|
This isn't in response to any particular person, and isn't directly relevant to the rescheduling talk, but is kind of interesting context: in terms of bureaucrats doing things the slow way, the news made the rounds a few weeks ago that DEA is looking to significantly increase the legal production of weed and a bunch of other schedule 1-2 drugs for research due to increasing medical interest. quote:Based on the increase in research and clinical trial applications, DEA has proposed increases in 3,4-Methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA), 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), 5-Methoxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine, Dimethyltryptamine, Lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), Marihuana, Marihuana Extract, Mescaline, Psilocybin, Psilocyn, and All Other Tetrahydrocannabinols to support manufacturing activities related to the increased level of research and clinical trials with these schedule I controlled substances. https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...d-assessment-of Several of the increases are in the triple or quadruple digit percentages. Five hundred grams of LSD is quite a bit of LSD. As far as unilateral executive action, here's a Brookings article from 2016 regarding rescheduling and emphasizing, among other things, that in their view strong public approval for Obama's (in)actions under enforcement discretion meant they were likely to stick. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixg...-state-systems/ I mention it not so much for the rescheduling content but because it's the Brookings Institute enthusiastically supporting a regulatory scheme allowing for blatant violation of the laws on the books. e: grammar eviltastic fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Nov 3, 2021 |
#
¿
Nov 3, 2021 22:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 15:28 |
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:500 grams of lsd is an astronomical amount of lsd. like 5,000,000 doses Wild-rear end guess: something to do with evaluating toxicology? LD50s for it are in mg/kg for mammals. But yeah it does seem a bit out of step with the other numbers. The other eyebrow-raiser is MDMA at 3200 grams, not so much because of the raw number but because the previous quota was 50g. Pamela Springstein posted:Joe Biden during the campaign was asked about marijuana and he said it should stay illegal because it's a gateway drug. Not quite, as far as I can tell - that was the stance before the campaign. During the campaign he hemmed and hawed about more research on the point being needed. Relevant to the rescheduling conversation, he also promised to have it rescheduled (presumably to schedule II) through executive action. Or at least that was an explicit plank of the party platform in 2020 which was adopted verbatim from the Biden-Sanders unity task force recommendations. quote:Substance use disorders are diseases, not crimes. Democrats believe no one should be in prison solely because they use drugs. Democrats will decriminalize marijuana use and reschedule it through executive action on the federal level. We will support legalization of medical marijuana, and believe states should be able to make their own decisions about recreational use. The Justice Department should not launch federal prosecutions of conduct that is legal at the state level. All past criminal convictions for cannabis use should be automatically expunged. And rather than involving the criminal justice system, Democrats support increased use of drug courts, harm reduction interventions, and treatment diversion programs for those struggling with substance use disorders.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2021 00:12
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I haven't read the mod feedback thread, but is "too many people are being tricked into revealing their assassination plans" actually something that has been discussed multiple times? lol Yes, the subject has come up before in threads like this. eviltastic posted:Asking about details of direct action and essentially demanding posters prove themselves regarding the subject is not a reasonable request in the same manner that, say, quizzing someone about other political activism, door knocking, and proving they aren't a slacktivist or are otherwise engaged would be. Part of the answer to your question is going to be "because I'm not bragging about the deets on the Something Awful Forums". e: to be clear, the issue is that someone actually interested or involved in direct action or organizing has a lot more to lose than their chance to shitpost, and would accordingly be circumspect about it on a forum like this one. eviltastic fucked around with this message at 22:36 on Nov 5, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2021 22:22
|
|
|
SpaceCadetBob posted:So was there any actual votes today or did everything get punted? Stuff's happening right now. https://twitter.com/MEPFuller/status/1456747946364518403 https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1456746927761022994 (Daily Beast and NBC News reporters, there. Matt Fuller in particular is a very reliable House-rep-understander.) e: I think that what's going on is a vote on a discharge petition allowing consideration of the BBB legislation, subject to a point of order raised by Rep. Jason Smith (R-MO) relating to CBO scoring. eviltastic fucked around with this message at 23:36 on Nov 5, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2021 23:23
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:They're not voting directly on the BIF at the moment, it's a procedural vote to move it toward passage. If it fails it can be redone later. I am very confused, because as near as I can tell what's actually under consideration relates to BBB, not BIF. Unfortunately the actual text of the resolution in question isn't on congress.gov. edit: Per the House clerk's office, it's H. Res. 774. https://clerk.house.gov/FloorSummary#FloorProceedings eviltastic fucked around with this message at 00:08 on Nov 6, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2021 00:01
|
|
|
I recall Jake Sherman being Politico alumni and an access-journalism uncritical amplifier type, so grain of salt, but: https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1456761461729112065 https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1456764338300203012 (the guy he's responding to in #2 is the co-founder of his newsletter) So if that's right, then it seems the call with Biden mentioned earlier was about locking in the moderates to voting on BBB first, and pinning them down based on the demand for a CBO score. eviltastic fucked around with this message at 00:37 on Nov 6, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2021 00:34
|
|
|
Matt Fuller is usually right about stuff like this. https://twitter.com/MEPFuller/status/1456814364875542530 e: I meant as to the first part, as to the last bit he probably shoulda said "would mean" in that last bit, he's not saying that part's happening eviltastic fucked around with this message at 03:50 on Nov 6, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2021 03:45
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:He's almost certainly more (ugh) electable. Whether he'd be a better president is... unclear, but I'd say he was probably the best CAMPAIGNER in 2020 - "mayor of middling Indiana town" is not exactly who you would expect to be a solid number two Not Bernie. Eh... I think that's giving short shrift to the amount of attention/hype/support he'd pulled before that campaign season. That was outsized relative to his resume well before 2020. Your average voter might not have known who he was, but us brain-poisoned politics types had been talking about him for years at that point. Remember the  moment when Martin O'Malley endorsed him for chair of the DNC?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2021 23:32
|
|
|
With the caveat that I didn't watch the interview and just read the excerpts posted (and tweeted) by Axios, that Hawley bit reads more like him trying to reference insecurities than just saying video games and porn are bad. Basically, I agree with this:fart_man_69 posted:He's selling them the dream of giving up those things and becoming "normal". There was no talk of making porn or video games illegal, right? So he's not actually threatening them. I'll add that it's not like building in some notion of self denial and repression being Truly Manly is new to the alt right, particularly with respect to masturbation. eviltastic fucked around with this message at 04:57 on Nov 9, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2021 04:54
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:As a patriot I will never punish someone for posting "wanker" Wanker's Corner is an actual place in Oregon. Wikipedia posted:In 1895, the Wanker family moved to the area and bought land where they built a store and tavern, an area later to become Wankers Corner at the intersection of Stafford Road and Borland Road.[2] It has frequently been noted on lists of unusual place names.[3] The two buildings currently located at Wanker's Corner are the Wanker's Country Store and the Wanker's Corner Saloon and Cafe. It is not a recognized community, it has never had a post office, nor does it consistently appear on maps of Oregon (although the AAA map of Oregon shows it in an inset). The United States Geological Survey classifies Wankers Corner as a "locale": "a place at which there is or was human activity".[4][5] 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2021 05:13
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:There's not some wage stagnation hidden in the numbers. The statistics show that wages up are because wages are up - the caveat is that prices are all over the place, not that the wage growth is fake. What stats are you going off of? 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2021 17:29
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:The increase in wage growth is offset by a very similar increase in prices, but that affects people differently because the prices are skewed by some specific categories: I mean, okay, if you want to say prices are all over the place I'll believe you. I don't take issue with your suggestion that subsets not impacted by particular price hikes will be better off. But there is absolutely stagnation of what we can call a typical wage "hidden in the numbers". BLS data shows real median wages going down, not up, for every quarter since Q2 2020, including the most recent one. FRED charts haven't been updated for Q3 2021 yet, but show the same thing. e: and taking a slightly longer view, as that NYT piece invites us to do, suggests similarly disappointing growth. I'm pretty suspicious of their choice to reference growth in average numbers when claiming "sharp" increases, particularly contrasted with the suggestion that said sharp increase was driven by lower earners. eviltastic fucked around with this message at 18:22 on Nov 9, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2021 18:11
|
|
|
rscott posted:I know this is an edge case, but I wonder how that weekly median income chart is generated exactly. In my case, I was forced to move to salary from hourly this summer and given a nominal increase in wages to compensate (lmao it's worth like 1 hour of OT a week). This summer I probably worked 150 hours of unpaid OT (before I said gently caress this poo poo and told my boss to reassign duties away from me to drop 15 hours a week), but in terms of hourly pay it looks like I'm making 7-8% more than I was last year or 2019, despite being on track to make like 20k less. Do they look at direct payrolls or do the extrapolate it from nominal hourly wages * 40? They draw the data from two big surveys, which I should probably just link rather than try to explain since I'm way outside my wheelhouse here. The short answer is yes, they do look at work schedules and not just hourly rates. https://www.bls.gov/ncs/ https://www.bls.gov/oes/ Mellow Seas posted:That's a strike against "the economy is good, actually" but it does still leave a question as to why people are interpreting the economy as being as bad it was in April 2009 when things were worse then by pretty much every measure except "if you want a thing and have the money for it, can you buy it easily?" If Democrats can address that (or if it addresses itself), it should help public perception of the economy, even if it doesn't bring us into "actually good economy" territory (which is something very few goons have actually seen in their lives). Yeah I agree there, it's an interesting disconnect, particularly given the numbers for confidence in the job market in that Gallup survey. My guess would be along the lines of Majorian's or Willa's - maybe things are getting back to normal, but for a lot of people in America "normal" sucked. However, record high confidence in the job market isn't something to shrug off like the usual tone deaf "the stock market's doing great, why are people pessimistic?" stuff. Professor Beetus posted:They could start by regulating the gently caress out of them, why are literally all trucks and SUVs now enormous? It's dumb as hell and I think less of every single person who drives one without explicit need. IIRC the explanation that came up before in a thread like this is a mix of (1) dealerships realizing that there's a big market for crew cabs, where previously that wasn't something they really pushed and (2) Bush/Obama-era fleet fuel efficiency standards incentivizing a larger footprint at both the individual model and the fleet level. Dunno if that's actually the reason, but both seem plausible.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2021 21:07
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:If people are personally doing great but feel that the nation at large is doing terribly, I don't see why that's so hard to believe. People believe poo poo that isn't true all the loving time, and this vague general perception stuff is exactly where it tends to happen the most. I think the surprise isn't because of the situation itself so much as that there's not a readily apparent reason for the decoupling in perception. Is Gallup right that the shift in perception is probably driven by inflation, gas prices, worker shortages, and supply chain issues? Are posters here right when they suggest it's about perceptions of economic security? If someone's pushing a counterfactual narrative, who is it, what's the counterfactual, and and why would it be (per Gallup) primarily impacting the views of independents and not partisans? This is a situation where it's very easy for me, at least, to let my biases write the conclusion for me, because it's kinda hard to falsify an explanation without something more to go on. As far as your example, at first glance it looks more to me like support for the ACA started trending upward after the exchanges opened in 2014 and the administration got past that godawful rollout, the substantial drop in "don't know" happened during the final months of the election, not after, and what was really inconsistent was unfavorables. Just off of eyeball math, I wouldn't take it as given that events during Republican efforts to repeal it during spring and summer 2017 obviously drove the change. But assuming that they did, I don't really think that or the crime statistics are analogous to the economy question. The exact questions from the survey were: quote:How would you rate economic conditions in this country today -- as excellent, good, only fair, or poor? That's subject to a shift in perception as to what "economic conditions in the country" even means, in a way that "Is there more crime in my area than there was a year ago" or "do you generally have a positive or negative view of the health reform law passed in 2010" is not. Twenty years ago, I personally would've parsed what the question was even asking in a very different way. I think it's an open question, given what's been posted, how subjective or objective the factors driving the shift in perception might be. eviltastic fucked around with this message at 00:55 on Nov 10, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2021 00:51
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:Also it's sad that the guy killed himself on the steps of the memorial, but his suicide note combined with the public nature of the act comes off as a really sad attempt to hurt and embarrass the girl that dumped him. It also comes across as an attempt to rationalize away a deeply lovely thing to do to people who he knew cared about him as an act of resistance. Guy goes straight from "there's not enough time to say goodbye" to "I've known I would do this for years". This isn't a callout or anything, but I don't think it's an idea to quote the text of a note like that when a summary would do. eviltastic fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Nov 12, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2021 17:29
|
|
|
I think that the tweet is overstating it and that the article is overselling the idea that there's party consensus on a message here. I mean, it leads with a bullet point and quote going "On a political level, it's a real threat" and concludes with another quote from someone else that includes "But this is not a threat to us."
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2021 23:32
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Then pray do tell which states and which candidates do you think are more or less likely to follow this 'didn't go hard enough on CRT' advice? That would come down to who listens to which viewpoint expressed in the article, since there’s more than one of them? I’m not saying I have any special knowledge here, I’m describing the content of the piece itself.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2021 01:50
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Can’t say that it’s too surprising that 18 swing voters who voted for Biden in 2020 and are unsure who they are voting for in 2024 aren’t paying much attention to politics in general…. Link seems broken: https://thirdway.imgix.net/pdfs/override/Qualitative-Research-Findings-%E2%80%93-Virginia-Post-Election-Research.pdf Not sure how much weight to give a single focus group, but it's interesting how much more blunt an assessment this was than other Third Way pieces I've read. (It's also interesting in that it's linked on Third Way's website right next to a plug for a Jennifer Rubin WaPo opinion column from a few weeks back that's effectively arguing against several of its key conclusions.)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2021 20:42
|
|
|
With respect to the sunglasses, at least, it's clearly a branding choice of Biden's being reflected. He posted this two days after election day. https://www.instagram.com/p/CHPKPeCAtFg/ They're all over the merch at joebiden.com like that. He gave Putin a pair as a gift. It's not remotely a stretch for someone to associate Biden with them without it being a right wing meme. As far as the authenticity, googling turns up pretty much nothing in the way of anyone talking about Joe Biden and aviators or sunglasses or images of him wearing them, even into the early years of the Obama administration. Whether they're a long time preference of his or not, leaning into that as a part of his brand seems relatively recent. e:  https://store.democrats.org/collections/summer/products/ice-cream-scoop eviltastic fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Nov 23, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2021 22:56
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:Everybody's favorite pillow, towel, and gibbering speculation magnate has released the full text of his request for the SCOTUS to undo the election and reinstate Trump. The legally trained and otherwise astute posters here may notice a few odd irregularities and missing things Actual document if anyone likes: https://cdn.michaeljlindell.com/downloads/fix2020first/states-v-us-and-states-compl-2021-11-23.pdf When the thread suggests that it was the same lawyer who drafted the Texas suit, and relies on some of the same argument, it's underselling it. Lengthy stretches are verbatim identical.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2021 04:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 15:28 |
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:LSU is a public school that takes in about $135 million per year. According to the financial statements at lsu.edu, you are low by an order of magnitude. e: guessing that's a figure for how much they take in in public funds from the state only. eviltastic fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Nov 30, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2021 21:47
|
|