tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post6249840474752203296..comments2023-10-24T09:06:30.200-04:00Comments on No More Mister Nice Blog: EVEN WHEN DEMOCRATS SEEM TO BE ON OFFENSE, IT'S STILL 1972 (OR 1980, OR 2002) FOR THEMSteve M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11963290427258439242noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-29749723311976463842016-06-25T13:47:09.596-04:002016-06-25T13:47:09.596-04:00"You're straining. The policies the sit-i..."You're straining. The policies the sit-in is intended to highlight are mainstream Democratic policies."<br /><br />I've thought about making believe I'm shocked to find out the center-right, corporations-first Democratic party didn't push for single-payer healthcare because single-payer was never a Democratic party policy. But that was pretty obvious way back in 2009 to those of us who put country before political party. <br />It's still sad that we had to listen to the "smart, pragmatic Democrats" bullshitting us for 7 years about how Dems really wanted single-payer, but it was smarter not to push for it because the votes weren't there.<br />Just goes to show you, if you give the center-right Democrats the better part of a decade, they'll eventually admit us "purity trolls" (AKA liberals) were correct all along.<br />I look forward to 2022, when blogs like this one admit that since the 1990s the Democratic Party's real constituents have been corporate rich donors.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00363187757246791754noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-46668148626910446582016-06-24T15:34:43.172-04:002016-06-24T15:34:43.172-04:00Steve M.,
Are you saying highlighting bad policies...Steve M.,<br />Are you saying highlighting bad policies might sway Republicans, but can't sway Democrats to pass good policies?<br />Or are you saying that pushing for good policies is the right thing to do, even if you don't have the votes? Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00363187757246791754noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-32182838988607426342016-06-24T02:40:43.592-04:002016-06-24T02:40:43.592-04:00Let us all give thanks for Scalia, the dickweed wh...Let us all give thanks for Scalia, the dickweed who blessed us with <i>Heller</i>. Until that monument to intellectual dishonesty, there was no "constitutional right" to own a firearm and, hence, no requirement of due process. This was always the danger of handing a constitutional trump card (no pun intended) to gun nuts. The simple fact is that owning a gun isn't, and never was, a "constitutional right."<br /><br />That's why it's vital that a Democrat be elected and name a new Supreme Court justice to reverse the lunacy. <br /><br />As for the "no-fly" list, there has never been any constitutional right to fly in an airplane. Period. End of.jsrthetahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09471258641340325875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-69827918275391639132016-06-23T23:26:51.214-04:002016-06-23T23:26:51.214-04:00The way I see it, if we're going to have a No ...The way I see it, if we're going to have a No Fly list, it should also be a No Buy list. The principle is simple: if you're too dangerous to board a plane in the United States of America, you are too dangerous to buy lethal weapons in the United States of America.<br /><br />If the list is bad (and I've never really understood why it's considered Constitutional), then we should do away with the list or fix the civil liberties issues with it. That has not been a priority until all of a sudden now it is. The ACLU is right to make this point because they've always been making this point, but the others are simply trying to distract from the real issue: guns should be, at minimum, much, much harder for violent individuals to obtain.sdhayshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02354409528975596405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-52662063650675490062016-06-23T19:48:25.799-04:002016-06-23T19:48:25.799-04:00Brent Scowcroft in a superannauted hack who fell i...Brent Scowcroft in a superannauted hack who fell in line after the war commenced or am I wrong? Did he ever accuse the OSP and the Cheney crowd of lying us into the war, or was his opposition transitory and tactical?<br />Trump did. In the middle of pro-military reactionary country.<br /><br />Speaking of sit-ins and admirable revolts.<br /><br />http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/fbi-revolt-of-watergate-proportions-if-hillary-skates/#!KenRighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02861276158382647529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-59749884166856787642016-06-23T13:32:43.106-04:002016-06-23T13:32:43.106-04:00Where are the smart, pragmatic Democrats telling C...<i>Where are the smart, pragmatic Democrats telling Congressman Lewis to sit down, be quiet, and get in line to support the milquetoast Democratic policies because asking for more is just being a "purity troll"?</i><br /><br />You're straining. The policies the sit-in is intended to highlight are mainstream Democratic policies. And the sit-in, unlike the puritopian Busters, targets Republicans and the right, not Democrats who are insufficiently pure.Steve M.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11963290427258439242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-11260529912117123882016-06-23T12:57:52.114-04:002016-06-23T12:57:52.114-04:00Perhaps, but as Charles Pierce rightly points out:...Perhaps, but as Charles Pierce rightly points out: <br /><br />"But at the heart of these actions is more than a protest against inaction on the issue of guns. It's a protest against inaction, period, against the repulsive and cowardly vandalism-by-inaction that has been the hallmark of the Congress almost from the second the president's hand came off the Bible in 2009."@bjork55https://www.blogger.com/profile/09451812507450810983noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-7743558845331362452016-06-23T12:12:20.043-04:002016-06-23T12:12:20.043-04:00Victor, maybe we could use something similar to lo...Victor, maybe we could use something similar to local draft boards to adjudicate no-fly list disputes. But even then, I don't see how any legislation will effectively force the DHS to provide transparency in such cases. The burden of proof would have to fall on the DHS to keep a person on the list once a case is filed. I've read that some Republican lawmakers are open to the idea of due process so people unjustly listed could be approved for gun purchase in a timely manner. It was unclear to me whether the due process being discussed would automatically take such people off the list as well. I can easily see a scenario where all congress GOP reps care about is getting the gun sale approved while innocent people still can't get off the list and travel. That way both sides in Congress could claim victory while nobody really wins anything.petrillihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17889489779105405703noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-48278267027138582732016-06-23T12:01:55.521-04:002016-06-23T12:01:55.521-04:00The smart, pragmatic Democrats tell me that going ...The smart, pragmatic Democrats tell me that going on the offense without the votes is "hoping for a sparkly pony". <br />Where are the smart, pragmatic Democrats telling Congressman Lewis to sit down, be quiet, and get in line to support the milquetoast Democratic policies because asking for more is just being a "purity troll"?Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00363187757246791754noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-75341266850713884652016-06-23T11:30:28.063-04:002016-06-23T11:30:28.063-04:00Fix the "no-fly" list, and make it legit...Fix the "no-fly" list, and make it legitimate.<br /><br />First, tell people on the list that they're on it, so that they can defend themselves against the charge(s).<br /><br />Second, make the defense of themselves cheap and easy, because who can afford a ton of attorney's? And this is where the ACLU can come in - since Public Defenders are overworked and under-staffed!<br /><br />As for me, I hate that list!<br /><br />But, for a start at gun-control, it's not an unreasonable place to start. It makes its point with the general public, most of whom, to be frank, are either dumb as posts, or have no time to really look at issues and analyze them like some of the rest of us do.Victorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06609452382111686086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-24107482889811411422016-06-23T10:53:35.347-04:002016-06-23T10:53:35.347-04:00(The due process argument as it relates to flying ...(The due process argument as it relates to flying is a legitimate concern, obviously.)Tom Hiltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17575511424823512042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-2250678674035239552016-06-23T10:51:56.488-04:002016-06-23T10:51:56.488-04:00But I get the due process argument.
I would get t...<i>But I get the due process argument.</i><br /><br />I would get the due process argument too, if gun ownership were a "right" in any non-trivial sense of the word, rather than the reckless and dangerous indulgence it really is.Tom Hiltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17575511424823512042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-91050886502744763832016-06-23T10:49:55.297-04:002016-06-23T10:49:55.297-04:00America does not and cannot have a foreign policy,...America does not and cannot have a foreign policy, because our political discourse has been infatilized to the point where overseas actors can only be undertstood as allegories for domestic factions.<br /><br />Doubtless Brent Scowcroft, from within the exceedingly confortable bubble in which he lives with his chosen colleagues, would disagree.<br /><br />But even if one granted, as an abstract premise, that America had a foreign policy, the only way the Democratic Party could "come off defense" about it would be to explicitly reject the entire American Project as it has been understood since Woodrow Wilson.<br /><br />That would be a piece of refreshing and salutary honesty, but it would also be as a stone down a well.Frank Wilhoithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17800594066476167549noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-72636741586332807952016-06-23T10:26:54.531-04:002016-06-23T10:26:54.531-04:00I get the due process argument, too, but what I do...I get the due process argument, too, but what I don't get is why it seems to be no biggie that we restrict peoples' freedom of movement based on this unconstitutional system. The due process problem with the terrorist watch list, etc., is cited by right, left and center as reason not to use it to stop gun sales. And then we go right back to using it to restrict freedom of movement without much discussion at all. Fix the fucking system so that it passes constitutional muster or don't use it at all.mlbxxxxxxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05931351723996391533noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-48731838776272427772016-06-23T10:18:15.500-04:002016-06-23T10:18:15.500-04:00All great points. It just so happens there is a wh...All great points. It just so happens there is a whole wing of the Democratic party that agrees and has been working real hard to yank Clinton and the rest of the old guard over to that way of thinking. Too bad so many Democrats who claim the same outlook are wishing them into the cornfield at the moment.petrillihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17889489779105405703noreply@blogger.com