« Stop Me If I’ve Said This Before: man of the family | Main | Neighbors are Moving »

September 19, 2020

Comments

KC

I hate so much of this. For some reason, last night I was particularly downed by the grim, inevitable-feeling waiting for the collection of "oh, but it's over 9 months until the next president is inaugurated, it's not right to appoint someone new" moral abandonment whiplash (while I avoid those sources with vigor and thus don't know to what degree it has already happened). Sometimes it's not the most important facets of something terrible that hit you first, but there's so much to grieve.

TheQueen

KC - I keep telling myself that I would be in total support of the hypocrisy if it were my side being hypocritical. I don’t know it that’s true, though.

KC

For me it isn't true, because I have been Pissed Off by "my side" being hypocritical. (I think there is a difference between "peoples' views naturally changing on a topic over the period of a decade" or "an off-the-cuff, not thought-through viewpoint is different from what you conclude when you really think through the subject" - none of this nonsense can be explained by either case.)

That said, Christianity is *extremely* against hypocrisy, like, really really really against it, so that may affect my viewpoint vs. how some other people feel about hypocrisy compared to expediency. But lying is an Absolute No (God hating liars and lying and lying tongues is, I think, way more repeated than any injunctions against any sexual sins), and hypocrisy gets totally blasted by Jesus on a ton of occasions. There is no "ends justify the means" in the Bible. (if anyone knows of any place where it seems to be, though, I'd love to know, because also I am not always right.)

TheQueen

KC - I well, it should be interesting to see how far the.left goes to combat the right. I read something today about being a Howitzer to a gun fight. I wonder if there will be extreme measures like the congressional sit-in or that one time everyone slept over to get to some midnight vote.

KC

Yeah. The left is also not wholly above "the ends justify the means" - although so far they have appeared to be less ludicrous and frequent about it, and also aren't claiming to be God's Chosen Whatevers; both make a significant difference for me. I also see a difference between "very-technically legal but it's egregiously and totally against the spirit of the law that it's legal *and yet* the details are not very news-interesting so few people will notice" and "this is publicly and obviously going to extremes and is a thing which has been done before when extremes are warranted and will be well-publicized so if those extremes are *not* warranted all participants will face backlash."

I would prefer the system to not be broken further, and hope that one of the first things done by a new president would be to close a ton of the loopholes that have been exploited during this term (which is hard to do while still enabling the things those powers were *meant* for; but smart and ethical lawyers do, in theory, exist). We'll see what happens, though.

Arlene

Ginsburg's death was a shock, even though we were all half expecting it. I'm a tiny bit hopeful that ramming through a new candidate for the court will turn some people away from voting for the Republicans. Maybe, it will effect the Senate race???

TheQueen

KC - the husband was talking tonight that the current fear is that with a Pro-Trump new justice installed the president will try to argue against mail-in ballots at the Supreme Court, like in Bush v. Gore, and then with the court in his pocket we will get four more years. I will riot.
Arlene - I hope only the particularly craven hypocritical senators are voted out. I’m sure some are ... are good people.

KC

The thing is, the justices really don't have to vote "his way." I'd expect there to be more shuffling over against the side of the law by any who would be threatened by impeachment or criminal charges if not-Trump is in office, but as far as I know, that's only one of them? And even then, ideally, none of them would go for disqualifying mail-in ballots en masse! (especially since multiple states *only do* mail-in ballots!) But the ones he has "seated" do not have to do his bidding and really shouldn't in this case (although there's also the possibility of blackmail, as he has "punished" plenty of people for displeasing him - although it's unclear whether he "warned" any of them ahead of time; but one would hope that all the justices are smart enough to realize that caving to blackmail means that there will just be future blackmail, especially if the individual remains in power?).

That said, it may be possible to simply hold various state counts up long enough (demanding recounts, demanding re-verification that all voters are legitimate and alive, whatever the state and federal laws allow) that conclusions aren't reached in time for the electoral college limit (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/09/trump-biden-electoral-count-act-1887/615994/ ) and euuugh and I would also strongly object to that.

TheQueen

KC - Bush v Gore aside, it is surprising that some governor hasn’t tried this in the past - slowing the vote process so it can’t be counted in time. It’s a slick move.

KC

I think it would be a Very Unpopular Move... unless you've pre-primed the populace to not trust anything, to believe conspiracy theories, and to be unable to unite. I mean, people get cranky if their vote isn't counted.

There are lots of weird "tools" that people just *wouldn't use* until now (or, as with playing chicken with government shutdowns - recently-ish). I don't know, and also I wish government would just *function properly* rather than doing All The Weasely Things (although I grant that technicalities are sometimes the best answer to technicalities; there's an old story about a student at Oxford who took advantage of a university statue still on the books to demand a beer while in an exam. They brought him the beer - and fined him the appropriate amount for not wearing his sword while taking the exam. The appropriate amount happened to be in pre-decimal currency, which made it rather more difficult to pay...)(I have no idea whether the story is apocryphal or not, but it demonstrates the general point).

TheQueen

KC - interesting - it looks like Snopes has changed its rating system from “is this urban legend true or false” to either “legend” or not. But here it is:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cakes-and-ale/

KC

I just checked another few things on Snopes, and it looks like the status options are True, False, or Legend - presumably Legend for something adequately popular and that has altered in the telling, but where it's functionally impossible to rule in or out entirely? (which makes me wonder if they read alllll the old rules from Cambridge and Oxford to ascertain that yes, there's something in there about demanding and being provided with provisions and yes, there's something in there about being fined for not wearing even weirder attire than is currently required for exams (sub-fusc!), but no, we don't know whether anyone actually ever *did* this, with or without retribution... but it has certainly become legendary, whether any version of that actually happened at any point!

TheQueen

KC - I think the change in categories happened when they widened from urban legend check to fact check.

KC

The halloween-candy-poisoned thing and the gang-initiation-headlights-blinking thing are both listed as "false" - but they may not have gone through their archives, and instead may be just using "legend" instead of "false" for urban legends moving forward? Not sure.

(I mean, also, the "someone's factual statement is false" vs. "conspiracy theory and false" vs. "urban legend and false" would be a kind of muddy line to draw, probably, unless you lumped anonymous/exclusively-passed-along things under the latter two, but put it in the first category if someone states it on record [potentially having relied on their social media/online information source which would be under the latter two, though?]. Anyway. It's really a mess out there.)

TheQueen

KC - remember back when it was just a woman named Barbara and her husband David and a wooden spoon? So long ago.

KC

I don't think I knew of it all that way back - you're one of the Originals. :-)

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)