Political Roundtable Part XXX

[Pointgod]

I don't think elected Republican officials are stupid, they just believe their voters will believe whatever they tell them. This is who they've chosen to represent them; this is the behavior they demand.

Dems made a strategic decision to eject non college educated white people from their party and the GOP gleefully absorbed them. Now they're the ones stuck with their hands in the honey jar

Dems didn’t so much as eject white working class voters, as they strategically decided to not be racist asshats which led to them losing white working class voters and now they’re also losing non college educated voters of all races despite being the only party that’s proposing policies to benefit these voters.

Republicans are shameless and peddle only grievance, divisive politics. the problem is that the majority of American voters are pretty apathetic and either don’t vote thinking both parties are the same or are easily swayed by the politics of fear.

Well, I distinctly remember my parents complaining about racism and xenophobia of union members way back in the eighties. Let me put it this way - as long as unions were still politically powerful, the Dems didn't push back on the unions' racism and anti-immigrant xenophobia. As the unions lost power the Dem party started to be more forcefully anti-racist, which "pushed" the former union members into Trump's arms. And if you look carefully at Dem actions and not their words, the Dems are just as anti-immigrant as the Republicans, they just don't say it out loud. Obama's immigration policy, as carried out by ICE during his presidency, was pretty horrific. And Biden's no better.

Not that I'm one to talk - I think we should make it as difficult as possible for immigrants to get residency status. I suppose I should clarify that I don't think torture should be involved or other human rights abuses.

Saying that Democrats are just as bad as Republicans on immigration is just lazy bothsiderism. One the obvious glaring difference is that Republicans dehumanize undocumented immigrants calling them invaders, dirty, criminals and scaremongering that they’re stealing American jobs. Republicans have weaponized immigration which is exactly why it’s so hard to get anything done.

During Obama’s term a bipartisan bill passed in the Senate and the Republican House refused to take it up because they want to use immigration as a political weapon.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2014/6/30/18080446/immigration-reform-congress-2014-house-john-boehner-obama

Just compare what Obama did on immigration to what Trump did and it’s not even close. In addition Trump tried to put caps on legal immigration which is just insane. You can even go as far as to blame the Republicans on the Supreme Court for Obama not being able to do more and Mitch McConnell for blocking Garland who might have been the deciding vote that would have helped millions of undocumented immigrants.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/immigration-stands-as-obamas-most-glaring-failure

With its 4-4 tie, the court thwarted Obama's last chance to shield up to 4 million people from deportation. The decision left in place an injunction freezing his 2014 executive action, which had expanded his protection of Dreamers and temporarily protected some parents of people with legal status.

The deadlock, resulting from a Republican blockade against Obama's Supreme Court nominee, left the constitutionality of the action unsettled. But it had a significant impact on Obama's legacy.

"If the Supreme Court had ruled in his favor, he'd probably be remembered as the person who helped to protect half of the undocumented population in the country," said Frank Sharry, founder of the immigration reform group America's Voice. Instead, he said Obama will be most remembered for his administration's deportations.

The majority of Democrats and some Republicans want to make practical changes to immigration reform while the majority of Republicans would just rather dehumanize immigrants and don’t care if their words put targets on peoples backs as long as it will get them power. There’s a clear distinction between the two parties and it’s not particularly close.

[Pointgod]

Read on Twitter

[Zonkerbl]

Hm, I didn't know about the supreme court debacle. That puts a new light on things.

[Zonkerbl]

I stopped myself from saying dumb things on twitter today. Twice!

[montestewart]

Hm, I didn't know about the supreme court debacle. That puts a new light on things.

Which one?

[Zonkerbl]

[snip]

You can even go as far as to blame the Republicans on the Supreme Court for Obama not being able to do more and Mitch McConnell for blocking Garland who might have been the deciding vote that would have helped millions of undocumented immigrants.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/immigration-stands-as-obamas-most-glaring-failure

With its 4-4 tie, the court thwarted Obama's last chance to shield up to 4 million people from deportation. The decision left in place an injunction freezing his 2014 executive action, which had expanded his protection of Dreamers and temporarily protected some parents of people with legal status.

The deadlock, resulting from a Republican blockade against Obama's Supreme Court nominee, left the constitutionality of the action unsettled. But it had a significant impact on Obama's legacy.

"If the Supreme Court had ruled in his favor, he'd probably be remembered as the person who helped to protect half of the undocumented population in the country," said Frank Sharry, founder of the immigration reform group America's Voice. Instead, he said Obama will be most remembered for his administration's deportations.

[snip]

This one, it's exactly what I did, I googled "did Obama deport more immigrants than any other President" and the answer is technically yes, but with the above asterisk I didn't know about

[Zonkerbl]

Some clarifications for last week's incredibly confused discussion of "how do you define 'woman'" in my twitter timeline, which conservatives present as a biological question:

"Woman" is a gender role traditionally associated with the female sex (however loosely defined). The definition changes over time as what is considered the "female" role changes with the advance of technology and corresponding changes in social values.

The "woman's" role in the past was thought to include domestic production (cooking, cleaning, caring for children), appreciating and creating fashion, and to exclude voting, all of which have changed over time as technological advance obviated the need for specialization by sex.

"Female sex" is a heuristic definition mainly associated with certain physical/biological characteristics, like having a uterus or two x chromosomes, although there are instances where society's heuristic rules will perceive a body as female even without these characteristics.

For example, a body that has lost its uterus as a result of a medical condition is still considered female. A body with atypical chromosome structure but still has female sex organs is usually considered female.

Technological advance has made it possible to intentionally change key organs associated with a certain sex heuristic to the opposite sex. Certain treatments can change body chemistry to make a "male" body appear "female" and vice versa.

The "traditional" definition of sex doesn't recognize a body that has been intentionally changed to female as "female," and the "traditional" definition of the gender role "woman" therefore doesn't recognize people inhabiting such bodies as "women."

As an aside, "intentional" is doing a lot of work here. Some body changes are "medically necessary," like the removal of a uterus affected by cancer. Isn't treating gender dysphoria with "intentional" body changes also "medically necessary"?

Current political debate shows that the "traditional" view is becoming perceived as unnecessarily arbitrary, and perhaps even cruel to people who have certain mental conditions that can be treated with sex altering treatments.

As the key distinction for "intentional" changes is determined by social mores rather than biological facts, the definition that becomes accepted in the United States will be the result of a political discussion.

"What do we mean by the word 'intentional' and does that even matter" is not a biological question.

Read on Twitter

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Woman?

My thoughts...Butters. SOUTH PARK episode where he becomes a pimp..nvm

Sent from my SM-A526U using RealGM mobile app

[Zonkerbl]

I'm biased because my daughter had a best friend in middle school who she loved to pieces and one of her two moms was a trans woman who was the best dudette at my wedding and is still my best friend. She taught me to brew beer.

[dckingsfan]

Read on Twitter

Wow, this so backfired on Putin.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?t=tlViBLpP2Otyb4a1kRfugg&s=19

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?t=-IZNrdckPcHgD6-x-YEUHw&s=19

Read on Twitter

?t=3JNCd6jyjR15U13UC24YlQ&s=19

[montestewart]

Read on Twitter

?t=tlViBLpP2Otyb4a1kRfugg&s=19

Sounds like URT not CRT

[dobrojim]

Pretty skeptical about Gov Reeves intentions here.

He'd be tarred and feathered if a full (honest) history of Confederate Heritage were taught.

Somehow the term Whitewashed seems like a more likely outcome.
After all, an Honest History would make a lot of people that consider themselves good god fearing people
feel bad.

That said, I think the harder (in this day and age) that a false history is promoted,
the more publicity and awareness of a true history will actually come to pass.
Kind of like how banning books tends to backfire and the books get more attention
and are read by more people. A book I didn't know anything about, Maus, topped the
WaPo book charts last week. Probably never would have happened if Cons ignored
it rather than had a hissy fit about it.

[pancakes3]

Sure, in terms of winning hearts and minds, banning things could have a reverse effect. The problem though, and this is what is meant by institutional racism, is that the halls of power, controlled by the incumbents with power, are able to implement deeply unpopular (and by virtue undemocratic as it subverts the will of the constituents) policies, even relatively banal policies like declaring April Confederate Heritage Month.

These power-wielders do not reflect the hearts and minds of the people (Mississippi is 40% black), and yet are able to declare April Confederate Month, gerrymander, take away voting booths, and all other forms of clawing and scratching to keep power.

But hey, SCOTUS has upheld that States are able to conduct elections in whatever way "they" choose. The question that people should be asking is: "is this what Mississippi chose or is it simply what a minority of Mississippians who are able to game the state election process in such a way that allows them to exert powers over Mississippi chose?"

And it's these extra questions are what moderate conservatives and even moderate democrats are refusing to engage with, leaving us with large segments of the voting population blindly faithful to the idea that the status quo cannot be changed.

[Zonkerbl]

Pretty skeptical about Gov Reeves intentions here.

He'd be tarred and feathered if a full history of Confederate Heritage were taught.

Somehow the term Whitewashed seems like a more likely outcome.
And that would make a lot of people that consider themselves good god fearing people
feel bad.

That said, I think the harder (in this day and age) that a false history is promoted,
the more publicity and awareness of a true history will actually come to pass.
Kind of like how banning books tends to backfire and the books get more attention
and are read by more people. A book I didn't know anything about, Maus, topped the
WaPo book charts last week. Probably never would have happened if Cons ignored
it rather than had a hissy fit about it.

Read on Twitter

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I'm biased because my daughter had a best friend in middle school who she loved to pieces and one of her two moms was a trans woman who was the best dudette at my wedding and is still my best friend. She taught me to brew beer.

I get along with so many people but among my closest friends is a woman who is lesbian. Great friend

My favorite couple that just moved were two females, gay

[dobrojim]

Pols that attack Gay and Trans people I am likely to hold a grudge against for a looong time.
I have 2 young adult 'kids', one lesbian and one trans man. They are attacking my family
when they go after those groups.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?t=xgkxsNLp6FW3iojRXDuGdg&s=19

[dobrojim]

Maybe India's problems have something to do with a culturally ingrained system of discrimination, ie the caste system.

Currently reading Superior by Angela Saini and one of the later chapters in the book is about the caste system in India,
a medieval relic.

https://www.amazon.com/Superior-Return-Science-Angela-Saini/dp/0807076910/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3ABBF9T2HUEH6&keywords=superior+race+science&qid=1649979368&sprefix=superior+race+science%2Caps%2C55&sr=8-1