That first part is kinda what I’m saying: Dems adhere to the rules and procedures even when it prevents them from taking completely reasonable actions that the people who they’re supposed to represent want.
Republicans break all rules and norms to do awful things and Dems refuse to break any rules or norms to stop them.
It’s like a fistfight where one fighter is wielding a sawed off shotgun and the other refuses to even fight dirty.
Well this is the bitch: you can’t play that game. Because the whole point of that game to smash the rules of order. To destroy the social contract. To create chaos and revoke rights. Any move you make is a win for them and a loss for everyone else.
You’re assuming that the only alternative to slavishly adhering to the rules as determined by people who could not possibly predict today’s circumstances is to ignore the very concept of rules and procedure.
I’m not advocating for Dems to do either. I’m advocating for them to change the rules for the better when they can and to bend or even outright break them when it’s necessary and justified.
Following rules for their own sake even when it’s clearly contrary to the needs and wants of the people is just a more socially acceptable form of authoritarianism.
Do you consider scrapping a long overdue minimum wage increase because an unelected bureaucrat with a strictly advisory role says it can’t be in a budget bill “due process”?
Because I consider that a gross miscarriage of justice for the people working two or three jobs and still failing to make ends meet because profiteering employers are still allowed to exploit them horribly.
So how it usually plays out is that destroying is usually much easier than building.
So if the oligarchs destroy the rules, you will not win by trying to rebuild them. You will only get back to some sense of normal by shooting back and making them understand why the rules were there. And I don’t mean threats.
The moment the office of the president was given complete immunity from everything, Biden should have had Musk shot. More realistically, Dems should have fought judicial appointments the same way as Reps did, and actually appointed activist judges instead of trying and failing to appoing Merrick fucking Garland.
The eleventh hour of the “system” was prosecuting Trump. That system does not exist anymore, there is nothing to defend at this point.
Nope.
Dems try to adhere to The Rules And Procedures
Pubs don’t give a shit
That first part is kinda what I’m saying: Dems adhere to the rules and procedures even when it prevents them from taking completely reasonable actions that the people who they’re supposed to represent want.
Republicans break all rules and norms to do awful things and Dems refuse to break any rules or norms to stop them.
It’s like a fistfight where one fighter is wielding a sawed off shotgun and the other refuses to even fight dirty.
Well this is the bitch: you can’t play that game. Because the whole point of that game to smash the rules of order. To destroy the social contract. To create chaos and revoke rights. Any move you make is a win for them and a loss for everyone else.
Don’t play chess with pigeons
That’s a false dichotomy.
You’re assuming that the only alternative to slavishly adhering to the rules as determined by people who could not possibly predict today’s circumstances is to ignore the very concept of rules and procedure.
I’m not advocating for Dems to do either. I’m advocating for them to change the rules for the better when they can and to bend or even outright break them when it’s necessary and justified.
Following rules for their own sake even when it’s clearly contrary to the needs and wants of the people is just a more socially acceptable form of authoritarianism.
Not assuming a falsity at all - the rules in question are due process
So THAT’S where you want the goal posts now?
Sure, due process is an inalienable human right that should never be infringed upon.
That obviously wasn’t what I was talking about, though.
Sorry, should have been clearer: due LEGISLATIVE process
What does that even mean, though?
Do you consider scrapping a long overdue minimum wage increase because an unelected bureaucrat with a strictly advisory role says it can’t be in a budget bill “due process”?
Because I consider that a gross miscarriage of justice for the people working two or three jobs and still failing to make ends meet because profiteering employers are still allowed to exploit them horribly.
So how it usually plays out is that destroying is usually much easier than building.
So if the oligarchs destroy the rules, you will not win by trying to rebuild them. You will only get back to some sense of normal by shooting back and making them understand why the rules were there. And I don’t mean threats.
The moment the office of the president was given complete immunity from everything, Biden should have had Musk shot. More realistically, Dems should have fought judicial appointments the same way as Reps did, and actually appointed activist judges instead of trying and failing to appoing Merrick fucking Garland.
The eleventh hour of the “system” was prosecuting Trump. That system does not exist anymore, there is nothing to defend at this point.
And that attitude is how we got here:
https://www.project2025.observer/
Tell that to Nancy’s stock portfolio… Or is that “legal”?
Either way they’re 2 rich 2 resist.
They’ve got dozens of excuses for failure, that’s just one of them.