Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

What stupid shit has Biden done today?

Envy or jealousy implies that I would like to be in those companies position. I don't, and I see the value in contributing proportionally to the upkeep of society.

I know I'm weird but I don't understand the entire mindset of people with massive amounts of money either. You can only use so much stuff in one lifetime. After that you have to spend a lot of time building a framework for making sure you keep all your money, make more of it, and generally maintain all your stuff. Betsy DeVoss has 11 yachts. Why would you possibly need or want 11 yachts the size of an American football field each?
 
Last edited:
I know I'm weird but I don't understand the entire mindset of people with massive amounts of money either. You can only use so much stuff in one lifetime. After that you have to spend a lot of time building a framework for making sure you keep all your money, make more of it, and generally maintain all your stuff. Betsy DeVoss has 11 yachts. Why would you possibly need or want 11 yachts the size of an American football field each?

I suppose there's some solace to be had from knowing they'll never be truly satisfied.
 
The Washington Times is a right wing crank vehicle. How Pro-Trump Forces Pushed a Lie About Antifa at the Capitol Riot

The conspiracy gained new momentum after The Washington Times, a right-wing newspaper, published an online article shortly before 2:30 p.m. claiming that a facial recognition firm had identified antifa activists in the crowd at the Capitol. The newspaper corrected the article less than 24 hours later, after its claims were proved false — but not before the story made an enormous impact. The article eventually amassed 360,000 likes and shares on Facebook, according to CrowdTangle, a tool owned by Facebook and used for analyzing social media.
 
Yeah, confusing how the Washington Post and New York Times are the centrist liberal rags and then Washington Times and New York Post are the right wing filth. Anyway, not particularly endorsing that paper, but it seems to be the original source for the story, and also not paywalled which helps - it's also picked up by Business Insider, The Times, Independent and Lad Bible (most of which are either paywalled or adblockerwalled), but as far as I can see they're just recycling the WT story. The original document doesn't seem to be public so can't really fact check it, so I suppose we just have to wait and see if the Biden administration deny it or not?

Fwiw, did some digging, here's what the latest White House press briefing seems to be saying:
Well, wall construction remains paused, to the extent permitted by law. So some has already been funded through a congressional authorization and funding allocation. But as agencies develop for a plan — it’s paused while agencies are developing a plan for the President on the management of the federal funds...

Under those circumstances, federal agencies are continuing to review wall contracts and develop a plan to submit to the President soon.

It is — it is paused. There is some limited construction that has been funded and allocated for, but it is otherwise paused.
 

Mainstream Democrats are in a hawkish mood when it comes to “domestic terrorism.” That is bad news for the left.

Immediately upon taking office, President Biden “tasked the director of national intelligence, in coordination with the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security, with compiling a comprehensive threat assessment on violent domestic extremism,“ according to The Washington Post. This request was prompted by the right-wing attack on the Capitol on January 6.

The resulting report, “Domestic Violent Extremism Poses Heightened Threat in 2021,” was submitted on March 1, and its executive summary was released publicly a few days later. While its list of findings include some obvious observations — for example, that extremists are “motivated by a range of ideologies” and use the internet “to recruit, plan and rally support for in-person actions” — the final page of the executive summary, listing “Categories of Domestic Violent Extremists,” reveals a concerning typology. It identifies five classifications: “Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremists,” “Animal Rights / Environmental Violent Extremists,” “Abortion-Related Violent Extremists,” “Anti-Government/Anti-Authority Violent Extremists” and “All Other Domestic Terrorism Threats” (“including a combination of personal grievances and beliefs with potential bias related to religion, gender, or sexual orientation”).

The most striking thing about this classification system — which seems to have been developed by the FBI during the Trump years — is its perverse refusal to divide between left and right, instead grouping opposing sides together under other categories. Right-wing militias, sovereign citizens and anarchists, for example, are all listed under “Anti-Government/Anti-Authority Violent Extremists.” Racist and anti-racist violence is compressed into “Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremists.”

“Abortion-Related Violent Extremists” includes both those “in support of pro-life and pro-choice beliefs” — despite the fact that the FBI cannot point to any pro-choice violence that escalated above the level of online threats, while anti-abortion fanatics have murdered 11 people and attempted to kill 26 more since 1993.

The classification system obscures a profound asymmetry in the distribution of violence as it is employed across the political spectrum, implying an equivalency between left and right. That presumption is contradicted by the evidence.
Good to know the Biden FBI will be keeping its eyes on those violent pro-choice extremists.
 
BUILD THE WALL! cont:



Apologies for just posting the twitter link, but can't find more indepth coverage of this latest development, here's an article giving background to the case though: Vargas, Garza: DOJ Should Dismiss All Border Wall Suits

And here's a reminder of Biden's position in 2020: Biden says he would stop border wall construction as president

NPR’s Lulu Garcia-Navarro asked the candidate what he would do about the “land confiscations,” in which the federal government seizes land to build border protection, to which Biden responded, “End it.”

“End. Stop. Done. Over. Not going to do it. Withdraw the lawsuits. We’re out. We’re not going to confiscate the land,” he said.
 
Biden's American Families Plan unveiled Wednesday leaves out two major health priorities pushed by congressional Democrats: reducing the cost of prescription drugs and lowering the eligibility age for Medicare. The major legislative package, which Biden will discuss in an address to Congress on Wednesday night, includes measures in areas like child care and paid leave, but largely steers clear of health care.

 
Biden's American Families Plan unveiled Wednesday leaves out two major health priorities pushed by congressional Democrats: reducing the cost of prescription drugs and lowering the eligibility age for Medicare. The major legislative package, which Biden will discuss in an address to Congress on Wednesday night, includes measures in areas like child care and paid leave, but largely steers clear of health care.



At this particular point in time, I would say that the childcare and paid leave are far more important.

He can go for the rest at a later date.
 
At this particular point in time, I would say that the childcare and paid leave are far more important.

He can go for the rest at a later date.
AOC claimes he has 'exceeded expectations that progressives had'.

If that's the case, that's some damn low expectations!

If only that were true eh.
 
Yet another US president who has caved to the pharmaceutical companies, not even trying to negotiate affordable, or less expensive, medicine for the American people.
 
As shit as Biden may be, it's interesting to see that the Democrats are to some extent bowing to pressure from the Bernie Sanders left within the party. It's in stark contrast to how the Labour Party have decided to deal with the left of their party. I think it will be better for the democrats long term- with a few concessions they can keep millions of younger voters on board rather than pissing them off. Once the LP's chief policy became 'Try to make the right wing press happy' they had no choice but to piss off the left but it's such bad long term strategy I sometimes can't believe they're doing it. I don't see Biden trying to appease the Fox News mob much (with the possible exception of immigration policy).
 
As shit as Biden may be, it's interesting to see that the Democrats are to some extent bowing to pressure from the Bernie Sanders left within the party. It's in stark contrast to how the Labour Party have decided to deal with the left of their party. I think it will be better for the democrats long term- with a few concessions they can keep millions of younger voters on board rather than pissing them off. Once the LP's chief policy became 'Try to make the right wing press happy' they had no choice but to piss off the left but it's such bad long term strategy I sometimes can't believe they're doing it. I don't see Biden trying to appease the Fox News mob much (with the possible exception of immigration policy).

A large part of their base are Sanders supporters. If they don't give something that way, we'll all walk away and start another party. While another party probably wouldn't be viable, it would draw Democratic Party voters away in any election to come. The results would be ugly and they know it. However, they'll only give what they think they absolutely have to so they'll need some leaning on.
 
Last edited:
Seems to me that Biden is pretending to be more progressive than he is. Seems likely to me that if he doesn't do something about the fillibuster, and making the likes of Manchin, Sinema and Kelly 'fall in line', if he's not going to properly deal with the parliamentarian, to do these things to get reforms through, then the Democrats might not do so well in the midterms and could start to lose support.

If he genuinely wants change then he's going to have to do these things and the sooner the better. But so far it appears he's not interested.
 
Biden administration announces intention to ban menthol cigarettes:

I've seen this described as "everyone: when are you going to decriminalise cannabis? Biden: I hear you, I've listened to your concerns, and I'm happy to announce that I will be criminalising menthols."

For more serious commentary, here's a joint letter from the ACLU and a number of other organizations on what the consequences of a ban might be:

And here's a reminder of what Eric Garner's mother wrote in 2019 when New York was considering a similar ban - Eric Garner, of course, being someone who was killed for selling tobacco products illegally:

Gwendolyn Carr, the mother of Eric Garner—who was killed by NYPD police officer Daniel Pantaleo with a chokehold while being arrested for selling loosie cigarettes in 2014—has come out come against a proposed ban on sales of menthol cigarettes in New York City. She is joined by Sybrina Fulton, whose son Trayvon Martin was shot to death in Florida by George Zimmerman in 2012.

In an October 16 letter to City Council Speaker Corey Johnson, who faces enormous pressure to ban menthol cigarettes, the two women wrote, “We urge you to pay very close attention to the unintended effects of a ban on menthol cigarettes and what it would mean for communities of color…”

Carr and Fulton are right to be concerned. Black Americans are the top consumers of menthol cigarettes; over 88 percent of African-American smokers prefer menthols to unflavored cigarettes and they comprise around 30 percent of the overall menthol market.

Drug bans of any kind have to be enforced, and enforcement criminalizes people. The NYPD has a notorious and well-documented history of disproportionately targeting people of color through stop-and-frisk, even though all races use drugs at similar rates.

“Both of us work with black youth throughout the country, including in New York City,” wrote Carr and Fulton. “We have seen the casualties of bad policies that have created unfortunate encounters with law enforcement.”

“When you ban a product sold mostly in black communities,” they continued, “you must consider the reality of what will happen to that very same over-represented community in the criminal justice system … We are concerned that the ban will create a whole new market for loosies and re-introduce another version of stop and frisk in black, financially challenged communities where aggressive policing is a full reality…”

Carr and Fulton called out the plain racism of a menthols ban, writing, “Banning menthol cigarettes means that cigarettes preferred by black New Yorkers would be illegal. Cigarettes preferred by non-black New Yorkers would be legal.”

For all of these reasons, drug policy reform advocates from the Law Enforcement Action Partnership*, the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement and the Harm Reduction Coalition, among others, have come out in opposition to a menthols ban, as Filter has reported.

Because banning menthol cigarettes⁠—with consequences that Carr and Fulton circumspectly described as “unintended”⁠—would in fact have a perfectly clear purpose: the creation of another racist pipeline into the criminal justice system.
 
Is the banning of menthol fags going to create a black market for menthols that would need to be enforced though? Presumably the manufacturers will just stop shipping them to the US, and the people who preferred menthols will either move to non-menthol fags or quit, like they did here?
 
I'd go full Bhutan with smoking laws if I had my way and think menthols are a problem because they make it easier to smoke. I remember preferring them as a teen. But this does sound a bit silly to me.

Although the 86% figure is misleading because only 18% of African Americans smoke. So it's 15% or so of the African American population who smoke menthols. And there's probably at least some support amongst the 82% that don't smoke.
 
Back
Top Bottom