State politicians flee Texas to derail legislation on voting restrictions, abortion access

[Metaphor]

So you are against voter restrictions

What a bizarre thing to say. I can't possibly be 'for' or 'against' such a vaguely-defined term. I am not 'for' voter restrictions in some abstract sense neither am I 'against' them. Legislation and policy that changes the status quo and has the effect of making it "easier" to vote or "harder" to vote has to be evaluated on its merits.

and for full investigation of Jan 6 insurrection?

Precisely what this has to do with the OP I'm quite sure I don't know, but yes, people who allegedly broke laws should be investigated.

And the Democrats from Texas should do the job that they were elected to do and show up to work.

 

[Toni]

Well yes - the electorate has that chance - but in the meantime asking elected legislators to do their jobs and attend their workplace does not seem unreasonable.

The legislation that the Texas GOP is attempting to pass would actually compromise the ability of the electorate to determine their legislators in free and open elections.

So your statement is a slick bit of irony there.....

"We have to subvert democracy to save it!"

I might have known you'd defend the deplorables on this one.

I offered zero defense or support. I merely pointed out the irony. It's pretty meta (no reference to your screen name)

Mitch McConnell has made a career out of preventing bills from being brought to a vote, confirmation hearings from being held, etc.

 

[Jarhyn]

"We have to subvert democracy to save it!"

I might have known you'd defend the deplorables on this one.

I offered zero defense or support. I merely pointed out the irony. It's pretty meta (no reference to your screen name)

Mitch McConnell has made a career out of preventing bills from being brought to a vote, confirmation hearings from being held, etc.

I do mourn for the time when we will have to recognize that there are folks in the room not playing at democracy at all and must do something about that.

 

[barbos]

So you are against voter restrictions

What a bizarre thing to say. I can't possibly be 'for' or 'against' such a vaguely-defined term. I am not 'for' voter restrictions in some abstract sense neither am I 'against' them. Legislation and policy that changes the status quo and has the effect of making it "easier" to vote or "harder" to vote has to be evaluated on its merits.

You said you are FOR democracy. I thought it means against restriction on voting which is what republicans are planning to make into a law.

and for full investigation of Jan 6 insurrection?

Precisely what this has to do with the OP I'm quite sure I don't know, but yes, people who allegedly broke laws should be investigated.

You said democrats should be doing their job. I say republicans should too and investigate the insurrection, yet they choose not to.

And the Democrats from Texas should do the job that they were elected to do and show up to work.

Even if them being there would effectively get them out of the job the next election cycle?
You do realize what is going on here?
Republicans know that demographics is killing them and the only way to stay in power is to prevent votes for democrats. Gerrymandering is not enough anymore.

 

[Jarhyn]

You said you are FOR democracy. I thought it means against restriction on voting which is what republicans are planning to make into a law.

and for full investigation of Jan 6 insurrection?

Precisely what this has to do with the OP I'm quite sure I don't know, but yes, people who allegedly broke laws should be investigated.

You said democrats should be doing their job. I say republicans should too and investigate the insurrection, yet they choose not to.

And the Democrats from Texas should do the job that they were elected to do and show up to work.

Even if them being there would effectively get them out of the job the next election cycle?
You do realize what is going on here?
Republicans know that demographics is killing them and the only way to stay in power is to prevent votes for democrats. Gerrymandering is not enough anymore.

And I say the job of anyone who has ever taken an oath to uphold the constitution, and our declaration of independence, that such antidemocratic activity is anethma to that oath and so warrants the loss of said job.. January 6 just means the mask and gloves are off.

 

[Metaphor]

"We have to subvert democracy to save it!"

I might have known you'd defend the deplorables on this one.

I offered zero defense or support. I merely pointed out the irony. It's pretty meta (no reference to your screen name)

There is no irony. Changing voting regulations does not subvert democracy. Legislators acting in concert to avoid attending the job they were elected and paid for, to prevent the passing of a bill that has majority support in the legislature, is open subversion of democracy.

 

[Metaphor]

You said you are FOR democracy. I thought it means against restriction on voting which is what republicans are planning to make into a law.

I'm afraid that what you thought it meant was rather simple-minded. Being pro-democracy does not entail being for every policy that purportedly makes voting 'easier', and being against every policy purportedly making voting 'harder'.

You said democrats should be doing their job. I say republicans should too and investigate the insurrection, yet they choose not to.

It is not a Senator's job to hold Senate enquiries on every issue that barbos wants to hold Senate enquiries on.

Even if them being there would effectively get them out of the job the next election cycle?
You do realize what is going on here?

No, I don't "realize" that because I do not believe it. But yes: they have a duty to turn up and vote 'no' on legislation they oppose.

 

[barbos]

No, I don't "realize"

That explains everything.

 

[Metaphor]

No, I don't "realize"

That explains everything.

Sure luv.

 

[Toni]

"We have to subvert democracy to save it!"

I might have known you'd defend the deplorables on this one.

I offered zero defense or support. I merely pointed out the irony. It's pretty meta (no reference to your screen name)

Mitch McConnell has made a career out of preventing bills from being brought to a vote, confirmation hearings from being held, etc.

I do mourn for the time when we will have to recognize that there are folks in the room not playing at democracy at all and must do something about that.

I long for it.

 

[Toni]

"We have to subvert democracy to save it!"

I might have known you'd defend the deplorables on this one.

I offered zero defense or support. I merely pointed out the irony. It's pretty meta (no reference to your screen name)

There is no irony. Changing voting regulations does not subvert democracy. Legislators acting in concert to avoid attending the job they were elected and paid for, to prevent the passing of a bill that has majority support in the legislature, is open subversion of democracy.

OK, ignorance then.

The proposed legislation would make it more difficult to vote---it would subvert democracy.

 

[Metaphor]

There is no irony. Changing voting regulations does not subvert democracy. Legislators acting in concert to avoid attending the job they were elected and paid for, to prevent the passing of a bill that has majority support in the legislature, is open subversion of democracy.

OK, ignorance then.

The proposed legislation would make it more difficult to vote---it would subvert democracy.

First, I reject your unevidenced assertion that the Texas bill would make it "more difficult to vote". Reading about the bills here indicates that there are several proposed regulations, some of which would make voting easier.

But, the mere fact of making it more difficult to vote does not subvert democracy. That is simple-minded. We could make it easier for people to vote by jettisoning all ID requirements and allowing voting after the polls have closed and having 24 hour a day voting places every three houses for weeks on end and letting people cast votes for all their family and friends--but of course implementing all of that would subvert democracy even as it makes voting easier.

 

[barbos]

Metaphor, so why have that bill? why now? what happened that prompted that bill?

 

[Metaphor]

Metaphor, so why have that bill? why now? what happened that prompted that bill?

I am not defending or attacking the bill. I am rejecting the simple-minded assertion that a bill that makes it harder to vote must be 'subverting democracy'.

But elected legislators who act in concert to exploit technical rules to prevent legislation from being passed--legislation that has the majority support of the legislature--and who leave the state they were elected to legislate in and be representatives in and who play hooky from work--are openly and shamelessly subverting democracy.

 

[barbos]

Metaphor, so why have that bill? why now? what happened that prompted that bill?

I am not defending or attacking the bill. I am rejecting the simple-minded assertion that a bill that makes it harder to vote must be 'subverting democracy'.

That's dumb. Of course preventing people from voting is subverting democracy.

But elected legislators who act in concert to exploit technical rules to prevent legislation from being passed--legislation that has the majority support of the legislature--and who leave the state they were elected to legislate in and be representatives in and who play hooky from work--are openly and shamelessly subverting democracy.

Democracy is not the only thing which is important. Constitution and laws in general are important too.
Republicans are like these muslim/terrorists parties in ME which use democracy to gain power and then dismantling it.

 

[Metaphor]

That's dumb. Of course preventing people from voting is subverting democracy.

Oy gevalt. First, you have moved the goal posts from 'making it more difficult to vote' to 'preventing people from voting'. Second, a bill that prevents people who are ineligible to vote from voting would be upholding democracy, not subverting it. Your proposal that 'making it harder to vote' entails 'subverting democracy' is simple, simple-minded, and wrong.

Democracy is not the only thing which is important. Constitution and laws in general are important too.
Republicans are like these muslim/terrorists in ME parties who use democracy to gain power and then dismantling it.

Oh well, then dissolve the Texas legislature at gunpoint, execute the Republicans, and install a one-party state.

 

[Jarhyn]

I do mourn for the time when we will have to recognize that there are folks in the room not playing at democracy at all and must do something about that.

I long for it.

I know you say this, but you will not be the one making the weapons necessary for the ejection, methinks. You will not be the one contemplating if your name is Oppenheimer.

 

[barbos]

That's dumb. Of course preventing people from voting is subverting democracy.

Oy gevalt. First, you have moved the goal posts from 'making it more difficult to vote' to 'preventing people from voting'.

Making it (needlessly) more difficult DOES prevent some people from voting.

Second, a bill that prevents people who are ineligible to vote from voting

That's not all what that bill does. And ineligible people are already forbidden to vote and don't generally vote anyway. So why this bill now?

would be upholding democracy, not subverting it. Your proposal that 'making it harder to vote' entails 'subverting democracy' is simple, simple-minded, and wrong.

Democracy is not the only thing which is important. Constitution and laws in general are important too.
Republicans are like these muslim/terrorists in ME parties who use democracy to gain power and then dismantling it.

Oh well, then dissolve the Texas legislature at gunpoint, execute the Republicans, and install a one-party state.

That's a great idea, considering what repubs did on Jan 6.

 

[Jarhyn]

Making it (needlessly) more difficult DOES prevent some people from voting.

Second, a bill that prevents people who are ineligible to vote from voting

That's not all what that bill does. And ineligible people are already forbidden to vote and don't generally vote anyway. So why this bill now?

would be upholding democracy, not subverting it. Your proposal that 'making it harder to vote' entails 'subverting democracy' is simple, simple-minded, and wrong.

Democracy is not the only thing which is important. Constitution and laws in general are important too.
Republicans are like these muslim/terrorists in ME parties who use democracy to gain power and then dismantling it.

Oh well, then dissolve the Texas legislature at gunpoint, execute the Republicans, and install a one-party state.

That's a great idea, considering what repubs did on Jan 6.

Quite my point, in this thread and others. A coup was attempted, and the party involved must be removed. It is appalling that they have been left to sit this far past even the day the maggots hatched. They are clearly beyond their use-by date.

 

[Metaphor]

Making it (needlessly) more difficult DOES prevent some people from voting.

And I would agree, a bill that had no other purpose than to make it needlessly difficult to vote would be subverting democracy.

But the Texas bill is not that and equating any bill that makes it harder to vote as 'subverting democracy' is simple, simple-minded, and wrong.

That's not all what that bill does. And ineligible people are already forbidden to vote and don't generally vote anyway. So why this bill now?

Irrelevant. Why not the bill now? If you have evidence that this bill subverts democracy, produce it. But don't make the false claim that it makes it more difficult to vote, and then equate "more difficult to vote" with "subverting democracy"

That's a great idea, considering what repubs did on Jan 6.

Yes, and I'm sure my post here incited people to violence too