…you can say it’s about drawing a line

Several Republicans are warning they will drag out Senate consideration of a massive military policy bill unless they get a vote on ending a Covid vaccination mandate for service members.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/gop-senators-threaten-delay-military-bill-vaccine-mandate

…but…between the part where that leaves these conscientious objectors with potentially upwards of a dozen mandatory vaccinations (not to mention an unspecified degree of pharmacological tweaks) & the part where signing up for the military generally comes with a willingness to follow orders…& any claim about that not being a defense generally presupposing that they aren’t literally life-saving ones…it seems more about being aligned

In the US Senate, Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent who caucuses with Democrats, announced that he would object to fast-tracking Joe Biden’s proposal that Congress impose an industrial settlement, until he can get a roll-call vote on the amendment that would guarantee seven paid sick days for rail workers.

The House voted 290-137 to impose a tentative contract deal that had been reached in September, but which four key unions had refused to join, on a dozen unions representing 115,000 workers.

The US president […] had warned of the catastrophic impact of a rail stoppage that could begin as early as 9 December and could cost the US economy about $2bn a day by some estimates, with chaos hitting freight and passenger traffic.
[…]
On Wednesday, the House passed the bill to block the strike and, separately, voted 221-207 to give seven days of paid sick leave to railroad employees, a plan that faces an uncertain fate in the evenly split Senate. Democrats and some Republicans have expressed outrage over the lack of paid short-term sick leave for railroad workers.

…if the jobs these people do are so essential it’s not ok for them to strike…then surely it follows that it must be equally essential that adequate provision be built in for a scenario in which they have to seek medical care during business hours…so…ol’ joe might be the one folks seem keen to put on the spot

Asked if Biden supported the separate House measure to require sick leave, the White House press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, said that the president broadly supported paid sick leave for all Americans “but he does not support any bill or amendment that would delay getting this bill to his desk”.

…but…in terms of alignment…the folks who might not vote for the sick leave being included & the ones who heavily subsidise their party consider it an unjust imposition

Railroad companies and the US Chamber of Commerce oppose amending the contract deal that was struck in September largely on the recommendations of an emergency board appointed by Biden.

The influential business lobby group said the sick leave, if passed and signed into law, “would impose an unworkable, one-sided modification to a labor agreement”.

…sure do sound like they’re toeing the same line

There are no paid short-term sick days under the tentative deal, after unions asked for 15 and railroads settled on one personal day.
[…]
Ian Jefferies, chief executive of the Association of American Railroads, said House action on sick leave could undermine future collective bargaining and argued the unions had historically bargained for higher overall wages and a more generous long-term leave policy.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/nov/30/us-rail-strike-congress-house-senate-union-sick-leave

…I say line…that part about undermining future collective bargaining by having paid sick leave mandated might be more of a möbius loop…but hey, ho…some people are just loopy

NBC News reported that in an attempt to “send a message” to the former president, Milo Yiannopoulos, a rightwing provocateur and former Breitbart editor, helped arrange for Fuentes to travel to Mar-a-Lago in Florida for a dinner between Trump and the rapper Ye, formerly known as Kanye West.
[…]
“I wanted to show Trump the kind of talent that he’s missing out on by allowing his terrible handlers to dictate who he can and can’t hang out with,” Yiannopoulos said.

“I also wanted to send a message to Trump that he has systematically repeatedly neglected, ignored, abused the people who love him the most, the people who put him in office, and that kind of behavior comes back to bite you in the end.”
[…]
He told NBC he also arranged the meeting “just to make Trump’s life miserable”, because he was aware news of the dinner would leak.

…apologies for quoting such a miserable excuse for a human being…but on the upside…ignoring for a moment the circular logic that doesn’t quite add up…it does rather sound like it adds up to a circular firing squad

“This is just not true at all,” Fuentes said on the messaging app Telegram, below a screenshot from the NBC article. “My intention was not to hurt Trump by attending the dinner, that is fake news. I love Donald Trump.”

…I mean…with friends like these

“Trump started basically screaming at me at the table telling me I was going to lose,” Ye said in a video since deleted from social media but transcribed by Newsweek. “I mean, has that ever worked for anyone in history? I’m like, ‘Woah, woah hold on hold on Trump, you’re talking to Ye.’”

Ye also said Trump was “really impressed” by Fuentes.
[…]
“He’s crazy. He can’t beat me,” Trump said of Ye […] [&] also said “Trump was totally blindsided” by Fuentes’s presence, adding: “It was a set-up.”

…to be honest, though…it was the bit buried at the end that caught my eye

On Wednesday, the Associated Press reported that Trump’s campaign was “putting new protocols in place to ensure that those who meet with him are approved and fully vetted”. Among those protocols, the AP said, citing unnamed sources, is a requirement that Trump is accompanied by a senior official at all times.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/nov/30/milo-yiannopoulos-nick-fuentes-donald-trump-dinner

…even allowing for the fact that I suspect they & I would differ substantially on what belongs in the pro/con column where that vetting is concerned…are you seriously telling me that only now has it occurred to them that full-time adult supervision is required for the petulantly puerile pustulent pestilence? I guess we’re back to lines drawn by alignment

Mr. McCarthy had been silent for days on Mr. Trump’s decision to have dinner with Nick Fuentes, the racist Holocaust denier who leads the white nationalist movement America First, and Kanye West, the artist and provocateur who has also made antisemitic comments.
[…]
“The president can have meetings with who he wants; I don’t think anybody, though, should have a meeting with Nick Fuentes,” Mr. McCarthy said later. “And his views shouldn’t — are nowhere within the Republican Party or within this country itself.”

…some or all of which might be up for debate…but let’s say kevin was just indulging in a spot of wishful thinking

He then falsely claimed that Mr. Trump had condemned Mr. Fuentes “four times”; the former president has never done so. Mr. Trump has repeatedly said that he did not know who Mr. Fuentes was, but has not denounced his views or statements, which include unabashed racism and antisemitism.
[…]
It was far from the first time Mr. McCarthy has struggled to address the extremism problem in the Republican ranks, especially around Mr. Fuentes, who marched at the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Va., in 2017 and outside the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. He has also warned that the nation is losing “its white demographic core.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/29/us/politics/mccarthy-trump-nick-fuentes.html

…but…if that were in fact true…would that be such a bad thing?

In an interview this week with NBC News, Iowa’s Republican party chair said he would be prepared to move the state’s caucuses – the process Iowa uses to identify its preferred presidential candidate – “to Halloween” should Democrats shake up their primary schedule.
[…]
Clamor has been growing in the party for a different state, with a population more representative of the US as a whole, to be given the first go, with Democratic officials in Michigan, in particular, pushing for the state to be moved up in the primary calendar.

Earlier this year, the Democratic National Committee made changes to its primary process, which could allow states other than Iowa and New Hampshire, the two states which have voted first since 1972, to kick off the ballot.
[…]
Given the first vote is usually held in January, Kaufmann’s threat has the appearance of hyperbole, yet since Kaufmann also heads the national Republican committee, as NBC reported, that oversees its presidential schedule, he would potentially have scope to change the date of the Iowa caucuses.

…you can take your pick about what you think is at stake

After changing its rules in April, in July the DNC postponed a vote on whether Iowa and New Hampshire should continue to be the first states in the calendar. According to US census data, 84% of Iowans identify as “white alone, not Hispanic or Latino”, and 89% identify the same way in New Hampshire. Nationwide, 59% of Americans identify as “white alone”, according to the census.

…but…even allowing for the part where the last census had an un-presidented margin of error…I guess kevin can’t have looked very hard for that demographic core he claims has been misplaced…well…he’d probably say displaced…but since he doesn’t seem to know what the fuck he’s saying…much less talking about…who’s counting? …or is it more about who’s left out of the count?

The Michigan primary was held on 10 March in 2020, by which time only three candidates – Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and Tulsi Gabbard, remained in the race. Biden won the Michigan primary convincingly, and carried the state in the presidential election.

…hmmm…where do you draw the line on a foregone conclusion?

Going first in the primaries brings prestige and exposure, with TV channels and newspapers providing daily updates from early states for weeks, and also brings a financial boost in the depths of winter. The Daily Iowan reported that campaigns spent $7.2m in Iowa in January 2020 alone – 14.7% of the state’s entire gross domestic product for that month.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/nov/28/iowa-republicans-caucuses-democrats

…getting to dictate the runners & riders before anyone else gets a look in is a valuable commodity

In the new year, Republicans will hold a majority in the House of Representatives. They will have the opportunity to set the chamber’s agenda, conduct oversight of the White House and amplify their platform in the run-up to the 2024 presidential election.
[…]
But House Republicans face low odds of success because of a triple threat: a fragile majority, factional divisions and untested leadership. […]

The House Freedom Caucus, an assertive faction of 40-odd lawmakers, includes the likes of Jim Jordan of Ohio, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Lauren Boebert of Colorado. Generally, the caucus embraces confrontation over compromise, is disdainful of party loyalty — which extends to the selection of its leaders — and has a track record of killing its party’s own bills. In a slim majority, it holds greater leverage over any legislation.

Kevin McCarthy has made assiduous efforts to court the caucus over the past few years to become speaker, yet the caucus members’ skepticism of him in that role remains: In a recent vote for the party’s nominee for speaker, over 30 Republicans voted against him, and at least five conservatives have said that they will oppose him when the full House votes for its next speaker in January. That is more than enough to deny him the speakership, since the nominee must get a majority of the entire House and no Democrat is expected to vote for Mr. McCarthy.

…by a curious coincidence…”at least five” is the number of votes he’d need to drop in order to fail to get the verdict from that house he tried to whip…& kevin purportedly can handle basic arithmetic

This makes Mr. McCarthy vulnerable. Freedom Caucus members are making demands that could ultimately be fatal to any hope of Republican success in the House. They want rule changes that, among other things, would weaken the speakership by making bipartisan coalitions harder to build, allowing only bills supported by a majority of the G.O.P. to come to the floor. Such a rule would constrain the speaker’s agenda-setting power and make it extremely hard to pass much-needed legislation unpopular with Republicans, like raising the debt ceiling.

…though he may struggle with more complex equations

At the moment, he seems inclined to give away the store. By not refusing caucus demands, he has most likely put himself along a troubled path similar to those of his predecessors Newt Gingrich and John Boehner. Mr. McCarthy has vowed to block an increase in the debt limit unless Democrats agree to spending cuts and suggested that the homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, could face impeachment.
[…]
Furthermore, if as speaker he consistently defers to the Freedom Caucus, he risks alienating more moderate or swing-district Republicans (or both). Only a handful of these lawmakers would need to cross party lines in order for the minority party to get its way.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/30/opinion/kevin-mccarthy-house-republicans.html

…assuming it comes to that

There are many variables here, including how these members might register their discontent. If they don’t vote for an alternative — if they vote “present,” for instance — their protest votes will effectively only count half as much. A candidate doesn’t need 218 votes, but rather a majority of those casting a ballot for an actual candidate. The death of Rep. A. Donald McEachin (D-Va.) on Monday doesn’t immediately change McCarthy’s math, but other members are absent or vote present, the threshold would also be lowered. (For more on the entire process, see here.)

But for now, it’s worth drilling down on just how firm McCarthy’s opponents are and what their beefs are, given the maneuvering ahead. As things stand, we count five Republicans as indicating they’re against McCarthy, including two who have indicated they won’t vote “present.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/11/29/mccarthy-house-speaker-republicans-opposed/

…let’s see if I can tot this up…if he just got the two against…but more than a couple of others opted to skip proceedings or just vote “present”…he’d fail to clear that bar…which could be fun, I suppose? …either way…there are some other counts that are starting to add up

Here's a quick and dirty breakdown of the Oath Keepers verdict. Note: All five defendants were found guilty of obstruction of an official proceeding, which means at sentencing they will all start at the same base offense level. pic.twitter.com/XbgCryruQV

— Jordan Fischer (@JordanOnRecord) November 29, 2022

…personally I’d admit to being curious as to what the seditious conspiracy would be exactly if it didn’t involve conspiring to obstruct an official proceeding…but did in fact obstruct an official proceeding…without conspiring to impede members of congress…it’s a head-scratcher…even if it side-stepped the members of congress part by focusing on, say, the VP…getting him out of the building so he couldn’t preside over things seems like it would still check the box for a conspiracy that included obstructing an official proceeding…but I’m sure somebody somewhere will get around to explaining it eventually

This monthslong effort placed a great deal of hope in the prosecution. It felt like a chance to both hold Jan. 6 rioters accountable and strike a critical blow against the far right as a movement. But despite Tuesday’s verdict, Americans — prosecutors and citizens — need to remain realistic about the limitations of a trial like this. Formal organizations like the Oath Keepers no longer define the American right-wing landscape. These increasingly decentralized movements may pose problems for prosecutors forced to play a time-consuming and expensive game of extremism whack-a-mole.
[…]
The evidence of a seditious conspiracy introduced in the Oath Keepers’ trial was damning, yet obvious. This is an organization whose stated goal is to confront a federal government it sees as illegitimate, openly using the rhetoric of revolution.

…speaking of borrowed rhetoric

The abandonment of formal organizations is not a new idea; white nationalists have been advocating for it since the 1970s. In 1992, Louis Beam, a Ku Klux Klan organizer instrumental in mobilizing white Galveston Bay fishermen against their Vietnamese neighbors, published a manifesto titled “Leaderless Resistance.” In it, Beam pointed to a key vulnerability for organizations like the Klan. The federal government, he said, could too easily infiltrate, pull member lists, and then prosecute those members, even using organized crime statutes like RICO.

The answer to this, Beam argued, was to disperse into more informal networks and affinity groups. Going even further, neo-Nazi Alex Curtis promoted “lone wolf” attacks, featuring militants completely separated from formal organizations.
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/oath-keepers-trial-finds-stewart-rhodes-guilty-sedition

…got to wonder how much resistance these assholes would put up in the face of a state that will come for you for waving a blank bit of paper about

A thread here for those who don't understand why the China protests over the weekend protests are so shockingly rare.

Surveillance. In. China. Is. Extreme. Think you could evade Chinese police? Let's walk through it:

— Cate Cadell (@catecadell) November 29, 2022

…but it’s worth noting that to those who won’t pick up a book the pages might as well be blank

Amid all the bombshell revelations about fallen crypto king Sam Bankman-Fried, a seemingly trivial bit of information might tell us everything we need to know: He doesn’t read books.

If you’re anticipating a caveat or qualifier, you’re as out of luck as the FTX investors whose money SBF allegedly lost. “I’m addicted to reading,” a journalist said to the erstwhile multibillionaire in a recently resurfaced interview. “Oh, yeah?” SBF replied. “I would never read a book.”

…never? …I don’t know about you but I try to avoid taking advice from people who act like books are kryptonite…which might sound a mite presumptuous…but…I have my reasons

Now, there are plenty of people who don’t read. This does not indicate that they are likely to end up accused of having robbed thousands of others of their fortunes in a speculative adventure that is part financial experiment, part Ponzi scheme. Some prefer to listen; some prefer to do something else altogether. The thing is, the reason counts.

Behold, then, SBF’s reason: “I don’t want to say no book is ever worth reading, but I actually do believe something pretty close to that. … If you wrote a book, you f—ed up, and it should have been a six-paragraph blog post.”

…now, don’t get me wrong…I do sympathize with butcher’s fond hope that one day I might manage to trim one of these down to about a half-dozen paragraphs…even if I don’t think there’s exactly a big chance of it happening…but I happen to know his preferences in that regard don’t stem from spurning anything that takes more than a moment to read…even if he might not entirely endorse molly roberts’ thesis

But no matter the type of book he’s talking about, what SBF is missing is the experience. You’re supposed to read not in spite of the digressions and diversions that stand between you and the denouement, but because of them; the little things aren’t extraneous but essential. And what you come out of a book with isn’t always supposed to be instrumental at all, at least not in any practical sense. You read to read; you don’t read to have read.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/11/29/sam-bankman-fried-reading-effective-altruism/

…I don’t know about anyone else

…but I guess one reason I like to read is to learn stuff I didn’t know…after all…it’s something to aspire to

…as would be managing to get one of these up on time for a change…so I guess it’s past time I moved on to the listening part?