The senate structurally favors republicans. It’s to the left’s advantage for it to be slow and inefficient. Now that that’s no longer the case it just means more than ever we need a movement with autonomous power that isn’t subjugated to a system that is designed to disenfranchise us.

Are you ready to call it fascism yet Jon?

I know. Lots of great boycotts lately I can’t support because that’s just my whole life already lol

Shameful.

There’s no clear evidence either way. If you cherry pick certain facts you can paint a compelling narrative of any ideology.

My take is the dude, like most Americans, doesn’t fit cleanly into right or left politics but was motivated by violent rhetoric targeting queer people. But we’ll see if further information comes to light.

I never said it’s not a solution, just not the only one.

I like the subtext here that non-Christians are basically not part of American society.

Wrong.

I’m so over these settlement games. If the world is going to push for a two state solution then let it be on the basis of the borders put forth in the past. If these settlers wish to live in the new Palestinian state then so be it. Otherwise, hey, lot of Palestinians recently became homeless.

Maybe, or it could just mean saying gay and trans rights exist while being otherwise apolitical. Or a million other things.

Also, leaning left according to MAGA mom… who knows what that really means.

deleted by creator

Makes sense. Peak of the “America can do no wrong” hubris.

I didn’t find a direct reference to the creation of immigration courts but maybe I missed it.

The immigration courts being subordinate to the executive branch seems so insane and in contradiction to the entire way the American legal system was designed. Who thought this was a good idea?

Great resource and very timely. Thank you!

Thanks. Unfortunately that’s how the system works so I don’t know if I can blame him too much. But it also demonstrates why politics can’t start and end with electoralism. We need to have a base of power that is outside of these types of pressures, which can match the pull of the institutions politicians are subjected to.

No one tells me to put clothes on.

What did he do?

There’s a difference between the legal concept as it relates to the constitution and the broader ethical principle on which the first amendment was based.

We can still talk about the ideal of free speech outside of the government. In fact, this ties into the myth of “free enterprise” which suggests that everything companies do is about freedom but everything the government does is about tyranny. This is obviously nonsense but we’re so indoctrinated to it that we rarely question it fully.

None of this relates to what I was saying. The UK already had its own sovereign government, otherwise it wouldn’t have been able to leave so easily.

I’m just saying the feds didn’t have so much power people wouldn’t pay so much attention to them and would pay more attention to their local stuff. Which would be good for democracy.

I’d like to see government focused on the neighborhood level whenever possible. Only move up to the next one if there is an unsolvable issue.

This is not the only change that’s needed so it won’t fix everything on its own but it would allow people to make much more effective decisions about their own lives instead of people in Kansas deciding things about local DC law enforcement like we do now. That’s bonkers.