Effort to Remove Marjorie Taylor Greene From Ballot Can Proceed, Judge Says

[NatMorton]

I already explained how it is censorship, you are getting caught up in the minutiae of how that censorship is being performed to find some sort of loophole and are failing at that attempt.

A book that can be freely sold and purchased is not being censored.

 

[Irredentist]

You don't view it that way, but I and many others do. More importantly, the duly elected representatives of FL and TX do.

Well of course you don't see it that way, these censorship laws are specially tailored to appeal to socially conservative voters who view education about gender identity as left wing indoctrination. They are intended to give the appearance of a political victory for Republican politicians, so that the ignorant will continue to vote for them.

 

[Slartibartfast]

View attachment 67386342

A book that can be freely sold and purchased is not being censored.

Thank you, this the definition I was going off and point 1 is my position and supports the idea that the government is censoring here as it is suspending or prohibiting these books due to them being seen as politically unacceptable.

 

[lurchadams]

Saying that there are Jewish Space lazers starting fires in California should be enough to put her in a mental institution..

Where.. she should still be congresswoman until the next election. She's a disaster, but she's THEIR disaster.

 

[Perotista]

Effort to Remove Marjorie Taylor Greene From Ballot Can Proceed, Judge Says (Published 2022)

The case that Ms. Greene unsuccessfully sought to have dismissed mirrors efforts against other Republicans centered on the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

www.nytimes.com

I don't have an opinion yet, but it certainly is an interesting development.

I think MTG is a 100% idiot. I have a huge problem with Democrats deciding or attempting to decide who the Republicans will choose to be their nominee in her district by eliminating her from the ballot. Whoever is elected in her district should be up to the people of her district. If they want to send this idiot back to congress, that should be their decision and their decision alone. They know who they are voting for.

This also could become a slippery slope in the future. The opposing party who doesn’t like the other party’s congressman or woman, finding a legal loophole or a reason to deny them ballot access and prevent them from running again. Look at what happened with the nuclear option. Ex-Democratic Majority Leader, Senator Harry Reid first used it. Then McConnell took his revenge by expanding it and used it, now it’s common practice. This too has that possibility.

It's the use of the 14th amendment for MTG. One needs to remember that ballot access eligibility is usually determined by the states for their own state and vary wildly state to state. Passing a state law dealing with qualifications to gain ballot access in that state for the sole purpose of denying a congressman a place on the ballot you don’t like is a real possibility in the future. Which could become common place like the use of the nuclear option which in the beginning was thought to be a one-time use.

If successful, as with the first use of the nuclear option, I guarantee the Republicans will seek political payback, revenge and will find a way in the states where they have a trifecta of control to deny ballot access to any congressman and perhaps senator they want gone.

 

[Irredentist]

So if we were to prohibit third graders being assigned the reading of essays written on the virtues of white nationalism, would that be censorship?

Of course it is, it would be censorship of white nationalism.

 

[NatMorton]

Are you trying to say that censorship isn't actually censorship unless it applies universally, in all circumstances and context? Because I don't think that is the correct definition of the term. Censorship can be applied not only by governments, but by private institutions as well, in a more limited sense.

See post #43.

 

[Slartibartfast]

I think MTG is a 100% idiot. I have a huge problem with Democrats deciding or attempting to decide who the Republicans will choose to be their nominee in her district by eliminating her from the ballot. Whoever is elected in her district should be up to the people of her district. If they want to send this idiot back to congress, that should be their decision and their decision alone. They know who they are voting for.

This also could become a slippery slope in the future. The opposing party who doesn’t like the other party’s congressman or woman, finding a legal loophole or a reason to deny them ballot access and prevent them from running again. Look at what happened with the nuclear option. Ex-Democratic Majority Leader, Senator Harry Reid first used it. Then McConnell took his revenge by expanding it and used it, now it’s common practice. This too has that possibility.

It's the use of the 14th amendment for MTG. One needs to remember that ballot access eligibility is usually determined by the states for their own state and vary wildly state to state. Passing a state law dealing with qualifications to gain ballot access in that state for the sole purpose of denying a congressman a place on the ballot you don’t like is a real possibility in the future. Which could become common place like the use of the nuclear option which in the beginning was thought to be a one-time use.

If successful, as with the first use of the nuclear option, I guarantee the Republicans will seek political payback, revenge and will find a way in the states where they have a trifecta of control to deny ballot access to any congressman and perhaps senator they want gone.

This is what I worry about as well. MTG did her tours for organized insurrectionists a day or two before 1/6 and on that basis, I see where the people suing have a strong point. However, I think the greater concern is that this opens up a new front in the struggle to find the next dominant US subculture.

 

[NatMorton]

Well of course you don't see it that way, these censorship laws are specially tailored to appeal to socially conservative voters who view education about gender identity as left wing indoctrination. They are intended to give the appearance of a political victory for Republican politicians, so that the ignorant will continue to vote for them.

That's nice.

 

[Irredentist]

That's nice.

Republicans have been very effective at selling the idea of a "culture war" so that they can cast themselves as the heroic defenders of traditional America family values. Many people, unfortunately, buy into that nonsense wholeheartedly.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Then I hope they lose this little cultural tantrum they are throwing, which I think they will as its mostly coming from the very old.

I think of conservatives as people who win short term battles but always lose long term wars.

Because all that ever happens is they pass a bunch of crazy shit or do crazy shit and then they die and then people come behind them and say things like "holy crap!! why is this book on unicorns banned????"

 

[Slartibartfast]

I think of conservatives as people who win short term battles but always lose long term wars.

Because all that ever happens is they pass a bunch of crazy shit or do crazy shit and then they die and then people come behind them and say things like "holy crap!! why is this book on unicorns banned????"

So much of this is fighting over the ideas of the 1900s, like dogs fighting over scraps.

Over the next ten years I think, the balance of power is going to shift to younger demographics and so will laws that deem who are society's winners and losers. We will probably see big shifts on things like education costs, housing, climate, technology infrastructure, etc. Whether this or that policy reminds someone of the cold war or ayn rand will be forgotten as the cultural associations to those events fade into history. Nobody cares about the stuff that Victorians were concerned about, for instance.

I suspect the next big fights are going to be about augmented reality, genetic modification, ethical use of AI, bionic modification, and what to do with third world nations and their climate refugees. But that may not happen for another 20-30 years by my guess. (I to tend to predict these things too far out though and they almost always happen sooner than I expect).

How Millennial Leaders Will Change America

One day soon, millennials will rule America

time.com

 

[CaughtInThe]

So much of this is fighting over the ideas of the 1900s, like dogs fighting over scraps.

Over the next ten years I think, the balance of power is going to shift to younger demographics and so will laws that deem who are society's winners and losers. We will probably see big shifts on things like education costs, housing, climate, technology infrastructure, etc. Whether this or that policy reminds someone of the cold war or ayn rand will be forgotten.

How Millennial Leaders Will Change America

One day soon, millennials will rule America

time.com

i think it will take everyone who was born before 1960 to pass away.

 

[Slartibartfast]

i think it will take everyone who was born before 1960 to pass away.

Enough that they are no longer a consequential voting block. Then this tantrum will stop and we will make progress again. This sort of thing seems to happen every 80-100 years to this country. The last time was the 1920s and the moral panics over jazz, masturbation, yellow journalism, communists/social darwinists, eugenics, married women who had job (or wore pants), etc.

They got resolved though. I think the US will navigate this new self made crisis as well. And like before, our national character, internal mythology and stories, and concept of community will change, as it does after these moments.

 

[jonny5]

I think MTG is a 100% idiot. I have a huge problem with Democrats deciding or attempting to decide who the Republicans will choose to be their nominee in her district by eliminating her from the ballot. Whoever is elected in her district should be up to the people of her district. If they want to send this idiot back to congress, that should be their decision and their decision alone. They know who they are voting for.

This also could become a slippery slope in the future. The opposing party who doesn’t like the other party’s congressman or woman, finding a legal loophole or a reason to deny them ballot access and prevent them from running again. Look at what happened with the nuclear option. Ex-Democratic Majority Leader, Senator Harry Reid first used it. Then McConnell took his revenge by expanding it and used it, now it’s common practice. This too has that possibility.

It's the use of the 14th amendment for MTG. One needs to remember that ballot access eligibility is usually determined by the states for their own state and vary wildly state to state. Passing a state law dealing with qualifications to gain ballot access in that state for the sole purpose of denying a congressman a place on the ballot you don’t like is a real possibility in the future. Which could become common place like the use of the nuclear option which in the beginning was thought to be a one-time use.

If successful, as with the first use of the nuclear option, I guarantee the Republicans will seek political payback, revenge and will find a way in the states where they have a trifecta of control to deny ballot access to any congressman and perhaps senator they want gone.

Exactly, shes an idiot, and idiots have a right to run for office.

 

[lurchadams]

Freedom of speech to me does not include attempts to subvert the constitution which she took an oath to defend. To me her speech is closer to hate speech than anything else bordering on suggesting violence. The same goes for any hate group. In my wildest imaginings I cannot believe the founding fathers would think "jews will not replace us" is an acceptable form of free speech. When a person or a group descends into hate speech, in my opinion they've crossed the line of decency. We don't need hate speech protected in my opinion.

The thing is - things are gong to work out with her - they have to. The fact that McCarthy is complicit in all the horseshit his caucus does is going to highlight how truly weak he is and it will work against him. Independents see what's happening and they're going to get sick of it too. I really think so. Things like the MTG/Gaezt/Lee et al debacle are really going to come back and bite Republicans in November.

 

[Perotista]

This is what I worry about as well. MTG did her tours for organized insurrectionists a day or two before 1/6 and on that basis, I see where the people suing have a strong point. However, I think the greater concern is that this opens up a new front in the struggle to find the next dominant US subculture.

Even if successful in removing MTG, who's to say the GOP doesn't come up with a candidate much worse. You just don't know. You may be removing Atilla the Hun only to get Genghis Khan. The only thing that seems certain if MTG goes, some other Republican will take her place.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Even if successful in removing MTG, who's to say the GOP doesn't come up with a candidate much worse. You just don't know. You may be removing Atilla the Hun only to get Genghis Khan. The only thing that seems certain if MTG goes, some other Republican will take her place.

Yup, she is just a symptom.

 

[Perotista]

Exactly, shes an idiot, and idiots have a right to run for office.

If enough idiots vote for them. It's the people's choice.

 

[Perotista]

Yup, she is just a symptom.

I think the major problem is the modern political era we’ve entered, that of polarization, the great divide and the super, mega, ultra-partisanship. It’s this era that brings the Trump’s and MTG’s to the forefront. I think it has infected both parties, but the Democrats a bit more sophisticated and able to hide it below the surface, less visible while the GOP is in your face type.

 

[Slartibartfast]

I think the major problem is the modern political era we’ve entered, that of polarization, the great divide and the super, mega, ultra-partisanship. It’s this era that brings the Trump’s and MTG’s to the forefront. I think it has infected both parties, but the Democrats a bit more sophisticated and able to hide it below the surface, less visible while the GOP is in your face type.

I think a lot of it has to do with a) generational change, b) racial demographic changes, and c) massive communications technology changes

In both cases, the effect it seems to be having on people is that the assumptions they grew up with and things they thought were just "the way it is" are being challenged. This creates a situation of anomie. That is fueling the want to band together to into tribes in order to feel socially and emotionally safe. If enough people are feeling that way, you have fertile ground for identity politics.

I think it will eventually calm down as the demographic changes in terms of the generational and racial demographic changes continue, but we may see some form of this conflict for the next 10-20 years, but eventually peaking and then new norms being formed.

Either that or I am just acting like a teenager at wafflehouse at 3 am and am opining baselessly.

 

[NatMorton]

Republicans have been very effective at selling the idea of a "culture war" so that they can cast themselves as the heroic defenders of traditional America family values. Many people, unfortunately, buy into that nonsense wholeheartedly.

That's nice, too.

 

[jonny5]

I think the major problem is the modern political era we’ve entered, that of polarization, the great divide and the super, mega, ultra-partisanship. It’s this era that brings the Trump’s and MTG’s to the forefront. I think it has infected both parties, but the Democrats a bit more sophisticated and able to hide it below the surface, less visible while the GOP is in your face type.

I just wish Dems would move on to states rights and then independence as the solution. Why do they have to force their ideas on others? Just run their own states like they want, red states can do the same, and people can move where they want.

 

[Slartibartfast]

I just wish Dems would move on to states rights and then independence as the solution. Why do they have to force their ideas on others? Just run their own states like they want, red states can do the same, and people can move where they want.

Historical reasons. Things like states rights were used to disenfranchise people or to uphold things like jim crow laws. When you have that kind of moral failing and the tool to fix that moral failing is federal power, federal power becomes viewed as the solution. If states were not routinely used to deny people their basic rights, it would be less popular.

If the topics were stuff like top marginal tax rate or the proper procedures for road construction signoffs. Then this would have never been a fight. Unfortunately states decided to up the ante in a way that a response had to happen.

 

[code1211]

Effort to Remove Marjorie Taylor Greene From Ballot Can Proceed, Judge Says (Published 2022)

The case that Ms. Greene unsuccessfully sought to have dismissed mirrors efforts against other Republicans centered on the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

www.nytimes.com

I don't have an opinion yet, but it certainly is an interesting development.

Seems to be just a tad dictatorial.