293
Nah, I'd say it's still pretty spot on 30 years later.
(hexbear.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2023
293 points (100.0% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15911 readers
6 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
It's more effective to ask how many Supreme Court seats they got in a single Trump term. The answer is the same but it all happened in a span of about 4 years, not 10.
Also ask how it happened. They prioritized ideology over "norms" and "rule of law". They controlled the Senate when Scalia died and just said "nah, we're not gonna let Obama get this one". Then with Trump in office one of their oldest knew it was time to retire (unlike a certain other Justice) then they
until that certain other Justice died in office and snagged that 3rd appointment a month before the election, contrary to their reasoning for blocking Obama, swinging the balance of the court even more in their favor.
Because no "norm" or "precedent" matters, even one you made up. When you have the power to do something to further your ideology, you do it. Regardless of the minority party's complaints. If the law doesn't stop you from doing it, you do it. If it does stop you, you find a workaround.
Democrats refuse to operate that way, which is why they can't govern. e.g. Biden could easily cancel all student loan debt regardless of what the Supreme Court says, because the Supreme Court has no way to actually prevent him from doing it. Worst case the R House impeaches him for defying the Supreme Court and the D Senate just acquits, so basically nothing but theater.
Instead they tried the bare minimum and gave it up at the first speed bump.
They actually don't want to govern and just use that as an excuse
Pretending you don't have the power to make a decision is... still you, making a decision. Biden is still governing. He is still responsible for the unbelievably terrible job he is doing no matter how loudly he keeps saying his hands are tied.
Bush II set the precedent for presidential powers being calvinball. Nobody is going to stop Biden (or will stop Trump after he gets elected again) from doing anything. Haven't you noticed Trump has yet to face a single actual material consequence from absolutely anything at all? Do you think that's an accident? An oversight?
That is a semantic difference. I think we basically agree just that we phrase it differently
Oh yeah for sure, sorry I'm just ranting