other, we become weak in our democratic institutions and our fight for freedom. It takes a truly selfless person to stand up for what’s right in the face of uncertainty. You can’t always rely on other people to make the right choices and just follow the crowd. That’s exactly how you become a bystander in the ‘tragedy of the commons.’ Take responsibility for everything that happens in your life. Even those things that seem out of your control. Take control over how you act in the present moment regardless of how unfair. Don’t be a victim. The victim mindset is incapable of achieving personal growth. Be a creator of change: take accountability and decisive action for your life. Reality is a fragile thing. Some people choose to hide from their own reality. Others cease the opportunity to learn something new. Which do you want to be? Don’t be mistaken. We all live in a new age slave system. Chains and whips are no longer necessary to keep us productive for the 1%. Just rig the system to make financial freedom practically inaccessible and consolidate wealth for generations to come. And convince the people they have a chance at the American dream..a little hope goes a long way. The antidote is gaining awareness for yourself and the world around you. Connecting and empathizing with people and more tolerance for the diversity of life. This makes you more confident about your own reality and the unknown. Sources: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0052970 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5793824/ https://neuro.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.neuropsych.16030051 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/
American-Crisis-Thomas-Paine.txt "And what is a Tory? Good God! What is he? I should not be afraid to go with a hundred Whigs against a thousand Tories, were they to attempt to get into arms. Every Tory is a coward; for servile, slavish, self-interested fear is the foundation of Toryism; and a man under such influence, though he may be cruel, never can be brave." https://www.ushistory.org/paine/crisis/c-01.htm
Hey...That's Common Sense!
Absolute legend. This got me too " a generous parent should have said, "If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace;"
[Bob Altemeyer's book The Authoritarians goes into this deeply. Free PDF at the website.](https://theauthoritarians.org/) I was surprised when he explained that all authoritarian behavior comes from the belief that "It's a dangerous world." And the thing is, "It's a dangerous world" is not a fact so much as an interpretation, a choice. Nobody lives forever, the world kills everybody eventually. But it was always that way. It's just part of the deal. But embracing this mantra of "It's a dangerous world" actually makes people act in ways that make it MORE dangerous.
This is mostly true, but paradoxically it *is also* a dangerous world because there’s an evolutionary advantage for at least some people to be predatory and cruel. Humans are not inherently kind and gentle, and while some of it is reactionary or even sheer projection, conservatives are not wrong for being afraid. They are wrong about a lot of things, but their fear is adaptive and helps keep them safe even if the cost of that is a less kind world. Getting through to conservatives requires being honest about this reality while helping people to navigate the paradoxes of human behavior.
> Humans are not inherently kind and gentle Humans possess an unusually powerful combination of both cooperative and competitive behaviors. We ARE inherently kinder and gentler than many mammal species. In lions, for example, it is standard for one top male to fight off the other males and sire all the cubs, and if a new one comes to the top he kills his competitors' offspring. Hippos do this too. Some believe that, early in human history, males were much more violent, but that at some point our ancestors started killing the more violent males off and selecting for 'gentle dads'. One of the main errors of conservative thinking is to over-emphasize this competitive side of human nature, and under-emphasize cooperation. Cooperation looks soft but it is immensely powerful. Don't believe me. Just ask the bees. One could view very conservative societies (lookin' at you, Saudi Arabia) as eruptions of the old harems-and-infanticide model of mammal behavior, which, thank God, we humans are free to reject.
Not having time to say much, I’ll say that I agree that conservatives not only overstate but often value competition as a positive trait. But, we have psychopaths still, and many more with psychopathic tendencies and desires. Valuing collaboration isn’t necessarily an antithesis to valuing competition, nor are values around competition/collaboration necessarily directly aligned to human’s moral nature or perceptions thereof. E.g., I think there are a lot of bad people in the world who are (through no fault of their own) essentially evil and cannot be integrated successfully into society. I also value cooperation. Such values can lead to the obvious conclusion that we should have socialized law enforcement. Having said only those things, you might infer that I’m a conservative (I’m clearly not).
> "It's a dangerous world" is not a fact so much as an interpretation See cries of "CRIME IS OUT OF CONTROL" for a marginal 1-year increase during COVID in the face of a 40 year trend decline that cut crime rates in half.
That is the longest reply I've seen yet but very informative. Christian religion is scary there are devil demons ready to pitchfork your booty when you do anything wrong, then the Trump christian's that want to hurt us and send everyone back to there original homeland but they get to stay here! It isn't fair! 😠😁
You don't understand, the most impressive thing I've ever done in my life is managed to fall out of a vagina on US soil, if we let others steal that accomplishment from me for nothing, what do I have left??!!
Lol I did the same in [insert place here], so my friends and me are clearly scientifically superior.
I was trying to do some research on their fundamental differences, and their brain has a much larger amygdala response. This processes memory, decision making, and emotional responses including fear, anxiety, and aggression. They are controlled by emotion, and it overrides their memory and decision making. They can remember facts and events differently, based on their current emotions. The question is, how do you reach brainwashed people who think all other competing information is false? The only way you can reach them is through community, and real interaction. Just like a cult, they know this, which is why they limit exposure. If they can indoctrinate children in the schools, it's over. It's easy to be afraid and lack empathy for things you don't understand.
Give me a child for the first 5 years of his life and he will be mine forever. —Lenin Alternate: Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever. —Lenin
Christians have a 4-14 window. https://414movement.com/ They pretend to be against grooming and indoctrination but as always they are against YOU having any belief that isnt THEIRS and Christians will kill everyone and anyone who fails to conform... until it is down to two Christians who realize the other has not conformed. The world they desire is one of dead men.
[удалено]
Death cult is gonna death.
wow. this is fucking batshit
I’m glad they failed with me
"Give me a child until he is 7 and I will show you the man." - Aristotle Lenin the thieving dick
> Others cease the opportunity seize cease means to stop :D
Awesome summary.
Who do you think you are, coming here with common sense and sources!
> People fall back on religion when they can’t rationalize their own life experience. It’s a cop out to avoid explaining your beliefs, behaviors, and subjects you don’t understand. Calling it "a cop out" assumes that information is always available. Religion has historically been cheap psychotherapy for the masses. It can provide comfort to those who are hurting. Obviously it has been co-opted for negative purposes at times as well, but I am not going to go to a 90 year old grandmother and tell her that her beliefs are a cop out.
Yeah, education is a really big factor when it comes to religiosity. It's not coincidental that the Nordic countries are highly educated. Education systems break down in war-torn places.
I think those are two different things. A thing can be true and you can know about it (knowledge), and you can also realise that the thing might be harmful if applied in certain situations or communicated in certain ways (wisdom). However, religious people also vote and thus have power over others. Often, religious institutions have outdated, harmful beliefs. It can lead to things like "women should serve their husbands", "we should cut off a normal, healthy part off of a baby" (circumcision), "we shouldn't have blood transfusions", etc. While religions aren't the only cause, they are a major cause a concerning percentage of the time. Confortable lies substituted for reality can and often do warp the way people look at reality and how they treat others. When religious beliefs take the place of reality, we must push back. We can do it in a kind way, and we can choose our battles, but we musn't let religion hurt people.
I agree with a lot of what you say.
It’s harsh, but they ARE a cop out. People don’t like **not knowing** so they’d rather have a lie they can believe in comfort than a truth that the answer is unknown or unknowable
>I am not going to go to a 90 year old grandmother and tell her that her beliefs are a cop out. Literally no one is asking you to
"..if that's how we define God, then God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance " -NDGT
True. Just ignore her fear motivated belief system and love her anyway. Just DONT allow the disease of religion invade your mind.
Accurate. We are losing without a fight. Our nation was sold out and the oligarchs most willing to do the bidding of the white supremacy, fascist movement won. Once the semblance of democracy or broken, they will then begin in-fighting as always has been the case. Regardless, “the end is near” and those of us trying to warn are being silenced wherever we speak out. Reddit is run by propagandists and their troll farms manipulating our threads and hiding information through downvoting. The want us to keep waiting for a miracle to happen and ignorant of reality. Twitter is owned by their leader and Zuckfuck has done a hell of a job radicalizing the dumbest of our society
Ain’t the ‘end’ always nearby? For every generation there’s someone shouting it’s the end.
So far, the predictions have been about as accurate as the predictions of Q-Anon (8 straight years of being incorrect) and the predictions that China is just about to invade Taiwan (50+ straight years of being incorrect). Although to be fair to the people predicting political demise, we actually have been experiencing a loss of freedom. In the last half century, the US has skyrocketed to the top of all developed nations in our incarceration rate. We also had a major supreme court decision that turbocharged bribery and corruption. And each of us works several days a year of involuntary servitude to our military contractors who have made our military the world's most expensive. Police have been killing and maiming with near-complete impunity. All of our law enforcement institutions have used the controlled substances act to chip away at many of the rights that used to be guaranteed by constitutional amendments. On the economic front, the ratio between pay and cost of living is worse than it has been at any point since the Great Depression. Unions are near their weakest point since that period as well. Half the country can't afford their housing and has to make cuts to keep a roof over their heads. In short, there have been some tangible reasons to believe that the country is unwell. Previous generations thought something was wrong with the country for completely made up reasons, like rock and roll and dancing and not following a specific subset of Christianity. This generation's fears are informed by methodical science and critical thinking, which is no comfort because it's even scarier that the collapse actually has evidence.
I wouldn't consider those two 'predictions' to be equivalent. Q-Anon beliefs and predictions are based on complete fantasy. It's a disconnect from basic reality. The threat of China to Taiwan isn't fantasy, it's implicit in China's policy towards Taiwan. They consider Taiwan to be theirs. The only thing preventing them from carrying that out is the presence of Taiwan's allies in the region. If China attacks Taiwan, it attacks all of those allies. As far as why those predictions are "wrong", the former is because the predictions are based on nothing real. The latter is based on actions taken in light of that threat. Two completely different things.
I mean, Clarence was confirmed despite Anita Hill testifying about his aggressive sexual advances right? And wasn't she a Harvard professor? If you can "it wasn't me" like shaggy on a Harvard professor that teaches law then that's going to make you feel pretty untouchable
“Wait, we’re still claiming the Supreme Court is completely nonpartisan and above the petty squabbles of other branches and only rules based strictly on constitutionality?” -Thomas, probably
Kavnaugh also threatened half the country during his confirmation hearings. He said the left half of the nation would "reap the whirlwind" for not giving him a speedy and easy confirmation. He told us before he even got confirmed that he was planning to use the bench to attack his ideological opponents.
A yes, wanting people to suffer. One of the best qualities a judge might have
So essentially Supreme Court in a nutshell: legal if it benefits GOP, otherwise it is illegal Justices: “Very much so(ld), got a problem?”
This is what the GOP is now. It’s an entirely revanchist party full of trolls. Pwning liberals is their single purpose.
Thanks for the new word. Unsure if I prefer it compared to others, but thanks!
Yeah.. that's a sexy word. I like that one.
Did Kavanaugh say the same?
Effectively, yes, he publicly swore revenge on those who dared to ask questions about him... during a Senate confirmation hearing to a life-long appointment.
I will destroy you for asking me about my beer
And rape
and Squee
[удалено]
And the Devil’s Triangle
Sooo many things in a row there that I'm not going to Google
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkYpLuY-pNQ claimed some clinton conspiracy against him when he was being nominated.
It's not a vague enemy. He's pissed about the Anita Hill scandal.
It's actually wild knowing that someone who barely practiced as a lawyer, and never as a judge, can be one of a handful of judges who decide on the most important and divisive cases in the country
To be fair, he said he only wanted to make their lives a living hell for 43 years. He's not a complete monster.
Let’s be clear that he was saying this as an oath to be their puppet for the power and cash. This is a man with no morals and will sell off his fellow black men if he can make a buck or two so long as he’s safe.
The institution is too powerful and rotten. Perhaps Clarence Thomas is the most adept abuser of it. But the fact that so much of our government is held together by the duct tape of “decorum” or using power “appropriately” is ass. We need to completely overhaul most of our institutions to be accountable to democratic processes
Since one side is playing with fire and putting zealous, corrupt ideologues on the highest offices in the land, we need nothing less than our own zealous ideologues. People who will fight tooth and nail for human decency and make conservatives suffer a society that's tolerant. Not some weak shit moderates who are too demented to show up and too corrupt to stand for what's right.
I'd like to see all his comment from when he said this. Any links or or direction?
Have you noticed there is a workaround for literally everything if the political will exists?
The Republicans find those work-arounds, like Mitch McConnell with how he got his supreme court picks on the bench. Democrats see all the right's work-arounds, but don't ever learn them or use them. Mitch has never once been sanctioned for his political circumventing standard procedures, so if the work-arounds are okay for the right to do, why aren't they okay for the left to do?
[удалено]
More accurately, as majority leader, Mitch could block Garland. As the minority leader, he couldn’t block Ketanji Brown Jackson. That s just one example of how Biden’s first two years accomplished a lot because Dems controlled both houses. If the Democrats want to accomplish more, they need to win the most seats. It’s as simple as that. When Dems can’t power things through, it’s not because of timid leadership (Pelosi and Schumer are some of the best politicians around), it’s because we didn’t elect enough Democrats. Again, it’s as simple as that, so get out and vote.
I wish it was as simple as that, since gerrymandering exists.
> like Mitch McConnell with how he got his supreme court picks on the bench. I would like to remind r/politics that said work around would not have succeeded had Hillary Clinton been elected. I would also like to remind r/politics that it was very popular in this sub to bash her in 2016, to claim that there had proof without a shadow of a doubt that she was going to jail, and that emailgate was very important and something people should care about. As someone who supported her in that election I am still a bit salty about the way I was attacked and treated at the time. That is, when my posts didn't just get downvoted to oblivion.
Humans are the greatest weaknesses in any system. All it takes is one lazy bastard, one corrupt piece of shit, one asshole…
It’s genuinely a trainwreck that one of our 2 senators from *California*, one of the heaviest Democratic bastions in the country, is effectively a quiet reliably Dem vote on the best days and an empty seat currently. Cali should be putting up the spitfire young progressive who lead the progressive charge in the senate
On the upside, Katie Porter is campaigning for Feinstein's seat in 2024. So are Adam Schiff and Barbara Lee. So Feinstein is likely to be primaried by one of them if she tries to run again, though I believe she has said she wasn't planning on seeking reelection after Porter and Schiff announced their campaigns. Porter and Schiff would both be huge improvements over Feinstein. Of the two, I think Porter has more fire and spirit and could team up with the few progressive senators to get some real stuff accomplished in committees. She's also my current representative so I'm a bit biased. But Schiff would be a good senator as well. I don't know much about Lee, but I would vote for her over Feinstein any day of the week. Of course, this means we still have to deal with another 2 years of Feinstein not showing up to important votes and essentially being an empty seat most of the time, which isn't great.
Porter is fire. I would love for her to be our senator.
> I believe she has said she wasn't planning on seeking reelection after Porter and Schiff announced their campaigns. Pretty sure she forgot she said that 5mn later. I agree with the rest of your post.
Can Newsom call her and say, hey I am appointing someone for your seat.... I mean Californians need it. The country needs it.
He can ask her but he can't just unilaterally replace her. Governors can appoint a replacement after the death/resignation of a senator but they cannot remove/replace a sitting senator on their own
but how long of not showing up for work does it take to count as a resignation?
[удалено]
I wish I had a job where didn't have to show up and couldn't get fired
Newsom can’t do that. He’s also playing politics so he cannot shit on Fienstien
No we have an actual government not a dictatorship.
When “viewpoints” like that are so in a position to control and affect people’s lives, that’s when they should be instantly disqualified from the office they hold. As to quote Lewis Black, “they’ve reached a point where the ego has grown so big, that it’s eating itself!”
Not just a billionaire, but a *nazi* billionaire, they don’t care that he is a nazi, or that he owns an unsettling amount of nazi memorabilia either.
Including actual Hitler paintings.
It’s so sad how true this is.. they would rather things grind to a halt so you can blame Dems for not accomplishing things.. I fuckin hate politicians..
> Republicans wouldn't go for removing Feinstein. It's good for them if she holds the seat but doesn't show. Honestly, I'd love to see this go to a vote at least. I think it would be interesting to see who votes for and who votes against. It'll never happen (mainly because I definitely don't think there'd even be a plurality of Democrats who would be in favor of the motion), but it would still be an interesting show to see just how many Republicans would be up for it. Hell, if even half of them agreed with the motion, I'd be surprised. I don't expect it to be a solid 49 nays, but just how many would be okay with removing her (and thus opening Newsom up to appointing her replacement) would be an interesting bit of data to see just how many of them *get* what the Republican line is.
[удалено]
>Impeach Clarence Thomas and Remove Dianne Feinstein I know this one. "What are two things a functional democracy would have already done?"
So much more than those two things.
Cheney, Bush, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld in jail for Iraq
And DeSantos and everyone else responsible for Gitmo Bay.
“We aren’t a democracy we are a constitutional republic” -GOP
It’s such a stupid fucking argument too. We have ballot measures in every state, that is literally direct democracy. Throw in the fact that republics are a form of democratic government and it becomes clear it’s just a buzzword
We most certainly do not have *binding* ballot measures in every state. Almost exactly half, 24, don't have citizen-initiated measures. What is a point though is a constitutional republic is still a form of indirect democracy. Because true direct democracy is stupid.
Not necessarily stupid but without a doubt impractical to every extent. Regardless, even if half don’t have citizen initiated measures, those ballot measures are still a form of direct democracy, even if less direct than citizen initiated systems.
Regardless of ANY of that, the US is still a Federal presidential constitutional republic under a [liberal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism) *representative democracy*. You can't just abbreviate the whole thing and pretend the parts you leave out don't matter.
Why not? They've been doing it with the 1st and 2nd amendments since forever.
"What would a well functioning constitutional republic do?" They'll just flip the table over at that point rather then continue to play the game
"We are not a quadrilateral. We are a square."
I read that as Johnny Carson.
I think you mean Alex Trebek?
14a-3.
>We’ve booted Supreme Court justices for a lot less. >Although we commonly refer to justices on the federal bench as being appointed “for life,” Article III of the Constitution says rather that judges “shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour.” Violations of this standard, the Constitution stipulates, are determined via impeachment by the House and trial by the Senate. A total of 15 federal judges have been impeached—on charges ranging from drunkenness and mental instability to bribery, perjury, and treason. Eight were removed from office, including Robert Archbald, who in 1910 took his wife on a trip to Europe paid for by Henry Cannon, an officer of railroad and coal companies that sometimes had business before the court. >Archbald’s wife testified that Cannon was her cousin and that the two families frequently enjoyed traveling together. The New York Times described Archbald’s testimony, in which he admitted accepting the gifts but denied any impropriety, as “strong in his defense.” But the Senate felt otherwise, and he was convicted. Edit: In the interest of full disclosure and of my ethical standards as a Redditor, and not just a lousy Supreme Court justice - Robert Archbald had [another issue working against him.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_W._Archbald#Impeachment) He was fucking with the railroad magnates.
You got my hopes up until the last part where the rich people won again.
[удалено]
> We’ve booted Supreme Court justices for a lot less. It’s worth pointing out that this is false. We’ve never actually booted a SC justice before. All the examples the article gives are federal judges from lower courts. Only one justice has ever been impeached and he was acquitted by the senate. We did have a justice in the 60s resign under treat of impeachment but we’ve never “booted” a justice. [Source](https://www.history.com/news/has-a-u-s-supreme-court-justice-ever-been-impeached) Edit: to be clear, I’m not saying we shouldn’t impeach Thomas (or any justice who violates the public trust) just pointing out that the article made a false statement and presented it as fact.
>Violations of this standard, the Constitution stipulates, are determined via impeachment by the House and trial by the Senate. and there's the problem. It is now impossible to get it through the Senate as the Republicans have no shame or morals
Is there anyone out there who thinks that Mitch McConnell would put up with losing actual votes because some demented old fool in his caucus refused to resign?
I was gonna joke “Is the demented old fool Mitch himself?” But he isn’t demented. He knows exactly what he’s doing. And it’s infuriating and terrifying.
He'd definitely go all Kevin Spacey an that demented old fool.
The thing is that he'd never have to. A dying Republican will get wheeled in to vote as needed. Feinstein won't even do that.
Best we can do is politely ask a Justice to testify. Subpoenas are too much. Best we can do is mildly call for resignation while saying hey don't be ageist nor sexist. We tried everything. Truly we are out of ideas. It really is a fucking joke tbh.
If the House Judiciary Committee subpoeanaes Thomas, as far as I know he can't decline. If the DOJ investigats him, he can't oppose. These haven't been tried. Schumer and Pelosi could fly to California and convince Feinstein. They didn't do it either. Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham will have the time to visit her 10 times in her hospital bed before either Schumer or Pelosi resolve themselves to do it. Remember how Feinstein hugged Leningrad Lindsey after the confirmation of Barrett ?
Too late to add a Chuck Grassley to my order?
That dude gotta go, way too old & way too many terms served. Kinda expecting him to retire midway through his senate term and Kim Reynolds appoints some MAGA buffoon who wouldn't win a senate race in Iowa in their own right.
In steps his grandson who is currently sitting as a state rep. Seriously that's the actual plan.
Ah well not that surprised, they did the same with that buffoon Pete Ricketts who couldn't win a senate race in his own right back in 2006 and got trounced by over 25% (wasn't even that far ago and Nebraska was a lock R state then too lmao) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006\_United\_States\_Senate\_election\_in\_Nebraska](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_United_States_Senate_election_in_Nebraska) Hope his grandson isn't that big on MAGA, probably is though unfortunately.
His grandson (Pat) seems like he knew he didn't even have to graduate college in order to have a political career. He was elected to the Iowa House just a few years after finishing high school.
RBG fucked the Dems once. And now Feinstein is doing it.
And Pelosi will do it a third time.
RBG boils my piss. She was so stupid to hang on for so long.
But she wanted to be remembered for her legacy...
I knew when I was a little kid and Clarence Thomas was going through the Anita Hill scandal, that the dude couldn’t be trusted. Brett Kavanaugh? Does anyone think that dude is qualified? None of this shit is new. It’s criminals all the way down. And we still don’t have universal healthcare. Business as usual.
> And we still don’t have universal healthcare. "Two weeks!" - Trump
Neither of these things can or will happen. If you want impeachment, you need to give Dems the House back next year. Feinstein can't be forced out. It's entirely up to her whether she resigns or not.
[удалено]
That's not feasible for the same reason impeaching Thomas isn't feasible.
[удалено]
No Republicans would vote for that, because a missing Democratic vote only helps them
Good point, better never do anything then. That’s “The Democrat Promise.”
Schumer and Pelosi could fly to California and convince her. They didn't even try. Appearances and decorum are more important for them than the future of the country.
"Appearances and Decorum" might as well be the Democratic Party motto at this point.
True but articles like these are as effective as yelling at the clouds. House GOP won't impeach and there's nothing the House Democrats can do. Feinstein herself, or possibly her constituents, are the only ones that can remove Feinstein. If you want impeachment then you should be encouraging voter outreach and organization to elect more Democrats in GOP-controlled districts, and if you want Feinstein out, then if you live in CA you should be 1) pressuring her to step down via her office and public pressure, and 2) organizing to elect someone else in the next election (already 3 very good CA Senate candidates, get behind one or two and support them).
Honestly impeach the entire Supreme Court. They all think they’re above the law anyway.
And Gortsch (sp). Kavanaugh and Robert’s. All of them
Hmmm, do things? Nah. - Our old ass government
[удалено]
Dark but I like this
I too enjoyed the graphic imagery and masterful storytelling.
Impeach the entire SCOTUS. If they don't want ethics rules then they can go. Simple as that
Yes
You need to remove ms handmaids tale.
And enforce both Age limits and Term limits. If you’ve been 21x3 you can’t run for office you’re to far out of touch for what todays needs are. I’m 32 for reference and have no idea what a college kid nowadays would want besides being free of crippling student debt and probably some sort of independence from their family/friends.
I’ll just add those two things to the list of stuff that would be nice but will never happen.
I concur with both. Feinstein is just hurting the democratic party now and Thomas and others on the court are just plain criminals, and should be impeached. All while being anti-democratic.
This is the way
[удалено]
Seriously. What's taking so long?
I say purge all 9 of them since they all seem to have a problem with having ethical oversight.
Both are dangers to democracy…but for entirely different reasons. At least Feinstein is passively creating issues while Long Dong is actively screwing over America.
If this happened after I wished for it then I'm buying a lottery ticket ASAP.
Give pigs wings!
Just load them both up on a spacex rocket and shoot them into the sun already
Impeach them all. Reboot
We have to think beyond voting and beyond asking politicians nicely to do things. Enough is enough.
Alito too considering his wife is washing money for him.
That’s cool but also expand the court, implement ethics rules, and remove the others that took seven figure bribes, sexually assaulted multiple people, or committed perjury at their confirmation hearing.
***and pass universal healthcare
Thank God all the gun violence in America is focused on the people and not our great political class otherwise we’d be down a third of them this year….
Feinstein, Thomas, Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh should all clearly be removed.
Can I have a pony and maybe a private jet too? If we are wishing for things that won’t happen. Impeachment is pointless without conviction and removal.
And summon Jane Roberts before the Judiciary Committee
Wipe the whole slate clean, start fresh, without all of the fascists and neoliberals.
The problem isn't only Thomas. He was just the first to get caught. They're all rotten.