Florida State Seminoles

[Professor Tiger]

The usually liberal Atlantic nails yesterday’s Brexit vote. The writer of the lead article, though mournful to the point of tears, is dead on about the dynamics, and are amazingly close to what is going on here. Does this sound familiar?

And yet, while this is a story with one central character, it is also about the deep structural and demographic currents working under the surface, eroding Labour’s historic heartlands and dragging Johnson to victory thanks to a new coalition of voters, transforming the Conservatives into a party that prioritizes national sovereignty and controls on immigration over economic growth, one that had the good fortune to face a Labour Party more out of touch with its base than ever before.

Wilson, the MP who replaced Blair in 2007, stood outside a sports hall used by the local taekwondo club, surrounded by camera crews. Liberated by the scale of the party’s defeat, voice cracking with emotion, he let his real feelings spill out. The party had lost touch with its voters, its world view appeared unpatriotic, its economic promises incredible, its internal culture intolerant, nasty, vengeful. But most of all, its leader, Jeremy Corbyn, was simply unconscionable to far too many voters.

[Toemeesleather]

Looks like dims will get bi-partisan support on the vote, but it will be in opposition.

[hedge]

Corbyn is a notorious anti-semite. It would be like having a known racist as the dem nominee here. But I agree that dems need to be careful not to appear to be moving too far left, which is why Uncle Joe is likely going to be the candidate. Of course, that's Trump's greatest fear as well, which is also the reason he is fixing to be impeached, i.e., what he was willing to do (and did) due to his fear of having to face Biden. It was probably unnecessary, as Biden appears fully able to gaffe himself out of a victory, but Trump let his fear get the best of him...

[hedge]

"I'm fascinated with Oberlin College and their lawsuit they lost."

I'm still reading the article, found this snippet with I thought was kinda funny:

"And that’s not uncommon that you have a town-gown sort of conflict, but it seems to have been particularly bad in Oberlin, perhaps because it’s so left-wing and they have so many of these crazy controversies, including one that made the newspapers.

It’s kind of funny when you think about it, the complaints about the General Tso’s chicken in the dining hall was inauthentic and that was offensive and the dining hall service actually apologized for insulting people culturally because of the chicken. I mean, just ludicrous, laughable things. But that sort of attitude was taken out on this bakery."

[eCat]

yea that General Tso things was crazy

The condensed version of it was the students were protesting how insensitive the dining hall was in serving General Tso's and the students didn't even know that General Tso's was created in America - and instead of telling the students they were morons, the school apologized. Its sounds absurd but it lays the foundation for how these students were so out of touch with the world outside their gates they thought it was perfectly acceptable to boycott a business for following the law that is applied to everyone.

(similar to our immigration situation)

[eCat]

on the Gibsons bakery website, they have a great read with transcripts from the court proceedings that support their case

its a long read too but an interesting one. It paints a pretty complete picture at how complicit a handful of people at the school were in focusing on taking down the bakery for having the nerve to press charges against a shoplifter. Also read the Roger Copeland letter to the editor - the link is included in the pdf below and look at their reaction in emails to it.

http://www.lawlion.com/wp-content/uploa ... ollege.pdf

[hedge]

"They organized safe spaces for my visit. They organized safety teams to guide people to safe spaces with glow sticks if they couldn’t find the safe spaces. In the library, which was the main safe space, they had coloring books for students—college students. It was the craziest thing."

[eCat]

this is what I"m talking about- I'm not Levin fan and I recgonize the source of this document, but I am confident in believing this is the sentiment among the rank and file voters of flyover states

During an appearance Thursday on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity,” conservative talker Mark Levin, author of “Unfreedom of the Press,” argued that the next elected Democratic president should face impeachment should President Donald Trump be impeachment by the Democrat-led House of Representatives.

Levin reminded viewers of the past indiscretions of the Democratic Party and said when the party engages in such behavior, it should be “slammed down,” which in this case would come in the form of impeachment for the next Democrat president. The next Democrat president of the United States must be impeached — not to get even, not because we’re at their low level — because the Republicans can’t live under one Constitution when the Democrats live under another Constitution, and it is the only way we’re going to stop them.”

“One party can’t be allowed to abuse the Constitution and yet wave it around while the other party sits there and takes it,” he continued. “The Democrat Party must be slammed down. The next Democrat president, if they vote for impeachment against Donald Trump must be impeached. And we have the blueprint. It’s the Pelosi project. She even said today, ‘We’ve been at this for 22 months, for two years. What do you mean we’re being fast here?’ We have the plan.”

If the Democrats really do believe there isn't a Blue America or a Red America, there is one America, they never would have gone down this path to begin with. Impeachment is now a weapon against a opposing party candidate, not a tool to control corrupt power against a sitting president.

[hedge]

"Also read the Roger Copeland letter to the editor - the link is included in the pdf below and look at their reaction in emails to it."

Do you mean the comments section of his letter?

[eCat]

no basically where this guy give a well reasoned response saying give Gibson's bakery due process before you kill their business and Raimando was "fuck this guy, I will unleash the students on him"

and that statement was actually used against her in the defamation case because she was saying her role was to focus on the saftey and security of students in the protest - but she sends an email out implying she controls the students as a single entity.

[hedge]

"Impeachment is now a weapon against a opposing party candidate, not a tool to control corrupt power against a sitting president."

I don't agree with that...

[hedge]

Yeah, I went back and saw the emails. Can't see that as anything but a poor career move on their part...

[eCat]

and there is another lessoned to be learned here. Certainly Raimando and her co workers didn't have the benefit of hindsight in realizing they were orchestrating a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the college but there were so many conversations they should have had face to face as opposed to documenting it in email.

that also reminds of watching the TV show 48 Hours where detectives have a camera crew follow them around to solve a crime in the first 48 hours after it occurs - and its probably 95% focused on the African American community.

and if you watch the show, I'm sure there are many cases that don't make the cut but for the ones that make it to air, at least 90% of the people on the show (vast majority of them being AA) are guilty of their crimes, so I'm kinda torn here but if there is one thing the African American community can do (besides telling them to stop committing crimes) is to stop believing they can talk their way out of a felony. Lawyers must watch this show and pull their hair out listening to these interviews with police where these young men and women lie or leave out things trying to make them appear innocent, like the cop is just going to let them walk.

The only thing any person should say to policeman - black, white - whatever if they find themselves being questioned is 1. am I under arrest? and if the answer to 1 is yes, then 2. I want a lawyer. If the answer to 1 is no, then get up and leave.

and honestly at this point, that message really needs to be out in the black community starting in around 5th grade.

The same it true of the white community - the white trash community - but for the most part whites don't give a shit, they want that scourge dealt with anyways.

[eCat]

"Impeachment is now a weapon against a opposing party candidate, not a tool to control corrupt power against a sitting president."

I don't agree with that...

I am convinced whoever, whenever the next president comes in - the opposing party will start throwing around impeachment. They won't start it, it will start with the media, whatever talking heads represent the opposing party, then that will get the masses ginned up and the politicians will respond to their base. That will be S.O.P. for the next 2 decades. Whatever Trump doesn't accomplish in his term as president, he has a built in excuse - impeachment witch hunt

and that will resonate with his voters - from manufacturing to draining the swamp . They will want their pound of flesh with the next guy.

[aTm]

"Impeachment is now a weapon against a opposing party candidate, not a tool to control corrupt power against a sitting president."

I don't agree with that...

What? Thats the whole thing thats been happening this entire time. The idea that this is all about some "Ukraine" thing is ludicrous. This impeachment has been stewing since 11/8/2016 and the reality is that even when the proceeedings about this one event is over, impeachment over "something" will likely still be something we have to live with until 2024. We are staring at 8 years of opposition trying to find something, anything they can use to gain traction to impeach. Thats a long time and it is very dangerous. How many rookie congressmen will have spent their whole terms in a congress where the goal to "win" for their side is to either fight against or instigate impeachment proceeedings, by the time this is all over?

Just on Tuesday at the "Women's Rule" summit, Pelosi was asked about the speed of impeachment proceedings and her response was “Its been going on for 22 months, ok? “Two and a half years, actually.” The #TeamBlue strategy has been drum up support for a way to impeach Trump from the day he was elected. Everything since then has just been searching for the best possible pretext.

[aTm]

For example, back in the day when Obama was recorded telling Putin that he'd "have more flexibility after the election" or whatever moronic thing that the #TeamRed mouthbreathers always mention, do you think that after all this, a #TeamRed congress would let that slide now? No, thats gonna be "alright lets start investigations and calling people in front of Congress! Goteeeem!"

[hedge]

Well, it's all going to depend on the makeup of the House after the 2020 vote. If repubs win back the House, then I think future Houses are going to be way more concerned with that, i.e., they'll be like "well, see what happened to the dems in 2020, it's obvious the public doesn't like this." It's all about job security for those people. If according to their calculus it's likely to get them defeated in the next election, they won't do it, irregardless of what the president says or does. But hey, the more time congress spends on this type of stuff, the less time they have to fuck things up in other areas. And the less time they have fuck around with "helping the American people" the better...

[hedge]

"This impeachment has been stewing since 11/8/2016"

I don't believe that. For some people, I'm sure it did, but not for the vast majority of the House. Of course, there's no way to know what was in their (or anybody else's) mind, but I just don't believe that the majority of the dems in the House were gung-ho for impeachment just b/c it was Trump...

[crotch]

I fully realize it's a waste of time trying to educate liberals, especially several here at TGP, but will post this anyway.

[hedge]

So you're saying Bush wanted to sell out the country?