USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

«‹›797 »

Gumball Gumption: Jan 7, 2012

I do really need to find out more about the green line track being too narrow. I'm just absolutely baffled at how you manage to do that. It's a standard!

# ? Dec 1, 2023 15:07

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 24, 2024 18:05

AtomikKrab: Jul 17, 2010; Keep on GOP rolling rolling rolling rolling.

I've ridden on both the DC and New York systems and the differences are very clear.

DC was designed in an era where they had to think really hard that "we might need to all hide down here while the world burns" It is relatively expansive and cavernous and has a bomb shelter vibe

NYC has a "we built this quick and dirty 100 years ago to get poo poo done." vibe

# ? Dec 1, 2023 15:08

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

North Carolina became the 40th state (41st counting D.C.) to accept the 2013 Medicaid expansion under Obamacare today.

600,000 people will get Medicaid benefits today in North Carolina after the Governor was finally able to overcome a lawsuit and reach a compromise with the Republican legislature.

The main things that finally got the Republican legislature to agree to accept the expansion were: The Governor agreed to pair the expansion with tax cuts for hospitals and health care providers, rural hospitals were strained and desperately lobbied for the additional money, and the Governor ended a lawsuit and budget standoff with the legislature.

The only states that have not yet accepted expanded Medicaid left are:

- Wisconsin
- Florida
- Wyoming
- Texas
- Kansas
- Tennessee
- Mississippi
- Alabama
- Georgia
- South Carolina

Wisconsin and Kansas both have Democratic governors that are trying to expand Medicaid, but are unable to overcome Republican opposition in the state legislatures.

Florida had a ballot measure to expand Medicaid, but it was delayed by the organizers and hasn't come up for a vote yet. It is currently scheduled to be on the 2026 ballot in Florida.

All the other states have no plans or made no indication that they plan to accept the Medicaid expansion anytime soon.

https://twitter.com/newschannelnine/status/1730225168977375314

# ? Dec 1, 2023 15:09

Bwee: Jul 1, 2005

Is there any reason beyond "Obama" that these states are refusing free money

# ? Dec 1, 2023 15:31

Eric Cantonese: Dec 21, 2004; You should hear my accent.

Bwee posted:

Is there any reason beyond "Obama" that these states are refusing free money

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L7HMRc_-nw

EDIT: but substitute "water" with "healthcare."

# ? Dec 1, 2023 15:34

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Bwee posted:

Is there any reason beyond "Obama" that these states are refusing free money

It's basically:

- Obama

- Philosophical opposition to government-provided or subsidized healthcare.

- The money is only technically free for about 5 years. After that, the state share increases by 2% per year until it caps out at 10%. Getting it 90% "free" is still an incredibly good deal for states, but if you want to free up as much of your state budget as possible for tax cuts, then Medicaid expansion can hurt your ability to do that. Especially since healthcare costs are generally growing and that 10% is not a fixed cost.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 15:34

Hieronymous Alloy: Jan 30, 2009; Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!; Morbid Hound

Bwee posted:

Is there any reason beyond "Obama" that these states are refusing free money

Technically the argument is that even with 70% cost share that extra 30% is money the state budget would have to cover

The actual argument is that Republicans in red states don't believe black people deserve to have health care.

If you don't understand something about red state politics, just ask yourself "what word or phrase in this situation do Republicans believe is just a synonym for '"n****r". Here, the phrase is "medicaid recipients".

# ? Dec 1, 2023 15:38

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

The way it was cast in Texas at the time was "We don't need hitch our wagon to a failed government program that's going to collapse because of [x]". I'm aware that's BS, but that's what they were pretending.

https://twitter.com/DKThomp/status/1730595703271952810

Article about all the fake workplace trends the financial papers have tried to invent since the pandemic, I thought this line was particularly good:

quote:

But trend journalism isn�t really about capturing a statistical truth. It�s about indulging reader anxiety by saying not only Everyone is feeling what you�re feeling, but also This moment is special, and you�re special too. By validating the fears and stresses of workers and managers, these articles succeed as a form of therapy, which is all the more powerful because it is discovered not on a counselor�s couch but in the business section, where it carries a patina of statistical authority.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 15:55

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

DeSantis agreeing to a debate with Gavin Newsom on Fox News that was moderated by Sean Hannity, and somehow losing that debate in spectacular fashion, has solidified the belief of many of his staff that he no longer has a chance in the Republican primary and probably never did.

Several members of his team are now thinking that his "success" as Governor was just that he had a huge Republican majority who would do anything he asked because they thought the future President might owe them a favor. He barely had to work for anything and just did not have the people skills or policy chops to convince people. The CEO of his SuperPAC has now quit and other members of his staff refer to his campaign as "a dumpster fire" that is doomed to fail.

He is also running in to problems with how devoted parts of the GOP base are to Trump. He had to run his primary campaign mostly as a Trump defender, which obviously makes it very hard to convince people to stop supporting him, and when he did find areas to criticize Trump for positions that he took that were unpopular with the GOP base... the base just swapped positions to support Trump and turn against DeSantis instead.

One hilarious example in the article is him trying to attack Trump and Biden for borrowing so much money, spending so much money, and contributing to inflation. The audience initially nodded along and agreed with him, but when he tried to tie Trump in to Biden for reckless spending, then the person he was making the point to swapped and said he supported Trump's spending, arguing that Trump was just trying to help the country.

quote:

�A dumpster fire�: DeSantis struggles grow in GOP presidential race

Ron DeSantis�s presidential bid is facing extraordinary turmoil approximately six weeks before the Iowa caucuses, with internal disputes erupting into public view as Republicans increasingly pin their hopes of stopping Donald Trump on a rival contender.

The CEO of the super PAC running much of DeSantis�s operation quit last week as allies took the unusual step of starting another super PAC late in the race. The vast political network led by Charles Koch � once drawn to DeSantis � endorsed Nikki Haley as it looks to stop Trump, promising the support of its ready-made field program. Some senior campaign aides are increasingly gloomy about their chances, according to a person close to DeSantis. �People increasingly think it�s over. It�s a dumpster fire,� said the person, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.

The fresh blows come at a critical time in the GOP primary, with Trump dominant in national and early state polls and a growing sense that he may be unstoppable. DeSantis entered the race with high expectations and formidable resources. But his struggles as a candidate � including his strained small talk, sometimes awkward smiles and perceived aloofness � have drawn widespread attention. And his theory of how to beat Trump � by appealing squarely to his supporters � has run up against enduring GOP enthusiasm for the former president, amplified by Trump�s indictments. Voters ready to move on from Trump have increasingly found Haley more compelling.

While some DeSantis allies are pessimistic, there�s precedent for dramatic shifts late in presidential primaries, leaving room for recovery. DeSantis�s team argues that only he can peel away enough Trump supporters to compete, and often point out that the former president is spending against DeSantis rather than Haley. DeSantis has focused intensively on Iowa, where he is about to hit all 99 counties and has high-profile surrogates, including Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) and evangelical leader Bob Vander Plaats.

�Team DeSantis leadership is not only optimistic about our pathway but we are incredibly excited to take this effort to the next stage over the final 47 days,� said DeSantis deputy campaign manager David Polyansky. �The Trump and Haley campaigns better buckle up for the ride ahead.�

DeSantis�s campaign has been attacking Haley as insufficiently conservative and dismissed the Koch network endorsement just before it was announced on Tuesday, declaring that �the pro-open borders, pro-jail break bill establishment is lining up behind a moderate,� a disparaging reference to the network�s positions on immigration and criminal justice matters.

But DeSantis and his team were stung by the loss, according to people in touch with them, and had cultivated a relationship with the network and its flagship group, Americans for Prosperity, despite DeSantis�s differences on some policy issues. An AFP polling memo explaining its endorsement read like a rebuttal to many of the DeSantis team�s arguments, pushing back on the idea that most of DeSantis�s early state supporters would flock to Trump if he were not in the race.

DeSantis has been tapping into the Christian, social-conservative networks that have powered past caucus winners. Mark Doss, who attended Vander Plaats�s Family Leader forum in November, said he was leaning toward DeSantis after people he respects, including pastor friends, put in a good word. �And I do have a high regard for Governor Reynolds,� said Doss, the ministry director of GoServ Global, an Iowa-based Christian humanitarian group.

Some of DeSantis�s vocal backers doubt that his endorsements will move the needle, however, and his challenges were hard to escape even at a November rally announcing Reynolds�s support, where some attendees effectively shrugged when asked if it mattered to them.

Internal turmoil

With time to change DeSantis�s fortunes dwindling, the governor�s allies are fighting with one another. DeSantis and some of his advisers have criticized Never Back Down, the primary super PAC supporting him, according to several people familiar with the comments. Never Back Down officials have expressed their own concerns: CEO Chris Jankowski quit last week while saying his job had become untenable and alluding to problems �well beyond a difference of strategic opinion.�

Jankowksi left shortly after close DeSantis allies set up a new super PAC and nonprofit called Fight Right, which last week began running ads attacking Haley for her comments on Hillary Clinton. There were initial concerns raised about the legal independence of the new group and whether the transfer of money from NBD followed legal compliance. Ken Cuccinelli, an NBD board member and former attorney general of Virginia, wrote in an email first reported by NBC News that he found the funding of some of the ads against Haley to be �exceedingly objectionable� and asked for his concerns to be preserved in records of the board.

Some DeSantis allies say there were concerns that Never Back Down is so closely associated with the governor that its negative ads hurt him. But the campaign is now publicly embracing Fight Right, and many view the group as an effort to put ad money under new control.

Andrew Romeo, a DeSantis campaign spokesman, said in a statement that any assertion that �the campaign has anything to do with the strategy being pursued by an outside entity is absurd and categorically false.�

DeSantis was in Palm Beach this week courting donors for the new entity � a practice allowed under campaign finance laws even as there are legal limits on strategic coordination.

A Monday memo from DeSantis�s campaign manager, James Uthmeier, said Fight Right�s �television team� would complement Never Back Down�s �ground game� � making no mention of the fact that Never Back Down has booked more advertising this election cycle than any other campaign or supporting group. He also wrote that Fight Right �features minimal overhead� and said �100% of contributions go direct to TV ads� � appearing to allude to some donors� gripes that other money hasn�t been well spent. Never Back Down, when it reported its finances this summer, disclosed multiple efforts to keep costs down.

Never Back Down was set up to work unusually closely with DeSantis, taking charge of outreach traditionally overseen by the candidate and pushing the boundaries of legal limits on super PACs� ability to coordinate with candidates. Some DeSantis backers say his race has demonstrated the downsides of that super PAC model, with tensions magnified by an inability to communicate about many things.

Roy Bailey, a DeSantis fundraiser who once served as national finance co-chairman for Trump, brushed off disagreements in the news as the kind of conflict between �smart people all wanting to achieve the same thing� that �happen in corporate America all day long.� But he acknowledged complications from the super PAC�s role. �The organization that DeSantis has no control over, while doing great things on the ground in Iowa and New Hampshire, is the one that keeps making the news.�

Challenges with Trump voters

One of DeSantis�s consistent hurdles has been his inability to persuade enough voters enthusiastic about Trump. Trump has used the four criminal indictments he faces as a rallying cry to build strong support among Republicans this year. And many Republicans have responded negatively to attempts to criticize him.

�What do you think about stimulus checks?� an old man in an American flag-patterned hat asked DeSantis one day in November, as the governor addressed a row of veterans in wheelchairs in Marshalltown, Iowa.

It was the perfect opportunity for DeSantis to contrast his approach with Trump�s, and he launched into standard GOP criticisms of pandemic-era government spending that contributed to inflation.

�They printed and borrowed trillions of dollars, starting in March of 2020, both Republicans and Democrats, both Trump and Biden �� DeSantis said.

�Trump started that,� the man echoed.

�Exactly,� DeSantis said.

But the man interrupted as DeSantis continued his explanation.

�I think he was helping the country by doing that,� he said of Trump.

Still, longtime Iowa operative Dave Kochel said there is still time for the evangelical voters who dominate the GOP caucuses to repeat history and give DeSantis a late boost.

�You can�t do more than he�s done, between the super PAC, between his own candidate schedule, going to all 99 counties, getting the governor and getting Vander Plaats,� he said, referencing the endorsement of an evangelical leader known for backing past Iowa caucus winners in the final stretch.

But Trump also has broad support from evangelical voters, and Haley is the one gaining ground in the polls, operatives noted. The endorsement from Americans for Prosperity, the flagship group of the Koch network, also provides Haley with more infrastructure in Iowa and beyond to address one of her challenges � a ground game that�s thinner than DeSantis�s. With Haley pulling even with DeSantis in Iowa and claiming a clear second in surveys of New Hampshire and South Carolina, her supporters say she�s the only Trump alternative with their eggs in multiple baskets.

�The Governor has received the support of Iowa�s popular Governor Kim Reynolds, evangelical leaders like Bob Vander Plaats, will hit all 99 counties across the state, and has our historic and unmatched caucus operation and grassroots efforts behind him to win on caucus night,� said Erin Perrine, communications director for Never Back Down. �Instead of regurgitating the consultant class talking points, The Post should get back to reporting,� she added.

DeSantis�s team has started to argue that Haley�s amped-up investments in Iowa, including large ad buys, raise the stakes of her performance there. An adviser also contended he is contrasting more forcefully with Trump at this point than the former U.N. ambassador.

DeSantis backers agree: He needs to distinguish himself in Iowa.

Said one DeSantis donor who still thinks the governor is Trump�s best challenger: �The best thing he�s got going for him is the expectations for him are so low.�

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/12/01/ron-desantis-presidential-campaign/

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 15:58 on Dec 1, 2023

# ? Dec 1, 2023 15:56

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

What happened in the debate such that most everybody is declaring it a disaster for DeSantis? Not that I doubt it, just that you rarely have clear winners and losers in a one-on-one presidential debate, each side has enough spin and media confederates to say We Won no matter what happened.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:00

mobby_6kl: Aug 9, 2009; by Fluffdaddy

zoux posted:

What happened in the debate such that most everybody is declaring it a disaster for DeSantis? Not that I doubt it, just that you rarely have clear winners and losers in a one-on-one presidential debate, each side has enough spin and media confederates to say We Won no matter what happened.

Yeah I dunno, Fox news (and chuds I assume) are convinced Ron won it, by a lot

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:04

Eric Cantonese: Dec 21, 2004; You should hear my accent.

mobby_6kl posted:

Yeah I dunno, Fox news (and chuds I assume) are convinced Ron won it, by a lot

I'm not sure if anyone "won." Everything I've been reading says they both seemed petty. Newsom has the advantage of being better looking and having a more natural smile and Desantis reportedly still looked awkward.

I know you guys don't like Politico, but this seems to be reflective of the general takeaways.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/12/01/gavin-newsom-and-ron-desantis-said-a-lot-their-body-language-said-more-00129522

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:08

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

zoux posted:

What happened in the debate such that most everybody is declaring it a disaster for DeSantis? Not that I doubt it, just that you rarely have clear winners and losers in a one-on-one presidential debate, each side has enough spin and media confederates to say We Won no matter what happened.

it was before the bottom fell out of his campaign and fox and others still loved him. i think he was trying to do it so he could just say "see i am already winner and can fight the dems" then he got his rear end kicked and it never stopped getting it kicked.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

DeSantis agreeing to a debate with Gavin Newsom on Fox News that was moderated by Sean Hannity, and somehow losing that debate in spectacular fashion, has solidified the belief of many of his staff that he no longer has a chance in the Republican primary and probably never did.

Several members of his team are now thinking that his "success" as Governor was just that he had a huge Republican majority who would do anything he asked because they thought the future President might owe them a favor. He barely had to work for anything and just did not have the people skills or policy chops to convince people. The CEO of his SuperPAC has now quit and other members of his staff refer to his campaign as "a dumpster fire" that is doomed to fail.

He is also running in to problems with how devoted parts of the GOP base are to Trump. He had to run his primary campaign mostly as a Trump defender, which obviously makes it very hard to convince people to stop supporting him, and when he did find areas to criticize Trump for positions that he took that were unpopular with the GOP base... the base just swapped positions to support Trump and turn against DeSantis instead.

One hilarious example in the article is him trying to attack Trump and Biden for borrowing so much money, spending so much money, and contributing to inflation. The audience initially nodded along and agreed with him, but when he tried to tie Trump in to Biden for reckless spending, then the person he was making the point to swapped and said he supported Trump's spending, arguing that Trump was just trying to help the country.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/12/01/ron-desantis-presidential-campaign/

another issue is that Ron has no charisma and never did basic political things like making friends and such. He basicaly is a weird control freak who did popular poo poo the base screamed for and did dick all and basicaly gambled trump would be dead or in jail or would abdicate. now he is underwater and he can't stop the campaign because its the only thing keeping him afloat and apperently alot of florida GOP types hate him now because he is scaring the money away and when he is out in 2026 he is done and gone.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:08

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

zoux posted:

What happened in the debate such that most everybody is declaring it a disaster for DeSantis? Not that I doubt it, just that you rarely have clear winners and losers in a one-on-one presidential debate, each side has enough spin and media confederates to say We Won no matter what happened.

Nobody really "won" because it was all forgetable - except one moment at the end - but, there were a bunch of different things that made DeSantis' campaign team lose faith:

- DeSantis was awkward and someone had clearly told him he needed to smile more, so he ended every question with a weird joker smile straight into the camera that he held until it was his turn to talk.

- DeSantis had a big moment planned where he was going to pull a map out from his coat to show how bad California was. He pulled out this brown blob map and said it was a map of "human feces" that he had personally developed. He didn't really explain it any more than that. Then, he tried to move on to the map showing how high California's murder rate was and Newsom pointed out that the same data actually says Florida has a higher murder rate than California. DeSantis just kind of shrugged and accepted the point.

- Newsome kept criticizing him for being trying to copy Trump and failing and DeSantis kept getting annoyed and asking Sean Hannity to make Newsome stop being mean.

- Newsom asked DeSantis if he would support a national abortion ban and DeSantis wouldn't answer because the debate stage "wasn't the place to talk" about it.

- The only line anyone will remember is during the closing arguments when Newsome said:

quote:

"We have one thing in common: Neither of us will be the nominee for our party in 2024."

And DeSantis got upset and tried to complain about him being rude, but kind of trailed off and the debate ended.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 16:12 on Dec 1, 2023

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:08

Eric Cantonese: Dec 21, 2004; You should hear my accent.

I'm not sure if this is kosher to share, but Desantis also showed off a page from a banned queer graphic novel and I can't imagine it didn't creep some people out.

https://twitter.com/imhoplite/status/1730429904607445366?s=20

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:10

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

Eric Cantonese posted:

I'm not sure if anyone "won." Everything I've been reading says they both seemed petty. Newsom has the advantage of being better looking and having a more natural smile and Desantis reportedly still looked awkward.

I know you guys don't like Politico, but this seems to be reflective of the general takeaways.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/12/01/gavin-newsom-and-ron-desantis-said-a-lot-their-body-language-said-more-00129522

yeah, to me its less about what they said and more all of that stuff. Newsome who i am meh on, came off as charming and easy going and knew how to handle the GOP moron types. desantis came off as akward dickhead who tried to use props and just said "you lie" a bunch of times. its not gonna convince anyone of anything really but its interesting seeing how bad desantis is with anything that isnt tightly controlled

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:10

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

Eric Cantonese posted:

I'm not sure if anyone "won." Everything I've been reading says they both seemed petty. Newsom has the advantage of being better looking and having a more natural smile and Desantis reportedly still looked awkward.

I know you guys don't like Politico, but this seems to be reflective of the general takeaways.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/12/01/gavin-newsom-and-ron-desantis-said-a-lot-their-body-language-said-more-00129522

This would be why we don't like politico lol.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

He pulled out this brown blob map and said it was a map of "human feces" that he had personally developed.

Well, he's a lovely cartographer.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:11

Eric Cantonese: Dec 21, 2004; You should hear my accent.

zoux posted:

This would be why we don't like politico lol.

Well, he's a lovely cartographer.

A columnist from USA Today said that Desantis won and you should see her bio...

quote:

Ingrid Jacques has worked in journalism for nearly two decades. Prior to starting at USA TODAY in May 2022, she served as a columnist and deputy editorial page editor at The Detroit News, where she spent 12 years as a member of the editorial board. She has written frequently on Michigan and national politics, with a focus on education and cultural issues. In addition to The Detroit News, her work has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, National Review (online), the Washington Examiner, Real Clear Politics, and the Weekly Standard, among others. A native of Salem, Oregon, Ingrid has a degree in English from Hillsdale College and a master�s in journalism from Michigan State University. She currently lives in Metro Detroit with her husband.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:13

Sax Mortar: Aug 24, 2004

Gumball Gumption posted:

I do really need to find out more about the green line track being too narrow. I'm just absolutely baffled at how you manage to do that. It's a standard!

According to my cousin, who just started at the MBTA as an engineer, it's likely because of the difference between measuring from the inside of the rail to the inside of the rail vs. the center of the rail to the center of the rail.

Also they noticed it years ago and decided "gently caress it!" and just went with it (this part is public knowledge and why people were fired). It's great that came out after I rode the extension a few times at full speed when it first opened.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:15

RBA Starblade: Apr 28, 2008; Going Home.

Games Idiot Court Jester

quote:

- DeSantis had a big moment planned where he was going to pull a map out from his coat to show how bad California was. He pulled out this brown blob map and said it was a map of "human feces" that he had personally developed.

Big deal, I can do that too.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:15

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Sandra Day O'Connor has died.

No official cause of death, but her family says she was suffering from advanced Alzheimer's for the past few years and had recently contracted a lung infection, so it was likely one or a combination of those.

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1730603873625055457

quote:

Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who forged a path for women in the law, championed ideological compromise and educated generations of Americans about the rights and duties of citizenship, has died.

The court announced her death in a statement Friday morning, citing "complications related to advanced dementia, probably Alzheimer's, and a respiratory illness." She was 93.

O'Connor was the first woman to serve on the nation's highest court, shattering two centuries of male-dominated jurisprudence with widely-celebrated poise, humanity and independence.

Historians consider her one of the most consequential women in American history.

"The law was a male thing. The Supreme Court was a male place. Merely her presence there as a woman changed everything," said Evan Thomas, O'Connor's official biographer.

"She was a feminist, but she didn't call herself that," said Thomas. "She knew that to get along with these men who were waiting for her to fail, she had to be careful, but at the same time tough and strong. It was a hard balance to strike, but she did."

Republican President Ronald Reagan appointed O'Connor in 1981 as, "truly a person for all seasons," a constitutional conservative who he believed would both solidify the court's right-leaning majority and fulfill a campaign promise to put a qualified woman on the bench.

"The proper role of the judiciary is one of interpreting and applying the law -- not making it," O'Connor, then 51, said during her confirmation hearing. She was confirmed by the Senate 99-0.

"When she arrived, there were no women's bathrooms near the justices' conference room, and they had just removed the plaques that said 'Mr. Justice' from the offices -- but she adapted quickly and confidently," said Kate Shaw, ABC News Supreme Court analyst and former clerk for Justice John Paul Stevens. "She came to be beloved by her colleagues."

While few considered her an ideologue, O'Connor was a loyal Republican, embracing the values of smaller government, self-reliance and social conservatism that the party of the 1980s represented.

"She came from the country-club wing of the party," said author Linda Hirshman, whose book "Sisters in Law" chronicles the relationship between O'Connor and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. "She had a libertarian streak. But Sandra Day O'Connor did not have a clear philosophy."

O'Connor famously demonstrated an independence and pragmatism that friends and associates say reflected her scrappy upbringing on her family's beloved Lazy-B ranch in southeastern Arizona.

For more than two decades, O'Connor was often the decisive vote on a narrowly divided court. She wrote landmark opinions on abortion and affirmative action, and is credited by some -- bitterly blamed by others -- for helping Republican George W. Bush secure the presidency in the contested 2000 election.

"It was a hard decision to make," O'Connor told CNN in 2010 of her vote to block additional Florida ballot recounts sought by Democratic nominee Al Gore. "But I do know this. There were at least three separate recounts of the votes, the ballots, in the four counties where it was challenged. In not one of the recounts would the decision have changed. So I don't worry about it."

She was an ardent defender of First Amendment protections, showing particular concern for religious liberty.

"A State that makes criminal an individual's religiously motivated conduct burdens that individual's free exercise of religion in the severest manner possible," O'Connor wrote in a concurring opinion in a 1990 case from Oregon. She didn't believe the right to free exercise was absolute, but she argued the bar for states to limit religious activity was high.

In a narrowly decided case in 1984, O'Connor joined the court majority in upholding a Rhode Island town's creche display as part of its holiday decor.

"The display of the creche likewise serves a secular purpose -- celebration of a public holiday with traditional symbols. It cannot fairly be understood to convey a message of government endorsement of religion," she wrote in a concurring opinion, proposing an "endorsement test" that the court would use widely in years that followed.

Yet over time, many conservatives would be disappointed with O'Connor.

In what was then the most important challenge to abortion rights since Roe v. Wade, O'Connor was the decisive vote in a case affirming those rights. In 1992, she joined the majority of justices to strike down a Pennsylvania law that required a woman to notify her husband if she wanted to have an abortion.

"There are millions of women in this country who are the victims of regular physical and psychological abuse at the hands of their husbands," O'Connor and her co-authors wrote in the majority opinion for Planned Parenthood v. Casey. "Should these women become pregnant, they may have very good reasons for not wishing to inform their husbands of their decision to obtain an abortion."

O'Connor had said she opposed abortion as a personal matter, but in Casey she explained that the notification requirement posed a "substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus attains viability," or an "undue burden."

The standard remained the Supreme Court's constitutional litmus test for state regulations related to the procedure until the court's 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization overturned Roe v. Wade and the litmus test in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

On the equally fraught issue of race in college admissions, O'Connor was similarly torn. She had concerns about the practice, but in 2003 joined with the court's liberals to preserve race-conscious admissions at the University of Michigan Law School.

"In the context of its individualized inquiry into the possible diversity contributions of all applicants, the Law School's race-conscious admissions program does not unduly harm nonminority applicants," O'Connor wrote in the opinion on Grutter v. Bollinger.

At the same time, she signaled that affirmative action should be temporary, writing, "We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today."

She believed in the constitutionality of the death penalty, but backed limits on who states could execute, especially the mentally ill.

''If statistics are any indication, the system may well be allowing some innocent defendants to be executed," she said in a speech in 2001.

Like much of the country during her tenure, she underwent a transformation on gay rights. Early on, O'Connor voted to uphold a Georgia law that made sodomy illegal. Two decades later, she took the other side in a similar case from Texas, arguing that the state's "bare desire to harm" homosexuals violated the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.

"The statute at issue here makes sodomy a crime only if a person engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex. Sodomy between opposite-sex partners, however, is not a crime in Texas," O'Connor wrote in a concurring opinion in Lawrence v. Texas. "Texas' sodomy law brands all homosexuals as criminals, thereby making it more difficult for homosexuals to be treated in the same manner as everyone else."

A decade later, in 2013, retired Justice O'Connor officiated the wedding of a same-sex couple at the Supreme Court.

Some civil rights advocates wished O'Connor had done more to advance their cause.

"Her legacy as the perfect first is the strongest part of her legacy. Her decisions in the many Supreme Court matters where she was the critical 5th vote, are not the strongest part of her legacy," said Hirshman. "Many of them were wrong. She gave the critical 5th vote to the conservatives in a number of cases where she did harm, actually."

Particularly troubling to some women's rights advocates was her vote in the 1986 case Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson. The court unanimously affirmed the plaintiffs claim of sex discrimination in the workplace, but stopped short -- thanks to O'Connor's vote -- in allowing the company to be held liable for the misconduct of its employees.

"O'Connor and Ginsburg, in the years they overlapped, came out with the same ruling on cases involving women 95 percent of the time. However, you will see that often she rules for the woman litigant in the case but restricts the ruling so narrowly that in real life it doesn't really help women a lot," said Hirshman.

Later in her career, O'Connor became particularly impassioned and concerned about the role of money in politics, especially in judicial elections.

"It has the effect of turning judges into these politically-elected figures in arms races, if you will, by people with the means to support them," she said after retiring.

She joined with Justice John Paul Stevens on a 2003 opinion upholding a landmark overhaul of campaign finance law -- the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, also known as the McCain-Feingold Act after the two senators who wrote the bill.

The law imposed first-ever limits on soft money contributions to the political parties and candidates by unions and corporations. But the court's decision wouldn't hold for long. Five years after her retirement, the court reversed in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

"If both sides unleash their campaign spending monies without restrictions, then I think mutually-assured destruction is the most likely outcome," O'Connor lamented in a speech at Georgetown University in 2010.

For as much influence as she had as a justice in the middle of a divided court, she long rejected the notion that she was ever a "swing vote."

"I don't think any justice -- and I hope I was not one," she told NPR in 2013, "would swing back and forth and just try to make decisions not based on legal principles but on where you thought the direction should go, and so I never liked that term."

Born in El Paso, Texas, in the midst of the Great Depression, O'Connor came of age on her family's beloved ranch in southeast Arizona. She rode horseback, herded cattle, tended to windmills and prayed for rain.

"It was the best life," she once said of her upbringing.

As the country moved past World War II, O'Connor enrolled at Stanford University -- finishing her undergraduate and law degrees in just six years.

She graduated at the top of her class, but for more than a dozen years struggled to get a job as a private attorney. Major American firms were largely closed to women lawyers at the time, some offering her secretarial positions as consolation. She declined.

O'Connor's first job out of school was as Deputy County Attorney of San Mateo, California. Later, she moved to Germany with her husband, John, who was a military lawyer, and worked as a civilian attorney in the U.S. Army.

Back stateside, O'Connor hung out her own shingle for private practice in Phoenix while raising her family of three boys -- Scott, Jay and Brian. In 1969, she turned to politics, accepting an appointment to the Arizona state Senate. She was re-elected twice and chosen by her peers to serve as Republican majority leader -- the first woman to lead the upper chamber in any statehouse nationwide.

In 1974, O'Connor turned back to the law, running successfully for the Maricopa County Superior Court. Five years later, she was appointed to the Arizona Court of Appeals. It was from there that she caught the eye of the Reagan White House.

"It is challenging to be a 'first,'" O'Connor wrote in her 2013 history of the Supreme Court.

"The first woman on the Court was carefully scrutinized by the press, the government, the lawyers, and the public," she wrote. "It is not always comfortable to be the object of so much attention. But the appointment of a woman to the Court opened countless doors to women all across the country. For that I am grateful."

In a simple letter to President George W. Bush in July 2005, O'Connor announced her decision to step down. Her husband John -- the love of her life -- had been diagnosed with Alzheimer's and required her care.

"I will leave it with enormous respect for the integrity of the Court and its role under our Constitutional structure," she wrote.

The retired justice remained an active voice in the legal world and was staunch advocate for civics education in America's schools. She founded iCivics, a free online platform for interactive learning about U.S. government and citizenship.

"iCivics is my most important legacy," O'Connor says in a video on the site. "I want students to learn how their government works and how, in essence, they're part of what makes it function."

The program has been used by nearly 200,000 teachers to reach more than 5 million students in all 50 states, according to the iCivics website.

"She said that meant more to her than being a Supreme Court justice. Her friends would say, 'Come on,'" said her biographer Thomas. "But she meant it."

In 2009, President Barack Obama awarded O'Connor the nation's highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

"She made a mighty fine justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. A judge and Arizona legislator, cancer survivor, child of the Texas plains, Sandra Day O'Connor is like the pilgrim in the poem she sometimes quotes, who has forged a new trail and built a bridge behind her for all young women to follow," Obama said.

At 88 years old, faced with "the beginning stages of dementia, probably Alzheimer's disease," O'Connor released a public letter announcing her intention to withdraw from public life in 2018.

"While the final chapter of my life with dementia may be trying, nothing has diminished my gratitude and deep appreciation for the countless blessings in my life," she wrote. "How fortunate I feel to be an American and to have been presented with the remarkable opportunities available to the citizens of our country. As a young cowgirl from the Arizona desert, I never could have imagined that one day I would become the first woman justice on the U.S. Supreme Court."

Ginsburg, the second woman justice who joined O'Connor on the bench 12 years after she was seated, hailed O'Connor for making the inclusion of women on the federal bench "no longer extraordinary, but entirely expectable."

In his public farewell to her, Chief Justice John Roberts summed up O'Connor as a "towering figure in the history of the United States, and indeed the world."

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 16:18 on Dec 1, 2023

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:15

Aztec Galactus: Sep 12, 2002

FlamingLiberal posted:

As someone who grew up in Miami-Dade County, I refuse to believe that there is competent leadership anywhere down there

Agreed on this and it should be noted that public transportation down there is abyssmal

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:18

FlamingLiberal: Jan 18, 2009; Would you like to play a game?

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Sandra Day O'Connor has died.

No official cause of death, but her family says she was suffering from advanced Alzheimer's for the past few years and had recently contracted a lung infection, so it was likely one or a combination of those.

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1730603873625055457

She did a lot of great things, but her legacy 100% has to be stained by Bush v Gore

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:22

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

Eric Cantonese posted:

A columnist from USA Today said that Desantis won and you should see her bio...

It's not the FbI agent part, it's the body language reading part. Politico might as well as commissioned a psychic to describe each man's aura, both are equally valid.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:22

Eric Cantonese: Dec 21, 2004; You should hear my accent.

FlamingLiberal posted:

She did a lot of great things, but her legacy 100% has to be stained by Bush v Gore

Really? I know O'Connor's historical significance as the first female justice, but I cannot think of an opinion that she wrote that was particularly well-written or reasoned or brave. She helped put a little veneer on the overall rollback of individual rights under the Rhenquist court. She wasn't the obvious ideologue that Scalia foreshadowed, but she was otherwise a pretty reliable mainstream conservative voice who reached mainstream conservative conclusions.

To be fair, I wasn't the world's best law student either and I'm not a legal historian.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:27

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

So George Santos could be expelled from the House today. Yesterday there were a round of speeches about it, including one in which Rep. Max Miller of Ohio got up and called Santos a "crook". Santos got up and called Miller a "woman beater". Today Miller sent this out to his caucus.

https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1730604017053483244

Santos is probably definitionally evil but it seems almost all the damage is going to be limited to Republicans so I guess I'm in favor of him? Sticky moral question.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:37

Nissin Cup Nudist: Sep 3, 2011; Sleep with one eye open

We're off to Gritty Gritty land

Ngl, I thought O'Connor died years ago

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:38

Magitek: Feb 20, 2008; That's not jolly.
That's not jolly at all!

Severe Alzheimer�s is a form of death

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:40

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Eric Cantonese posted:

Really? I know O'Connor's historical significance as the first female justice, but I cannot think of an opinion that she wrote that was particularly well-written or reasoned or brave. She helped put a little veneer on the overall rollback of individual rights under the Rhenquist court. She wasn't the obvious ideologue that Scalia foreshadowed, but she was otherwise a pretty reliable mainstream conservative voice who reached mainstream conservative conclusions.

To be fair, I wasn't the world's best law student either and I'm not a legal historian.

She had a very impressive personal life and worked very hard/overcame a lot to get where she got, but you are basically right (in my opinion).

The thing that got her a lot of love and hate was that she was trying to find "practical" and "common ground" solutions to problems through a legal lens. Some people liked her for trying to find the "greatest common good" solution to problems and not being an ideologue. Some people hated her because they felt that she was mostly ruling from her personal opinion of what the best "middle ground" option would be instead of adhering strictly to the law and precedent (this was much more shocking for a Justice to do in 1983 than today).

A majority wanted to ban abortion? She was the 5th vote saying you can't ban abortion, but you can dramatically restrict it past the first trimester.

A majority wanted to ban affirmative action? Can't do it, but you can severely restrict it.

The "brave" decisions she made were basically to not bend to the extreme end of any argument, but you can also argue that taking the middle of the road option all the time was not especially brave. I don't really agree that she took many brave positions or that she wrote especially well-reasoned opinions, but some people say that it as brave to stick to her guns all the time and do "unpopular" things with the other 8 justices by preventing any of the other 4 from getting exactly what they wanted.

Having her there and appointed by Reagan was a much better result than many of the other potential options from a practical standpoint, but she wasn't especially amazing or brave on the bench (in my opinion). She was very brave and impressive in her personal/professional life prior to the court, though.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:44

haveblue: Aug 15, 2005; Toilet Rascal

zoux posted:

Santos is probably definitionally evil but it seems almost all the damage is going to be limited to Republicans so I guess I'm in favor of him? Sticky moral question.

I know Santos's main defense is that he hasn't been formally convicted of anything and a number of reps are handwringing about that, but I kinda think a precedent that you can be kicked out of the House just for being an enormous piece of poo poo that everybody hates is fine and worth establishing

Expulsion needs a supermajority, so we're not going to get a situation where the majority purges the minority every time the house changes hands. We need to bring shame and remorse back to politics and kill this new normal of everyone just posting through it because the will isn't there to hold them to behavioral standards

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:44

Retro42: Jun 27, 2011

zoux posted:

Santos is probably definitionally evil but it seems almost all the damage is going to be limited to Republicans so I guess I'm in favor of him? Sticky moral question.

Cheering on the horrible person for burning every other horrible person around him on his way out the door isn't really a moral dilemma. It's more like enjoying karma in effect.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:48

Timmy Age 6: Jul 23, 2011; Lobster says "mrow?"; Ramrod XTreme

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

DeSantis agreeing to a debate with Gavin Newsom on Fox News that was moderated by Sean Hannity, and somehow losing that debate in spectacular fashion, has solidified the belief of many of his staff that he no longer has a chance in the Republican primary and probably never did.

Several members of his team are now thinking that his "success" as Governor was just that he had a huge Republican majority who would do anything he asked because they thought the future President might owe them a favor. He barely had to work for anything and just did not have the people skills or policy chops to convince people. The CEO of his SuperPAC has now quit and other members of his staff refer to his campaign as "a dumpster fire" that is doomed to fail.

He is also running in to problems with how devoted parts of the GOP base are to Trump. He had to run his primary campaign mostly as a Trump defender, which obviously makes it very hard to convince people to stop supporting him, and when he did find areas to criticize Trump for positions that he took that were unpopular with the GOP base... the base just swapped positions to support Trump and turn against DeSantis instead.

One hilarious example in the article is him trying to attack Trump and Biden for borrowing so much money, spending so much money, and contributing to inflation. The audience initially nodded along and agreed with him, but when he tried to tie Trump in to Biden for reckless spending, then the person he was making the point to swapped and said he supported Trump's spending, arguing that Trump was just trying to help the country.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/12/01/ron-desantis-presidential-campaign/

I also just want to highlight the wonderful photo that the article uses.

Some photographer had a very good day at the office.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:56

Bubbacub: Apr 17, 2001

Gumball Gumption posted:

I do really need to find out more about the green line track being too narrow. I'm just absolutely baffled at how you manage to do that. It's a standard!

I know, we've been building railroads for centuries! Gauging is supposed to a standard part of rail inspection. Weird that it's just the green line tracks, they also rebuilt the commuter rail lines and they are still handling normal speed trains, including freight and Amtrak.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:56

Timmy Age 6: Jul 23, 2011; Lobster says "mrow?"; Ramrod XTreme

Retro42 posted:

Cheering on the horrible person for burning every other horrible person around him on his way out the door isn't really a moral dilemma. It's more like enjoying karma in effect.

Ladies and gentlemen, we got him. I think the votes just crossed the supermajority threshold to boot him.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:58

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

House is voting to expel Santos right now and it looks like it will succeed.

Only 1 Democrat voted "Nay."

102 Republicans voted "Yea."

# ? Dec 1, 2023 16:59

Hieronymous Alloy: Jan 30, 2009; Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!; Morbid Hound

You know in a way that's an impressive achievement

Even Ted Cruz couldn't garner that kind of unanimous hatred

# ? Dec 1, 2023 17:00

Morrow: Oct 31, 2010

There is, in fact, a bar in politics now. You need to be seven feet tall and an Olympic jumper level of charlatan to hit it but some bare minimum of decency has been established.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 17:02

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

You know in a way that's an impressive achievement

Even Ted Cruz couldn't garner that kind of unanimous hatred

A majority of Republicans voted to keep him, but it was a slim majority.

Looks like the final vote is going to be 311 to 114.

# ? Dec 1, 2023 17:03

RBA Starblade: Apr 28, 2008; Going Home.

Games Idiot Court Jester

If he gets expelled can he try running again?

# ? Dec 1, 2023 17:03

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 24, 2024 18:05

haveblue: Aug 15, 2005; Toilet Rascal

"Committing crimes" has now tied with "being a confederate" in reasons representatives have been expelled

Can't wait to see who puts crimes over the top in the future

# ? Dec 1, 2023 17:05

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

«‹›797 »