Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 361: The Art of the Heal

(+) Yeah! (+)

Ted Cruz, legendary advocate for Pennsylvanians

https://twitter.com/SenTedCruz/status/1352040800646029312

Excerpt when it comes to letting them have their electoral votes count

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Ted Cruz, legendary advocate for Pennsylvanians

https://twitter.com/SenTedCruz/status/1352040800646029312

Excerpt when it comes to letting them have their electoral votes count

God I can't wait until we get commercially viable fusion power. Being able to tell the entire fossil fuel industry to fuck off forever will be so nice.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Ted Cruz, legendary advocate for Pennsylvanians

https://twitter.com/SenTedCruz/status/1352040800646029312

Excerpt when it comes to letting them have their electoral votes count

Even better, he limited that just to Pittsburgh, who very publicly announced they would continue following the accords when Trump withdrew.
---

kevwaffles posted...

Even better, he limited that just to Pittsburgh, who very publicly announced they would continue following the accords when Trump withdrew.

Because, as I saw pointed out, he's literally taking the "Pittsburgh, not Paris" language from Trump's original announcement that he was pulling out of the deal

Pretty sad, Ted!

---

As Ted must know, representing Texas and all, the oil industry is dying. Fracking is not going to make money whether or not it's allowed.

https://twitter.com/ashtroid22/status/1352085800301768704?s=21

https://twitter.com/zenias14/status/1352091736693157890?s=21

---

https://twitter.com/CarolLeonnig/status/1352066474492497921

Michael Flynn's brother (a Lt. Gen) was on the call on January 6 when Capitol Police was begging for, and getting denied, a response from the National Guard. The report doesn't state that Flynn was actively obstructing because we don't yet have all the details on who said what, etc. (Though the tweet thread says that one account of the call said Flynn said some of them were "peaceful protestors" prompting a reply of "They're not peaceful anymore.") but it's notable because Army officials had been lying that he wasn't there when asked over the past two weeks until today. It wasn't until today when WaPo confronted the army with accounts from multiple offices on the call they went, "Oh, yeah, he was." Also I dunno if it being today/a new administration plays a part but yeah.

---

Genuinely shocked that some of those executive orders werent a matter of law already.

I dont like Biden or agree with his politics, but he may go down as one of the best presidents just for cleaning up the mess.

---

Lmfao at how much of a fanboy you have to be to already considering Biden might be the best president ever 24 hours into his presidency.


---

Oh just to be clear, thats not a pro-Biden statement. More a statement of the insanely low bar. Executive presidents are inherently bad, I have been pretty consistent about that!

---

To put it another way, you're saying most anyone else in Biden's place would do the same and thus get the same treatment.
---

Pipeline move wasn't a good one.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Pipeline move wasn't a good one.

Right. It was great

---

I'm really mixed on the pipeline move. I think that if the land wasn't indigenous it would be a bad move but I don't like the fact that the government was steamrolling over indigenous land like that

---

Keystone XL was terrible for the environment. Nice to see Biden do something about it.

"But what about the jobs!"

How many of those jobs are permanent again? Hint: Very few of them. We need to move toward renewable energy instead of creating temporary jobs that will eventually become obsolete as people move to renewable energy sources anyway. Instead of building a pipeline that will potentially destroy the water supplies of Native American communities, as well as disrupt their burial grounds.

---

Pipelines are one of the most efficient way on the planet to transport oil. If you are still going to be moving oil, pipelines are a better option than trucks. Environment is not a good argument.


---

masterplum posted...

Pipelines are one of the most efficient way on the planet to transport oil. If you are still going to be moving oil, pipelines are a better option than trucks. Environment is not a good argument.

The pipeline would dramatically increase carbon output. Especially since the pipeline will allow oil companies to rapidly expand tar sand production, which would increase emissions by an unacceptable amount. The environment is an excellent argument against the pipeline.

---

masterplum posted...

Pipelines are one of the most efficient way on the planet to transport oil. If you are still going to be moving oil, pipelines are a better option than trucks. Environment is not a good argument.

Bolded the important part. We need to reduce oil use.

---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Bolded the important part. We need to reduce oil use.

We absolutely do. But even ignoring that, the pipeline increases emissions by a truly absurd amount. People should not get to pretend that "Hey, it's more efficient and therefore better for the environment!" when it's absolutely not.

---

The pipeline moves existing production more efficiently to save money, which lowers prices. Making them use rail is not better for the environment. Not too long ago we had a derailment and oil fire I believe. The only argument to wanting to not have the pipeline for the "environment" is basically that you want to drive up their costs so that they can't compete at current prices and their industry goes under. Now, mind you Canada isn't happy about it because you are mostly fucking with their industry.

---

kevwaffles posted...

To put it another way, you're saying most anyone else in Biden's place would do the same and thus get the same treatment

Pretty much! These are common sense moves, but will have a meaningful impact because of how dire the situation was. The mask one in particular really struck me, here any indoor public space requires a mask and has since near the start of the pandemic. Its a very obvious move. I had kind of figured, but it does drive home just how much Trump refused to handle COVID.

What I had hoped would be the response to Trump though was the removal of power from the executive. Its messed up that one person can wield that much power with fairly insufficient checks. Its also unique in democracies, even compromised ones. Like, remember after the failed coup in Turkey, when Erdogan used a narrow referendum to give himself a ton of extra powers as President? And how he was rightly decried as a tinpot dictator for it? He still doesnt have nearly as much internal power as the POTUS does. Same deal with Orban. Its wild, and a relic of a bygone age when leaders had a lot more power. Its very concerning that the presidency is as powerful as it is.

---

Lightning Strikes posted...

What I had hoped would be the response to Trump though was the removal of power from the executive. Its messed up that one person can wield that much power with fairly insufficient checks. Its also unique in democracies, even compromised ones. Like, remember after the failed coup in Turkey, when Erdogan used a narrow referendum to give himself a ton of extra powers as President? And how he was rightly decried as a tinpot dictator for it? He still doesnt have nearly as much internal power as the POTUS does. Same deal with Orban. Its wild, and a relic of a bygone age when leaders had a lot more power. Its very concerning that the presidency is as powerful as it is.

It's because it's the result of perverse electoral incentives. Much of the power that the presidency has accumulated, especially in recent decades, has been unchallenged by Congress, if not actively abetted by Congress, because they've found it more politically advantageous for themselves to avoid taking what may be politically difficult votes/action upon themselves so they have just let the President do it.

It's very much a continued pattern of how modern government absolutely does not work "as the framers intended." They thought that each branch would prioritize protecting their own authority and that the "checks and balances" would arise in large part because any attempt by one of the other brnaches to expand their power and encroach on the territory of the others would be met by the offended branch sticking up for itself and challenging to keep that authority.

Instead, rather predictably, loyalty has become mroe to one's political party than to their branch so politicians, and Congresspeople in particular, are more than happy to let another branch accumulated power even at their expense so long as they perceive it as helping them or having their political party/ideology.

While a lot of problems with our government are fundamental and would require Constitutional Amendments to fix, this one could largely be helped if Congress just got a backbone and stood up to the Executive getting more and more powerful - but they're not because in many cases they themselves have been pushing their responsibilities onto the Executive. Even if you had a President that actively were trying to "give back" power (already unlikely by nature) I don't think Congress would willingly take some of it back!

---

Executive actions are needed because of Congressional INaction.

I'd imagine if Congress wanted to (which, as you said they typically don't), they could override an Exec Action with an actual law.

---

TERFs super pissed off at Biden.

Yesssss feed us your hate, worms.

---

https://twitter.com/alexandraphelan/status/1352226238379778055?s=19

---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

TERFs super pissed off at Biden.

Yesssss feed us your hate, worms.

What did he do?

---

banananor posted...

What did he do?

TERFs don't want transgender people included in these anti discrimination EOs.

---

He did an EO stating that LGBTQ+ are included under Title VII and every agency under his authority needs to enforce it that way
---

Go Joe Go.

---

This is a pretty solid start to his administration no gonna lie.

He still needs to make sure a substantial COVID bill gets passed but in terms of one day of work Im pretty happy so far.

---

What does TERF stand for? I ask because I'm not sure if I want to Google that kinda shit.
---

kevwaffles posted...

What does TERF stand for? I ask because I'm not sure if I want to Google that kinda shit.

Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist

Its mostly older feminists that think acknowledging trans women as women erases what womanhood means, and definitely a bigger thing in the UK than it is here.

Its kind of shorthand for anti-trans bigots in general since we dont have a large TERF contingent here in the US, and its a fun shorthand, even though it loses its meaning when used that way
---

Trans exclusive radical feminist I think?

---

xp1337 posted...

While a lot of problems with our government are fundamental and would require Constitutional Amendments to fix, this one could largely be helped if Congress just got a backbone and stood up to the Executive getting more and more powerful - but they're not because in many cases they themselves have been pushing their responsibilities onto the Executive. Even if you had a President that actively were trying to "give back" power (already unlikely by nature) I don't think Congress would willingly take some of it back!

This is more because Congress is nonfunctional due to having two chambers, not just because they aren't incentives to stand up to executive power. There's party loyalty, sure, but since it is much, much easier than passing laws it's one of the few surefire avenues they have for achieving their goals. It isn't just a matter of principle - it's unfortunately about being practical.

In other words, it does require altering the Consitution to fix. Abolish the damn Senate.

---

Can you imagine what trump would have done with the house and no senate.

Im good without a powerful executive thanks

---

The term TERF started becoming more well known and used in the US when J.K. Rowling started doing her bullshit, so yeah UK origins primarily.

---

masterplum posted...

Can you imagine what trump would have done with the house and no senate.

Im good without a powerful executive thanks

He had the House for 2 years and the Senate for the whole 4

Im not sure what removing the Senate does in this hypothetical
---

Jakyl25 posted...

He had the House for 2 years and the Senate for the whole 4

Im not sure what removing the Senate does in this hypothetical

I was gonna make this same post, but then I remembered it was only because of John McCain in the Senate that Obamacare was spared execution.

---

Inviso posted...

I was gonna make this same post, but then I remembered it was only because of John McCain in the Senate that Obamacare was spared execution.

Well they would have replaced it with something better, right??? They just never got a chance to tell us what it was
---

Inviso posted...

I was gonna make this same post, but then I remembered it was only because of John McCain in the Senate that Obamacare was spared execution.

And who knows what other radical changes that werent even brought up because of McCain and co

---

Speaking of senators, if was a Democrat strategist, I would go through hell to make DC statehood happen. It isnt going to be undone, you have the moral high ground, and you get a permanent +2 Bonus to senators for all time

---

Inviso posted...

I was gonna make this same post, but then I remembered it was only because of John McCain in the Senate that Obamacare was spared execution.

Just elect more John McCains to office and stuff can fail by one vote by a fluke in a united Congress too. Simple and good government, right?

I'm open to the idea that Republicans would be more brazen with their legislative tactics if it was easier to pass laws, but that's an argument for not letting them assume power, not having a nonfunctional legislature just to keep them in check. The reality is that the GOP knows how to best use the government as it stands, not "as the framers intended" and right now that means using Congress and the Senate mainly as an obstructionist tool while they fuck around with the executive and judicial branches. They aren't really relinquishing power in that sense.

---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Just elect more John McCains to office and stuff can fail by one vote by a fluke in a united Congress too. Simple and good government, right?

I'm open to the idea that Republicans would be more brazen with their legislative tactics if it was easier to pass laws, but that's an argument for not letting them assume power, not having a nonfunctional legislature just to keep them in check. The reality is that the GOP knows how to best use the government as it stands, not "as the framers intended" and right now that means using Congress and the Senate mainly as an obstructionist tool while they fuck around with the executive and judicial branches. They aren't really relinquishing power in that sense.

The best form of government is a benevolent dictator
The worst form of government is a malevolent dictator

Good government is all about balancing how much power you give to the executive for that exact reason

---

DC statehood should be the immediate and dominant focus of Congress as soon as this Covid bill is passed. What argument is there for the Dems to sit on their hands APART from ineptitude?

---

CaptainOfCrush posted...

DC statehood should be the immediate and dominant focus of Congress as soon as this Covid bill is passed. What argument is there for the Dems to sit on their hands APART from ineptitude?

To be fair there's a lot of stuff that needs focus right now. Something is going to slip through the cracks. Really hope DC statehood doesn't, though.

---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

TERFs super pissed off at Biden.

Yesssss feed us your hate, worms.

coincidentally that transphobic hashtag erases the existence of trans men, as always with these people

unless they wanna start the hashtag #BidenErasedTheWorld in which case woah

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Well they would have replaced it with something better, right??? They just never got a chance to tell us what it was

They told us. It was UBI checks of between $2,000 and $14,000 a year.

---

masterplum posted...

The best form of government is a benevolent dictator
The worst form of government is a malevolent dictator

Good government is all about balancing how much power you give to the executive for that exact reason

sure, so you should want to actually empower the legistlative branch. one way to do that is to abolish the senate, because a very large reason as to why it is so weak is that the House and Senate have to be in total agreement or else they actively start undermining each other.

---

I get the idea behind it, but boy do I not want to abolish the Senate with the House in the state that it is.
---

Our constitutional structure is great as is. Never forget that government is capable of doing more evil than good. The worst government will do a lot more damage than the best government can do good.

---