The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

The place for measured discourse about politics and current events, including developments in science and medicine.
Post Reply
N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

N.E. Brigand wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 6:53 pm The New York Times fact checked President Biden's State of the Union address last night, including this claim: "Our economy created over 6.5 million new jobs just last year, more jobs created in one year than ever before in the history of America."

The Times found that claim to be only "partially true," because the government didn't collect jobs data prior to 1939.

(The U.S. population was less than half what it is now in 1939, so it's a sure bet that Biden's claim is completely true. Media bias against Democrats! Whether the job growth reflects well on Biden's presidency or not is a different and more slippery question, to be sure. But in describing the "state of the union," it's relevant statistic.)
The Bureau of Labor Statistics today issued its monthly jobs report, which indicates the U.S. added 678,000 jobs in February and that the unemployment rate has fallen to 3.8%. That's the lowest it's been since before the pandemic -- and in the past 20 years, it's only that low or lower for one year (Mar. 2019-Feb. 2020).

That said, despite the current good employment situation and the fact that the U.S. added more jobs in 2021 than in any prior year, new polling finds that 35% of Americans believe that the U.S. lost jobs last year, 21% say they don't know, and only 28% respond correctly that the U.S. gained jobs.
User avatar
Voronwë the Faithful
At the intersection of here and now
Posts: 46144
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by Voronwë the Faithful »

"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
User avatar
Voronwë the Faithful
At the intersection of here and now
Posts: 46144
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by Voronwë the Faithful »

There is finally an actual (as opposed to acting) director of the Office of Management and Budget. Shalanda Young becomes the first black woman confirmed to that position by the Senate.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/15/politics ... i9IiiEVKRM
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

Senator Mike Braun (Republican of Indiana) said today that the Supreme Court was wrong to ban interracial marriage in its Loving v. Virginia decision in 1967. Braun says that matter should have been left for the states to decide, and that's "the beauty of the system." Asked to clarify that he was serious, he said he was, and that it would be "hypocritical" of him to say otherwise.

At the time, 16 states banned interracial marriage. (Some of them probably would still ban it to this day if not for that decision.)

Then 45 minutes later, Braun's office issued a statement saying that he misunderstood the question(s) without specifically refuting his earlier comments. Rather, the new statement says "there is no question the Constitution prohibits discrimination of any kind based on race". But that was every bit as true before the Loving decision as after. What happened in 1967 is that the Supreme Court got around to saying it was true. In my opinion, Braun's second statement leaves the door open for him to say the Court would be correct to change its mind now. In other words, I suspect Braun's earlier comments show what he really feels, and I don't think he's unique in those views, particularly in the Republican Party.
N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

N.E. Brigand wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 10:58 pm Senator Mike Braun (Republican of Indiana) said today that the Supreme Court was wrong to ban interracial marriage in its Loving v. Virginia decision in 1967. Braun says that matter should have been left for the states to decide, and that's "the beauty of the system." Asked to clarify that he was serious, he said he was, and that it would be "hypocritical" of him to say otherwise.

At the time, 16 states banned interracial marriage. (Some of them probably would still ban it to this day if not for that decision.)

Then 45 minutes later, Braun's office issued a statement saying that he misunderstood the question(s) without specifically refuting his earlier comments. Rather, the new statement says "there is no question the Constitution prohibits discrimination of any kind based on race". But that was every bit as true before the Loving decision as after. What happened in 1967 is that the Supreme Court got around to saying it was true. In my opinion, Braun's second statement leaves the door open for him to say the Court would be correct to change its mind now. In other words, I suspect Braun's earlier comments show what he really feels, and I don't think he's unique in those views, particularly in the Republican Party.
Glad to see that I'm not the only one who noticed that Sen. Braun's correction doesn't really change his previous astounding comments:

N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

N.E. Brigand wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 10:05 pm "South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg was reading Joe Biden conspiracy theories at John Solomon's 'Just The News' website while driving when he slammed into a man, killing him and hitting him so hard the man's face came through the windshield. (Ravnsborg claimed he thought he hit a deer.)"

Here's the source of that quote, which includes video of investigators talking Ravnsborg through a timeline based on his phone's history.
Ravnsborg won't even be impeached for killing a man and covering it up. And that's not my description of his actions. Those are the words of his fellow Republican, Kristi Noem, the governor of South Dakota.
N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

I think there is some insight in the following passage from this review by Joseph O'Neill of two recent books on American culture and history:
The United States has secretive agencies that do legally dubious things, but it doesn't have a deep state in the Turkish sense. It may be said to have a deep state in another sense, however: America. America preceded, and brought into being, the republic we now live in--the United States of America. Almost everyone still talks about America, not about the United States; about Americans, not USAers. America, in short, was not extinguished by the United States. It persists as a buried, residual homeland--the patria that would be exposed if the USA were to dissolve. Primordial America (at least in the popular imagination) was where folks prayed hard, worked hard on the land, and had rightful recourse to violence. In this imaginary place, people were white, Christian, English-speaking. They had God-given dominion over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. All of this inevitably informs the way American nationals apprehend one another and their country. They feel in their bones that some people are Americans and other people are merely citizens of the United States.

Our deep state doesn't require conspiracies or coups or even self-awareness. It is a permanent ideological feature, like gravity. It reveals itself in our politics. A common trope -- "Imagine if a Democrat did that" -- refers to a state of affairs in which one party is bound by norms and rules, and the other party less so. One president must constantly generate his legitimacy, even as he excellently complies with the rules; another president benefits from a legitimacy so profound that his rule-breaking has the effect of rule-making. One group is perceived to be synthetic and unpatriotic, another as authentic and patriotic. This guy is a snowflake; that guy is a victim of prosecution. And so on.

The unspoken ratio decidendi of Bush v. Gore is that, when it comes to the crunch, America trumps the United States and its papery constitutional affirmations. Democrats get this as much as Republicans do. Consciously or unconsciously, they know the score. They experience this knowledge mostly as fear.
User avatar
RoseMorninStar
Posts: 12899
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 11:07 am
Location: North Shire

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by RoseMorninStar »

This concept is evident (to me) in the 'family values' dog whistle.
My heart is forever in the Shire.
User avatar
Voronwë the Faithful
At the intersection of here and now
Posts: 46144
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by Voronwë the Faithful »

N.E.B. I think you'll appreciate this from Heather Cox Richardson:
March 30, 2022 (Wednesday)

CBS News has hired Mick Mulvaney as a paid on-air contributor. In his first official appearance on Tuesday morning to talk about President Joe Biden’s budget proposal, anchor Anne-Marie Green introduced Mulvaney as “a former Office of Management and Budget director,” and said, “So happy to have you here…. You’re the guy to ask about this.”

Mulvaney was a far-right U.S. representative from South Carolina from 2011 to 2017, when he went to work for then-president Trump as the director of the Office of Management and Budget. While in that position, he also took over as acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the government organization organized by Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) after the financial crisis of 2008. In its first five years, the CFPB recovered about $11.7 billion for about 27 million consumers, but in Congress, Mulvaney introduced legislation to abolish it. At its head, Mulvaney zeroed out the bureau’s budget and did his best to dismantle it.

While retaining his role at the head of the Office of Management and Budget, Mulvaney took on the job of acting White House chief of staff on January 2, 2019. This unprecedented dual role put him in a key place to do an end run around official U.S. diplomats in Ukraine and to set up a back channel to put pressure on newly elected Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky to announce he was launching an investigation into the actions of Joe Biden’s son, Hunter.

As director of OMB, Mulvaney okayed the withholding of almost $400 million Congress had appropriated for Ukraine’s protection against Russia. In May 2019, he set up “the three amigos,” Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland, special envoy Kurt Volker, and Energy Secretary Rick Perry, to pressure Zelensky. When the story came out, Mulvaney told the press that Trump had indeed withheld the money to pressure Zelensky to help him cheat in the 2020 election. “I have news for everybody,” he said. “Get over it. There’s going to be political influence in foreign policy.” He immediately walked the story back, but there it was.

This event was the basis for Trump’s first impeachment. While Republican senators refused to hold Trump accountable, the Government Accountability Office found that withholding the money was illegal. Ironically, the GAO report came out during Trump’s second impeachment.

And yet, CBS hired Mulvaney and simply introduced him as a former director of the OMB, saying he was the guy to explain Biden’s budget. (After the episode, the CBS standards department reminded staffers they should always identify people with their relevant biographical information.)

Jeremy Barr of the Washington Post tonight revealed that he had reviewed a recording of a phone call in which the co-president of CBS News, Neeraj Khemlani, suggested they had hired Mulvaney to guarantee access to Republican lawmakers. “If you look at some of the people that we’ve been hiring on a contributor basis, being able to make sure that we are getting access to both sides of the aisle is a priority because we know the Republicans are going to take over, most likely, in the midterms,” Khemlani told staff. “A lot of the people that we’re bringing in are helping us in terms of access to that side of the equation.”

People on the right have talked about a “liberal media” now for a generation. It has come to represent the idea that the media is slanted toward the Democrats. But initially, the phrase meant media based in facts.

In the 1950s, those eager to get rid of the government system instituted by the Democrats during the Great Depression of the 1930s grew frustrated because people liked that system, with its business regulation, basic social safety net, and promotion of infrastructure. In 1951, in “God and Man at Yale: The Superstitions of “Academic Freedoms,” William F. Buckley, Jr., rejected the Enlightenment idea that rigorous debate over facts would lead toward truth; the fondness of a majority of Republicans and Democrats for the newly active national government proved people could not be trusted to know what was best for them. Instead, he called for the exclusion of “bad” ideas like an active government, and for universities to push individualism and Christianity.

Three years later, Buckley and his brother-in-law, L. Brent Bozell, Jr., would divide the world into “Liberals,” by which they meant the majority of Americans from both parties who liked the New Deal government, and “Conservatives” like themselves, who were determined to overturn that government. Movement Conservatives lumped Soviet-style socialism and the New Deal government together.

With its focus on facts, the media, like the universities, was “liberal,” and Movement Conservatives wanted their ideology to be heard. In 1987, President Ronald Reagan’s appointees to the Federal Communications Commission killed the Fairness Doctrine, which had required public media to present issues fairly, and right-wing talk radio took off. In 1996, Australian-born Rupert Murdoch started the Fox News Channel, calling it “fair and balanced” because it presented the Movement Conservative ideology that fact-based media ignored.

Twenty-five years later, that ideology had become so powerful that true believers tried to stop a legitimately elected Democrat from becoming president, and in the year since, their conviction has only become stronger. Now CBS News has hired a member of the administration that urged the attack on our democracy.

“When, oh Lord, when will the elite political media treat the current Republican Party as the threat to the republic that it most obviously is?” asked Charlie Pierce in Esquire.

Here’s what’s at stake: On the one hand, Biden is trying to rebuild the old liberal consensus that used to be shared by people of both parties, instituted by Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt to protect workers from the overreach of their employers and expanded under Republican Dwight Eisenhower to protect civil rights. To this, Biden has focused on those previously marginalized and has added a focus on women and children.

Biden’s new budget, released earlier this week, calls for investment in U.S. families, communities, and infrastructure, the same principles on which the economy has boomed for the past year. The budget also promotes fiscal responsibility by rolling back Trump’s tax cuts on the very wealthy. Biden's signature yesterday on the Emmett Till Antilynching Act, making lynching a federal hate crime in the United States, is the culmination of more than 100 years of work.

Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken are defending democracy against authoritarianism, working to bring together allies around the globe to resist the aggression of Russian president Vladimir Putin.

On the other hand, the Republican Party is working to get rid of the New Deal government. While Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell wanted to face the midterms without a platform, Senator Rick Scott (R-FL), who chairs the committee responsible for electing Republican senators, has produced an “11-point plan to rescue America.” It dramatically raises taxes on people who earn less than $100,000, and ends Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act.

With a 6 to 3 majority on the Supreme Court, Republicans have also taken aim at abortion rights and are now talking about ending other civil rights protected by the federal government after 1950: the right to birth control, interracial marriage, and same-sex marriage.

The Republicans have sided with authoritarianism as they back former president Trump and his supporters, over 2,000 of whom stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. This week, federal judge David Carter wrote that it was “more likely than not” that Trump committed a federal crime when he encouraged the attack, and yesterday we learned that there are more than 7 hours of phone records missing from the official White House logs of that day. At The Guardian, Hugo Lowell today reported that Trump made at least one call from the White House that day that should have been on the logs and was not, opening up the possibility that Trump’s people tampered with the phone records.

And while Putin has launched a war of invasion on our democratic ally Ukraine, just yesterday, Trump asked Putin to help him dig up dirt on a political rival, just as he did in 2016.

Voters cannot choose wisely between these two paths unless their news is based in facts. Earlier this week, fact triumphed over ideology on the Fox News Channel, when anchor John Roberts noted that Senator Rick Scott’s 2022 Republican platform calls for raising taxes on most Americans and ending Social Security. Scott said that Roberts was using “a Democrat talking point.” But Roberts stood firm on facts: “It’s in the plan!” he said. “It’s not a Democratic talking point. It’s in the plan!”
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

On May 16, 2019, the conservative Heritage Foundation put out this statement:
The unemployment rate is at 3.6 percent. That’s the lowest it’s been in almost 50 years.

You’d have to go back to the days of the first moon landing to get an employment rate this good.
Today, the March 2022 U.S. jobs report was issued.

The unemployment rate is at 3.6 percent.
N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

N.E. Brigand wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 7:17 pm On May 16, 2019, the conservative Heritage Foundation put out this statement:
The unemployment rate is at 3.6 percent. That’s the lowest it’s been in almost 50 years.

You’d have to go back to the days of the first moon landing to get an employment rate this good.
Today, the March 2022 U.S. jobs report was issued.

The unemployment rate is at 3.6 percent.
The unemployment rate was 6.4 percent when Joe Biden took office in January 2021.

And yet, as noted in this report from Politico, "more people think jobs have been lost over the last year (37%) than those who think they’ve been gained (28%)."
N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

N.E. Brigand wrote: Mon Apr 04, 2022 12:26 am
N.E. Brigand wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 7:17 pm On May 16, 2019, the conservative Heritage Foundation put out this statement:
The unemployment rate is at 3.6 percent. That’s the lowest it’s been in almost 50 years.

You’d have to go back to the days of the first moon landing to get an employment rate this good.
Today, the March 2022 U.S. jobs report was issued.

The unemployment rate is at 3.6 percent.
The unemployment rate was 6.4 percent when Joe Biden took office in January 2021.

And yet, as noted in this report from Politico, "more people think jobs have been lost over the last year (37%) than those who think they’ve been gained (28%)."
Maybe the public believes jobs have been lost thanks to mainstream media reports like this:



Despite Axios claiming that Biden's administration is unable to enact a campaign promise to "create 'millions' of jobs," the number of jobs in the U.S. has increased by more than 8 million in the first 14 months of Biden's presidency. He's already done what he promised!

Yet more proof that the mainstream media is biased against Joe Biden.
N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

I think this nicely restates a point I've been making:
It seems like Joe Biden’s efforts to improve Ukraine’s quality of governance were successful and not in fact a corrupt giveaway to his son at all — a debate many people once pretended to be interested in is now pretty settled.

I think it would be nice if journalists who took GOP scandalmongering face value at least themselves made a show of doing follow-up on this stuff. How were Trump’s document-retention policies? Did reforming the Ukrainian prosecutor’s office work?

Even on a straight policy question, I never a see a story that’s like “Here’s what Kevin McCarthy says he would do to reduce inflation and some evidence as to how likely that is to work.”

If you’re going to take the criticisms seriously, take them seriously.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Meanwhile, there were 19 references to "Hunter Biden" on ABC News's Sunday morning show. And today ABC published this:

Secret Service paying over $30K per month for Malibu mansion to protect Hunter Biden

But after you get a few paragraphs into the story, you learn this:
Retired senior Secret Service agent Don Mihalek, now an ABC News contributor, said the arrangement is "the cost of doing business for the Secret Service," adding that under the federal law, the agency has a mandated protective responsibility for the president, the first family, and anybody else the president designates for protection.

"Typically, wherever a protectee sets up their residence, the Secret Service is forced to find someplace to rent nearby at market value," Mihalek said, noting that the agency is also renting out properties to protect President Joe Biden's residences in Wilmington and Rehoboth Beach, Delaware.

"This isn't new," Mihalek said. "The Service has had to do this in past administrations, and unfortunately, the housing market right now has driven the prices up substantially."
And if you get another dozen paragraphs into the story, you learn this:
In the first year of Donald Trump's presidency, the Secret Service requested $60 million of additional funding to protect Trump and his family, with about $27 million of that going to protecting them at their private residency at the Trump Tower in New York City, according to internal agency documents obtained by the Washington Post at that time.

Throughout Trump's presidency, his family business came under fire for bringing in revenue from the Secret Service by charging for space at various Trump properties across the globe that agents used while protecting Trump and his family members.
So it apparently cost more to protect Donald Trump's family while he was president, and Trump himself was being paid by the Secret Service.

Oh, and Trump's adult children were still being protected by the Secret Service for at least six months after he left office.
N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

Glad to see the Biden administration trying to get the truth out:

N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

N.E. Brigand wrote: Wed Mar 30, 2022 12:02 am
N.E. Brigand wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 10:05 pm "South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg was reading Joe Biden conspiracy theories at John Solomon's 'Just The News' website while driving when he slammed into a man, killing him and hitting him so hard the man's face came through the windshield. (Ravnsborg claimed he thought he hit a deer.)"

Here's the source of that quote, which includes video of investigators talking Ravnsborg through a timeline based on his phone's history.
Ravnsborg won't even be impeached for killing a man and covering it up. And that's not my description of his actions. Those are the words of his fellow Republican, Kristi Noem, the governor of South Dakota.
Surprise, surprise! As I also noted here, while a South Dakota House of Representatives two weeks ago recommended against impeaching Ravnsborg two weeks ago, the full House has just voted 36-31 to impeach him.
N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

N.E. Brigand wrote: Sun Jul 11, 2021 1:01 am
N.E. Brigand wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 5:24 am
Voronwë the Faithful wrote: Wed Jun 09, 2021 11:05 pm I would be very skeptical of a determination that the clearing of the park had nothing to do with Trump's photo op at the church.
A federal judge today ruled that Trump, Barr, and oher federal officials can't be sued for violating protesters' rights while violently clearing Lafayette Park, but that Arlington County and District of Columbia officials who helpd Trump, Barr, et al. violently clear the park can be sued for violating protesters' rights.

Apparently due to some bad Supreme Court precedent.

Seems like an "I was just issuing orders" rule that protects the evil masterminds while throwing the book at their henchmen.
In Michael Bender's new book on the Trump presidency, he reports that after protesters were violently removed from the park, "Inside the outer Oval, aides erupted in high-fives."

I'd like the judge who ruled that Trump and Barr can't be sued to address that, please.
News: Justice Department Announces Civil Settlement in Lafayette Square Cases
Today, the Department of Justice announced that it has reached an agreement to settle claims in four civil cases arising from the June 1, 2020, law enforcement response to racial justice demonstrations in Lafayette Square in Washington, D.C.

As part of the settlement, the United States Park Police (USPP) and the United States Secret Service (USSS) agreed to update and clarify their policies governing demonstrations, and to implement the policy changes within 30 days of today’s settlement. The plaintiffs, Black Lives Matter D.C. and individuals who attended the protests, agreed to dismiss their claims for equitable relief against the United States.

Changes to the agency’s policies include more specific requirements for visible identification of officers, limits on the use of non-lethal force and procedures to facilitate safe crowd dispersal.
N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

A senior writer at the conservative National Review delivers exactly the message that Texas's governor, Dan Abbott, wants Americans to be repeating:



But the White House is correct!

Even Texas's Agricultural Commissioner, Sid Miller, who is endorsed by Donald Trump, says that Abbott's "enhanced safety inspections" on trucks entering Texas from Mexico are a "misguided policy" that "is stopping food from getting to grocery store shelves and, in many cases, causing food to rot in trucks—many of which are owned by Texas and other American companies. It is simply political theater."
N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

N.E. Brigand wrote: Thu Apr 14, 2022 12:54 am A senior writer at the conservative National Review delivers exactly the message that Texas's governor, Dan Abbott, wants Americans to be repeating:



But the White House is correct!

Even Texas's Agricultural Commissioner, Sid Miller, who is endorsed by Donald Trump, says that Abbott's "enhanced safety inspections" on trucks entering Texas from Mexico are a "misguided policy" that "is stopping food from getting to grocery store shelves and, in many cases, causing food to rot in trucks—many of which are owned by Texas and other American companies. It is simply political theater."
Abbott has relented arguably by violating the U.S. Constitution. He signed an agreement with the governor of the Mexican state of Nuevo León: Texas will end its new safety inspections and Nuevo León will ste up security on its side of the border. But here's Section 10 of Article I of the Constiution:
Section 10: Powers Denied to the States

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing its inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
But I don't know what the enforcement mechanisms or penalties are for breaking this particular law.
N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

The Biden administration was probably going to lift the mask mandate on flights soon anyway, so I think it's unlikely they'll appeal, but they really shouldn't let the precedent of Judge Mizelle's ruling stand unchallenged. Here's how ridiculous the ruling is: it says that masks used to prevent the spread of communicable diseases aren't covered by the law that gives the federal government the ability to regulate "sanitation" to protect public health.

(Decide for yourself if any of this background is relevant: Judge Mizelle was one of ten Trump-appointed federal judges who were deemed "not qualified" by the American Bar Association. She was all of 33 when she was appointed to this lifetime position, so she'll still be making MAGA-informed rulings after most of us are dead. She had no courtroom experience at all, as a judge or lawyer, at any level. No Democrats voted for her. She was confirmed *AFTER* Donald Trump lost the 2020 election and while he was actively working to overturn the results. Her husband had a position way above his experience in the Dept. of Justice during Trump's presidency -- and he now works at Jared Kushner's investment fund: the one that just received $2 billion from the Saudi sovereign wealth fund, over the objections of the Saudi fund's advisors. She clerked for Clarence Thomas. And one of her clerks, in fact the one who actually filed the decision, interned with a group now challenging other Covid-19 safety measures (though not before Judge Mizelle, as far as I know).)
N.E. Brigand
Posts: 6962
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:41 am
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

Re: The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

Post by N.E. Brigand »

Not sure where this would fit best, so:

Hilarious attempt by Fox News to rewrite history: "Now, with the advent of secular stagnation in the Obama years, from 2000-2021, the economy only grew half as much, 1.8%."

(As shown at the link, that wasn't just a slip of the tongue.)
Post Reply