Octopus Overlords

malchior wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 3:03 pm

Alefroth wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 2:52 pm

Kurth wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 1:08 pm

malchior wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 9:34 pm

Alefroth wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 6:02 pm There is no way she gets confirmed. Once they have you defending apparent sympathy to child pornographers, it's over.

I don't think this type of transparent bullshit moves the needle against her. It more bolsters Hawleys creds with the smooth brains.

This circus is just for show. She is as good as confirmed.

You have that much confidence in Manchin?

If Manchin does kill this then he might as well get it over with and switch parties. And that's mostly glib but I don't even want to think through all the dem in disarray shit posting that'd occur.

Yup. Am I a *little* nervous that Manchin and/or Sinema will fuck this up? Sure, I've given up on depending on them to do sensible / logical things. Is it a high risk? No. And like you say, Manchin would really only fuck this up if he's actively planning on switching parties.

I would like to think that it doesn't come down to just a couple of unreliable DINO senators. Are there really no GOP senators who will vote to confirm her on her merits?

Max Peck wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 5:29 pm I would like to think that it doesn't come down to just a couple of unreliable DINO senators. Are there really no GOP senators who will vote to confirm her on her merits?

hahhahahahahahaa oh wait you're serious. Dude I wouldn't even count on Manchin at this point.

Max Peck wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 5:29 pm I would like to think that it doesn't come down to just a couple of unreliable DINO senators. Are there really no GOP senators who will vote to confirm her on her merits?

I don’t believe there have been any indications of defectors, but someone like Romney voting to confirm wouldn’t terribly surprise me.

Max Peck wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 5:29 pm I would like to think that it doesn't come down to just a couple of unreliable DINO senators. Are there really no GOP senators who will vote to confirm her on her merits?

And risk being painted with the soft on child pornographers brush? I don't think so, but I really hope I'm wrong.

Alefroth wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 6:08 pm

Max Peck wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 5:29 pm I would like to think that it doesn't come down to just a couple of unreliable DINO senators. Are there really no GOP senators who will vote to confirm her on her merits?

And risk being painted with the soft on child pornographers brush? I don't think so, but I really hope I'm wrong.

I think this is down the wrong track. They won't vote for her because she isn't on their team. There isn't calculus required beyond that. They don't actually care about the child porn stuff. Otherwise they'd shun Gaetz or Hastert.

Voting for a liberal to replace a liberal on a 6-3 court is the easiest political move in the world. "They always say we're not bipartisan, but look how bipartisan we are!"

If it comes down to 51/50, that probably means Clarence Thomas is on a ventilator.

Or it means the Republicans are assholes.

One of the more infuriating things I’ve read is that Jackson has basically been forced into saying she’d recuse herself in a case on affirmative action at Harvard University. Is there any context I’m missing though?

In any case, Cory Booker’s speech about her was just amazing, I thought.

Alefroth wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 6:08 pm

Max Peck wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 5:29 pm I would like to think that it doesn't come down to just a couple of unreliable DINO senators. Are there really no GOP senators who will vote to confirm her on her merits?

And risk being painted with the soft on child pornographers brush? I don't think so, but I really hope I'm wrong.

After reading through this thread, I actually tuned in and listened to some of the hearing yesterday. Unbelievable. Does anyone think it’s a coincidence that they’ve decided to label her as soft on child porn at the same time the crazies in the GOP base honestly believe Democrats are child trafficking pedophiles?

And not a single GOP Senator will rise to her defense or call out Hawley and Cruz and company for what they’re doing? We are so incredibly fucked.

Have there been any public comments from Collins or Murkowski?

I know people keep saying she's already confirmed and this is all just grandstanding and sound-bite creation for re-election, but I can't help but think there will be (D) voting against her. I mean, we already know not a single person from the GOP will vote to confirm her, so it won't take much to block her confirmation...

Also, sure is weird about Justice Thomas, eh?

Skinypupy wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 6:04 pm

Max Peck wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 5:29 pm I would like to think that it doesn't come down to just a couple of unreliable DINO senators. Are there really no GOP senators who will vote to confirm her on her merits?

I don’t believe there have been any indications of defectors, but someone like Romney voting to confirm wouldn’t terribly surprise me.

Assuming all 50 Democrats vote yes to confirm (which is still very very likely) then I think it's probable that Susan Collins votes to confirm. She's still in a blue state, and as long as her vote isn't determinative the flak from the right won't be unbearable (and what flak there is will be useful to tout her bipartisan schtick).

However, if Manchin or Sinema decide to fling poop at the wall, then there is no chance that she'll save Jackson's confirmation. In other words, she can be relied upon as long as it doesn't matter.

So I still think 52 votes is the most likely outcome - Collins and one of Romney / Murkowski / some GOP senator up in a blue / purple state.

ImLawBoy wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 10:25 am Have there been any public comments from Collins or Murkowski?

Surely they're too concerned to talk to the press.

hepcat wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 7:54 am One of the more infuriating things I’ve read is that Jackson has basically been forced into saying she’d recuse herself in a case on affirmative action at Harvard University. Is there any context I’m missing though?

her alma mater and where she is currently serving out the last two months of a six-year appointment to the Board of Overseers.

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 10:25 am I know people keep saying she's already confirmed and this is all just grandstanding and sound-bite creation for re-election, but I can't help but think there will be (D) voting against her. I mean, we already know not a single person from the GOP will vote to confirm her, so it won't take much to block her confirmation...

Also, sure is weird about Justice Thomas, eh?

I don't feel great about the fact that I'm borderline praying for Thomas's death, but the reality is that I basically am. We really need to fix the SCOTUS selection process.

Isgrimnur wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 10:36 am

hepcat wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 7:54 am One of the more infuriating things I’ve read is that Jackson has basically been forced into saying she’d recuse herself in a case on affirmative action at Harvard University. Is there any context I’m missing though?

her alma mater and where she is currently serving out the last two months of a six-year appointment to the Board of Overseers.

Yeah the board of overseers role is the basis for the recusal. It's not that she's saying that she would recuse herself because she's black.

El Guapo wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 10:36 am I don't feel great about the fact that I'm borderline praying for Thomas's death, but the reality is that I basically am. We really need to fix the SCOTUS selection process.

As established by McConnell, they can slip Jackson into his seat while the body is still warm and then Biden can make another nomination for the still-retiring Breyer.

Oh, and then add like 4 more seats. Because f all these people.

Kurth wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 10:17 amAfter reading through this thread, I actually tuned in and listened to some of the hearing yesterday. Unbelievable. Does anyone think it’s a coincidence that they’ve decided to label her as soft on child porn at the same time the crazies in the GOP base honestly believe Democrats are child trafficking pedophiles?

A few folks have pointed out why this is dangerous. It is pretty much how Pizzagate was instigated. It is also hard not to note it is ironic that she sentenced that idiot. And slightly departed below the guidelines there too. A clear miscarriage of justice!?

And not a single GOP Senator will rise to her defense or call out Hawley and Cruz and company for what they’re doing? We are so incredibly fucked.

This is who they are. They took the foul flavor of the fullness of Fox News' night time line up, fermented it into a toxic brew of frightful rhetoric, and furled it to the world for all to see. It is fully frightening.

El Guapo wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 10:27 amHowever, if Manchin or Sinema decide to fling poop at the wall,

Thank goodness they aren't known for doing that!

malchior wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 11:21 amThis is who they are. They took the foul flavor of the fullness of Fox News' night time line up, fermented it into a toxic brew of frightful rhetoric, and furled it to the world for all to see. It is fully frightening.

Indeed. There is a positive feedback loop that encourages this behavior. I don't know if this is interesting to others but I was just reading the NY Times coverage on this and thought is did a really good job accounting for the insanity. Then I took a step back and realized it's to some extent part of the attack.

The NY Times piece extensively discusses Republican actions, tactics, etc. with barely a mention of what the Democrats did or said. It isn't like they don't cover the Democrats but it clear that the Republicans are good at what they do. They got the NY Times to focus almost entirely and write what they said and did. The Republican members in other words got the NY Times (and most media outlets) to amplify their noise. I get this is tricky to balance and I still feel the article is good. However, I'm struck by how all encompassing the attack is and how they play every part of the system like a fiddle.

Edit: One more note - there even is a completely unnecessary (and unwelcome) quote from Matt Schlapp from CPAC in the piece. It doesn't even really make sense considering it was mostly about the hearing but fuck it if the NY Times wasn't going to sledgehammer in another "conservative" voice.

Conflict/fake or real rage/drama draws a lot more eyeballs than things that...aren't.

I'm not yet convinced it's part of some larger GOP playbook and suspect it has become part of their DNA now. Outrage sells.

This speaks volumes.

JUST IN: A photo taken by @kentnish shows Ted Cruz searching Twitter for his own name after questioning Ketanji Brown Jackson with debunked narratives and going back and forth with Dick Durbin.

Worse than kids in school.

El Guapo wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 10:36 am I don't feel great about the fact that I'm borderline praying for Thomas's death, but the reality is that I basically am.

Your list is a lot shorter than mine.

While you weren't looking, the current SCOTUS further gutted the Voting Rights Act in an unsigned Shadow Docket opinion...

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court issued an astonishing decision throwing out Wisconsin’s new legislative districts as a violation of the equal protection clause. The majority accused a Republican justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court of greenlighting a “racial gerrymander” by creating one more majority-Black district in the state Assembly. Wednesday’s unsigned decision, issued through the shadow docket, hands Wisconsin Republicans an unexpected victory in their quest to reduce Black representation in the legislature. It also alters the law of redistricting in fundamental yet cryptic ways that might, to a cynic, seem designed to disadvantage Democrats in every single case.

Carpet_pissr wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 12:08 pm Conflict/fake or real rage/drama draws a lot more eyeballs than things that...aren't.

I'm not yet convinced it's part of some larger GOP playbook, I think it has become part of their DNA. Outrage sells.

I'd suggest there are books about this being part of a GOP playbook. "It Was All a Lie" and "Let Them Eat" as quick examples but sure outrage has always sold.

I more meant I suspect as late as 20 or so years ago, the NY Times and most major outlets acted somewhat as a moderator. They acted in some capacity as control rods of our political discourse. Now it seems they just amplify the outrage without tamping it down at all. What crazy thing did Graham say today!? Click here to find out.

Admittedly , it also could be the wrong focus. In the end, this discourse is demonstrably moving voters. We are the politics in the end and our culture is broken. Still I really believe people respond and normalize on what they hear over and over.

Pyperkub wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 12:14 pm While you weren't looking, the current SCOTUS further gutted the Voting Rights Act in an unsigned Shadow Docket opinion...

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court issued an astonishing decision throwing out Wisconsin’s new legislative districts as a violation of the equal protection clause. The majority accused a Republican justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court of greenlighting a “racial gerrymander” by creating one more majority-Black district in the state Assembly. Wednesday’s unsigned decision, issued through the shadow docket, hands Wisconsin Republicans an unexpected victory in their quest to reduce Black representation in the legislature. It also alters the law of redistricting in fundamental yet cryptic ways that might, to a cynic, seem designed to disadvantage Democrats in every single case.

I'm shocked. SHOCKED, I tells ya.

Pyperkub wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 12:14 pm While you weren't looking, the current SCOTUS further gutted the Voting Rights Act in an unsigned Shadow Docket opinion...

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court issued an astonishing decision throwing out Wisconsin’s new legislative districts as a violation of the equal protection clause. The majority accused a Republican justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court of greenlighting a “racial gerrymander” by creating one more majority-Black district in the state Assembly. Wednesday’s unsigned decision, issued through the shadow docket, hands Wisconsin Republicans an unexpected victory in their quest to reduce Black representation in the legislature. It also alters the law of redistricting in fundamental yet cryptic ways that might, to a cynic, seem designed to disadvantage Democrats in every single case.

Bam?

malchior wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 12:18 pm

Pyperkub wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 12:14 pm While you weren't looking, the current SCOTUS further gutted the Voting Rights Act in an unsigned Shadow Docket opinion...

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court issued an astonishing decision throwing out Wisconsin’s new legislative districts as a violation of the equal protection clause. The majority accused a Republican justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court of greenlighting a “racial gerrymander” by creating one more majority-Black district in the state Assembly. Wednesday’s unsigned decision, issued through the shadow docket, hands Wisconsin Republicans an unexpected victory in their quest to reduce Black representation in the legislature. It also alters the law of redistricting in fundamental yet cryptic ways that might, to a cynic, seem designed to disadvantage Democrats in every single case.

Bam?

Looked back, but the tweet link didn't show for me and I didn't read carefully enough

malchior wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 12:17 pm

Carpet_pissr wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 12:08 pm Conflict/fake or real rage/drama draws a lot more eyeballs than things that...aren't.

I'm not yet convinced it's part of some larger GOP playbook, I think it has become part of their DNA. Outrage sells.

I'd suggest there are books about this being part of a GOP playbook. "It Was All a Lie" and "Let Them Eat" as quick examples but sure outrage has always sold.

I more meant I suspect as late as 20 or so years ago, the NY Times and most major outlets acted somewhat as a moderator. They acted in some capacity as control rods of our political discourse. Now it seems they just amplify the outrage without tamping it down at all. What crazy thing did Graham say today!? Click here to find out.

Admittedly , it also could be the wrong focus. In the end, this discourse is demonstrably moving voters. We are the politics in the end and we our culture is broken. Still I really believe people respond and normalize on what they hear over and over.

I wasn't clear. No doubt there was a strategy, and one that has been honed over decades (and overt, as documented in many places as you said), I'm just saying at this point in the decades-long 'game', it seems like the players just ARE this way now, as opposed to some conscious "OK, according to the right's overall strategy, I should behave THIS way...say THIS thing, etc" I'm suggesting the years-in-the-making conscious efforts at a controlling message and plan have now morphed into normalcy and default behavior for many right-wing pols.

Pyperkub wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 12:22 pm

malchior wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 12:18 pm

Pyperkub wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 12:14 pm While you weren't looking, the current SCOTUS further gutted the Voting Rights Act in an unsigned Shadow Docket opinion...

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court issued an astonishing decision throwing out Wisconsin’s new legislative districts as a violation of the equal protection clause. The majority accused a Republican justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court of greenlighting a “racial gerrymander” by creating one more majority-Black district in the state Assembly. Wednesday’s unsigned decision, issued through the shadow docket, hands Wisconsin Republicans an unexpected victory in their quest to reduce Black representation in the legislature. It also alters the law of redistricting in fundamental yet cryptic ways that might, to a cynic, seem designed to disadvantage Democrats in every single case.

Bam?

Looked back, but the tweet link didn't show for me and I didn't read carefully enough

No worries - a blurb in an otherwise busy day! It's also an indirect sign of how effective the assault on democracy is. It is very hard to even keep track on what is happening across the political landscape.

Carpet_pissr wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 12:25 pm

malchior wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 12:17 pm

Carpet_pissr wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 12:08 pm Conflict/fake or real rage/drama draws a lot more eyeballs than things that...aren't.

I'm not yet convinced it's part of some larger GOP playbook, I think it has become part of their DNA. Outrage sells.

I'd suggest there are books about this being part of a GOP playbook. "It Was All a Lie" and "Let Them Eat" as quick examples but sure outrage has always sold.

I more meant I suspect as late as 20 or so years ago, the NY Times and most major outlets acted somewhat as a moderator. They acted in some capacity as control rods of our political discourse. Now it seems they just amplify the outrage without tamping it down at all. What crazy thing did Graham say today!? Click here to find out.

Admittedly , it also could be the wrong focus. In the end, this discourse is demonstrably moving voters. We are the politics in the end and we our culture is broken. Still I really believe people respond and normalize on what they hear over and over.

I wasn't clear. No doubt there was a strategy, and one that has been honed over decades (and overt, as documented in many places as you said), I'm just saying at this point in the decades-long 'game', it seems like the players just ARE this way now, as opposed to some conscious "OK, according to the right's overall strategy, I should behave THIS way...say THIS thing, etc" I'm suggesting the years-in-the-making conscious efforts at a controlling message and plan have now morphed into normalcy and default behavior for many right-wing pols.

For sure. Also really highlights that what they do naturally now is more effective than any semblance of deliberate messaging strategy by the Democrats. I'm not suggesting the Democrats join them in the gutter but you would have figured they'd be able to get more than a couple of sentences on a piece about their own goddamn Supreme Court nominee, right?

"Interesting" perspective from the right. I've seen a few posts from the right where they think they scored significant damage on her nomination in the committee. I guess we'll see how it goes when it comes out of committee on April 4th.

malchior wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 4:25 pm "Interesting" perspective from the right. I've seen a few posts from the right where they think they scored significant damage on her nomination in the committee. I guess we'll see how it goes when it comes out of committee on April 4th.

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson wasn’t properly vetted.

Aside from being confirmed by the Senate three times before?

In fairness, the Left's opinion after the Kavannaugh hearings was similar.

stessier wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 4:48 pm In fairness, the Left's opinion after the Kavannaugh hearings was similar.

Right, but if a piece of poop gets through your water filter, you are right to say, “That wasn’t properly filtered” , even if similar filters have historically done a pretty good job keeping the poop out.

I'm shocked that Mitch said he won't vote for her. I mean he fairly sat and judged the process with an open mind. What a guy!

Some people guessed Thomas was the lone vote against releasing records to the 1/6 committee because of his wife. And they were mostly mocked. At this point i feel that many people are choosing not to face the wretched state of our affairs. Everytime we think we hit bottom the bottom falls out again.