Re: Greenwald on Russiagate
 

Not sure why you think Democrats would fight this to the death.

On the debt jubilee thing, the government would pay the cost, because it's a taking. If the government were going to pay that much, is that the best way to spend it?

Re: Greenwald on Russiagate
 

It needn't be structured as a taking. Structure it as a five year amendment to the bankruptcy code allowing poor people meeting certain debt to income ratios to file bankruptcy and discharge all unsecured debt, renegotiate all secured debt, including mortgages, and entirely wipe out:

1. 100% of delinquent medical debt for non-elective procedures/care;
2. Up to 1/2 of non-grad school student loan debt involving accredited institutions;
3. 100% of student loan debt involving for-profit schools; and,
4. 100% of all non-grad school private lender student loans.

I'm not going to get into the weeds on how this can be done. There are literally endless rule tweaks and adjustments which could effect this result. But the aim should simply be to cancel almost all outstanding medical and student loan debt for poor people.

Democrats, most notably Schumer, would fight this alongside Republicans tooth and nail because it would hammer certain investors. Which is true. This concept would provide a financial opportunity to indebted people of modest means at cost to some investors. The cry against it would be, "You're stealing from pensioners!"

I'd say it's more stealing from rentiers.

You and I know all the economic arguments for transferring from Wall Street and pensioners to a demographic of poor people that skews somewhat younger (they spend it!). But that wouldn't deter Schumer and McConnell from serving the interests of those who fatten their campaign coffers by painting such a plan as theft from the old and weak. And that's why none of this will ever happen.

ETA: Oh, and a universal income will never happen because... Socialism!!!!!

ETA2: One other thing that would help ease a lot of the financial burden in this country would be to put a $10k per year cap on fed backed non-grad school student loans. Radically cut that revenue stream for higher education and you'll see the totally unjustifiable tuition increases collapse almost overnight. That'd increase retirement savings for parents enormously, easing the retirement crisis the country is facing.

Re: Distinction Deniers
 

Is there anyone worse qualified to make that argument?

Re: Greenwald on Russiagate
 

This was the libertarian party platform position, right?

Re: The ever insufferable Sullivan
 

Nicely done.

TM

Re: Distinction Deniers
 

I note he did that with a manel. He may have a penis but he has no balls.

Re: Distinction Deniers
 

An out of control trolley is barreling down the tracks heading for eight people. You can pull a switch and send the trolley towards a track where there is just one person, but that person is your client. Do you pull the switch?

Re: Distinction Deniers
 

Is it the old racist Indian client?

Re: Distinction Deniers
 

Hold on, let me go sign a retention agreement with Sebastian Gorka.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I never thought I'd live to see the Republicans winning a government shutdown battle. And post tax reform polling is far kinder to the GOP than I anticipated.

I survived net neutrality, tax reform, and now the #SchumerShutdown. Bring on the zombie apocalypse!

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I think everyone perceives them winning this one.

Dems got CHIP through at the cost of three weeks and then we do it again with DACA up front.

Republicans got CHIP through without having a clean vote on it, something a lot of Rs in deep red districts feared.

And a bunch of the leadership gets to go to Davos and on their other junkets.

But we'll see what it looks like next time around. The big development really is that the Rs have fully embraced being anti-Dreamer.

Though, overall, the big development right now really is that the Turks are bombing the Kurds. We're into the next phase of war in the Middle East.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Democrats should credit Kelly for the compromise and watch Trump blow the bill straight the fuck up.

TM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Reportedly (by Vanity Fair on Twitter), Ivanka is already leading the search for Kelly's replacement.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Nah, we want CHIP. We should just thank whoever we want fired next after it's signed.

Really, there should be some kind of rule giving the minority the ability to bring an occasional bill, maybe three or four a year, to the floor. For Dems, the inability to get either CHIP or DACA to the floor despite their popularity leads to the need to hold up the CR, and I concede similarly that the rare bill the Rs would have brought up under that kind of provision in Democratic controlled house or senate would have been things that probably should have passed.

And without the pressure from these bills, getting to a CR would be much simplified.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Look, I know we all want CHIP funded and a clean DACA. And it would be awful for families to be destroyed because Republicans are assholes. But I'm at the point where I'd almost rather let Republicans go ahead and cut off their own dicks--politically speaking, although I'd rather it be literal--such that the political losses over the next two election cycles are so huge that they are out of control for 10-12 years.

(And, yes, I understand this makes me sound slightly Susan Sarandish, but I'm sick of all this shit.)

TM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

If the House of Representatives doesn't want to vote to authorize DACA, if POTUS sticks to the pretense that it's illegal, and if the courts don't reverse that call, then there's nothing Democrats can do to protect Dreamers. The biggest thing that has changed in the last several days is that after signaling that he would accept a deal to save DACA, Trump reversed course ("shithole") and took a harder line. Democrats can't control this.

There are at least some Republicans who want to protect the Dreamers and at least some who want to screw them. I suspect many would like to signal to their base that they are in the latter camp while not actually doing anything to screw them. IMO, when the issue becomes wrapped into the brinksmanship of a shutdown, Republicans' preferences become a function of partisanship, reaction and a general desire to signal dominance, which makes it harder to strike a deal. In the position, Republicans who would like to cut a deal with Democrats on the substance can't, because they can't afford to be seen to compromise.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I am completely sympathetic.

I think DACA is going to be a battle royale that defines the parties, and we're going to have that fight and the Rs are going to behave like assholes/conservatives (sorry to be redundant there) and the Dems are going to be both rational and compassionate but we are also likely going to lose this round.

But CHIP didn't need to be that battle, and it helps a lot of people. The key is we've got to keep and refocus the anger at the Rs in three weeks, not spend it on the Ds in the meantime.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

The more royale the battle, the harder it is for Republicans to vote to save DACA, and the worse the outcome for Dreamers.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Like I said, we're likely going to lose that battle. The Rs want to define themselves as hardcore anti-immigrant, especially anti-non-white-immigrant. And they have power over the institutions necessary to let them do that. They are going to screw the Dreamers.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I haven't followed the DACA thing much (other than those stories about the deportation of the Mexican and Polish guys who've been here for 30 years). But I recall hearing that 75% of Republicans and 90% of Democrats polled support DACA.

What constituency exactly is the GOP catering to here? Am I missing something, or is this just political suicide? Putting aside the indecency of their position, the numbers don't justify it.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

They believe screaming "illegals" and making racially tinged comments about the Dreamers wins it for them. If you read the poll questions on "illegal immigrants" or "Haitian or African illegals" rather than the poll questions on "Dreamers" the Republicans see it as playing to their base in places like white Pennsylvania.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

There are also some in the former camp that really don't care and just don't want to pay the political cost of saying they don't care. Which I think is the real obstacle.

The Hastert Rule and 45's flip-flopping are give them cover to keep pretending they care. They haven't been forced to vote on it and are pretty happy about it.

And now the Dream Act will go through committee, get amended out of recognition by Tom Cotton or whomever and McConnell will bring it to the floor in a form that the Dems can't support and be able to claim he met all his promises and they voted against it.

The Dems just don't have the stomach for this game.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

It's already over. They lost yesterday.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

They also think that pretty much anyone who votes on the issue is already not in their camp.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I disagree. They got money for CHIP, an agreement for a vote on DACA (which may not be worth anything, but then even that is worth something), and only gave up three weeks of funding.

Whatever the polling, my view is the Republicans lost a little. Because the shutdown doesn't make anyone more likely to vote for a Republican in November, and it undermines the idea that the Republicans are getting things done and that Donald Trump is a dealmaker.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I think the Dems scored a clear win. They got CHIP. Granted, Republicans probably needed to find a way to give them CHIP, and now a bunch of Rs can say they voted for it to centrists and that they had to to the base loonies. But the Dems still got a program the Republican base doesn't want.

And they set up DACA for a stand-alone vote, or they have an immediate hammer if it doesn't happen. That's going to be a tough moment for a lot of swing-district Rs. Even if the R base is increasingly eager to kill DACA.

I think the R base will beat us on DACA and it will become a key election issue. If there is a scenario where the Dems win DACA, that would be absolutely huge given the Republican advantage.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

They got a thing that the GOP was for anyway and a worthless promise. Yes, they only gave up three weeks of funding to get that worthless promise.

They also signalled that they will cave three weeks from now if the GOP says "illegals" enough, which the GOP is willing to do.

Yesterday, we had a real shot at getting the Dream Act. By no means certain, but nonetheless, an actual possibility if the Dems could stand strong.

They couldn't and McConnel isn't going to believe they will be able to three weeks from now either.

I hope I'm wrong, but I think it's over.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

The Republican base does not care at all about CHIP.

Which the GOP sees as a win for them.

It's not. They will vote yes. The Dems will vote no because of the newly added poison pills. GOP gets the substance for it's base and the political issue for swing district voters.

None of this should be hard to see coming. The Dems aren't going to get a better deal when they have less leverage. That's not how it works.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

They got something they wanted, CHIP, in exchange for something else they wanted, the government functioning as normal. They did not give anything up.

If you believed before the shutdown that the Dems could get DACA restored, it was because Trump and many Republicans had signaled they could be OK with that. Now they have changed signals and things look worse. If the House GOP is not going to vote to restore DACA, they are not going to vote to restore DACA in order to end a shutdown. There's nothing Democrats can do about that. It's not a question of the Democrats caving. It's a question of not having the votes. If they don't have the votes, then the best they can do is get a vote and make Republicans actually vote against it, instead of posturing around it and letting the program end on its own. In the circumstances, that will be a tactical victory. The Democrats need to go and win 220 House races. (Beating up Chuck Schumer will not help.)

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

See, you are looking at this like trump, as a ratings game. This is about policy. This is about states starting to shut down CHIP programs and kids not getting healthcare. This is about people getting deported. In both cases, Chuck and Co. are minimizing the damage despite being in the minority.

What silliness these inter party attacks are. Eyes on the prize, dude, eyes on the prize.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

This will never be a game Democrats can win without educating a public about issues they clearly don't care about. Everyone (who isn't a Tea Party psycho) is for helping children. But Republicans will actually let funding expire, throwing hundreds of thousands of families into chaos in order to get what they want. That's a game Democrats (or anyone with any kind of compassion) will always lose. Because we will fund a fucking wall if it means not actively shitting all over sick kids. Same with DACA. Same with absolutely any bill that actually helps people.

It's a losing proposition. That's why Dems are always brought in to clean up after Republicans. People only realize the Republican Smash 'N' Grab approach to government after everything is completely fucking broken. And they immediately forget who broke everything the first time someone says "Your taxes are going to lazy Blacks and Mexicans."

TM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I think the level of diversity in a community has a lot to do with how people feel about it. Until very, very recently, it wasn't really an issue that ANYONE wanted to talk about in Texas. Everyone knows someone whose family may not entirely be kosher. And our economy is pretty immigrant labor dependent. The restaurant and construction industries would crumble, I think, if anyone took it too seriously here. A few years back, the legislature tried to do some rah rah rah we don't like immigration thing and then tried to carve out their lawn people and housekeepers and nannys. I don't think they've tried again since.

My housekeeper, who has been working with my family for over 30 years, is from El Salvador. I am pretty sure her kids were born here, and I helped her get her citizenship back when I was in law school. I don't know about her sister, though. Or the rest of her community. A family member's wife is undocumented. He brought her over from Mexico when they first got married without going through proper channels, and she got caught and deported. She came back a year later, and she's been here for 16 plus years*. Her kids were born here. We've talked to immigration lawyers several times about trying to get her presence legit, but she's not even eligible to get in line, much less get to the back of it.

My guess is that in other parts of the country, this isn't as big of an issue or if it is, it's just emerging. And people who don't know someone who is in danger of having their whole life ripped apart because of this doesn't care as much as those of us who do. So when it's a theoretical kid or even 27 year old who didn't even know that they weren't born here, it's a lot easier to say "kick them out" than it is when you're talking about the point guard on your kid's basketball team.

This is a pretty good summary of the state of things in Texas.
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/12...ented-workers/


*I can't remember exactly when they got married, but I went to their daughter's quinceañera last summer, and it was one of the best parties I've been to in the last 10 years.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

And if it is, this. 56% say Trump and congressional Republicans are more to blame. 38% say Democrats. And are any of that 38% less likely to vote for Democrat in November as a result?

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I think you are wrong about this. I think there are a substantial number of people out there who say, sure, it would be nice if kids didn't have to die, but I take care of my own and the rest isn't my problem, don't tax me to pay for it.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

The really funny thing is I'll bet the 38% who blame dems are half Trump's core base and half Bernie's core base.

But, excellent point.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I'm looking at it from the perspective of power and leverage. Yesterday, the Dems, as the minority party in both houses, had some. Today, it has none. That's it. It isn't going to get more with less power.

Yes, which is why both parties backed CHIP, and why CHIP wasn't a win yesterday. CHIP is what McConnell held hostage so he could give Dems nothing, and use to deny that the shutdown was only about immigration.

Yes, and every day that passes more people's DACA status is expiring, which some committee hearings and a vote in three weeks doesn't change.

So far they've gotten zero mitigation on DACA. Nothing.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

This is really it. To some degree, it seems like something amenable to a gay rights style "coming out" movement, but that's asking vulnerable people to make themselves more vulnerable.

Nonetheless, should things go as Stephen Miller wants them to, a lot of people are going to learn about the undocumented people around them and start caring.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Yup, and especially when the Dems act like the GOP is still acting in good faith when it isn't.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Do you really think that? Come on, dude.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Which statement do you think is incredible? Surely not that the GOP isn't acting in good faith, that's been clear since Obama was elected.

That the Dems are acting like the GOP is acting in good faith? How else do they take a "deal" that's just Mitch McConnell's word that he'll let some form of a bill be voted on?