Funny little story - Politicians, particularly conservatives, pretend they're afraid of true democracy because of "mob rule," as if it wasn't a mob we saw in action on 1/6 with our own eyes. But they continue to work hard to tell us that we didn't actually see what we really saw.
The fact is unless they're inherently evil, mobs tend to not erupt unless the individuals forming the mob are deprived of what they need. But politicians, particularly conservatives, tend to be more about money, power, and influence than action.
But, mostly money.
They know from the beginning that they have no intentions of providing much of what the people want, including to those who vote for them. So they come up with all kinds of stuff - excuses and distractions - like austerity, budget cuts, "small government," fiscal conservatism...
...supply-side economics, and bizarre tax policy, when in reality they're projecting, deflecting and gaslighting the proletariat in the name of policy and ideology for not meeting their needs. It's a governance scheme of non-governance set up for failure to perform by design.
The result is they need to perpetuate their lies and look over their shoulders because their constituents will be mad as hell, and looking for someone to blame.
It's easy then to blame policies that were never going to work on the opposition who knew that they wouldn't, but conservative voters aren't interested in understanding why.
So the opposition gets painted with sabotage, or worse, because it's simpler (although lazy and intellectually dishonest) to vilify the opposition for telling the truth and not supporting the schemes in the first place, than to hold the politicians accountable for failing.
And while the above may sound cynical or even craven, history has borne out that it's more true than not. All one needs to ask is what conservative policies have worked in the past 100 years...of for that matter, ever? And, who have conservative voters historically blamed?
But, in the final analysis, instead of the fear, paranoia, subterfuge, and lying, wouldn't it be easier reduce, if not eliminate, all alleged concerns about mobs and mob rule if they simply did the jobs they were elected to do?
Oh, and accepted responsibility? And left lobbyists money on the table? And worried less about appeasing donors. And...
I am deeply sorry for the children who are left behind when their parents die because they refused the vaccine and masking for political reasons. The children are the pawns and victims of monstrous political games, and the choices of their parents.
But I am as equally frustrated, sad, and angry about hospital staffs who are being abused and exploited by antivaxxers for political reasons. Not only are they being exhausted by people becoming desperately ill for almost completely preventable reasons,...
...but just by going to work every day, they walk into extremely hazardous conditions. That goes for everyone from the doctors and nurses providing the treatment to the cleaning and cafeteria staffs providing for patient comfort.
If you look at how the DoJ and FBI handled the failed Epstein investigations years ago, then fast forward to the the Nasser investigation in 2015, then KAVANAUGH in 2018, There is a deep cultural problem with how the Justice Department ignores rape, sex and child trafficking.
That's in spite of the fact that there are federal laws on the books to combat those specific issues. Right now it appears that each time the public becomes aware a a failure, a piecemeal review is done treating each incident as a standalone situation with no depth or results.
The reality is the lack of seriousness that the DoJ and FBI apply to those investigations IS as big a problem as the rapes and trafficking itself. It's a deep, systemic, cultural problem, and it requires a deep root cause analysis - and criminal charges for officials - to fix it.
The entire role of States is to govern the residents therein. If states delegate and abdicate their governing and enforcement duties, then there is effectively no state. If anyone can enforce the law on anyone, there's no need for police departments, or state governments.
That is anarchy.
Thus states are chartered with that responsibility as states. Individuals have no inherent right to enforce or deny the rights of other individuals. That power to individuals is nonexistent and can't even be granted by the state.
That's what makes SCOTUS's non-decision decision in the Texas abortion law case such a silly, embarrassing, cowardly sham. The court called the scheme "novel." It's not. But it is craven and nefarious. And it demonstrates the courts willingness to be overtly blind and dishonest.
There are many valid reasons for Biden to expand the court - and for Manchin and Sinema to get out of the way. So far they have given little to no reason which betrays and highlights their underlying position of obstructing Biden purely because they are venal and craven.
But, someone will sue over mandates announced today. I believe SCOTUS will then seize the opportunity to block him, because they have run amok. Because it is a national emergency, if they do, I hope he takes the opportunity to expand the court and shut down the conservatives.
At that point, whether or not tens of thousands will continue to get sick and die will then not be on the republican who have made their position clear. It will be completely on Manchin and Sinema.
In the midst of a pandemic that's still spreading, and testing is still an expensive bottleneck, it seems criminally negligent for inexpensive home testing kits, which take a few minutes, to not be available for every home in America when they already exist.
Meanwhile, PCR tests which take days can still cost $100 or more, far more. That is almost completely unusable and no good for parents or teachers who are responsible for kids who still can't be vaccinated.
I'm glad that Biden is pushing hard for the availability of in-home testing, but I want to know why the tests seem to be held up on the market when they've been in existence for months? And who, specifically, are the beneficiaries of not making them more widely available?
The women of Afghanistan don't need the Taliban, but the people of Afghanistan, including the Taliban need Afghanistan's women. Maybe this view is contrary to the conventional view for some here in the US, but maybe it's time for the conventional to change?
For an entire generation while the Taliban was chasing across the country trading hostilities with the US, the women of the nation were developing knowledge, skills, abilities, and experience in a multitude of things and areas.
Not only did women participate in national governance and administration, they helped develop commerce, run businesses including a variety of media, were involved in provincial administration affairs, participated in local government, and in the judiciary,