Yes. Denial. It's over there on the side table, you just can't see it because you put a load of papers down on top of it.
Yes. Misanthropy. It's still in your hand.
Yes. Nihilistic humor and remembering that everything dies. Probably next to my keys.
I've been taking my anger out on Chipotle workers. When they ask "Was that made perfectly for you?", I scream that only God makes things perfectly and storm out without paying.
Kudos to the commenter (politicalfootball?) who predicted long ago that an emergency would be declared.
Yes. Unhinged rants*. That would be the butt, Bob heebie.
*I may have misunderstood the assignment.
It seems like National Emergencies get declared every couple of years and cover everything from "Oh shit, we're all going to die!" to "Wake me up if something happens."
Seems to me that this will be on the latter end of the spectrum, and probably won't do Trump any good.
That would be the butt, Bob heebie.
It's terrible for storage because of the hole.
1. Apparently we will, yes.
2. I try to keep the big picture in mind. That's depressing, but in a different and less acute way than if I thought of this stuff as emergencies. In the long run, declaring a national emergency to build the wall isn't the most dictatorial thing Trump and the GOP have done in the past 5 years. It's probably not in the top 5 worst incidents. It's also far from the biggest waste of money. It sucks but I don't feel guilty for not protesting in the streets about this and don't think this is the last kilocalorie before the frog is boiled.
If you need a ray of sunshine, there are signs, however, slight, that this really might be going too far. Even the conservative Washington Examiner has come out fairly strongly against this stunt.
3. 8 times out of 10, a kid took it. The 9th time or some significant fraction of it, it was the spouse trying to organize things.
11.3: Interesting! In my life, it's almost always my own damned fault.
Some people say that there's a woman to blame.
(I guess 11.3 just did.)
I figure that there's a really good chance that this state of emergency gets slapped down hard by the courts, and then we have a precedent that keeps him from using the same mechanism on something more important. Worst case, the courts ultimately decide it's ok, we get to waste some money on a useless wall for whatever is left of Trump's term by the time this makes its way through the courts, and then President Warren gets to (1) kill the rest of the wall and (2) use the precedent to negate the Hyde amendment by reallocating defense dollars to pay for Medicare abortions for all. I think (2) is why even conservative judicial hacks will be reluctant to uphold this particular power grab even if they are willing to ignore the existing precedent and constitutional arguments, but we'll see.
That's why I'm feeling pretty chill about things today.
Yeah, even if it weren't insanely unconstitutional, I think Roberts (if no one else) is smart enough to understand that if allowed to stand it's almost guaranteed to lead to a climate change state of emergency before he retires, and protecting capital is his number one goal.
15: Looks as if legal ways could be found, actually (if not sufficient funds).
9, 11.2: I think this is different, in that it's trying to appropriate funds for something Congress specifically refused to fund; and more importantly in that emergency defense powers are being invoked on transparently false grounds (immigrants threaten national safety as criminals/terrorists, that a wall would help with these problems, that military assistance is necessary for construction).
We do have 31 pending national emergencies already: the law needs to be fixed, and I won't be surprised if Trump's successor is presented with something that seriously limits it. The artificiality of this one is so striking: he negotiates a bill, signs it, then doesn't want to live within it. On the other hand, just what is the deal with having a bunch of unallocated money sloshing around in the DOD budget anyway.
So, really, I'd say the chances of Roberts voting no are really going to depend on exactly what Trump actually does. I'm not convinced that he'll vote to strike down use of appropriated but unallocated defense funds, especially if there's some kind of competently written finding justifying, on the lowest threshold of that word, some conceivable military benefit of the additional fencing that gets built.
That's if it gets to the SC from a challenge by Pelosi. If it's a challenge from a Texas landowner, arguing that the supposed emergency is not a sufficient basis to take over property (especially destroying houses etc in the path of the fence) without paying just compensation, then maybe it goes the other way. Or maybe not: Justice Douglas' dissent in US v. Caltex is transparently correct, but, even without Trumpismo, apparently not the law.
(I'd expect the government to try first for an Abrahim-Youri style argument, that is that the land there are taking from a border area rancher is for his own good, so they don't have to pay for it.)
Justice Douglas' dissent in US v. Caltex
Which says...?
I have no doubt that the military had authority to select this particular property for destruction. But whatever the weight of authority may be, I believe that the Fifth Amendment requires compensation for the taking. The property was destroyed, not because it was in the nature of a public nuisance, but because its destruction was deemed necessary to help win the war. It was as clearly appropriated to that end as animals, food, and supplies requisitioned for the defense effort. As the Court says, the destruction of this property deprived the enemy of a valuable logistic weapon.
It seems to me that the guiding principle should be this: Whenever the government determines that one person's property whatever it may be-is essential to the war effort and appropriates it for the common good, the public purse rather than the individual, should bear the loss
13: How dare you impugn my feminism. I clearly said "spouse". I acknowledge that Cassandane cleans up more often than I do, but not all that much. I've moved her stuff now and then.
12: Hard to say. I rarely lose "that thing I was just holding" at all. But something I was holding a few hours ago, or something that was clearly visible in one place for days and can't be found when I actually want it, chances are either that Atossa is playing with it now or played with it recently and put it somewhere else, or Cassandane decided to tidy up since the last time I walked by.
Trump actually said this today!?
I could do the wall over a longer period of time, I didn't need to do this, but I'd rather do it much faster....The only reason we're up here talking about this is because of the election, because they want to try and win an election which it looks like they're not going to be able to do. And this is one of the ways they think they can possibly win is by obstruction and a lot of other nonsense. And I think that I just want to get it done faster, that's all.
Emergency?
Even in light of all the other fucked up stuff this week, it's worth mentioning that an elected Republican said that we shouldn't outlaw the death penalty because Jesus was executed. Fortunately, they never noticed that's just as good of an argument against executing the innocent as executing the guilty.
I missed 28; it refers to this.
Not a Christian, but that's some interesting theological claims wrapped up in the argument that The Salvation of All Humanity requires state execution. Like, if Pilate had been like "nah, we don't get into this kind of shit, never goes over well with the provincials" and instead some rival sectarians had taken him out back and beaten him to death, would Jesus's death not count? Would God have to take a mulligan?
Of course, Jesus is dead and back and gone again*, so presumably she wants to keep the window open for any future messiahs who need to be executed. Which seems rather heretical to all the forms of doctrinaire Christianity I'm familiar with.
* Why is a potential return called "The Second Coming" when it should clearly be called "The Third Coming"?
Also from that article: she describes sexual relations with the exact same cadence Ralph Wiggum does.
According to officials with Wyoming Equality, a Cheyenne-based civil rights group, Hutchings told 10 students from the Gay-Straight Alliance at Cheyenne's Central High, "If my sexual orientation was to have sex with all of the men in there and I had sex with all of the women in there and then they brought their children and I had sex with all of them and then brought their dogs in and I had sex with them, should I be protected for my sexual orientation?"
30.last: I think because, in terms of theology, leaving for less than 48 hours doesn't count as a separate trip.
OK, so apparently Trump is going to use money already set aside for 10 USC 284(b)(7), which allows other agencies to request DOD funds for "[c]onstruction of roads and fences and installation of lighting to block drug smuggling corridors across international boundaries of the United States." Apparently, there are several billion dollars in that account. I can't imagine that the declaration is necessary for this, nor would I expect the Roberts Court to find use of funds already appropriated for section 284 to be unconstitutional. It's a dumb use of the money, and spending it on the wall means it's not getting spent on more sophisticated military assistance efforts, but it's not going to be the End of the Republic.
Are the DOD lawyers smart enough to stay within the lines in section 284? I wouldn't bet on them not doing so.
I guess asking why he didn't try the way that wasn't stupid and illegal, that's not going to be fruitful. But it seems to me that taking money from the account for fences and barriers to make Wall is much easier before you sign passed legislation saying "Fuck Wall."
I'm sure the Defense Department doesn't mind Trump coming after their money.
Is there any chance that John Roberts isn't a total shithead on that issue?
||
NMM2 Bruno Ganz, progenitor of one of the best memes in internet history.
|>
For a second, I thought it was the wincing guy with the gray hair and beard.
Unforgettable in Wings of Desire, and did some fantastic work with Herzog, Rohmer, and others. One of the greatest actors of his generation. RIP.
I haven't seen Wings of Desire since college. Maybe I'll put it on my rewatch list.
I remember reading an interview with Ganz where he was asked about the Downfall parodies. He said he was amazed by how creative people got with them.
People don't know this, but most of the parodies were made by Herzog.
I just looked up "Wings of Desire" and see that it was remade into a movie with Nicolas Cage.
47 I think I knew this at one point but had successfully repressed the memory. Until now.
"I don't want the world to see me, because I don't think that they'd understand...."
Maybe the answer to 35 is that it's not actually about the wall per se, but about beating Pelosi (to get the wall).
Just as there isn't really all that much opposition to building a decent fence -- as the President points out, we've been building fences for years -- but it's to his petulance insistence that his wall will do something truly significant.
Once he builds his fence, and it has no impact at all on the availability of drugs from Mexico, the cultists can chant 'shoot them all' and be happy.
It's like they don't realize true happiness comes from within.
And by "within" I mean "within the continental United States".
I've wondered whether my Columbo rewatch needs to include "Wings of Desire" or not.
If that's the one with Johnny Cash, then yes.
But they didn't have Nicholas Cage play Nick Cave, which you'd think they would seize on if they were already going that road.
Speaking of movies, I like how Logan's Run barely tries to hide that it was mostly filmed in a hotel lobby.
Farrah Fawcett looks really out of place here. Like nobody else in the whole city has access to hair products or a bra.
Anyway, he is running. Logan, that is.
Past the naked groping people and into the utility corridor.
||
The super-fancy eyedrops I had to buy since my eyes have been all itchy, are priced at about $17,000 per gallon. I'm guessing somewhere around $300 of that would be the packaging. Seems excessive to me.
Man alive! The road to Hell is sure as fuck paved with good intentions. Certainly not going to get into it on this forum, and threats are for weaklings, and true justice rarely if ever prevails, but goddamn, the shit I am dealing with right now has completely degraded my estimation of a few people to whom I previously bore only a small amount of bad will.
Orson signing off, Nanoo nanoo.
||>
Very sorry to hear you're going through that Natilo.
They are in the hall of frozen people now. They should try to reanimate them, just in case they aren't dead.
(I guess I can say that this is all due to a horrible situation that has befallen my friend [the one who fucked up things always happen to]).
There's a man trying to kill another man on the Senate floor using an American flag. So, the future isn't very different.
It turns out you can live past 30, but you need to pay attention to your fiber consumption.
||
He was daily in Danger of being killed by the Stones that tumbled from the Mountains early and late in the Mornings and Evenings. This, as the Blacks said, was occasioned by the wild Goats going to their Caves on the Edge of the Mountain, whose Foot was at the Top of the Rock, under which they were; For the Land, says the Author, rises something like the Pyramids of Egypt.|>
What's that from? It doesn't seem like your usual sort of thing.
Cape Verde. (Some traveler's account.)
Trump apparently pestered the prime minister of Japan to nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize. Somehow that's more pathetic than forcing your doctor to let you write your own health report.
||
I wish I'd known about this back when I was a religious studies/philosophy undergrad and reading Kant's First Critique.
|>
Question for people more steeped in budget stuff than me:
What is the difference between the current budget and the renegotiated offer that was proposed right before shutdown (not the $6bn for wall proposal, but the second one with $1 or $2bn for it?)
Did we just end up at that or similar with a month of shutdown and the nat. emergency proclamation that seems to have hijacked the news?
Link for above: (sorry for crap citation, but not a wash post subscriber and google is being annoying at finding a difference source than this).
Link for above: (sorry for crap citation, but not a wash post subscriber and google is being annoying at finding a difference source than this).
It's strange how Trump can call for 'retribution' against those who parody him and nobody takes it serious, except people who take things seriously to make (necessary) tedious arguments about American decline. "The president is a total shit" is just priced into the market.