What's happening in DC is just the logical extension of what's been happening since 2000. It's a complete mess and we'll be lucky if the result of "waiting it out" isn't a Roman Empire style collapse.
Saddly, the secular republicans died with the Northeastern republican party.
Lately it's the crazy religious types and the Crazy Randian types. Not sure what the Corporate-business Republicans are doing.. Probably laying low hoping it will be over soon?
Saddly, the secular republicans died with the Northeastern republican party.
Lately it's the crazy religious types and the Crazy Randian types. Not sure what the Corporate-business Republicans are doing.. Probably laying low hoping it will be over soon?
Christie would be crazy to appeal gay marriage ruling from judge. This way he doesn't have to sign a law allowing it. Just blame judge during GOP primary in 2016. He gets his crazy cake and eats it too.
So who is Ted Cruz and where does he rank of the scale? and what makes him strong enough to contend against the Democrats?
Ted Cruz is a new kid on the block (this is his first term), and he is not happy with where the Republican party has been going. What most republican pundits think he is doing is trying to divide the Republican party in two, then run one half himself. The half he would run is the Tea Party extremists, who are trying to show they are the most unlike any Democrat and will fight them at every turn. This would in turn leave more reasonable Republicans who are willing to negotiate in the middle ground closer to Democratic points of view and thus in a far weaker position to have any influence in the GOP.
The whole 21 hour speech was really just to gain publicity and raise fund raising power for the Cruz campaign. Remember that fundraising via extreme statements is the new name of the game in politics and Cruz got himself on every news station in a 24 hour news cycle. In addition he is able to say "look, I am a politician who does what he says he will, if you vote for me I will follow my promises unlike "soft" Republicans". There was never any hope nor intention to stop the funding for the ACA.
The power that Cruz is able to wield now would not have been possible before Obama was elected to office. Before you had to serve your time before people would take you seriously. But Obama got elected to president before he had even completed his first term at Senator. This has opened the door to new guys like Cruz who can jump right in and expect a presidential run.
I did a quick Google search and the first link mentioned stripping citizenship.
If Cruz is able to split the Republican party in half and both half's still remain viable might it encourage members of the Democratic party to do the same? Right now the mantra is, "splitting the party lets the other party win." If splitting the party results in a three party system might we get a fourth coming from the left?
Christie would be crazy to appeal gay marriage ruling from judge. This way he doesn't have to sign a law allowing it. Just blame judge during GOP primary in 2016. He gets his crazy cake and eats it too.
Looking at the judge's reasoning... Are they any examples of good "second class citizen" status things between state and federal laws that we as a people generally like?
What about issues like environmental rules where EPA sets the base but states are free to make standards higher? Can the state counter that even though the feds are offering benefits to married couples they are able to raise the bar on what constitutes a marriage? Are these two things not legally analogous?
If the feds lack jurisdiction over an issue are they still able to pass laws dealing with it? I am thinking now of how states issue drivers licenses, are there any 'federal benefits' associated with having a drivers license?
If the feds lack jurisdiction over an issue are they still able to pass laws dealing with it? I am thinking now of how states issue drivers licenses, are there any 'federal benefits' associated with having a drivers license?
The biggest federal benefit I see is that your license works in any state, not just the state you got it in.
What about issues like environmental rules where EPA sets the base but states are free to make standards higher? Can the state counter that even though the feds are offering benefits to married couples they are able to raise the bar on what constitutes a marriage? Are these two things not legally analogous?
Note that the New Jersey judge struck down the provision under the Equal Protection clause; New Jersey has marriages and civil unions, giving similar benefits to each, but now that the federal government recognizes same-sex marriage but doesn't recognize civil unions for those same benefits, same-sex couples in New Jersey weren't able to receive those benefits. In the judge's opinion, that's a violation of equal protection.
Also those totally aren't analogous, as among other things one is a matter of regulatory law while the other is one of contract law.
Oh, and for the driver's license thing, states are allowed to set whatever the fuck provisions they want for handing out licenses, but there are laws making federal highway funding contingent on having certain restrictions in place.
If Cruz is able to split the Republican party in half and both half's still remain viable might it encourage members of the Democratic party to do the same? Right now the mantra is, "splitting the party lets the other party win." If splitting the party results in a three party system might we get a fourth coming from the left?
Steve, surely you already know why we can't have three or four parties.
Remember 1912. Remember 1992. Though most don't realize it, our parties today are still those of the Jackson/Adams split.
Cruz was born in Canada. He can't run for President.
Not true. The legal definition of "naturally born citizen" is anyone who was born into citizenship. Cruz's mother was born in America, so he was given citizenship when he was born, thusly a naturally born citizen.
As for reigning in the crazies, the Catholic church can not possibly reign them in and continue to exist for too many more generations. A moderate church eventually drops all of its doctrine, and an increasingly secular youth won't bother with it. Only the crazies will remain over time.
I'm seriously liking and respecting what the new pope is doing.
I'm kinda split on this one. Part of me wants the Catholic Church to become as weak sauce as the Anglican Church in the UK or the Lutheran Church in Germany, and so become essentially harmless. The other part of me wants the Catholic Church to double down on crazy, or really throw a lot of shit at a lot of fans, until all world governments close the church down and/or severs all official connections with it. Unfortunately both plans still lead to a whole lot of bad outcomes. My earlier example of the Anglican Church in the UK is specific, as the Anglican Church in Africa is a different animal entirely, and is following the double down on crazy route. If the crazy outer groups split from the larger, more moderate group (and do so for anti-moderate reasons), any control the more moderate parts of the church might have had over them is gone.
So either you have one group moderate and cause splits, or the whole thing stays crazy and (hopefully) falls to outside pressures. Ah well.
Comments
Lately it's the crazy religious types and the Crazy Randian types. Not sure what the Corporate-business Republicans are doing.. Probably laying low hoping it will be over soon?
He is also out of office now.
You'd think Ring-wingers being so concerned for the welfare of this country would at least try to convince people with actual facts..
The whole 21 hour speech was really just to gain publicity and raise fund raising power for the Cruz campaign. Remember that fundraising via extreme statements is the new name of the game in politics and Cruz got himself on every news station in a 24 hour news cycle. In addition he is able to say "look, I am a politician who does what he says he will, if you vote for me I will follow my promises unlike "soft" Republicans". There was never any hope nor intention to stop the funding for the ACA.
The power that Cruz is able to wield now would not have been possible before Obama was elected to office. Before you had to serve your time before people would take you seriously. But Obama got elected to president before he had even completed his first term at Senator. This has opened the door to new guys like Cruz who can jump right in and expect a presidential run.
If Cruz is able to split the Republican party in half and both half's still remain viable might it encourage members of the Democratic party to do the same? Right now the mantra is, "splitting the party lets the other party win." If splitting the party results in a three party system might we get a fourth coming from the left?
What about issues like environmental rules where EPA sets the base but states are free to make standards higher? Can the state counter that even though the feds are offering benefits to married couples they are able to raise the bar on what constitutes a marriage? Are these two things not legally analogous?
If the feds lack jurisdiction over an issue are they still able to pass laws dealing with it? I am thinking now of how states issue drivers licenses, are there any 'federal benefits' associated with having a drivers license?
Also those totally aren't analogous, as among other things one is a matter of regulatory law while the other is one of contract law.
Oh, and for the driver's license thing, states are allowed to set whatever the fuck provisions they want for handing out licenses, but there are laws making federal highway funding contingent on having certain restrictions in place.
Remember 1912. Remember 1992. Though most don't realize it, our parties today are still those of the Jackson/Adams split. Not true. The legal definition of "naturally born citizen" is anyone who was born into citizenship. Cruz's mother was born in America, so he was given citizenship when he was born, thusly a naturally born citizen.
As for reigning in the crazies, the Catholic church can not possibly reign them in and continue to exist for too many more generations. A moderate church eventually drops all of its doctrine, and an increasingly secular youth won't bother with it. Only the crazies will remain over time.
So either you have one group moderate and cause splits, or the whole thing stays crazy and (hopefully) falls to outside pressures. Ah well.