how is this literally happening in real life

GHALIBAF: "So I'm not really sure what our objectives are here because our leader is in a coma and maybe has brain damage so it's all just scheming viziers, y'know?"

VANCE: "You're not gonna believe this."

gotta get comfortable speaking the language of illegitimacy

I don't expect much from Trump beyond strategic incompetence and bluster, but how is Netanyahu feeling about a deal that will feed billions of dollars to Iran?

Looking, again, for a steelman view of this. Is there ANY plausible argument that we didn’t just kill a bunch of people to no purpose and hand a giant geopolitical victory to an extremist regime after making it more entrenched and more extreme?

If long-term gyre widening trends continue, we think there is a high likelihood of the centre proving unable to hold

Quite rare to see a chart that says quite so overtly that no one involved has the slightest clue what’s happening here

I don’t think people understand what’s this means: MEDICARE AND MEDICAID ARE BLOCKING ALL WHEELCHAIRS, WALKERS, CANES, INSULIN PUMPS, GLUCOSE MONITORS, CPAP MACHINES, NEBULIZERS, BEDS, CRUTCHES, COMODE CHAIRS, BED SORE PRESSURE PADS, CHAIR LIFTS, OXYGEN TANKS, BREATHING EQUIPMENT, to name a few.

This all is absolutely our second chance at getting reconstruction right.

I’m physically following them around using my government name telling them to arrest me and they haven’t bothered to arrest me. Also half the US Attorney’s office here in MN just resigned! They do not have a case and they do not have manpower, but their only tool is trying to be menacing.

Man 'trains' crows to attack MAGA hats as there's 'no longer a moral option' A man has gone viral after training a murder of crows to swoop down and snatch MAGA hats from unsuspecting Trump supporters, documenting his months-long experiment

Just sharing source in case anyone's looking for it www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-... The guy was very meticulous, documented the entire method of training crows

With 7 you could win any shell game

We're about to see like two dozen R incumbents retire. What we do with this cycle will decide if Republican government will be restored in the United States. It's absolutely imperative that we impose capital C Consequences to the members of this administration.

How does this square with the age of first-time home buyers spiking to a record high?

And yes these means nuking the filibuster.

10 min in: 💣 filibuster
12 in: expand Court
15 in: confirm slate of Justices w/o hearings
20 in: expand House, John Lewis Act
22 in: DC statehood
25 in: strip Trump hires of civil service protections.
30 in: break up DHS

Democrats Must Embrace War Mindset We have exited a long period of peace and entered into a struggle not unlike war, in which all the old certainties have gone malleable and the future of the republic is at stake.

this piece has been in the works a while but honestly i could not have asked for a better foil than ezra klein's interview with ta-nehisi coates. klein longs for peacetime--but you don't get to decide when you're in a fight.

www.liberalcurrents.com/democrats-mu...

I have many good memories and only a few scars

Good times

scully: mulder you can't seriously believe in this

mulder: I'm telling you, glonzo is more than just stories.

To Donald Trump and his administration:

If you hurt my people, nothing will stop me — not time or political circumstance — from making sure you face justice under our constitutional rule of law.

Potentially some conflict between this and promoting YIMBYism

the thing everyone is going to have to accept is that the post-trump period, whenever it comes, will not and cannot be a project of national unity, it must be a project of partisan project of renewal, in the same way that reconstruction and the new deal were partisan projects of renewal.

There is no such thing as liberalism — or progressivism, etc. There is only conservatism. No other political philosophy actually exists; by the political analogue of Gresham’s Law, conservatism has driven every other idea out of circulation. There might be, and should be, anti-conservatism; but it does not yet exist. What would it be? In order to answer that question, it is necessary and sufficient to characterize conservatism. Fortunately, this can be done very concisely. Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protectes but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. There is nothing more or else to it, and there never has been, in any place or time. For millenia, conservatism had no name, because no other model of polity had ever been proposed. “The king can do no wrong.” In practice, this immunity was always extended to the king’s friends, however fungible a group they might have been. Today, we still have the king’s friends even where there is no king (dictator, etc.). Another way to look at this is that the king is a faction, rather than an individual. As the core proposition of conservatism is indefensible if stated baldly, it has always been surrounded by an elaborate backwash of pseudophilosophy, amounting over time to millions of pages. All such is axiomatically dishonest and undeserving of serious scrutiny. Today, the accelerating de-education of humanity has reached a point where the market for pseudophilosophy is vanishing; it is, as The Kids Say These Days, tl;dr . All that is left is the core proposition itself — backed up, no longer by misdirection and sophistry, but by violence.

So this tells us what anti-conservatism must be: the proposition that the law cannot protect anyone unless it binds everyone, and cannot bind anyone unless it protects everyone. Then the appearance arises that the task is to map “liberalism”, or “progressivism”, or “socialism”, or whateverthefuckkindofstupidnoise-ism, onto the core proposition of anti-conservatism. No, it a’n’t. The task is to throw all those things on the exact same burn pile as the collected works of all the apologists for conservatism, and start fresh. The core proposition of anti-conservatism requires no supplementation and no exegesis. It is as sufficient as it is necessary. What you see is what you get: The law cannot protect anyone unless it binds everyone; and it cannot bind anyone unless it protects everyone.

I think it's now possible to make a poli-sci course that equips one for modern political analysis better than most classic theory and has a syllabus sourced entirely from random internet posts.

Text 1. Wilhoit's Law, born as part of a 2018 blog comment
crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/l...

If this is substantiated every single justice department attorney who touched the filings denying jurisdiction should be disbarred unless they're individually willing to put in a sworn statement declaring that they were told something different and identifying who lied to them about it

Hey, some of us are from Portland

New York Times: ICE Imposes New Rules on Congressional Visits The policy specifies that ICE field offices are not subject to an existing federal law that allows members of Congress to make unannounced oversight visits to immigration facilities that “detain or otherwise house aliens.”

To be really clear: The reason members of Congress can't just walk right in is because of the guns. Armed DHS personnel won't allow entry. In other words, DHS is using armed force to *break* laws.

Democrats need to wrap their minds around that. Accept that the frog is boiled.

Simultaneously holding the beliefs that Democratic leadership needs to be completely replaced and many incumbents need to be primaried and also that everyone who cares must vote for every Democrat on the federal ballot next year if we have any hope at saving the country.

Trump created the problem. The single reason Iran was so close to obtaining a nuclear weapon is that Trump destroyed the diplomatic agreement that put major, verifiable constraints on their nuclear program.

Who is the "they" you're referring to?