Political Discussion

www.cnn.com

How a group of senators in 1975 came up with a rule that changed the chamber forever

The 60-vote threshold to overcome the filibuster and pass legislation in the Senate seems as immovable as ever. But that threshold is relatively new. It was established after an epic fight in the 1970s, an era that today seems like something from an alternate universe.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

The history of the filibuster and how the 60 votes to overcome is relatively new. Started around 1975.

The filibuster used to be rarely used, and required someone to speak for days or months on end to stall passing of a bill. Now they just ask for a vote to see if they have the numbers to override a filibuster. No filibuster actually takes place. Also, with how polarized we are today, it seems like it's being used by republicans for any legislation created by the democrats for no reason other than to just obstruct it.
 
www.postcrescent.com

ThedaCare asks court to temporarily stop 7 stroke, trauma employees from moving to Ascension

The temporary injunction would halt the employees' move to Ascension for 90 days to give ThedaCare time to look for replacement staff.
www.postcrescent.com

Wow, just wow.

From my understanding based on discussion of this story elsewhere, the judge did indeed issue the temporary injunction they were asking for. Because the 13th amendment prevents them from forcing the employees to work for ThedaCare, all the injunction amounts too is these employees can't work elsewhere at other hospitals or medical facilities for 90 days.

The general consensus is "If I were one of those employees, I would not be showing up to work at Thedacare on Monday".

WI is a at will employment state. ThedaCare could have laid them of at any time for any reason and employees can leave for any reason as well.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
www.postcrescent.com

ThedaCare asks court to temporarily stop 7 stroke, trauma employees from moving to Ascension

The temporary injunction would halt the employees' move to Ascension for 90 days to give ThedaCare time to look for replacement staff.
www.postcrescent.com

Wow, just wow.

From my understanding based on discussion of this story elsewhere, the judge did indeed issue the temporary injunction they were asking for. Because the 13th amendment prevents them from forcing the employees to work for ThedaCare, all the injunction amounts too is these employees can't work elsewhere at other hospitals or medical facilities for 90 days.

The general consensus is "If I were one of those employees, I would not be showing up to work at Thedacare on Monday".

WI is a at will employment state. ThedaCare could have laid them of at any time for any reason and employees can leave for any reason as well.
Click to expand...
Sooooo we are going to get kids to join the ranks of healthcare workers by barring them from leaving one job for a better job somewhere else? Right now, healthcare professionals on reddit are freaking out that they could be stopped from perusing better opportunities somewhere else. I'm healthcare adjacent and I'm sweating a bit by this. The judge does invoke the 13th amendment, but I still think this is akin to slavery.
 
While I try to avoid reveling in other's misfortune, he had it coming:

A federal court on Friday banned convicted fraudster Martin Shkreli from ever working in the pharmaceutical industry again in any capacity and ordered him to pay back $64.6 million in profits from his infamous scheme that raised the price of the life-saving drug Daraprim more than 4,000 percent.

US District Judge Denise Cote issued the lifetime ban after finding that Shkreli engaged in anticompetitive practices to protect the monopoly profits of Daraprim.

Daraprim is a cheap, decades-old anti-parasitic drug used to treat toxoplasmosis, which often sickens people with compromised immune systems (such as AIDS patients) and can be deadly to newborns. Shkreli and Mulleady allegedly set up a complex scheme that kept the drug out of the hands of competitors, restricted suppliers from selling critical drug ingredients to competitors, and blocked the release of sales data that would reveal the market size to competitors.

Meanwhile, Shkreli and Mulleady abruptly hiked the list price of Daraprim by more than 4,000 percent, from $17.50 to $750 per tablet.

Friday's ruling follows a settlement announced last month in which Vyera and its parent company, Phoenixus, agreed to pay up to $40 million to victims of the Daraprim scheme. The settlement also required the companies to make Daraprim available to competitors at cost and barred them from entering into any similar scheme for 10 years. Mulleady was banned from the pharmaceutical industry for seven years.

Shkreli is currently serving a seven-year prison sentence from a 2017 securities fraud conviction related to two hedge funds he ran prior to the Daraprim scheme. Following his fraud conviction, he was ordered to forfeit $7.36 million in assets, including the sole copy of the Wu-Tang album Once Upon a Time in Shaolin, which he bought in 2015 at auction from Wu-Tang member RZA for $2 million.

arstechnica.com

Shkreli’s infamous 4,000% price hike gets him a lifetime pharma ban

New York's attorney general celebrated with Wu-Tang Clan references.
arstechnica.com arstechnica.com

And if I were a patient that was harmed by this, I would file a civil suit for restitution.
 
nolalady said:
Sooooo we are going to get kids to join the ranks of healthcare workers by barring them from leaving one job for a better job somewhere else? Right now, healthcare professionals on reddit are freaking out that they could be stopped from perusing better opportunities somewhere else. I'm healthcare adjacent and I'm sweating a bit by this. The judge does invoke the 13th amendment, but I still think this is akin to slavery.
Click to expand...

Apparently the judge that issued this injunction has a iffy track record. People have dug into him and found that he once issued a 42 day jailing for contempt when someone rolled their eyes in the courtroom.

urbanmilwaukee.com

Court Watch: 42 Days in Jail for Rolling His Eyes

Judge puts defendant in jail for alleged bad attitude. Appeals court overturns decision.
urbanmilwaukee.com urbanmilwaukee.com

Also

www.postcrescent.com

Reviewer recommends Judge Mark McGinnis no longer serve on truancy court

"The district should request that Judge McGinnis should no longer have the truancy court responsibility."
www.postcrescent.com

There is hope that this injunction will be overturned and wont set a president. But I fear the damage may have already been done to the employees affected by it.
 
As the House's January 6 committee continues its work to get to the bottom of what happened before, during and after the riot at the US Capitol, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has a warning for them: If Republicans take over the House, you could well be arrested.
Yes, really.
"I think when you have a Republican Congress, this is all going to come crashing down," Gingrich told Fox's Maria Bartiromo. "And the wolves are going to find out that they're now sheep and they're the ones who are in fact, I think, face a real risk of jail for the kinds of laws they're breaking."
Click to expand...

Man, it still surprises me every day how petty and divided our politicians are.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
Man, it still surprises me every day how petty and divided our politicians are.
Click to expand...
The bottom line with all of this is that they are attempting to use the 14th amendment to label Trump as an insurrectionist and under that amendment, he can never run for or hold office. This was something they did after the civil war to prevent Confederate government participants from participating in any more government.

And I think that it's this language "insurrectionist" that is causing a lot of the crazy. Dems have to make a strong case that this was more than a riot, this was an insurrection. Add in Liz Cheney wanting to keep Trump away (because he often targeted her and would say she wasn't a "real conservative"), and you've got people from the GOP and the entire democrat party wanting to paint this a certain way because if Trump comes back, he could and would kill their careers as politicians. I realize that what Trump and his croneys did was terrible, but if democrats think that the only way for them to win 2024 is to ban Trump from running instead of putting up a candidate that people want to vote for that runs on populist platforms of already well received issues, we've already lost folks. I guess if you can't beat 'em, ban 'em.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jan
The thing about Trump is that his ego overrides absolutely everything. A semi valid supporting point many of his voters bring up is that he is beholden to no one and does his own thing. That is not entirely true but the idea has some merit. He is entirely beholden to his ego and by extension anyone stroking it. The corporate oligarchy of the US doesn't really operate under the ego principle and is more about monetary leverages and concentration of leverage powers. So, while Trump could be useful, he doesn't actually fit the overarching power system and is ultimately unpredictable and dangerous. If he had like, I don't know, actual scruples, he might actually be what we all need. Because the unstated position of banning Trump is that the two party system wishes to ensure only placing candidates that fit the monetary leverages power system without the unpredictability of narcissistic ego that Trump brings to the table.

The GQP absolutely perpetrated an insurrection. The 1/6 commission is actually shedding light on some of the actual evil doers and complicitors. If it had been all Trump by himself there would be no hesitation at this point to call it insurrection and maybe even go for a public hanging. As it is, there's enough vested powers implicated that it becomes necessary to either avoid the insurrection terminology or at least buy time to reposition the system such that those fully implicated can go ahead and take the fall when it can no longer be denied.
 
debianlinux said:
Because the unstated position of banning Trump is that the two party system wishes to ensure only placing candidates that fit the monetary leverages power system without the unpredictability of narcissistic ego that Trump brings to the table.
Click to expand...
The monetary leverages power system requires much less unpredictable narcissists for office. We should be clear that they are all narcissists.
 
www.cnn.com

Unilever cuts 1,500 management jobs in global overhaul

Unilever will cut 1,500 jobs globally as it revamps its structure amid growing unease among shareholders over its performance.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com


Capitalism sucks major donkey balls.


Unilever is cutting 1,500 management jobs around the world as the consumer goods giant comes under intense pressure from shareholders to boost growth.
Click to expand...

And all because of the stock market:

Shareholders have ratcheted up the pressure on Unilever after its stock sank 10% last year. The firm's shares got hammered last week after the company revealed it had made three failed bids to acquire GlaxoSmithKline's consumer health care business. Unilever said Thursday that it would not raise its rejected £50 billion ($68 billion) offer, and the stock subsequently bounced back.
Click to expand...


Meanwhile, I saw them called out on Twitter earlier this week for raising their prices, record profits and executive bonuses. Not to mention stock buyback was up.
 
www.cnn.com

Analysis: How the Omicron variant ignited new battles and changed pandemic politics

The Omicron variant may be showing the first hopeful signs of passing its peak. But the angry politics of Covid-19 are only getting more intense, and given their future electoral implications, look certain to outlast the pandemic itself.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

Posting here because this is more about the political divide in America than the pandemic itself.

I found this a fascinating read. And as the pandemic continues on conservatives are only digging in deeper and fighting any kind of government precautions. They are using it to booster their careers and it will likely be future talking points for elections.
 
www.cnn.com

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer plans to retire

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer plans to retire, giving President Joe Biden a chance to nominate to the bench, a well-placed source familiar with the matter told CNN.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

This is big news. And hopefully it will give Biden the chance to replace a liberal justice with another liberal justice before republicans take back control and can appoint another conservative.

Though I expect Republicans will not make this easy. Based on passed comments by good ol' Mitch McConnell, we can expect them to filibuster and block any nomination of a "liberal justice" with them only voting to confirm a moderate.

I wonder how far the GOP's powerplay will go with this one. And what types of games we can expect to see.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
www.cnn.com

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer plans to retire

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer plans to retire, giving President Joe Biden a chance to nominate to the bench, a well-placed source familiar with the matter told CNN.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

This is big news. And hopefully it will give Biden the chance to replace a liberal justice with another liberal justice before republicans take back control and can appoint another conservative.

Though I expect Republicans will not make this easy. Based on passed comments by good ol' Mitch McConnell, we can expect them to filibuster and block any nomination of a "liberal justice" with them only voting to confirm a moderate.

I wonder how far the GOP's powerplay will go with this one. And what types of games we can expect to see.
Click to expand...
I need the eye roll emoji for this. The amount of Congressional shenanigans will be off the chain.
 
Schumer wants a quick timeline to confirm a Supreme Court pick. Similar to what the Republicans did for Amy Coney Barrett.

Schumer also plans to the change to Filibuster Rules that Republicans Used back in 2017 that will allow a simple majority, a vote down party lines to advance a Supreme Court Nominee.

So that makes me wonder, how will Joe Manchin and Kristen Sinama respond to this. Will they be a note vote without any Republican support?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top