American Politics: Fiscal Cliffhanger

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

Traditional marriage was outlawed and suppressed.

what?

[Vassenor]

If the USSR was socially conservative, then how do you explain their suppression of the Russian Orthodox Church, the monarchy, and other aspects of traditional Russian culture? They might not have been individualist liberals, but that doesn't make them conservative. And their radicalism went beyond merely changing the economic system.

The USSR (as Marxists) believed that traditional (what today would be called by some hetero-normative) sexuality and nuclear family were bourgeoisie social constructs of oppression. Traditional marriage was outlawed and suppressed. After a decade or two, the top-down imposed sexually liberated were not producing enough offspring for the Party's economic aspirations. The concern deepened with the threat of Nazi Germany. Orthodox priests were called out of the salt mines to create rules and regulations for the least amount of familial bonds conducive to Party goals. Scientific Communism then conceded that humans organically needed at least enough familial bonds for Soviet Socialism to function. The priests were sent back to the gulags.

Gonna need to see a source for that one chief.

[Alcala-Cordel]

It's a long way to the election, but as it stands (barring something drastic happening), Trump is the current front runner with a +50% point lead over the current contenders. The more Trump is attacked by the Left, the stronger the support will be for the half of the country that hates what they perceive as the lies and manipulation of the Left.

If he gets the nomination I can’t see him winning this time. Candidates who gave been indicted don’t win.

If Trump is the nominee there will be serious consequences downballot for Republicans.

People underestimated his chances in 2016 as well, but the Democrats decided to nominate an unlikeable candidate who couldn't get people energized. I'm not saying Trump's going to win, but the Democrats should know better than to be overconfident. Especially when their candidate is unlikeable and boring. The popular vote still doesn't elect the president.

[San Lumen]

If you don’t want to read certain books fine but don’t prevent others from reading them.

Why not?

Because you have zero to censor things you find objectionable. What you find objectionable someone else might not.

What gives you the right to decide what others can read?

[Shrillland]

Why not?

Because you have zero to censor things you find objectionable. What you find objectionable someone else might not.

What gives you the right to decide what others can read?

It's best to just leave him be. He just wants another ride on this carousel of shit.

[American Legionaries]

Why not?

Because you have zero to censor things you find objectionable. What you find objectionable someone else might not.

What gives you the right to decide what others can read?

Is this another one of those times when you go off about your disapproval for my political beliefs as if that's relevant?

[American Legionaries]

Because you have zero to censor things you find objectionable. What you find objectionable someone else might not.

What gives you the right to decide what others can read?

It's best to just leave him be. He just wants another ride on this carousel of shit.

I'd much rather get off it, tbh.

[Shrillland]

It's best to just leave him be. He just wants another ride on this carousel of shit.

I'd much rather get off it, tbh.

Then do so. Ignore him, me, anyone you like.

[American Legionaries]

I'd much rather get off it, tbh.

Then do so. Ignore him, me, anyone you like.

Momma Tel always told me that ignoring a problem won't make it go away.

[Arval Va]

Because you have zero to censor things you find objectionable. What you find objectionable someone else might not.

What gives you the right to decide what others can read?

Is this another one of those times when you go off about your disapproval for my political beliefs as if that's relevant?

It's more like when the books being banned aren't actually harmful or worth banning.

[Restored England]

No, he will not. Mark my words. The trump fanatics do not define the Republican party.

Many of his supporters don't want anyone else right now, and for the moment there aren't any opponents influential enough to credibly threaten his chances. The only way Trump loses the nomination is if he's legally prevented from doing so, which would be really funny but also allow DeSantis to take power. That would probably be worse.

Trump would just bolt the GOP and split the Republican vote. Care to guess how that would end?

[San Lumen]

No, he will not. Mark my words. The trump fanatics do not define the Republican party.

Many of his supporters don't want anyone else right now, and for the moment there aren't any opponents influential enough to credibly threaten his chances. The only way Trump loses the nomination is if he's legally prevented from doing so, which would be really funny but also allow DeSantis to take power. That would probably be worse.

Nothing can legally prevent him from running. Trump could technically run for President from prison.

[Shrillland]

Then do so. Ignore him, me, anyone you like.

Momma Tel always told me that ignoring a problem won't make it go away.

Good advice to be sure. Just talking to Lumen, or Lumen talking to you, won't make each other go away, either. You guys are too set in your ways, so why keep banging your heads against these walls until you both drop dead of CTE(Cyber Temper Explosion)?

[Alcala-Cordel]

Many of his supporters don't want anyone else right now, and for the moment there aren't any opponents influential enough to credibly threaten his chances. The only way Trump loses the nomination is if he's legally prevented from doing so, which would be really funny but also allow DeSantis to take power. That would probably be worse.

Trump would just bolt the GOP and split the Republican vote. Care to guess how that would end?

That's entirely possible, but it's not good to be so certain. Even if that is the case, it's smart to treat your opponent like a credible threat.

Many of his supporters don't want anyone else right now, and for the moment there aren't any opponents influential enough to credibly threaten his chances. The only way Trump loses the nomination is if he's legally prevented from doing so, which would be really funny but also allow DeSantis to take power. That would probably be worse.

Nothing can legally prevent him from running. Trump could technically run for President from prison.

Most likely true. If he's indicted for inciting the attack on the capitol, he might be barred from running under the 14th amendment.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

[Zurkerx]

Prosecutors have evidence that Trump was warned for retaining classified documents. Those notes were from his Evan Corcoran. Usually, said notes would not be viewable due to attorney-client privilege, but an Appeals Court disqualified that earlier in the year. The notes, also surprisingly detailed, document how Trump knew he had said documents, wondering if he could push back against the DOJ's subpoena. The notes would likely be used to prove that 1.) Trump had possession of documents and 2.) Trump attempted to obstruct the probe. More is being gathered, but the Special Counsel's case is growing strogner.

Interestingly enough, the Special Counsel has subpoenaed Records on Trump’s Foreign Business Deals Since 2017. Those also relate to Trump's handling of classified information. The countries involved include China, France, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Oman.

Likely, what they're looking at is whether Trump's foreign deals is somehow tied to his handling of classified information. More importantly, it seems they're trying to determine whether during his Presidency that he gave said documents to get said deals. It would certainly be tough to prove, but what might be a little easier is if the fact he continued to do this well after leaving the White House. If so, we have a massive problem on our hands. Basically, they're looking for a motive that will strengthen their case.

[San Lumen]

Prosecutors have evidence that Trump was warned for retaining classified documents. Those notes were from his Evan Corcoran. Usually, said notes would not be viewable due to attorney-client privilege, but an Appeals Court disqualified that earlier in the year. The notes, also surprisingly detailed, document how Trump knew he had said documents, wondering if he could push back against the DOJ's subpoena. The notes would likely be used to prove that 1.) Trump had possession of documents and 2.) Trump attempted to obstruct the probe. More is being gathered, but the Special Counsel's case is growing strogner.

Interestingly enough, the Special Counsel has subpoenaed Records on Trump’s Foreign Business Deals Since 2017. Those also relate to Trump's handling of classified information. The countries involved include China, France, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Oman.

Likely, what they're looking at is whether Trump's foreign deals is somehow tied to his handling of classified information. More importantly, it seems they're trying to determine whether during his Presidency that he gave said documents to get said deals. It would certainly be tough to prove, but what might be a little easier is if the fact he continued to do this well after leaving the White House. If so, we have a massive problem on our hands. Basically, they're looking for a motive that will strengthen their case.

Its becoming increasingly likely Trump is charged in this case I think the only question is when and in what manner.

[Bombadil]

Indiana Code outlines the following definitions of materials that are "harmful to minors":

Nudity, sexual content or "sado-masochistic abuse"

A persuasiveness for minors to engage in sexual activities

Offensive content to community standards for adults considering what's suitable to minors to see

Content void of "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value" for kids

Librarians who violate the law could be charged with a Level 6 felony and face up to two and a half years of jail time.

So, fairly vague outlines for what can be considered harmful to minors, that can result in school librarians facing more than 2 years in jail.

Link

Good job Indiana.. if you don't like it you can easily move to Arkansas..

One example is an Arkansas measure that says school and public librarians, as well as teachers, can be imprisoned for up to six years or fined $10,000 if they distribute obscene or harmful texts. It takes effect Aug. 1

Oh well..

[San Lumen]

Indiana Code outlines the following definitions of materials that are "harmful to minors":

Nudity, sexual content or "sado-masochistic abuse"

A persuasiveness for minors to engage in sexual activities

Offensive content to community standards for adults considering what's suitable to minors to see

Content void of "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value" for kids

Librarians who violate the law could be charged with a Level 6 felony and face up to two and a half years of jail time.

So, fairly vague outlines for what can be considered harmful to minors, that can result in school librarians facing more than 2 years in jail.

Link

Good job Indiana.. if you don't like it you can easily move to Arkansas..

One example is an Arkansas measure that says school and public librarians, as well as teachers, can be imprisoned for up to six years or fined $10,000 if they distribute obscene or harmful texts. It takes effect Aug. 1

Oh well..

This is truly becoming scary. This is what happened in Europe in the 1930s.

[Narland]

The USSR (as Marxists) believed that traditional (what today would be called by some hetero-normative) sexuality and nuclear family were bourgeoisie social constructs of oppression. Traditional marriage was outlawed and suppressed. After a decade or two, the top-down imposed sexually liberated were not producing enough offspring for the Party's economic aspirations. The concern deepened with the threat of Nazi Germany. Orthodox priests were called out of the salt mines to create rules and regulations for the least amount of familial bonds conducive to Party goals. Scientific Communism then conceded that humans organically needed at least enough familial bonds for Soviet Socialism to function. The priests were sent back to the gulags.

Gonna need to see a source for that one chief.

https://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/bolsheviks-targeted-women-and-children-with-antifamily-antimarriage-propaganda/
https://internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article5401
The second URL is close to the resources I had access to back in the 70s, but the particular books I am thinking about don't seem to be referenced. This current academic trend of quoting from the most recent sources closest to the researchers biases instead of the most objectively comprehensive as close an unbroken chronology from a variety of sources to the object of study is asinine. The historiography of Soviet Communist Sexuality is a determinist dialectician's flapjack that's been noted each time there has been yet another novel Soviet narrative that contradicts the old but always was at every 5 year plan.

The paywall is up for me this summer until school resumes so I am not going to strain myself. Suffice it to say, the imposition of licentiousness to destroy the fabric of bourgeoisie (or feudal (they are opportunistic)) society so that a Marxist revolution can take place is part and parcel of dialectic. That is until the vanguard that takes power (not always the proletariat of International Socialists) and reconstitutes to a more natural sexuality conducive to their power structure over society, which is usually just as socially conservative as most of the rest of world history.

[Neu California]

US states agree breakthrough deal to prevent Colorado River from drying up

I say we leave the alfalfa farms owned by the Saudis high and dry in particular.

[Vassenor]

If he gets the nomination I can’t see him winning this time. Candidates who gave been indicted don’t win.

If Trump is the nominee there will be serious consequences downballot for Republicans.

People underestimated his chances in 2016 as well, but the Democrats decided to nominate an unlikeable candidate who couldn't get people energized. I'm not saying Trump's going to win, but the Democrats should know better than to be overconfident. Especially when their candidate is unlikeable and boring. The popular vote still doesn't elect the president.

And even then she still managed to be more popular with voters than he was overall.

[Northern Seleucia]

Biden seals 3 deals in Pacific islands as U.S. competes with China

[San Lumen]

https://apnews.com/article/arizona-kari ... 41f44abb95

Judge dismisses Kari Lake’s final claim in election loss for Arizona governor

[Deblar]

It's really not. It's a bunch of PR stunts that are often actively counterproductive to bringing about the alleged goals. Like DeSantis's little war on Disney, which has so far had the primary effect of giving Disney big tax breaks while discouraging them from bringing money into the Florida economy.

That would seem like the opposite of "owning the libs" then, wouldn't it?

Yes, because he doesn't even know how to do it right

[Melrovia]

Trump would just bolt the GOP and split the Republican vote. Care to guess how that would end?

That's entirely possible, but it's not good to be so certain. Even if that is the case, it's smart to treat your opponent like a credible threat.

Nothing can legally prevent him from running. Trump could technically run for President from prison.

Most likely true. If he's indicted for inciting the attack on the capitol, he might be barred from running under the 14th amendment.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

I think Trump supporters like and respect DeSantis enough to fall in line if he gets the nomination even though he isn't their first choice. I doubt they're gonna pass up the chance to see the left have another meltdown like in 2016.