Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
That's sort of a meaningless statement — one-man rule in some capacity is there to stay until the Chinese economy implodes. But one type of Communist oligarchy doesn't have to look the same as the next.
"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."I was making a deliberate contrast to the previous regime's primus inter pares style of leadership over Shi's revival of the more traditional personality cult with one man as both leader and embodiment of policy. The dictatorship remains, but when there's decision-making done by a council of Communist grandees over one man, there's a difference; when the published ideology of the leader (Hu's Eight Principles versus Shi Jingping Thought) is a set of vaguely defined moral guidelines over a vast programme of social engineering, there's a difference. I feel like we're arguing semantics here because we've run out of anything meaningful to say
"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."I wrote a whole six-page essay contrasting the two. Xi ironically deeply admires the US and believes that it’s global power comes from its military successes in the past, so he has ramped up funding and loosened the lease on the PLA. In contrast, Hu and his supporters believed that China could forge its own direction to gain superpower status, and moderates military spending so that the money could go into the civilian economy instead.
Come 2012, the PLA officer corps were tired of having to fight for their funding, and looked to Xi to return them to their “rightful” place in society.
Kind of an inaccurate comparison, because Xi is at least somewhat competent.
Brezhnev was not the brightest tool in the shed, to put it mildly.
Better comparison would be Caracalla from the Roman Empire. Competent, but brutal.
That said, his militaristic approach misses a number of points. If he thinks America got where it is purely because of military strength, he's got a very strange view of history. There's a number of factors involved in America's rise to lead a Unipolar world - military might is just one of the reasons.
Edited by TechPriest90 on May 10th 2019 at 10:59:59 AM
I hold the secrets of the machine.Following opioid suits, family behind deadly Oxy Contin squabbles
FILE PHOTO: Bottles of prescription painkiller Oxy Contin made by Purdue Pharma LP sit on a shelf at a local pharmacy in Provo, Utah, U.S., April 25, 2017. REUTERS/George Frey/File Photo At least twice in recent months, eight members of the Sackler family who own Oxy Contin maker Purdue Pharma LP have been at odds over how to respond to allegations implicating them in deceptive marketing of prescription painkillers that led to widespread fatal overdoses, said people familiar with the matter.
The family members have split into two groups that their advisers dub the “A side” and “B side,” the people said.
One point of contention centers on how aggressively former Purdue President Richard Sackler should disavow emails he had written years earlier that maligned opioid addicts, a debate that came to a head in anticipation of a critical segment on HBO’s news satire “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver.”
Another disagreement surfaced over legal defense tactics, with a lawyer for one faction initially counseling against Purdue settling an Oklahoma case in favor of a bankruptcy filing that would halt lawsuits.
The family dynamics will likely influence how the Sacklers resolve roughly 2,000 lawsuits by cities, counties and states alleging Purdue pushed prescription painkillers on unsuspecting doctors and patients while concealing their addiction and overdose risks.
The Sacklers are sacklers of shit. They can all rot.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I mean, what did Heisenberg do that the Sacklers didn't, except worse?
So rather than throwing those violating subpoenas in jail, the House has come up with a more novel idea - daily fines
. There's apparently precedent for it, and if you start fining an individual $25,000/day for each time they refuse to answer the subpoena, that's going to add up very quickly.
I have an idea. Instead of sending people to jail for violating Congressional subpoenas, I propose that we instead f*cking send people to jail for violating Congressional subpoenas.
I knew this was going to happen the moment they gave Barr a second deadline for acquiescence. House Democrats simply don't have the nerve to arrest the Attorney General. Trump's playing chicken and they're desperate to find a way to fold without losing face.
Edited by TobiasDrake on May 10th 2019 at 1:40:20 PM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.I knew this was going to happen the moment they gave Barr a second deadline for acquiescence. House Democrats simply don't have the nerve to arrest the Attorney General. Trump's playing chicken and they're desperate to find a way to fold without losing face.
You are aware right that the subpoenas were given for a reason?
This puts pressure on them to provide the necessary information, and that's what matters. The information.
Throwing people in jail would be satisfying but what matters is utility not satisfaction. It's not a lack of nerve, it's strategy.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangI'm going to throw my two cents in and agree this is bullshit.
Disgusted but not surprised.
You couldn't just fucking arrest him, could you?
People who believe that the law should be fairly applied to politicians who perjure, obstruct, and other actions aren't going to be impressed by a speeding ticket.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on May 10th 2019 at 12:49:35 PM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.Disgusted but not surprised.
Ridiculous, $25K is not bullshit. It's a very real punishment that unlike jail allows for them to cave in and follow our instructions.
Frankly, I think some people here have confused what the actual objective is. It's not punishing them for violating the subpoena, what the Democrats want is for them to come and talk to the House.
This allows for that in ways that jail likely wouldn't.
$25K a day isn't a speeding ticket, this is a disingenuous reading of their response.
And this is exactly what I mean, you're ignoring the entire point of the subpoenas in the first place. Throwing them in jail stops them from talking to Congress.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on May 10th 2019 at 12:51:06 PM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangThe Trump Administration is making an authoritarian stand against Congressional oversight. Trump's cronies are violating subpoenas because they know the spineless Legislative won't do anything to make them cooperate.
What we need is a bloody nose to the Executive. A show of force against their strongman tactics that shows that when we subpoena, we damn well mean it and will back it up with arrests and imprisonment if needed.
A fine doesn't do that. We fine them, they don't pay it. And then we're back at square one. They're already violating subpoenas; the f*ck makes you think they'll cough up some pocket money?
We are in a Constitutional crisis; now is not the time for Democrats to get cold feet. This is another show of weakness in the face of an authoritian threat to our democracy.
Edited by TobiasDrake on May 10th 2019 at 1:54:32 PM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Is Parable wrong about being able to take the fines straight out of the paychecks or something?
My musician pageA fine is not jailtime.
And can be overturned a lot easier than jailtime.
Basically, he can challenge that in court and even if he's not being paid for being Attorney General—he's not going to starve.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on May 10th 2019 at 12:58:17 PM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.Everyone in Washington is independently wealthy. We can't take more money from a paycheck than is already there, and not getting a paycheck basically means nothing to these people's finances.
Edited by TobiasDrake on May 10th 2019 at 1:58:54 PM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Going to agree with the notion that Tobias and Charles are jumping the gun here, and also say they both of you have a tendency to do such.
I'll agree with Fourth Spartan that getting the actual information and going from there is more important than some cathartic "fuck you!". I'd also question the notion that that won't end up happening anyway.

He didn't exactly bring it back,it's been there since they've had a communist government,it's just been a lot more noticeable
have a listen and have a link to my discord server