Jump to content

The Politics Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 45.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vee

    6816

  • DRW50

    5988

  • DramatistDreamer

    5521

  • Khan

    3459

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

I share a lot of your concern but I also recognize a lot of this is posturing and politics. I am the last person who wants Roe overturned but while we hear about states limiting abortion rights what you never hear about are states that expanded them. When Pritzker won as Governor in Il, RHA, the Reproductive Health Act, was passed. It was a sweeping reform for abortion rights. New York passed a bill not quite as expansive but that expanded abortion rights as did Nevada and New Mexico, 2 states with significant Latino populations(for everyone who claims none of Latinos support abortion rights).

 

There are also plans ready to go to help women in states with limited rights now in states where abortion rights have been marginalized to get women the help they need. It will be put in full blown if this happens. I am a member of a chapter of NARAL in Il and we are already helping women in states surrounding Illinois and will expand those efforts.

 

Frankly the ultimate goal should be a congressional bill to legalize abortion. That should have been the goal years ago. But that won't happen until enough states have passed their own legislation and I agree with Vee that will happen and there will be monumental pressure if Roe is overturned. 

 

As for voting rights, I am actually happy to see that letter. That tells me there is movement. And Murkowski as usual is demonstrating she is far more reliable than that fraud Susan Collins. Murkowski didn't vote for Kavanaugh remember. As for her ability to win re-election, don't count her out after what she accomplished last time, winning as an independent after losing the GOP primary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

McCarthy stabbed John Katko, another so-called "thoughtful" Republican who worked closely with Democrats for the commission to happen, in the back. Watch Katko just shrug it off the way all the GOP enablers do.

 

The Republicans, with the media going along every step, are doing their best to memory hole 1/6 and knowing their voter suppression and gerrymandering tools are enough to get away with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I honestly don't care and like the 9/11 Commission, an entire waste of time. We never heard about the deliberate ignoring of information transitioned to the Bush administration because Bush wanted a war and 9/11 gave him what he needed. What democrat in their right mind would want any republican on this commission to spew crazy town nonsense. I have more confidence in the DOJ. A special prosecutor would be better than this.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The 9/11 commission was basically about making sure no surprises came up to harm Bush's re-election and allowed for a controlled narrative. A commission about the insurrection would be far different because there is much to be learned about just what elected officials knew about the attack and who financed it. But for the most part I think Democrats want to make sure that the electorate doesn't forget about January 6th and be able to use it as in issue in the midterm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Violent crime, especially shootings and subway slashings, has gotten out of hand here in NYC (certainly compared to recent numbers, if nowhere near the heights of the ‘80s and early ‘90s). It’s not surprising that supposed “law and order” candidates would thrive in this environment. Kathryn Garcia got the NYT endorsement.

 

 

Edited by Faulkner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

The SDNY has always been handling the criminal investigation. It was the NY AG that was conducting the civil investigation. They are joining forces. The NY AG always maintained that should there be any evidence of criminal wrongdoing, they would turn it over to the SDNY, where the District attorney was already handling the criminal case. The difference now is that the NY AG now has the authority to 'get in' on the criminal investigation.

Again, presidential pardon only has power in federal cases. This is not a federal case, neither the criminal, nor the civil. This is NY jurisdiction. SDNY stands for Southern District of New York, which is essentially New York City. It is not a federal case. Notice that the Justice Department has no active part either investigation because this has to do with activities concerning Trump Inc., not the presidency.

Edited by DramatistDreamer
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

    • https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/shortland-street-fears-speculation-grows-about-shows-future-amid-industry-struggles/T2GECWXTI5AD3AMEV46YYYUE6E/ Still a big cloud over whether the show will get another year.
    • I had hoped they'd pair her with Michael Knight. They had a nice chemistry and he's been one of the better random castings on GH. When it comes to Gio, I found the scenes with Dante to be overdone. It's obvious they're trying to set up conflict for the reveal but I don't think that was needed. It actually made me less excited for the reveal and killed any interest I had in Dante and Gio forming a bond.
    • He also lost the woman he was going to marry, under very sudden circumstances. They are probably surprised Rena has wanted to stay. I think Lois works OK in her current capacity, if they allowed her to have more of a point of view, a bit more life of her own, and not just the reason for Gio's paternity being hidden. The character always felt very thin to me and on paper this dynamic with Tracy, Brook Lyn, Gio, visits from Gloria could be better for her than how overly centered she was on the canvas the first time around. But as of now she could be better used.  Somehow the show that was revived due to supercouples seems completely alien to romance. The older cast has this hardest but even with tiers who are younger or middle-aged, they've really dragged their feet about Liz and Lucky, they have contorted themselves in trying to figure out how to pair a man with Joss, Kai and Trina barely get focus...and others I struggle to remember. They also blew up Sasha/Cody so now I guess we're meant to be waiting to see if she finds true love with Jason? The show is so hesitant and when you are this hesitant it means you are incapable of writing romance.
    • I agree.  Rena doesn't seem to mind the lighter workload and seems happy though. Strangely, a lot of the veteran cast are without viable love interests-Sonny, Nina, Lois, Jason, Tracy, Alexis, Carly (Brennan doesn't count).  The show lacks serious interest in romance.
    • I just can't wait until next week when we can go back to a full weeks worth of episodes. 3 episodes and a mid-week gap has been so difficult to deal with, especially in light of how good the show is.
    • I always hoped they'd change Parker's paternity back to Phillip.  I guess it doesn't matter since Chloe is off the show currently.  I don't recall Holly or Maggie mentioning Parker, so it's not they are close to him. 
    • I’ve reached the summer of 1998.  Until now, my impression has been that the show has steadily improved since the great quality dip of 1994, reaching as high as 8/10 in 1997. Sure, I could complain about a few things in 1997 (Claudia got wasted after her initial storyline; Thorne’s feelings for Taylor were a bit too sudden; the storyline where Sheila lived with James and Maggie while pregnant got rather boring; Mike periodically revisiting Sheila despite being on the run from authorities), but overall it was a very strong year.  I liked the Thorne/Taylor/Ridge triangle, the mystery plot about who shot Grant, the sham wedding to trap Sheila, Stephanie/Eric/Lauren, and Clarke manipulating his way back to working at Forrester. I even liked the Greenland storyline with Eric/Lauren/Rush, although I had expected to hate it. Maybe 1996 tops 1997 in raw soapy excitement (especially as Sheila got a chance to interact with a larger canvas of characters), but certain problems with overall storyline cohesion puts it somewhat below 1997 for me. Unfortunately, early 1998 has turned out to be a bit of a speedbump, perhaps on par with 1995 levels of quality: - Maggie’s character really got trashed after James left her to be with Sheila, and the early 1998 storylines where she imprisoned Sheila in the house from Psycho, or installed those wires and mikes and such in her house to make her think she’s going crazy, were total GARBAGE. So much so that the latter storyline (and Maggie with it) pretty much disappeared into a limbo.  - I have mixed feelings about the twins plotline with Lauren. No way did Rush survive being shot with a crossbow through the chest, and the romance between Lauren and Rush’s good twin brother Johnny was rather dry to me. I did however enjoy the camp aspect of Rush taking his brother’s place to be with Lauren, and Eric rescuing her. But it doesn’t appear like Bell cared too much about the Johnny/Lauren romance beyond the twin storyline gimmick, and it too disappeared in an unsatisfactory manner (come on, why not hire Johnny’s actor for just 5 more episodes for an arc where he realizes Lauren is not over Eric, or JUST SOMETHING?) - Clarke wormed his way back to FC in late 1997, which had exciting storytelling potential, but then he disappeared almost entirely. Sad to see my favorite character wasted in this manner. Does he get anything interesting to do between now and the Morgan saga of 2000-2001? - The Thomas saga was entertaining in 1997, but it got stretched out too much, and made some of early 1998 tiresome, with Ridge having to decide YET AGAIN which woman he wants to be with. On the plus side, I like the plotline of Thorne being neighbors with Macy and Grant, and we’ve finally been introduced to the SORASed Rick/Amber/CJ crowd. The Stephanie/James/Sheila triangle is also starting, and it makes me excited (I remember seeing some if it in my childhood). I know Sheila, Grant, and James are all leaving soon, which I honestly kind of dread - between them and Clarke’s near-absence, it feels like herd is going to get culled too much in the near future. But I know there’s the familiar 1999-2002 to look forward to.
    • LOL - this is a perfect description, and that's what I loved about it! May be a bit campy, but it immediately caught my attention in a good way.  I'm not familiar with the Fishing Trip storyline, I'll have to look that up. I've noticed that about Josh, which has made him less attractive to me overall. He just yells a lot when he's not happy. Wow, Reva was married to HB!  LOL - "Always... eventually, and again"
    • I love your ideas. I would love to see Jack grown up this confused unhinged individual. He should hold a grudge against both Brooke and Taylor.   
    • @chrisml

      Please register in order to view this content

       
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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