MANY Red States Now BLOCKED!

[BootmanLA]

6 hours ago, Close2MyBro said:

So in California, where the democrats have a super-majority, using your logic, if the assembly and senate passes the bill and the governor signs it, you still blame the Republican who introduced it? Incredible.

That is not what I wrote, and if that's what you take from it, I suspect the issue is more biases on your part perhaps combined with, shall we say, "uncareful" reading.

For starters, we were talking about a map where legislation has been *introduced*. My comments were about *that map*. You made an unwarranted jump to assuming such legislation would pass - regardless of the party controlling the state - and then made a further jump to assume I would blame one party for the hypothetical passage of such a bill even if the other party enjoys a majority. That's so many levels of assumption and guesswork I can't attribute it to sheer inability to read.

But here's the reality. Some states have a solid majority of Democrats or Republicans in their state legislature. Some even have a so-called supermajority, generally meaning the number needed to override any veto by the governor, or to pass legislation for which that the state's constitution requires such a supermajority. But a not-insignificant number of legislative chambers are fairly closely divided, meaning a handful of members of the majority party, if they vote with the minority on some issue, can get that issue passed. That's more common with Democrats crossing the aisle to vote with Republicans on social issues, because Republicans trying to flip a seat go scorched-earth to portray a Democrat in a swing state as some cross between Pol Pot and the devil, funded by George Soros and an international cabal of baby-eating sex fiends.

In any event, if you have a chamber with 53% Democrats and 47% Republicans, and enough Democrats, under that kind of fake-outrage electoral pressure, switch sides on book banning or online access or whatever to pass the bill, it's still a Republican effort funded by, supported primarily by, and voted for almost totally by Republicans. So yes, in some cases, despite your supercilious attitude, it can be the fault of Republicans in a state with a Democratic majority in the legislature that such a bill passes.

One reason is that Democrats, unlike Republicans, don't usually punish their members for voting their version of "their conscience" on such legislation. When a Republican does it (ie votes for a Democratic priority), he's immediately set up for a primary challenge by some nutcase even farther to the right who vows never, ever, ever to do something like that. Which is one reason the Republican party's nuts are firmly in the grip of extremists.

[BootmanLA]

5 hours ago, Close2MyBro said:

If a majority of democrats pass the bill, the the democrats are the cause of the problem. They have the power to stop it, and if they choose not to, then that's on them.

Again, the Democrats, unlike the Republicans, do not usually demand lock-step compliance with what the party leaders dictate must be policy, under penalty of being primaried out of office.

You are always eager to blame an entire party (well, only ONE entire party) for the actions of a few who cross the aisle to join the opposing side on a particular issue. But for some reason you never, ever, ever seem to blame the OTHER entire party for the actions clearly endorsed by the vast majority of its members, even when that party's policy choices are steeped in misogyny, racism, homophobia, and other forms of hatred of anyone who is "other" to them. Are you so secure in your privilege as an (apparently) white male that you think they wouldn't come for you in a heartbeat if they took power in a state you're in?

[ErosWired]

26 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

because Republicans trying to flip a seat go scorched-earth to portray a Democrat in a swing state as some cross between Pol Pot and the devil, funded by George Soros and an international cabal of baby-eating sex fiends.

This is what floors me every time. The demonizations are so outrageously irrational on their face that they would make a cat laugh, yet humans evidently are incapable of braining it through.

[maxdick23]

On 7/2/2023 at 8:11 PM, ErikRaw said:

I hate this fucking state (Texass).  just a little over a year and I hope to blow out of this shithole.

You could always go to California

[CoolestDude]

On 7/9/2023 at 1:30 AM, DallasPozzible said:

I’m in Texas. A few nights ago, I got the block page. The next day I didn’t. However, I know permanent blocking is coming, so I’m now using a VPN.

The new Texas law goes into effect on September 1, 2023. Thus, we should be OK here through August. I suspect the effective date will ultimately be delayed by the courts, but we'll see.

[ErosWired]

@JimInWisc - A downvote on that? Really? Are you saying you actually believe there’s an international cabal of baby-eating sex fiends? I thought better of you. That’s just crazy talk. It couldn’t actually be true of anybody, of any political persuasion.

[Close2MyBro]

10 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

Again, the Democrats, unlike the Republicans, do not usually demand lock-step compliance with what the party leaders dictate must be policy, under penalty of being primaried out of office.

You are always eager to blame an entire party (well, only ONE entire party) for the actions of a few who cross the aisle to join the opposing side on a particular issue. But for some reason you never, ever, ever seem to blame the OTHER entire party for the actions clearly endorsed by the vast majority of its members, even when that party's policy choices are steeped in misogyny, racism, homophobia, and other forms of hatred of anyone who is "other" to them. Are you so secure in your privilege as an (apparently) white male that you think they wouldn't come for you in a heartbeat if they took power in a state you're in?

I think you need to read your posts, because you're actually describing yourself.

[BootmanLA]

4 hours ago, Close2MyBro said:

I think you need to read your posts, because you're actually describing yourself.

I attribute things to the Republican party when (a) a Republican does that thing and (b) no one in the Republican party of any stature whatsoever criticizes him or her for it. Or (c) when it's in the Republican Party platform.

So, for instance, the fact that Hair Furor has the approval of a solid majority of the Republican party, and virtually no one of stature criticizes him for his outrageous behavior and statements, then yes, I consider that something the Republican party endorses. Being criticized by his ex-cabinet members - who are no longer public officials - doesn't count, because they're not major figures in the party. When the House Speaker, House Majority Leader, Senate Minority Leader, or a chairman of a major committee in the House or ranking member in the Senate calls him out, I'll credit that. Until then, he's the albatross around the neck of the party and that means everyone who professes to believe in it - because HE is what the party believes in.

And when I say that Republicans want to outlaw all abortion, or ban same-sex marriage, I say that because it's in the party's national platform - at least, the last one adopted. People can mealy-mouth whine about "not all Republicans" but if you belong to a party whose official platform - which starts each section with "We believe that...", you are announcing to the world you support those positions.

You don't see that nearly so much on the Democratic side because we welcome internal criticism. We have prominent members who sometimes make outrageous statements, and our leaders are usually quick to announce that the statement in question does not represent the views of the party, merely that member. I think the last time the Republican leadership did that was sometime in the Eisenhower administration.

If the Democratic leadership were as weak at calling out members for offensive comments as the Republican leadership is, I would happily hang the worst offenses of a Democrat on the party. But I don't have to, because they aren't that weak. 

[rawTOP]

ALL of these bills are framed as "Protect the children", so not voting for them allows people to assume you don't care about kids and aren't sympathetic to the problems of parents. The issue is that there are real problems with kids and the Internet. Good/decent solutions are in the works (kinda) but they're not far enough along that reasonable politicians know about them and can point to them. They don't want to get to the next election and have their opponent say "yes, the bill I supported has problems, but at least I was willing to do SOMETHING, my opponent wasn't willing to do ANYTHING!"

[PozBearWI]

These things combined with a never ending stream of "breaking news".  The orange clown ensures by his misdeeds that he is at the top, or near the top of every news story.  It's time to put him at the END of the newscast.  

We've a genie out of the bottle of too much news.  Bad weather is no longer news.  It is part of everyday life.  Ditto shootings.  How about actual new things that happened, and then updates on open items once a week?  

Here in Wisconsin it seems all the networks care more about how we feel and less about reporting facts.  

Is there a way, socially, politically and in our media to quiesce the noise and get back to more personally productive pursuits?

[ErosWired]

3 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

Until then, he's the albatross around the neck of the party and that means everyone who professes to believe in it - because HE is what the party believes in.

I think the mistake is assuming that the political class believes in anything. They do not support him because they believe in him; they support him because they fear him - or rather, the wrath of his base if they speak against him. Trump himself believes in nothing - he is the quintessential transactional opportunist.

[ArdmoreKimberly]

Oh wow what about Oklahoma and what is happening?

[Pigforpoz]

What's a VPN ?

[SmoothATLVers]

8 hours ago, Pigforpoz said:

What's a VPN ?

VPN = Virtual Private Network. Technology that allows you to create encrypted connection with the internet 

[ytowndaddybear]

If issue 1 passes in Ohio today, it won't be long before it is added to the list.   The United States of Fascism coming to a town or state near you.