Jump to content

The Politics Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Members

That last article says what I've been thinking this term. I do think on gay rights he is more of a swing or quasi-left vote, but on many other areas, not so much. Still, it's a sobering loss. The best I can hope for is that no one is appointed before November and that Democrats win back the Senate. I doubt that will happen though. 

 

What was the article on the recession? I know many have said one has to be coming in the next year or two, the only question is how bad it will be. Right now with the trade stuff and more and more countries actively avoiding working with us, I think it will be pretty bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 45.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vee

    6818

  • DRW50

    5992

  • DramatistDreamer

    5521

  • Khan

    3465

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

This nation is f*cked. At this point, do Liberal States of America and Conservative States of America. Separate but equal. Won't ever happen but it should. But then red taker states would have to support themselves, hence why this won't happen.

 

Barring that, NY/California SHOULD secede, IMO. We're going backwards at an alarming rate. Gilead isn't such an impossibility these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This piece discusses pre-fascism in The U.S. and Italy, although I agree more with the people who see it as the early stages of fascism.  I think he is right on when he calls what is happening on our border as a trial balloon. One that worked pretty well overall.

 

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fintan-o-toole-trial-runs-for-fascism-are-in-full-flow-1.3543375?mode=amp

 

Fascism does not need a majority – it typically comes to power with about 40 per cent support and then uses control and intimidation to consolidate that power. So it doesn’t matter if most people hate you, as long as your 40 per cent is fanatically committed. That’s been tested out too. And fascism of course needs a propaganda machine so effective that it creates for its followers a universe of “alternative facts” impervious to unwanted realities. Again, the testing for this is very far advanced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Unfortunately, it WILL happen.  She will place so many restrictions on the law that we'll STILL have to cross lines just to get access even to medicinal marijuana.  I put nothing past the woman.

 

I must admit I'm not too up on SCOTUS to know what Kennedy's retirement would mean.  How bad is his decision to retire for us?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah, I'm reading some articles about this now and...it don't look good.

 

Roe v. Wade will most def be overturned -- or, if not overturned, then chipped away at until it's all but obsolete.  Which means more "backroom jobs," more abortion pills being acquired through the black market, more women exposing themselves to potential injury and even death.  And all because they see each baby as another, potential Republican vote.

 

When it comes to voting rights and affirmative action, the court(s) of today apparently operate on the notion that it's no longer 1965; and that we, as a nation, have "come around" in our thinking about racial and ethnic inequalities.  Of course, the average and truly ENLIGHTENED American knows that not to be the case.  So, good luck, my potential grandkids, in getting those measures protecting minorities' voting rights back into law!  I wish you well!

 

And as for gay rights...well, you know, all I had ever hoped for was that same-sex couples BE allowed to marry -- because, hell, why should heterosexuals have all the misery? -- and that those marriages be recognized as legal by the government.  Anything beyond that, I reasoned, was too pie-in-the-sky.  So, the ONLY hope I have now is that SCOTUS will remain true to its history of "stare decisis," or whatever it's called, and not reverse THAT decision w/o "some compelling reason to do so" (per Vox), even as they allow businesses and such to discriminate the hell against gays and transgendered persons.  (In other words -- fine, you won't bake cakes for queers, but they're still married in the eyes of the law, so eat it.)

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Ya know...this is pure speculation...but I would NOT be surprised if, after Trump announces Kennedy's replacement and he/she is quickly voted into SCOTUS, the GOP in Congress all-of-a-sudden ramps up talk of impeaching his ass.  Because, after all, according to certain pundits, one major reason why they've stuck by Trump for so long (albeit reluctantly, in some cases), was because they needed him to pack the court with a right-leaning majority.  Once that happens, I predict, they'll suddenly find him to be dispensable.

 

Will it make any difference if they were to succeed on that front?  No.  The damage has been done -- damage, quite frankly, that'll take at least several generations to fix.  But, at the very least, Trump could finally be put down like the rabid dog that he is, and we could get on with the business of healing the country's many wounds.

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

What f*ckin election did he win??  Look at some of the faces of the bystanders in that picture--split between those who don't believe a word of what he just said while others are humoring him the way one humors a doddering old fool.  Or is that "dotard"?

 

Women's reproductive rights is not just about Roe v. Wade (though that is a large part of it) but also access to birth control and family planning initiatives. 

The recent story of the woman who had a miscarriage comes to mind.  This woman was prescribed medication and the pharmacist refused to fill the prescription, preferring to let the woman suffer instead.  There is a strong possibility that we will see more of these types of situations arise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I tried following the news in Los Angeles at https://laist.com (independent public radio and news) They had up-to-the minute accurate info during the wildfires in January. There's no video, no impact to my mind as to what's happening. Trying other outlets, to get the truth, but it's hard.  
    • That's a bit murky since that happened during a writers' strike. Assuming Kristen Marie had a 2-year contract she left about when her contract would have expired and Sharlene and Josie showed up right before that. Lemay was officially credited as HW from September 1988 but it seems very probable that his anticipated tenure influenced events that happened during the strike which started in April. 
    • I've seen so many posters over the years who are bright, creative, well-versed in soap history, and who care deeply about the integrity of the genre. I'd put the shows' chances in their hands a lot faster than I would allow any of the "usual suspects" to take control of the dramas they've already helped decimate. When I returned to university in the 1980s, I created a bible for a new soap and presented it in my screenwriting class. It was in reaction to how badly I saw the network shows being butchered at the time. The creative process was thrilling; a total joy, and I still smile when I remember the positive feedback I received from the professor and my fellow students. I was used to seeing written commentary from professors on my work. This one wrote me a long, complimentary note on the final page of the bible, but also graded it 97%, A+. I was beaming ear to ear for days!

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Thanks. I do wonder if Rose was meant to be more given the caliber of actress they hired. I remembered Sara and Peggy staying longer as they were still on when Soapnet started their repeats. I wonder if that was part of the reason they brought Jake's brother in. 
    • Speculation about Missy Reeves' potential evolution on basic civil rights doesn’t change my opinion of her. My view is shaped entirely by her public social media presence—which I find unpalatable—and I have no interest in learning more beyond that. I simply liked Jennifer’s hair and dress. That’s as far as my admiration goes.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Cheryl was gone before Lemay came back but I agree with your thinking that he would rather a character from a family he introduced to the show than a family he did not originate.  I remember reading somewhere in the early 90's probably after DS left as writer, their was an either a writer or a producer who made a comment that their intent was bring the McKinnon family back to AW.  Would have made sense for the newer viewers from the 80's.  Much like Lemay's attempt to bring the Frames back from his writing in the 70's in his 1988 return
    • DePriest left in January 1988. According to the AWHP, Rose last appeared nearly a year before in February 1987 while both Sara and Peggy appeared as late as October 1987.
    • Annie was not brought in as an antagonist for Reva. Reva wasn’t even on the canvas when Annie first appeared in late 1994. 
    • The speculation……….very entertaining. 
    • I had forgotten that several Days stars came out strong against Melissa. Good for them!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy