Fair enough. So as a liberal Catholic I should anticipate vindication but only in the unsatisfying way one might experience it from beating a game on easy mode. :)
I think the most the US could "give" (not sure what else to call it) is to officially tell Israel they have a totally free hand and no matter what they do, no matter how bad it is, there will be no repercussions from the US, no matter what anyone else in the region does or has to say about it.
Maybe that's what this message really is. 'Kill them all or drive them out, do whatever you want, we don't care.'
The gun thing I think is easier to just go back to pre-Sandy Hook Obama era. Treat it as a state and local issue. Hogg is of course the opposite of the type of person you want for that pivot but I think you can get pretty far on let New York be New York and let Texas be Texas.
I read an article on this the other day. Democrats were still very competitive with young women, it's young men where they got killed. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but on the whole I believe young men are less gung ho on gun control.
Hey I'm just glad we've finally established that you understand physical reality, as opposed to a bunch of cultural contingencies and language games.
But here's the part all the words in the world won't get around. At the end of the day, a person calling herself a 'trans man' as you defined that concept is really just a woman who pretends to the social conventions of a man, and may have had some cosmetic surgeries and/or hormonal treatments in hopes of changing her body to better resemble the secondary sex characteristics of a man.
If she has had surgeries and/or hormonal treatments she may have harmed her reproductive system to the point pregnancy is not possible, and while I think an adult has the right to do that stuff if they want, she's still a woman. Again, not really hard.
As an aside I'll also reiterate, no such thing as a 'cis' so please stop with that.
I think you're onto something with this. All volunteer force has made the military more remote than maybe ever. We not only lack the writers for the source material, we probably lack the production people and maybe even audiences to see it as a source of humor.
Of the nominees I saw Dune 2, the Substance, and Anora. I thought all 3 of them failed to stick the ending and would therefore feel pretty meh about any of them being called best anything.
That's not the right way of analyzing something like PEPFAR. The beneficiaries are people in impoverished countries that left to their own devices will become hot beds of a deadly disease that doesn't recognize borders. PEPFAR is self-interested noblesse oblige, not a question of enablement or moral hazard.
I'm certainly not in hysterics over it. I'm not even totally sure I disagree with overturning it.
I do think that where to draw the line on what administrative agencies can do is a very fraught area of law in light of the lack of clear constitutional guidance. In theory Congress can eliminate statutory mandates for the agencies or force modifications or elominate an agency entirely any time it wants but the reality of Congress' general laziness about doing so creates (in my mind at least) questions of legitimacy of agency decisions. Maybe not necessarily legally but popularly.
I still vividly recall the day in my admin law class that we discussed Chevron and suddenly having a realization of how profound the questions raised by the administrative state really are. Even as a generally liberal person I see the case for trimming it back. The idea that there are things that got put in place in the 60s or 70s or whenever (to say nothing of what has grown around them) are totally sacrosanct and never up for discussion or debate is IMO itself a kind of reactionary stance, no matter how progressive the people who hold that position claim to be.
And yet you'd still ideally have a thoughtful gradualism, hopefully led by Congress or at least carefully negotiated between the branches. Even failing that, and if irresponsibility is necessary I'd be more comfortable with it coming out of a really reckless majority in the legislative branch. Ultimately I think the unfortunate answer to your question about how to manage it is something like 'elect responsible leaders' which is something we seem to be failing at. No one said democracy was easy and it we fail it will be our own fault.
At the end of the day elections have consequences for public policy.
What I'm still not seeing explained is where the authority to do this stuff comes from unilaterally and without an act of Congress.
Of course this has always been the most dangerous part of Trump. Not that he gets policy wrong, the whole point of a democratic and republican form of government is that policy changes and can be changed again. It's the continuous haphazard playing chicken with the system that we can't have.
Dark, I'd suggest this is an area where 0 sum thinking is the wrong approach. Should the program be run well, and not as a boondoggle? Of course. But absent evidence that such is the case (and my understanding is that it's pretty successful), this is the kind of pittance out of the federal budget that is pretty easy to justify. It is a globalized world and the last thing we need is more people contracting or dying from AIDs and if we can prevent that by distributing cheap antiretroviral drugs to developing countries we should.
My understanding of USAID has always been that it is strongly suspected to be at least to some degree a front for espionage or other clandestine activities.
However I would say the way to eliminate something like that is through lawful means (i.e. probably Congress), not sending an unelected bazillionare consigliere of the president and his bufoonish henchman to bust it up.
U.S. tariffs on Mexico delayed as country agrees to rush 10,000 troops to border
The subline is:
The order to send Mexican national guard troops to the border is meant to strengthen efforts to block the flow of drugs, especially fentanyl, coming into the United States.
I am open to the possibility that when drilling down on the details it is more stunt than substance. However as it is being reported from non-Fox News type outlets it not immediately obvious that such is the case.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Welcome to the Quagmire”
Objectively I think you'd have to say yes. Maybe all thats gone is the fig leaf.
On “Open Mic for the week of 2/3/2025”
Birthright citizenship EO stayed by a federal judge.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/2025/02/05/birthright-citizenship-injunction-trump-immigration/
I assume we will be seeing this about 1000 more times in the coming weeks.
On “The 97th Oscars’ Best Picture Race: As Wide Open As It Gets”
Fair enough. So as a liberal Catholic I should anticipate vindication but only in the unsatisfying way one might experience it from beating a game on easy mode. :)
On “Welcome to the Quagmire”
I think the most the US could "give" (not sure what else to call it) is to officially tell Israel they have a totally free hand and no matter what they do, no matter how bad it is, there will be no repercussions from the US, no matter what anyone else in the region does or has to say about it.
Maybe that's what this message really is. 'Kill them all or drive them out, do whatever you want, we don't care.'
"
Jared Kushner?
On “The 97th Oscars’ Best Picture Race: As Wide Open As It Gets”
I must strenuously, strenuously, and even more strenuously object to this totally undeserved denigration of Stilgar.
But also was Conclave legit good? My question wasn't meant sarcastically, I couldn't tell if your endorsement was serious or not!
On “Open Mic for the week of 2/3/2025”
Those are harder issues to deal with.
The gun thing I think is easier to just go back to pre-Sandy Hook Obama era. Treat it as a state and local issue. Hogg is of course the opposite of the type of person you want for that pivot but I think you can get pretty far on let New York be New York and let Texas be Texas.
"
I read an article on this the other day. Democrats were still very competitive with young women, it's young men where they got killed. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but on the whole I believe young men are less gung ho on gun control.
On “Open Mic for the week of 1/27/2025”
Hey I'm just glad we've finally established that you understand physical reality, as opposed to a bunch of cultural contingencies and language games.
But here's the part all the words in the world won't get around. At the end of the day, a person calling herself a 'trans man' as you defined that concept is really just a woman who pretends to the social conventions of a man, and may have had some cosmetic surgeries and/or hormonal treatments in hopes of changing her body to better resemble the secondary sex characteristics of a man.
If she has had surgeries and/or hormonal treatments she may have harmed her reproductive system to the point pregnancy is not possible, and while I think an adult has the right to do that stuff if they want, she's still a woman. Again, not really hard.
As an aside I'll also reiterate, no such thing as a 'cis' so please stop with that.
On “Open Mic for the week of 2/3/2025”
So much for America first.
On “The 97th Oscars’ Best Picture Race: As Wide Open As It Gets”
I think you're onto something with this. All volunteer force has made the military more remote than maybe ever. We not only lack the writers for the source material, we probably lack the production people and maybe even audiences to see it as a source of humor.
"
You're forgetting the finest comedic war film of all.
Hot Shots: Part Deux.
"
Was it in fact good?
Of the nominees I saw Dune 2, the Substance, and Anora. I thought all 3 of them failed to stick the ending and would therefore feel pretty meh about any of them being called best anything.
On “Open Mic for the week of 2/3/2025”
Ding ding ding ding.
"
That's not the right way of analyzing something like PEPFAR. The beneficiaries are people in impoverished countries that left to their own devices will become hot beds of a deadly disease that doesn't recognize borders. PEPFAR is self-interested noblesse oblige, not a question of enablement or moral hazard.
"
I'm certainly not in hysterics over it. I'm not even totally sure I disagree with overturning it.
I do think that where to draw the line on what administrative agencies can do is a very fraught area of law in light of the lack of clear constitutional guidance. In theory Congress can eliminate statutory mandates for the agencies or force modifications or elominate an agency entirely any time it wants but the reality of Congress' general laziness about doing so creates (in my mind at least) questions of legitimacy of agency decisions. Maybe not necessarily legally but popularly.
"
I still vividly recall the day in my admin law class that we discussed Chevron and suddenly having a realization of how profound the questions raised by the administrative state really are. Even as a generally liberal person I see the case for trimming it back. The idea that there are things that got put in place in the 60s or 70s or whenever (to say nothing of what has grown around them) are totally sacrosanct and never up for discussion or debate is IMO itself a kind of reactionary stance, no matter how progressive the people who hold that position claim to be.
And yet you'd still ideally have a thoughtful gradualism, hopefully led by Congress or at least carefully negotiated between the branches. Even failing that, and if irresponsibility is necessary I'd be more comfortable with it coming out of a really reckless majority in the legislative branch. Ultimately I think the unfortunate answer to your question about how to manage it is something like 'elect responsible leaders' which is something we seem to be failing at. No one said democracy was easy and it we fail it will be our own fault.
"
At the end of the day elections have consequences for public policy.
What I'm still not seeing explained is where the authority to do this stuff comes from unilaterally and without an act of Congress.
Of course this has always been the most dangerous part of Trump. Not that he gets policy wrong, the whole point of a democratic and republican form of government is that policy changes and can be changed again. It's the continuous haphazard playing chicken with the system that we can't have.
"
Heh fair enough.
"
The secrets have been known for years and are all summarized in the video below:
https://youtu.be/K7y2xPucnAo?si=Jot7nTUvvtwqKjkK
"
Dark, I'd suggest this is an area where 0 sum thinking is the wrong approach. Should the program be run well, and not as a boondoggle? Of course. But absent evidence that such is the case (and my understanding is that it's pretty successful), this is the kind of pittance out of the federal budget that is pretty easy to justify. It is a globalized world and the last thing we need is more people contracting or dying from AIDs and if we can prevent that by distributing cheap antiretroviral drugs to developing countries we should.
"
My understanding of USAID has always been that it is strongly suspected to be at least to some degree a front for espionage or other clandestine activities.
However I would say the way to eliminate something like that is through lawful means (i.e. probably Congress), not sending an unelected bazillionare consigliere of the president and his bufoonish henchman to bust it up.
"
Says the guy who'd sell the Chinese the ropes they use to hang us.
"
Like I said above to March, depends on what happens. If nothing then I think we can feel pretty confident in the stunt hypothesis.
"
The headline at WaPo is:
U.S. tariffs on Mexico delayed as country agrees to rush 10,000 troops to border
The subline is:
The order to send Mexican national guard troops to the border is meant to strengthen efforts to block the flow of drugs, especially fentanyl, coming into the United States.
I am open to the possibility that when drilling down on the details it is more stunt than substance. However as it is being reported from non-Fox News type outlets it not immediately obvious that such is the case.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.