The Song Fight Bulletin Board

And who knows, maybe it’s gonna be a long four more. Whew that would suck.

I think this song might’ve been the last time I pulled the cello out of its case: https://open.spotify.com/track/2xEIEmIj ... -XWp7HnT1w

Kinda crazy. Anyway. Good luck to us all this Tuesday.

JB

Hi everyone.

I’m sitting here ahead of your dateline, pondering how my state insists I am paid to not work today because some horses will run around for a few minutes in the afternoon, while you are asked to find time around your work to take part in what appears to be one of more significant single moments of this modern age.

The sun is shining here, and I am preparing to cook a leg of lamb because I’m finally able to share my space with other people (thanks to a state government that pushed us hard to be safe), and I am hoping with all sincerity that you get what you need today.

Be well, be warm, and be kind.

And if you need me, I’m here (and on the slack thingo).

Good luck guys. The world is watching and hoping for a return to sanity.

Just recalled this little bit of doggerel I wrote 4 years ago - I really hope I don't have to write another one:

http://www.songfight.org/music/it_hasn_ ... _ihhmy.mp3

Hey all, I don't really know what to say. If I'm this stressed about it in Canada, I can't imagine how you're feeling south of the border. Man, I hope this goes the right way — for everyone's sake. Stay safe.

Finally!!!

Holy shit!!!!!! We are hopefully rid of this worst president ever.

Phew. Now we can go back to ignoring all of our societal problems.

Man, you're in Georgia, it's just getting started. Help us bring this one home.

Okay, it's *mostly* over. I will do what I can as neither Purdue nor Loeffler are people I want representing me.

Damn, I just looked up both of those Georgia senators and they are both VERY rich and morally bankrupt.

Yep. I don't understand the appeal of either of them. I knew more about Purdue going into it, didn't like him much. I'd not really paid attention to Loeffler up until the election came around and .... ugh, I don't understand why people like her either.

Our local TV stations have been pretty much a bombardment of ads relating to that senate race for a long time. There's been one ad that straight up called Ossoff a terrorist-affiliated commie. Because Purdue's campaign said so. Or something. It's getting old.

On an unrelated note, I wish my town would hurry up and announce the winner of the town council results. I wanna know if Billy Campbell is gonna make the park great again, dammit!

I did a very cursory look at the republican candidates and I don't much care for either. But I think I'd rather them win. I never Never NEVER want single party in control of the House, Senate and the Presidency. Doesn't matter which party, that's never a good thing.

Pigfarmer Jr wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 09, 2020 8:38 am

I did a very cursory look at the republican candidates and I don't much care for either. But I think I'd rather them win. I never Never NEVER want single party in control of the House, Senate and the Presidency. Doesn't matter which party, that's never a good thing.

I agree with you on a conceptual level. I mean for what it's worth I'm not *huge* on Ossoff and don't really know a lot about Warnock -- and on principle I always make sure that I actually research who I'm voting for. I just already know for sure that I'm definitely not into Loeffler or Purdue. I wasn't huge on Biden either, but between him and Trump it seemed more prudent to at least get the guy who apparently hated the democratic process out of office. Lesser of 2, blah blah blah.

IMO we need some united, effective federal government, at least until the next mid terms 2 years from now, to deal with the pandemic and try to stave off mass death, mass evictions, etc.

I'd be more on board with a split government if one side wasn't going to just stymie everything for the sake of stymieing everything. The GOP doesn't seem interested in good governance, even if they're in charge, but certainly not if someone else is in charge. Then their singular focus is getting back in charge, at the expense of everything else-- like US Citizens.

JB

jb wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 09, 2020 10:53 am

I'd be more on board with a split government if one side wasn't going to just stymie everything for the sake of stymieing everything. The GOP doesn't seem interested in good governance, even if they're in charge, but certainly not if someone else is in charge. Then their singular focus is getting back in charge, at the expense of everything else-- like US Citizens.

JB

This is exactly the problem. When one side is completely intransigent, plays extreme hardball with judicial appointments to the point of the Garland/Barrett double standard, our country gets screwed, and a small minority get to subject the rest of us to their medieval sensibilities. Besides, Democrats are divided enough to be our own opposition party.

What JB said. The current GOP has shown themselves to be a bunch of morally bankrupt, cowardly, selfish assholes who are ok with sacrificing the best interests of their constituents, the founding principles of our democracy, and the very ideas their party supposedly stands for, as long as they can cling onto wealth and power on both a personal and societal level. These are not perfect, platonic ideal Republicans existing in a vacuum and making reasonable and carefully considered decisions about small government or whatever. It’s utterly naive to think they’d be reasonable and cooperative if they hold Senate control. I’m a bleeding-heart liberal, I’ve never thought much of the GOP, but watching them fall in line to enable Trump over the last four years has pushed dislike into utter disgust and complete disrespect. And look at how dirty they were with Merrick Garland’s confirmation. They stole that Supreme Court seat with excuses they seemed to completely forget about once it was Barrett’s turn to be nominated. So if you’re interested in the balance of power and checks and balances across the branches of government, maybe consider that Trump has stacked the Supreme Court with THREE right-wing judges who will be there for life. I just pray those judges will have more backbone, intelligence, and moral principles than the GOP Senate. Romney is basically the only one to do even the barest minimum of standing up for his principles.

The Trump administration, the Trump campaign and, most importantly, the GOP at large, together are currently attempting a bloodless coup with regards to this not-close presidential election. (And it wasn't close, by popular vote or by Electoral College standards). They consider Democrats to have no legitimacy whatsoever. Loeffler and Perdue, as well as McConnell, Barr, Graham and many others are not just on board with this - they are pushing this result. To them it's not about what is good for the people of this country, it's about entrenching their power and destroying the other.

And this example of political asymmetry is only the most recent. You could provide an unending number of examples going back to Nixon.

You need a complete overhaul of your 250 year old constitution. It is an absolute shit show. Don’t give a single person power to pardon criminals and veto your congress. It is insane. Pull yourselves out of the 18th century and become a modern country. For 4 years - the world largest economy fell into the hands of an idiot - and every single one of you are responsible for that. Stop it and grow up.

You need a complete overhaul of your 250 year old constitution

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/

I think "complete overhaul" is a bit much. We could probably use some updates of the anti-democratic bits, like Senate representation (two Senators for every state regardless of population, with state populations now ranging from <1M to >40MM, something probably pretty unimaginable to the founders) and the Electoral College. Now that one of our two parties is acting almost entirely in bad faith we probably need strengthening of the checks and balances. To your main point, yes, we could probably use some more/clearer limits on the executive branch. Also helpful would be term limits for the legislature, IMO, and replacing lifetime Supreme Court appointments with long terms, like maybe 10-20 years. Unfortunately we're not likely to be able to amend the Constitution because the amendment process requires a very large consensus.

Most of this is about corruption, IMO. I think both parties are corrupt in terms of serving moneyed interests, and one party is also corrupt in terms of pursuing power by any means and at all costs, and in terms of being anti-democratic white supremacist religious extremists. If we had some effective way to battle corruption then the Constitution would probably be fine as is.

But to me that's the nut of all of human governance. Power corrupts, how do we have governments which don't become corrupt? Most people who seek out power over others seem to be the ones who are least trustworthy with that power.

We also have a media problem in that "both sides" get portrayed as equally valid, which IMO is completely ludicrous at this point. I wish we had an FCC that could fine Fox News into oblivion.

Caravan Ray wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 5:16 am

You need a complete overhaul of your 250 year old constitution. It is an absolute shit show. Don’t give a single person power to pardon criminals and veto your congress. It is insane. Pull yourselves out of the 18th century and become a modern country. For 4 years - the world largest economy fell into the hands of an idiot - and every single one of you are responsible for that. Stop it and grow up.

re: constitution. The constitution hasn't been adhered to for at least 140 years if not longer. If it were considered a legal document and followed as such AND we still had problems then you might have an argument. But you're argument is like saying the treaties the U.S. government forced the plains Indians to sign didn't work so the solution was to write a new one when the problem was that the U.S. government (or at least the office of Indian affairs, the military and most of the politicians) never intended to follow it in the first place. Doesn't much matter what it says if you're not gonna follow it.

re: economy. I've heard people make the claim that the successful economy just prior to the pandemic was a continuation of what Obama and Biden started. That is arguable but the most interesting part is the implicit admission that the economy improved. Whether Trump was the reason for it or whether nothing he did impeded what was already set in motion doesn't really matter. He at least didn't ruin it. All that being said, his tariff war was a huge mistake. But then he was, with a few policy exceptions, a New York Democrat, so what do you expect?

For the record I never voted for Trump.