Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: General Discussions (Read 376425 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1140 –
Quote from: Thryleon – on
Are you insinuating that guys that cup another guys manhood are less manly than those who don't?

Honest question.
No i'm saying it has no bearing on manliness....just a weird thing to get players to do (under any circumstances) but under a banner of manliness?

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1141 –
I'd tell the bloke running the show to GAGF,  even he had three stripes.

Some sh1t crosses a line and a lot of that camp sound like that.
DrE is no more... you ok with that harmonica man?

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1142 –
Quote from: DJC – on
Moreland is in the Wurundjeri-Woiwurrung traditional owner area and Kingston, Casey, Stonnington and Mornington are in the Bunurong traditional owner area.  Neither of those groups have  their own flags and none of those councils have gifted land to the traditional owners.  In fact, no Aboriginal groups in Victoria have their own flag; they all use the Harold Thomas flag.

It’s pretty clear that the claim that Aboriginal groups were charging local governments a fee for flying their own flags is false.  The claim about “sacred places” gifted to Aboriginal groups is also false.

Who knows what local government councillors get up to.? Their “initiatives” generally reflect their beliefs and are usually developed without the local Aboriginal group’s knowledge or input.
I get that there may be no official involvement from the Indigenous groups, but I'm not surprised as I was referring to what I believe to be dodgy disingenuous behaviour.

I've never heard of or seen any Indigenous Tribal flags before very recent times, when I gather someone pegged that there may be a quid in it for them or their mates!

I'd love for the traditional elders step forward and call out the fakes and the fake claims, because if they don't they are basically sanctioning the behaviour.

As for councils following whatever laws there may be, I drive past council chambers every morning, and every week there is a different weird flag flying even in gale force winds like today. This week flapping around was a Rainbow Pride flag, wedged between the Indigenous and Torres Strait Islander flags, and what I thought was an EU flag but when I got to work and checked it was a Non-Binary Pride Flag. So I think the official regulations aren't worth much at all!

FFS, Kingston used to have a bloke who flew the Nazi flag long with many others in his front yard, and the council and authorities did feck all about it for decades. It became well known and a sick novelty to drive past and see what shizen was flying each day!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1143 –
If you have about 50 minutes, this is compelling viewing.
The reporting/thoughts/reactions/opinions from Whateley, Hodge and Lyon I found especially strong, clear and top shelf reporting.
YouTube video:
Video Preview Image


Eddie Betts has done his bit as a leader in general and as a leader of his people. Courage and honesty. He has given the indigenous community and the community as a whole much to respect, even be inspired by.

Oh, and Tex... you were quoted as saying that 'the camp' made you a better man, was that on display last year with 'those' words that came out of your mouth? Time to come clean, fella.
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1144 –
The US Supreme Court’s decision to scrap Roe v Wade has created an interesting problem for the Republicans. For 50 years, opposition to abortions has been an easy way to fire up the religious right without ever having to do anything in Congress. While it was the law of the land, Roe v Wade meant that Congress was unable to pass any laws against abortion that would withstand legal challenge. Like a bloke whose friends are holding him back physically from getting into a punch on, the Republicans were free to yell out threats to get rid of abortion without the risk of losing the fight.

For 50 years, women have been confident that Roe v Wade would continue to guarantee the right to an abortion. That meant it was difficult to motivate women to vote to preserve that right. While Republicans dreamt of reversing Roe v Wade by installing a conservative President with a compliant Republican majority in the Senate so religious conservatives could control the Supreme Court, female Democratic voters were apathetic. Sure enough, Hillary couldn’t turn them out by stressing that Trump would pack the court with religious conservatives and that’s exactly what happened.

Now, the Republicans are living the saying, “Be careful what you wish for because your wish might come true.”

Women now realise the only way to avoid The Handmaids Tale coming to life is to vote Democrat at Federal and State levels. Sure, women of the religious right will no doubt continue to fight to ban abortions completely, but the less religious conservative women and independents may change their votes. Even Donald Trump warned that the reversal of Roe v Wade may work against the GOP.

A vote in ruby-red Kansas has brought this into sharp relief. That State’s constitution guarantees the right to abortion and the GOP proposed an amendment to abolish that guarantee. The GOP controlled legislature would then have been able to join the other Red States in banning abortion (although the GOP tried to deny that this was what they wanted to do). They ran this vote together with the Democratic and Republican primaries which should have helped them pass the amendment as independent voters were left out and Democratic voters don’t turn out in big numbers for primaries. But the amendment was voted down by nearly 60% of voters.

Opinion polls suggest the reversal of Roe v Wade is quite unpopular. If the Democrats can harness this sentiment, the widely expected loss of the House and Senate in the midterms in November might not eventuate.



 

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1145 –
I cant actually believe they revoked abortion rights. 
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1146 –
The “reasoning” in the Dobbs decision would also enable the Supreme Court to reverse decisions that recognised the right to same-sex marriage and mixed marriage as well as those which prohibited racial and sexual discrimination in voting and other scenarios. The Supreme Court merely needs to wait for cases that challenge those rights so that the conservative majority can get rid of those rights too. Gays and blacks have even more reason to vote for Democrats in November.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1147 –
Disempowering anyone who isn't white, male, hetero and wealthy. Fairly standard approach when the wealthy and powerful are determined to turn the US into a Fascist state. The parallels with Nazi Germany are disturbing.

Whilst the Democrats are better than the alternative, I'm guessing they are also concerned about upsetting the elites. I haven't researched this too closely, but I believe the Democrats had chances over the last 50 years to codify Roe V Wade into law, but never did. Obama I believe claimed that signing this into law would be one of the first things he would do as President. Never happened.

The popular vote seems to be very much in favor of abortion rights. The Federal government is certainly not serving the people.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1148 –
Remember that the Howard Government would have been seen as rabid Socialists in the US and the Fraser Government would have been seen as fanatical Communists. The Democratic Party is a centre-right party as that’s about as left-wing as the mainstream can stomach.

After dealing with the GFC, Obama prioritised Obamacare and there’s a fair argument he was right to do so. It withstood a concerted attempt by the Republicans under Trump to repeal it and it has remained pretty popular. It has also been a shining symbol of how the Democrats in Congress can improve life for Americans.

Getting Obamacare passed was a slugfest. The Republicans opposed it fanatically, dreaming up such things as Death Panels to attack it. In the end, 36 Democrats in the House voted against it and the Democrats were only able to pass it in the Senate because the 60 Democrat Senators were able to defeat the filibuster. The Senate passed the Bill at the end of 2009, but in January 2010 a Republican won a special election to replace the deceased Senator Ted Kennedy and the Democrats would never again have the 60 votes needed to defeat the filibuster. Given Mitch McConnell was implementing a policy of opposing everything Obama wanted there was never any chance that a Bill to codify Roe v Wade would pass in the Senate. (The Democrats could have killed the filibuster with a simple majority but they chose not to do so out of fear that McConnell would kill the filibuster when he was next in power, but he did that anyway.)

It was amazing that Obama and Pelosi were able to push it through given that they were asking many Democrats to commit career suicide. The Tea Party candidates were able to capitalise and the GOP took control of the House and flipped a few seats in the Senate.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1149 –
The present obstacle to passing a Bill to codify Roe v Wade is that the Democrats only have 50 Senators. Unfortunately, 2 of those Senators, Manchin and Sinema have ruled out killing the filibuster, so it would need 10 Republican Senators to vote in favour of it. Good luck with that!

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1150 –
Mav, no doubt your knowledge in these areas is better than mine. I heard a figure from Chris Hedges that said the GOP and Democrats agree on roughly 90% of legislation. And I'm not sure exactly how you define mainstream - I suspect the positioning of the Dems as far right as they are is more the work of the DNC, not the rank and file. Bernie Sanders enjoyed considerable popular support in 2016 and 2020, and failed to win the nomination both times. The wealthy elites that have real power in the DNC hate Sanders, they hate his ideals, and they worked diligently to install a more complaint, obedient figure like Biden. The Squad, so far as I can tell, exert very little influence on policy. As much as it pains me to say it,  they seem to be little more than window dressing, existing to give some kind of weight to the idea that the Dems are "for the people." At least that's how I see it.

I'm not really convinced that the failures of the Dems to enact "people first" legislation is solely down to GOP roadblocks, even if the latter is ably led by that despicable Mitch "there's no such thing as too low" McConnell.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1151 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
I'm not really convinced that the failures of the Dems to enact "people first" legislation is solely down to GOP roadblocks, even if the latter is ably led by that despicable Mitch "there's no such thing as too low" McConnell.
In terms of US and local politics, often I have to wonder how much of that apparent inability to progress due to a roadblock or other external interference, really turns out to be based on a mutual benefit be it ever so subtle!

Intent can be rather plastic.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1152 –
Lobbyists and dark money certainly create a disconnect between popular support for legislation and what can be passed into law. For instance, gun reform is pretty popular according to surveys but the NRA has managed to kill any attempts to pass sensible restrictions. Trying to wean the US off fossil fuels is likewise exceedingly difficult. The Koch brothers have been GOP megadonors and their money comes from fossil fuels. Senator Joe Manchin is a Democrat but he’s also a coal baron from a pretty conservative State (West Virginia). He’s able to single-handedly shoot down any Bill that comes before the Senate as McConnell will line up 50 Republican Senators behind him. Unsurprisingly, he doesn’t like Biden’s energy policies or a raft of progressive policies.

Unfortunately, the Democrats have to deal with the reality that they can’t get popular legislation through Congress. As well as the problems of dark money and lobbying, they also have to face a rigged electoral system distorted by gerrymandering and voter suppression at state level and a conservative Supreme Court that stands ready to kill progressive White House action (for example, it ruled that Biden couldn’t use existing powers to phase out coal-fired power generation and as mentioned above there’s no way the Congress will give him that power).

I would love to see more progressive policies being pursued, but everyone in the US knows Congress is broken and campaigning on those policies is almost dishonest. Biden argued that he could break the deadlock in Congress by reaching out to Republicans. He had a history of doing so in the Senate back in the day. But his hopes of bipartisan deal making have been dashed. He was so desperate to get some cooperation that he reached a highly dubious deal with Mitch McConnell. He agreed to nominate an anti-abortion judge in Kentucky if McConnell agreed to let Biden’s judicial appointments go through. This was lunacy as McConnell would have broken his promise after pocketing the judge he wanted. This caused consternation amongst Democrats as this deal was revealed in the wake of the Supreme Court reversing Roe v Wade and would have undermined Democrats campaigning on pro-choice policies. As it was, the deal was blocked by McConnell’s fellow Republican Senator for Kentucky, Rand Paul, who threw a hissy fit because he wasn’t kept in the loop.

I guess if you’re going to be impotent if you win elections as a Democrat, you might as well offer the Sun and the moon to inspire the voters, but you have to be extremely pragmatic and crafty once you are elected. And progressive voters have to be satisfied with small successes here and there.

Perhaps Bernie might have won in 2016, but remember that Hillary won the popular vote handily and she probably would have become President if FBI Director James Comey hadn’t delivered his October surprise by announcing he was reopening the investigation into the emails only to shut it down a few days later. Bernie wasn’t as popular with black voters as Hillary and it’s the black voters who delivered victory for Joe Biden in 2020. Picking Joe Biden as the candidate in 2020 was a pretty reasonable choice as he was the guy who was going to cause Trump the most problems. Trump had identified him quite early as the guy he needed to kill off. He went after him in particular at his rallies and we now know he had been trying to get dirt on him well before he was nominated as the Democratic Presidential candidate. Given how important it was to beat Trump, I can certainly understand why Democrats went with the safe option.

There’s some small hope coming out of Georgia. Stacey Abrams is a star and is spearheading a voting rights campaign which seems to have helped the Democrats win both Senate seats in Georgia and she’ll be running for Governor come November. If she can win support in such a ruby red State, anything is possible.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1153 –
It seems that Scotty from marketing was right when he sermonised about people not trusting governments ... and particularly any governments that he has a role with  ::)
It's still the Gulf of Mexico, Don Old!

Re: General Discussions

Reply #1154 –
Quote from: DJC – on
It seems that Scotty from marketing was right when he sermonised about people not trusting governments ... and particularly any governments that he has a role with  ::)
It's a bit hard to judge this, as much as I want to slam Scotty the facts are not yet known, the media will want to paint it one way, however the implementation was clearly dodgy.

For example, I could argue that early in the pandemic the needs for leadership, governance and management were not clear. In this regard it's easier to take over an established portfolio, or more than one if needed, given they have established bureaucracy in place, than it would be to lump the unknowns of the pandemic on any individual. It was probably reasonable to say I can look over the day to day of several ministries, some ministers being constrained by border closures and the like, and free them to address the unknown pandemic as a team.

It also meant that the newly formed national cabinet had an equivalence across state and federal boundaries.

Even so, he should have done all this with transparency not secrecy, it left someone like Frydenberg in an untenable situation, and reeks of a secret NSW takeover of Federal politics.

I would think the biggest issues are yet to surface, wait until the states do a retrospective analysis of this.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"