LetMyPeopleVote
LetMyPeopleVote's JournalBeto O'Rourke blames Gov. Greg Abbott for nixing live audience in tonight's debate
Greg is scared of a live audience
https://twitter.com/HoustonChron/status/1575900852958777345
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/texas/article/Beto-O-Rourke-blames-Gov-Greg-Abbott-for-nixing-17478110.php
"Greg Abbott let more people into the room to watch him ban abortion in cases of rape and incest than he's letting into the room to watch tonight's debate," O'Rourke tweeted Friday morning.
He was referencing Abbott's signing ceremony last year for Senate Bill 8 — the so-called "Heartbeat Bill" — that banned nearly all abortions in Texas months before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. He was surrounded by dozens of Texas lawmakers who had championed the legislation.
Abbott's campaign said O'Rourke's tweet was inaccurate, and both candidates had agreed to rules put out by Nexstar Media Group, the television station hosting the 7 p.m. debate at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley in Edinburg.
"The terms of debate were agreed to by both campaigns months ago, and now, at the last minute, Beto doesn't like them," said Mark Miner, the communications director for the Abbott campaign. "He's a fraud surrounded by incompetence. Tonight Beto will have to explain his support for defunding the police, open borders and extreme environmental energy policies that will kill hundreds of thousands of energy jobs in Texas."
But O'Rourke's team said Nexstar did not make the decision. Chris Evans, the communications director for the O'Rourke campaign, said the Democrat had repeatedly proposed hosting the debate with an audience of invited guests, students and members of the public — but the Abbott campaign rejected those ideas each time.
O'Rourke buses Uvalde families to Edinburg for debate as Abbott derides him as 'con man'
At the only debate between Greg Abbott and Beto, there will be no audience or live press. The press will be in a separate room and Greg is terrified of facing live voters who have not been prescreened,
Beto has brought Uvalde family members to this event. Greg is hiding from these family members because it is clear that Greg never cared about these family members.
https://twitter.com/HoustonChron/status/1575944478438850592
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/election/2022/article/O-Rourke-buses-Uvalde-families-to-Edinburg-for-17478125.php?utm_campaign=sftwitter&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=referral
Families held two different press conferences — one with O'Rourke — blasting Abbott for not calling a special session of the Texas Legislature to address gun violence and for not allowing them in the audience as the debate is broadcast on Friday night from the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley.
“He has repeatedly refused to enact stricter gun laws,” said Kimberly Rubio, the mother of 10-year-old Lexi who was among the 19 children and two teachers killed in their classroom at Robb Elementary on May 24.
Other family members of Uvalde victims like Gloria Cazaras, whose daughter Jackie was killed that day, said Texas should raise the age to buy weapons like the AR-15 that was used by the killer to massacre the children at Robb Elementary.
The shooter was 18 at the time of the killings. Florida, New York and California have already raised the age to buy those weapons to 21, but Abbott has said he believes it could be unconstitutional to do in Texas.
O'Rourke buses Uvalde families to Edinburg for debate as Abbott derides him as 'con man'
At the only debate between Greg Abbott and Beto, there will be no audience or live press. The press will be in a separate room and Greg is terrified of facing live voters who have not been prescreened,
Beto has brought Uvalde family members to this event. Greg is hiding from these family members because it is clear that Greg never cared about these family members.
https://twitter.com/HoustonChron/status/1575944478438850592
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/election/2022/article/O-Rourke-buses-Uvalde-families-to-Edinburg-for-17478125.php?utm_campaign=sftwitter&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=referral
Families held two different press conferences — one with O'Rourke — blasting Abbott for not calling a special session of the Texas Legislature to address gun violence and for not allowing them in the audience as the debate is broadcast on Friday night from the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley.
“He has repeatedly refused to enact stricter gun laws,” said Kimberly Rubio, the mother of 10-year-old Lexi who was among the 19 children and two teachers killed in their classroom at Robb Elementary on May 24.
Other family members of Uvalde victims like Gloria Cazaras, whose daughter Jackie was killed that day, said Texas should raise the age to buy weapons like the AR-15 that was used by the killer to massacre the children at Robb Elementary.
The shooter was 18 at the time of the killings. Florida, New York and California have already raised the age to buy those weapons to 21, but Abbott has said he believes it could be unconstitutional to do in Texas.
Statement from President Biden on Russia's attempt to annex Ukrainian Terrority
https://twitter.com/What46HasDone/status/1575862377915895810Lizzo played a Founding Father's flute and conservatives lost their minds
The racists in the MAGA movements are proud to display their racism
https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1575818012623511552
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/why-lizzo-playing-james-madison-s-crystal-flute-not-controversial-n1299179
https://twitter.com/lizzo/status/1573681768145817607
Fast-forward a week and suddenly people have thoughts about the propriety and sanctity of Lizzo gleefully playing a few notes on that flute on a stage in Washington on Tuesday. It’s somehow a tragedy and a scandal that anyone would dare be so crass as to remove a Founding Father’s obscure tchotchke from its place of safekeeping to be used as a prop for a twerking symbol of America’s moral decadence.
When I say “people,” what I really mean is “a handful of men who love to be mad on the internet.” And their sudden surge of interest in early American musical instrument lore is as transparent as the crystal flute itself.
The backstory of how the flute went from a hidden-away catalog to appearing on stage in Lizzo’s hands is actually pretty heartwarming. She accepted Hayden’s offer to visit the library’s extensive collection of flutes, spending three hours on Monday exploring and trying out the instruments on hand, according to The New York Times. That included the crystal flute that Hayden had teased in her tweet — and which the superstar asked if she could play during her D.C. performance on Tuesday.
https://twitter.com/librarycongress/status/1575208737052278817
......These outraged screams aren’t because the flute could have been damaged, or because Tuesday’s performance cheapened the monetary or historical value of the item or denigrates Madison’s legacy. Instead, they are mad because someone who is living her life as unapologetically fat, Black and female dared have a good time in public. They are mad because something that was once owned by a slaveholding Virginian aristocrat would be introduced to America as part of a concert where Lizzo dared jiggle her ass for a second or two while playing it.
The anger directed at her feels like a direct offshoot of the reactionary backlash that we’ve seen to Blackness in pop culture in recent weeks. If anything, Lizzo — who declared to her audience after returning the flute “HISTORY IS SO FREAKING COOL!” — showed more reverence and respect for history in her time at the Library of Congress than many of the conservatives who would prefer to see America’s backstory sanitized into a homogenous sludge of patriotic but ahistorical hero worship.
Do these cranks actually believe what they’re saying? I have doubts — what we’re seeing is the online equivalent of an involuntary spasm in a muscle touched with an electrical wire. But do prominent commentators like Shapiro know that their audiences will have felt a reflexive feeling of revulsion toward Lizzo and want to capitalize on it? Absolutely.
Supreme Court investiture marks another historic first for Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson
History is being made today with the formal investiture of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson
https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1575455052554244097
https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/29/politics/supreme-court-jackson-investiture/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twCNN&utm_content=2022-09-29T11%3A58%3A49&utm_term=Tlink
The investiture ceremony for Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman on the bench, will be marked by pomp from the ages, including the use of Chief Justice John Marshall’s historic bench chair and commission language that dates to the first justice, John Jay, appointed by President George Washington.
“Know ye,” the presidential commission, as read by Clerk of Court Scott Harris, will begin, “that reposing special trust and confidence in the wisdom, uprightness, and learning of Ketanji Brown Jackson … in testimony whereof, I have caused these letters to be made patent and the seal of the Department of Justice to be hereunto affixed.”
President Joe Biden, who selected Jackson, will attend the Friday morning ceremony, a White House official told CNN. It is customary before the event for the president to chat privately with the justices in a conference room and to sign the court’s oversized guest book.
The official told CNN that Vice President Kamala Harris, first lady Jill Biden and second gentleman Doug Emhoff will also be at the investiture.
Supreme Court investiture marks another historic first for Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson
Source: CNN
The Supreme Court, a place bound by tradition and formality, will hold one of its most scripted rituals on Friday for a justice whose appointment broke the mold of history.
The investiture ceremony for Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman on the bench, will be marked by pomp from the ages, including the use of Chief Justice John Marshall’s historic bench chair and commission language that dates to the first justice, John Jay, appointed by President George Washington.
“Know ye,” the presidential commission, as read by Clerk of Court Scott Harris, will begin, “that reposing special trust and confidence in the wisdom, uprightness, and learning of Ketanji Brown Jackson … in testimony whereof, I have caused these letters to be made patent and the seal of the Department of Justice to be hereunto affixed.”
President Joe Biden, who selected Jackson, will attend the Friday morning ceremony, a White House official told CNN. It is customary before the event for the president to chat privately with the justices in a conference room and to sign the court’s oversized guest book.
The official told CNN that Vice President Kamala Harris, first lady Jill Biden and second gentleman Doug Emhoff will also be at the investiture.
Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/29/politics/supreme-court-jackson-investiture/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twCNN&utm_content=2022-09-29T11%3A58%3A49&utm_term=link
Putin illegally proclaims annexation of four Ukrainian regions at Moscow ceremony
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1575826578462117889https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/09/30/russia-ukraine-war-putin-annexation-live-updates/?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter
In Zaporizhzhia, suspected Russian missiles struck a civilian convoy killed at least 25 people early Friday, Ukrainian officials said. With roughly a quarter of Zaporizhzhia still in Kyiv’s hands, including the city of the same name, Russia’s grip on the region remains tenuous even as it plans to claim it as its own.
As Supreme Court's standing falters, Alito pushes flawed defense
The public approval of the SCOTUS has crashed due the actions of partisan hacks like Alito. The overturning of Roe was not simply a poorly written decision that relied on on 16th century witch hunter but was a rejection of the fundamental premise that American is a land of laws and precedents cannot be overturned just because some partisan hacks have gained control
Alito is a partisan hack and is upset that people are calling him a partisan hack.
https://twitter.com/stevebenen/status/1575476351066378241
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/supreme-courts-standing-falters-alito-pushes-flawed-defense-rcna49939?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma
“Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts?” she asked. “I don’t see how it is possible.”
Six months later, when the Dobbs ruling was formally released, Sotomayor joined with Justices Stephen Breyer and Elana Kagan, writing in a dissent that the decision “undermines the Court’s legitimacy.”
A couple of weeks ago, Kagan advanced the conversation during remarks at Northwestern University School of Law. “When courts become extensions of the political process, when people see them as extensions of the political process, when people see them as trying just to impose personal preferences on a society irrespective of the law, that’s when there’s a problem — and that’s when there ought to be a problem,” Kagan said.
Justice Samuel Alito, the author of the Dobbs ruling, has heard the concerns — and he clearly has a problem with them. The Wall Street Journal reported:
In a comment Tuesday to The Wall Street Journal, Justice Alito said: “It goes without saying that everyone is free to express disagreement with our decisions and to criticize our reasoning as they see fit. But saying or implying that the court is becoming an illegitimate institution or questioning our integrity crosses an important line.”
The article did not quote the far-right jurist further — I suspect he didn’t elaborate — though the ambiguity leaves some unanswered questions. If Kagan and others have crossed “an important line,” what exactly does Alito see as the appropriate consequence? Is he of the opinion that people are free to disagree with the high court, but not question its legitimacy?
What’s more, Alito hasn’t exactly presented a defense of the institution. Indeed, in his comments to The Wall Street Journal, he didn’t even make an argument, per se. The justice’s pitch, in effect, is that people shouldn’t question the integrity of the court or its members because, well, just because.......
But as The Washington Post’s Ruth Marcus explained in a recent column, the justices’ own rulings have been every bit as important.
The inflamed public reaction stems also from the fact that the law changed because the court’s membership changed. The ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was the culmination of a political and politicized process to bolster the conservative majority by any means necessary. And this stacked court has — time after time, but most flagrantly in overruling Roe v. Wade — abandoned normal rules of restraint, twisted or ignored doctrine, and substituted raw power to achieve its desired result.... And this is how the institution undermines its own legitimacy. If the court behaves like just another political body, it loses the only power it has, of achieving public acceptance of its rulings.
When Republican-appointed justices ignore precedents they’d previously said they’d uphold, it undermines the court’s legitimacy. When Republican-appointed justices deliver overtly political speeches, it undermines the court’s legitimacy. When Republican-appointed justices take aim at fundamental American principles, such as the separation of church and state, in displays of raw power, it undermines the court’s legitimacy.
The block of partisan hacks on the SCOTUS have destroyed the legitimacy of the SCOTUS. The best way to respond to this is to GOTV and vote in so many Democrats in the House nd Senate that we can expand the court to neutralize these partisan hacks
As Supreme Court's standing falters, Alito pushes flawed defense
The public approval of the SCOTUS has crashed due the actions of partisan hacks like Alito. The overturning of Roe was not simply a poorly written decision that relied on on 16th century witch hunter but was a rejection of the fundamental premise that American is a land of laws and precedents cannot be overturned just because some partisan hacks have gained control
Alito is a partisan hack and is upset that people are calling him a partisan hack.
https://twitter.com/stevebenen/status/1575476351066378241
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/supreme-courts-standing-falters-alito-pushes-flawed-defense-rcna49939?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma
“Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts?” she asked. “I don’t see how it is possible.”
Six months later, when the Dobbs ruling was formally released, Sotomayor joined with Justices Stephen Breyer and Elana Kagan, writing in a dissent that the decision “undermines the Court’s legitimacy.”
A couple of weeks ago, Kagan advanced the conversation during remarks at Northwestern University School of Law. “When courts become extensions of the political process, when people see them as extensions of the political process, when people see them as trying just to impose personal preferences on a society irrespective of the law, that’s when there’s a problem — and that’s when there ought to be a problem,” Kagan said.
Justice Samuel Alito, the author of the Dobbs ruling, has heard the concerns — and he clearly has a problem with them. The Wall Street Journal reported:
In a comment Tuesday to The Wall Street Journal, Justice Alito said: “It goes without saying that everyone is free to express disagreement with our decisions and to criticize our reasoning as they see fit. But saying or implying that the court is becoming an illegitimate institution or questioning our integrity crosses an important line.”
The article did not quote the far-right jurist further — I suspect he didn’t elaborate — though the ambiguity leaves some unanswered questions. If Kagan and others have crossed “an important line,” what exactly does Alito see as the appropriate consequence? Is he of the opinion that people are free to disagree with the high court, but not question its legitimacy?
What’s more, Alito hasn’t exactly presented a defense of the institution. Indeed, in his comments to The Wall Street Journal, he didn’t even make an argument, per se. The justice’s pitch, in effect, is that people shouldn’t question the integrity of the court or its members because, well, just because.......
But as The Washington Post’s Ruth Marcus explained in a recent column, the justices’ own rulings have been every bit as important.
The inflamed public reaction stems also from the fact that the law changed because the court’s membership changed. The ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was the culmination of a political and politicized process to bolster the conservative majority by any means necessary. And this stacked court has — time after time, but most flagrantly in overruling Roe v. Wade — abandoned normal rules of restraint, twisted or ignored doctrine, and substituted raw power to achieve its desired result.... And this is how the institution undermines its own legitimacy. If the court behaves like just another political body, it loses the only power it has, of achieving public acceptance of its rulings.
When Republican-appointed justices ignore precedents they’d previously said they’d uphold, it undermines the court’s legitimacy. When Republican-appointed justices deliver overtly political speeches, it undermines the court’s legitimacy. When Republican-appointed justices take aim at fundamental American principles, such as the separation of church and state, in displays of raw power, it undermines the court’s legitimacy.
The block of partisan hacks on the SCOTUS have destroyed the legitimacy of the SCOTUS. The best way to respond to this is to GOTV and vote in so many Democrats in the House nd Senate that we can expand the court to neutralize these partisan hacks
Profile Information
Member since: Mon Apr 5, 2004, 04:58 PMNumber of posts: 145,130
