Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Celerity
Celerity's Journal
Celerity's Journal
August 7, 2022
The death toll from the Israeli assault on Gaza has risen to 31, including six children; more than 260 people have been injured.
Rocket sirens and explosions heard in West Jerusalem.
The Palestinian Islamic Jihad confirms the killing of its second commander.
Groups of Israeli settlers storm Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in occupied East Jerusalem under the protection of Israeli forces.
https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/1555848864405590020
https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/1556178073422274561
The death toll from the Israeli assault on Gaza has risen to 31, including six children
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2022/8/7/israel-palestine-latest-updates-dozens-killed-in-three-day-gaza-assaultThe death toll from the Israeli assault on Gaza has risen to 31, including six children; more than 260 people have been injured.
Rocket sirens and explosions heard in West Jerusalem.
The Palestinian Islamic Jihad confirms the killing of its second commander.
Groups of Israeli settlers storm Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in occupied East Jerusalem under the protection of Israeli forces.
https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/1555848864405590020
https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/1556178073422274561
August 6, 2022
In a video posted to her social media channels, Georgia GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene claimed without evidence that Ashli Babbitt, the woman shot and killed by a Capitol Police Officer on Jan. 6 as she tried to jump through a door's broken window that led to the Speaker's Lobby, posed no threat and was actually trying to stop the rioters.
Greene described Babbitt as an "unarmed woman" who is "on video hitting someone in the face that was breaking the glass to go in to the Speaker's Lobby." "Ashli Babbitt was someone that was trying to stop them from going in," Greene said. "And that's on video and there's proof of it."
Greene is likely referring to conspiracy theories circulated by Trump supporters claiming that Babbitt was fighting back against an "antifa false flag" that took place that day. One video that has gained traction in pro-Trump circles claims Babbitt "was trying to stop those people from busting up the place, and then had to flee from them. That’s why she went through the window, and then got shot, got assassinated by that f------- rent-a-cop."
snip
https://twitter.com/patriottakes/status/1555259262464663552
Marjorie Taylor Greene: Ashli Babbitt was actually trying to stop rioters from entering the Capitol
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-ashli-babbitt-was-actually-trying-to-stop-the-rioters-from-entering-the-capitol/ar-AA10lJWVIn a video posted to her social media channels, Georgia GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene claimed without evidence that Ashli Babbitt, the woman shot and killed by a Capitol Police Officer on Jan. 6 as she tried to jump through a door's broken window that led to the Speaker's Lobby, posed no threat and was actually trying to stop the rioters.
Greene described Babbitt as an "unarmed woman" who is "on video hitting someone in the face that was breaking the glass to go in to the Speaker's Lobby." "Ashli Babbitt was someone that was trying to stop them from going in," Greene said. "And that's on video and there's proof of it."
Greene is likely referring to conspiracy theories circulated by Trump supporters claiming that Babbitt was fighting back against an "antifa false flag" that took place that day. One video that has gained traction in pro-Trump circles claims Babbitt "was trying to stop those people from busting up the place, and then had to flee from them. That’s why she went through the window, and then got shot, got assassinated by that f------- rent-a-cop."
snip
https://twitter.com/patriottakes/status/1555259262464663552
August 6, 2022
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/democrats-insulin-inflation-reduction-act-b2139876.html
Democrats are bracing for a fight to include capping the price of insulin on their climate and health care bill as they prepare for a long night of votes on Saturday. They included a provision to cap the price of insulin in their legislation known as the Inflation Reduction Act, which Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senator Joe Manchin negotiated together. The legislation would cap out-of-pocket costs for insulin to $35.
But Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough issued a guidance against a provision that would cause drug companies to rebate Medicare if it raised the price of drugs higher than inflation. Democrats hope to pass the bill through a process called budget reconciliation, which would allow them to pass it with a simple majority. Should the bill pass through this process, it would allow them to avoid a Republican filibuster, since Democrats only have 50 Senate seats with Vice President Kamala Harris serving as the tie breaker.
The Senate Parliamentarian must determine if aspects of the legislation are germane to the budget or are an “extraneous matter.” If she rules that a part of the legislation does not relate to the budget, Democrats will have a vote on the amendment during the “vote-a-rama,” wherein a series of amendments are voted for the bill.
The presiding officer could ignore the parliamentarian and decide it complies with rules about budget reconciliation, but that would require 60 votes for the amendment to pass that way, as Roll Call reported. Senator Raphael Warnock of Georgia, who is up for re-election this year, has made capping the cost of insulin a signature issue in his campaign against Republican Herschel Walker.
snip
related:
Democrats plan to challenge parliamentarian on insulin cap
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3591084-democrats-plan-to-challenge-parliamentarian-on-insulin-cap/
Senate Democrats say they plan to challenge a ruling by the parliamentarian striking a proposal sponsored by Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) to cap insulin prices from the Inflation Reduction Act, according to a Democrat familiar with the plan.
As of now, Warnock’s proposal to cap out-of-pocket insulin costs at $35 a month is in the bill, but the parliamentarian is expected to rule on the Senate floor that it does not comply with the Byrd rule, which prohibits policymaking in budget reconciliation bills that have a tangential impact on spending and revenue.
But Democrats plan to challenge the parliamentarian’s ruling on the floor, which means they would need 60 votes to waive an objection to keeping the insulin provision in the bill.
Any effort to overturn the parliamentarian is not likely to get 10 Republican votes, but it will put Republicans on the record as opposing a $35 monthly cap on patients’ insulin costs, which Democrats can use as political ammo in the midterm elections.
snip
Democrats brace for insulin fight on Inflation Reduction Act (The Senate parliamentarian again)
Democrats want to cap the price of insulin to $35https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/democrats-insulin-inflation-reduction-act-b2139876.html
Democrats are bracing for a fight to include capping the price of insulin on their climate and health care bill as they prepare for a long night of votes on Saturday. They included a provision to cap the price of insulin in their legislation known as the Inflation Reduction Act, which Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senator Joe Manchin negotiated together. The legislation would cap out-of-pocket costs for insulin to $35.
But Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough issued a guidance against a provision that would cause drug companies to rebate Medicare if it raised the price of drugs higher than inflation. Democrats hope to pass the bill through a process called budget reconciliation, which would allow them to pass it with a simple majority. Should the bill pass through this process, it would allow them to avoid a Republican filibuster, since Democrats only have 50 Senate seats with Vice President Kamala Harris serving as the tie breaker.
The Senate Parliamentarian must determine if aspects of the legislation are germane to the budget or are an “extraneous matter.” If she rules that a part of the legislation does not relate to the budget, Democrats will have a vote on the amendment during the “vote-a-rama,” wherein a series of amendments are voted for the bill.
The presiding officer could ignore the parliamentarian and decide it complies with rules about budget reconciliation, but that would require 60 votes for the amendment to pass that way, as Roll Call reported. Senator Raphael Warnock of Georgia, who is up for re-election this year, has made capping the cost of insulin a signature issue in his campaign against Republican Herschel Walker.
snip
related:
Democrats plan to challenge parliamentarian on insulin cap
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3591084-democrats-plan-to-challenge-parliamentarian-on-insulin-cap/
Senate Democrats say they plan to challenge a ruling by the parliamentarian striking a proposal sponsored by Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) to cap insulin prices from the Inflation Reduction Act, according to a Democrat familiar with the plan.
As of now, Warnock’s proposal to cap out-of-pocket insulin costs at $35 a month is in the bill, but the parliamentarian is expected to rule on the Senate floor that it does not comply with the Byrd rule, which prohibits policymaking in budget reconciliation bills that have a tangential impact on spending and revenue.
But Democrats plan to challenge the parliamentarian’s ruling on the floor, which means they would need 60 votes to waive an objection to keeping the insulin provision in the bill.
Any effort to overturn the parliamentarian is not likely to get 10 Republican votes, but it will put Republicans on the record as opposing a $35 monthly cap on patients’ insulin costs, which Democrats can use as political ammo in the midterm elections.
snip
August 6, 2022
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/senate-parliamentarian-democrats-prescription-drugs-b2139806.html
The Senate Parliamentarian killed a key aspect of Democrats’ proposed plan to allow Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices on Saturday.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced on Saturday morning that Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough released her guidance saying that the inflation rebate aspect of Democrats’ legislation, called the Inflation Reduction Act, should be more limited in scope.
“While there was one unfortunate ruling in that the inflation rebate is more limited in scope, the overall program remains intact and we are one step closer to finally taking on Big Pharma and lowering Rx drug prices for millions of Americans.” he said.
Mr Schumer and Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia announced their agreement on the legislation last Wednesday, with a key part of the legislation being that Medicare would be allowed to negotiate drug prices. In addition, the legislation would have required drug companies to pay Medicare back the the difference between the inflation rate and the drug price increase if it raises prices higher than the rate of inflation.
snip
Senate parliamentarian kills key part of Dems' prescription drug plan in the Inflation Reduction Act
The plan would cause manufacturers to rebate Medicare if they increased drug prices higher than inflationhttps://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/senate-parliamentarian-democrats-prescription-drugs-b2139806.html
The Senate Parliamentarian killed a key aspect of Democrats’ proposed plan to allow Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices on Saturday.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced on Saturday morning that Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough released her guidance saying that the inflation rebate aspect of Democrats’ legislation, called the Inflation Reduction Act, should be more limited in scope.
“While there was one unfortunate ruling in that the inflation rebate is more limited in scope, the overall program remains intact and we are one step closer to finally taking on Big Pharma and lowering Rx drug prices for millions of Americans.” he said.
Mr Schumer and Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia announced their agreement on the legislation last Wednesday, with a key part of the legislation being that Medicare would be allowed to negotiate drug prices. In addition, the legislation would have required drug companies to pay Medicare back the the difference between the inflation rate and the drug price increase if it raises prices higher than the rate of inflation.
snip
August 6, 2022
Americans’ Fears are Suppressing Participation in the Democratic Process
https://globalextremism.org/post/fear-and-elections/
A new poll commissioned by GPAHE and conducted by Edge Research shows that Americans are generally more afraid than we were five years ago. We’re most afraid of crime, as expected, but we’re also afraid of each other. We feel as, or more, divided than we did during the Civil War. Mass shootings, political and racial divisions, and extremist rhetoric and violence are all taking their toll on Americans’ sense of safety and security. Most significantly, these fears are causing Americans to be wary of involvement in the democratic process, including voting, as many now fear their polling places are unsafe. Young people as well as Black and Hispanic people feel the most afraid to participate.
GPAHE conducted this poll because we wanted to measure the impact of growing extremism and violent attacks on Americans. We wanted to understand how, if at all, racially and politically motivated violence, extremist political rhetoric, and extremist group activity are affecting our willingness to participate in the democratic process and our general sense of safety. What we found is alarming. Our sense of unease fuelled by both violence and social division leaves the majority of Americans experiencing some level of fear about the potential actions of others in day-to-day life. Not a single place we asked about – the grocery store, schools, houses of worship, and more – was rated as a place that Americans feel “completely or very safe.”
Only 41 percent feel safe at polling places. The least amount of people, 22 percent, feel safe at concerts or festivals. Black (48 percent) and Hispanic (46 percent) people have a far lower sense of personal security in day-to-day life than white people (60 percent), and one-in-five young people (18-25) reported feeling actively at risk (19 percent at risk compared to 10 percent overall). White and older Americans report feeling the safest, but they’ve experienced the greatest decline in sense of safety over the last five years.
Fears are divided along racial and party lines
We are united in our fear but divided, as on most things, on the cause. The erosion in our sense of security is stemming from a number of factors – general crime but also our own divisiveness, with mass shootings being the exception. It is no surprise that for those of us who feel less safe than five years ago, 74 percent of us fear mass shootings, given the number of such incidents that our nation has witnessed in the last few years, and we fear both single actor shooters and coordinated violence from organized extremist groups.
snip
Americans, especially Black, Hispanic,& young people, are very concerned w/ safety at polling places
Americans’ Fears are Suppressing Participation in the Democratic Process
https://globalextremism.org/post/fear-and-elections/
A new poll commissioned by GPAHE and conducted by Edge Research shows that Americans are generally more afraid than we were five years ago. We’re most afraid of crime, as expected, but we’re also afraid of each other. We feel as, or more, divided than we did during the Civil War. Mass shootings, political and racial divisions, and extremist rhetoric and violence are all taking their toll on Americans’ sense of safety and security. Most significantly, these fears are causing Americans to be wary of involvement in the democratic process, including voting, as many now fear their polling places are unsafe. Young people as well as Black and Hispanic people feel the most afraid to participate.
GPAHE conducted this poll because we wanted to measure the impact of growing extremism and violent attacks on Americans. We wanted to understand how, if at all, racially and politically motivated violence, extremist political rhetoric, and extremist group activity are affecting our willingness to participate in the democratic process and our general sense of safety. What we found is alarming. Our sense of unease fuelled by both violence and social division leaves the majority of Americans experiencing some level of fear about the potential actions of others in day-to-day life. Not a single place we asked about – the grocery store, schools, houses of worship, and more – was rated as a place that Americans feel “completely or very safe.”
Only 41 percent feel safe at polling places. The least amount of people, 22 percent, feel safe at concerts or festivals. Black (48 percent) and Hispanic (46 percent) people have a far lower sense of personal security in day-to-day life than white people (60 percent), and one-in-five young people (18-25) reported feeling actively at risk (19 percent at risk compared to 10 percent overall). White and older Americans report feeling the safest, but they’ve experienced the greatest decline in sense of safety over the last five years.
Fears are divided along racial and party lines
We are united in our fear but divided, as on most things, on the cause. The erosion in our sense of security is stemming from a number of factors – general crime but also our own divisiveness, with mass shootings being the exception. It is no surprise that for those of us who feel less safe than five years ago, 74 percent of us fear mass shootings, given the number of such incidents that our nation has witnessed in the last few years, and we fear both single actor shooters and coordinated violence from organized extremist groups.
snip
August 6, 2022
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/05/us/politics/arizona-2020-election-conspiracy-theories.html
https://archive.ph/P3D9g
Of the roughly three dozen states that have held primary elections this year, Arizona is where Donald Trump’s conspiratorial fantasies about the 2020 election seem to have gained the most purchase. This week, Arizona Republicans nominated candidates up and down the ballot who focused their campaigns on stoking baseless conspiracy theories about 2020, when Democrats won the state’s presidential election for only the second time since the 1940s. Joe Biden defeated Trump in Arizona by fewer than 11,000 votes — a whisker-thin margin that has spawned unending efforts to scrutinize and overturn the results, despite election officials’ repeated and emphatic insistence that very little fraud was committed.
The most prominent winner in Tuesday’s Republican primary for governor was Kari Lake, a telegenic former news anchor who became a Trump acolyte. There’s also the G.O.P. pick for secretary of state, Mark Finchem, a cowboy-hat-wearing state lawmaker who marched at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. They are joined by Blake Masters, a hard-edged venture capitalist who is running to oust Senator Mark Kelly, the soft-spoken former astronaut who entered politics after his wife, former Representative Gabby Giffords, was seriously wounded by a gunman in 2011.
There’s also Abraham Hamadeh, the Republican nominee for attorney general, along with several candidates for the State Legislature who are all but certain to win their races. It’s pretty much election deniers all the way down. Another notable primary result this week: Rusty Bowers, the former speaker of the Arizona House, who offered emotional congressional testimony in June about the pressure he faced to overturn the election, was easily defeated in his bid for a State Senate seat. To make sense of it all, I spoke with Jennifer Medina, a California-based politics reporter for The New York Times who covers Arizona and has deep expertise on many of the policy issues that drive elections in the state. Our conversation, lightly edited for length and clarity, is below.
snip
How Arizona Became an Abyss of Election Conspiracy Theories
This week’s primaries showed how Donald Trump’s lies about the 2020 election have gripped Arizona Republicans. To learn why, we spoke with a reporter who has deeply covered the state.https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/05/us/politics/arizona-2020-election-conspiracy-theories.html
https://archive.ph/P3D9g
Of the roughly three dozen states that have held primary elections this year, Arizona is where Donald Trump’s conspiratorial fantasies about the 2020 election seem to have gained the most purchase. This week, Arizona Republicans nominated candidates up and down the ballot who focused their campaigns on stoking baseless conspiracy theories about 2020, when Democrats won the state’s presidential election for only the second time since the 1940s. Joe Biden defeated Trump in Arizona by fewer than 11,000 votes — a whisker-thin margin that has spawned unending efforts to scrutinize and overturn the results, despite election officials’ repeated and emphatic insistence that very little fraud was committed.
The most prominent winner in Tuesday’s Republican primary for governor was Kari Lake, a telegenic former news anchor who became a Trump acolyte. There’s also the G.O.P. pick for secretary of state, Mark Finchem, a cowboy-hat-wearing state lawmaker who marched at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. They are joined by Blake Masters, a hard-edged venture capitalist who is running to oust Senator Mark Kelly, the soft-spoken former astronaut who entered politics after his wife, former Representative Gabby Giffords, was seriously wounded by a gunman in 2011.
There’s also Abraham Hamadeh, the Republican nominee for attorney general, along with several candidates for the State Legislature who are all but certain to win their races. It’s pretty much election deniers all the way down. Another notable primary result this week: Rusty Bowers, the former speaker of the Arizona House, who offered emotional congressional testimony in June about the pressure he faced to overturn the election, was easily defeated in his bid for a State Senate seat. To make sense of it all, I spoke with Jennifer Medina, a California-based politics reporter for The New York Times who covers Arizona and has deep expertise on many of the policy issues that drive elections in the state. Our conversation, lightly edited for length and clarity, is below.
You’ve been reporting on Arizona for years. Why are many democracy watchers so alarmed about the primary election results there? It’s pretty simple: If these candidates win in November, they have promised to do things like ban the use of electronic voting machines and get rid of the state’s hugely popular and long-established vote-by-mail system. It’s also easy to imagine a similar scenario to the 2020 presidential election but with vastly different results. Both Lake and Finchem have repeatedly said they would not have certified Biden’s victory.
snip
August 5, 2022
https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2022/08/the-deepening-mystery-of-kyrsten-sinema/671066/
https://archive.ph/qq0PC
Senator Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona said that she’ll sign on to the Democrats’ climate bill—after advocating for a few adjustments that she apparently didn’t care to explain to anyone.
Enigma Wrapped in a Loophole
Democrats were relieved last week when Senator Joe Manchin and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced that they had reached a deal on sweeping climate legislation. But that relief lasted only about a minute, because pretty soon, there was a holdup: Sinema wasn’t so sure about the bill. Reports told us that it had something to do with getting rid of the carried-interest loophole, which allows hedge-fund managers and others to pay a lower tax rate on certain portions of their income. But the Arizona senator didn’t explain why she might not like that provision in the legislation. “Sinema has apparently never uttered the phrase ‘carried interest’ in a public legislative session,” The New York Times reported.
Yesterday, after more negotiating, the Democrats reached a deal: They stripped out that tax provision and one dealing with accelerated depreciation, which will benefit manufacturers. Then they added both a 1 percent tax on stock buybacks and a few billion dollars in drought funding for the Southwest. Sinema said that she was satisfied, which means the Democrats were too. But we’re all still confused. The Democrats’ new legislation might actually be more effective than the original in terms of reducing the deficit, and Sinema could make the case for that. She could tell Americans that this was what she was going for all along. She could talk about wanting to get more dollars for drought relief. But she won’t talk with reporters, and she didn’t say anything like that in her vague statement last night.
https://twitter.com/mehdirhasan/status/1555363155089432576
The senator’s silence has left commentators to fill in the blanks about her motives. “Sinema wielded her extreme political power to demand a tax break for rich Wall Street bros,” Ezra Levin, from the progressive group Indivisible, tweeted last night. “Every day, Kyrsten Sinema gets up and asks herself a simple but important question: How can I help venture capitalists and wealthy private equity managers pay lower tax rates than everyone else?” Matt Fuller from The Daily Beast posted. Even the conservative pundit Hugh Hewitt, who is no fan of the bill, seemed mystified.
https://twitter.com/MEPFuller/status/1555327774402945028
Sinema has long cultivated a strange air of mystery, refusing to explain herself to the press or even to her own voters. She’s been a leading obstacle in basically every element of her party’s agenda. She opposed a minimum-wage hike in the COVID-19 relief bill without really explaining why. And she never laid out her qualms with Build Back Better legislation—even after a constituent confronted her in a bathroom. “She doesn’t seem reachable,” one prominent Arizona Democratic activist who campaigned for Sinema told me this spring. “I don’t understand!” Two other Sinema voters, both political independents, told me in January that they didn’t necessarily mind their senator’s opposition to Build Back Better; they just wish they understood it.
snip
The Deepening Mystery of Kyrsten Sinema
The Arizona senator effectively leverages her power, but her ends are unclear.https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2022/08/the-deepening-mystery-of-kyrsten-sinema/671066/
https://archive.ph/qq0PC
Senator Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona said that she’ll sign on to the Democrats’ climate bill—after advocating for a few adjustments that she apparently didn’t care to explain to anyone.
Enigma Wrapped in a Loophole
Democrats were relieved last week when Senator Joe Manchin and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced that they had reached a deal on sweeping climate legislation. But that relief lasted only about a minute, because pretty soon, there was a holdup: Sinema wasn’t so sure about the bill. Reports told us that it had something to do with getting rid of the carried-interest loophole, which allows hedge-fund managers and others to pay a lower tax rate on certain portions of their income. But the Arizona senator didn’t explain why she might not like that provision in the legislation. “Sinema has apparently never uttered the phrase ‘carried interest’ in a public legislative session,” The New York Times reported.
Yesterday, after more negotiating, the Democrats reached a deal: They stripped out that tax provision and one dealing with accelerated depreciation, which will benefit manufacturers. Then they added both a 1 percent tax on stock buybacks and a few billion dollars in drought funding for the Southwest. Sinema said that she was satisfied, which means the Democrats were too. But we’re all still confused. The Democrats’ new legislation might actually be more effective than the original in terms of reducing the deficit, and Sinema could make the case for that. She could tell Americans that this was what she was going for all along. She could talk about wanting to get more dollars for drought relief. But she won’t talk with reporters, and she didn’t say anything like that in her vague statement last night.
https://twitter.com/mehdirhasan/status/1555363155089432576
The senator’s silence has left commentators to fill in the blanks about her motives. “Sinema wielded her extreme political power to demand a tax break for rich Wall Street bros,” Ezra Levin, from the progressive group Indivisible, tweeted last night. “Every day, Kyrsten Sinema gets up and asks herself a simple but important question: How can I help venture capitalists and wealthy private equity managers pay lower tax rates than everyone else?” Matt Fuller from The Daily Beast posted. Even the conservative pundit Hugh Hewitt, who is no fan of the bill, seemed mystified.
https://twitter.com/MEPFuller/status/1555327774402945028
Sinema has long cultivated a strange air of mystery, refusing to explain herself to the press or even to her own voters. She’s been a leading obstacle in basically every element of her party’s agenda. She opposed a minimum-wage hike in the COVID-19 relief bill without really explaining why. And she never laid out her qualms with Build Back Better legislation—even after a constituent confronted her in a bathroom. “She doesn’t seem reachable,” one prominent Arizona Democratic activist who campaigned for Sinema told me this spring. “I don’t understand!” Two other Sinema voters, both political independents, told me in January that they didn’t necessarily mind their senator’s opposition to Build Back Better; they just wish they understood it.
snip
August 5, 2022
https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/wait-what/62ebe476da4cea0020f2d3d3/andrew-cuomo-gerrymandering-midterm-elections/
https://archive.ph/BuEnB
If Democrats lose control of the House of Representatives in November, there will be plenty of blame to go around. But one villain in that disaster surely will be former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. To understand why, you need to go back to 2012. The political world was somewhat more normal then, and Cuomo, a centrist Democrat with long-term presidential ambitions, made a Faustian bargain, as Chris Smith described earlier in the summer in Vanity Fair. He claimed that he was seeking to end years of gerrymandering by creating a nonpartisan commission to draw the state’s congressional maps. Instead—in a short-sighted, last-minute, politically opportunistic move—he allowed legislators to file a redistricting plan shortly before midnight on a Sunday in March, and put off a potential state-constitutional amendment to create an independent commission until after the 2020 census.
This year, after that commission stalemated in its plans, the New York Court of Appeals threw out the Democrats’ proposed congressional-district map in April and brought in a “special master” named Jonathan Cervas to redraw it. The final map—released on May 16 and approved later that week—may well have ended any chance Democrats had of keeping control of the House. At least that’s what David Wasserman, the senior editor at The Cook Political Report, thinks. “The New York Court of Appeals’ decision to strike down Democrats’ gerrymander likely drove a stake through the heart of any remaining chance Democrats had to hold the House majority in 2022,” he told me. For 2022, The Cook Political Report now identifies 162 blue seats as safe, compared with 191 safe red seats.
Jack O’Donnell, a Democratic strategist who once worked for New York Senator Charles Schumer, agrees that the redistricting is a disaster for Democrats. And he lays the blame at the former governor’s feet. “Cuomo wanted to avoid the ire of editorial boards, so he proposed an independent redistricting commission,” O’Donnell told me. “The language governing redistricting was vague and imprecise, while the commission, with an equal number of Republican and Democratic allied members, was born to fail … The proposed constitutional amendment gave Democrats, Republicans, and Cuomo cover to do whatever they wanted in 2012 while postponing any real test until 2022.”
After the New York state legislature drew new congressional lines in 2012, O’Donnell explained, Democrats were optimistic that the blue state would be a counterweight to the blatantly partisan redistricting processes happening elsewhere. But, he added, that hope was built on a shaky foundation. And the responsibility for the state-constitutional amendment that created the redistricting commission was clear. Former New York State Assembly Speaker and convicted felon Sheldon Silver and former New York State Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos “were the sponsors of the proposed amendment,” O’Donnell said, “but the architect of it was Governor Cuomo.”
snip
Molly Jong-Fast: If Democrats Lose the House, Andrew Cuomo Might Be to Blame
In 2012, the now-disgraced former governor negotiated a deal that helped bring about this year’s disastrous redistricting.https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/wait-what/62ebe476da4cea0020f2d3d3/andrew-cuomo-gerrymandering-midterm-elections/
https://archive.ph/BuEnB
If Democrats lose control of the House of Representatives in November, there will be plenty of blame to go around. But one villain in that disaster surely will be former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. To understand why, you need to go back to 2012. The political world was somewhat more normal then, and Cuomo, a centrist Democrat with long-term presidential ambitions, made a Faustian bargain, as Chris Smith described earlier in the summer in Vanity Fair. He claimed that he was seeking to end years of gerrymandering by creating a nonpartisan commission to draw the state’s congressional maps. Instead—in a short-sighted, last-minute, politically opportunistic move—he allowed legislators to file a redistricting plan shortly before midnight on a Sunday in March, and put off a potential state-constitutional amendment to create an independent commission until after the 2020 census.
This year, after that commission stalemated in its plans, the New York Court of Appeals threw out the Democrats’ proposed congressional-district map in April and brought in a “special master” named Jonathan Cervas to redraw it. The final map—released on May 16 and approved later that week—may well have ended any chance Democrats had of keeping control of the House. At least that’s what David Wasserman, the senior editor at The Cook Political Report, thinks. “The New York Court of Appeals’ decision to strike down Democrats’ gerrymander likely drove a stake through the heart of any remaining chance Democrats had to hold the House majority in 2022,” he told me. For 2022, The Cook Political Report now identifies 162 blue seats as safe, compared with 191 safe red seats.
Jack O’Donnell, a Democratic strategist who once worked for New York Senator Charles Schumer, agrees that the redistricting is a disaster for Democrats. And he lays the blame at the former governor’s feet. “Cuomo wanted to avoid the ire of editorial boards, so he proposed an independent redistricting commission,” O’Donnell told me. “The language governing redistricting was vague and imprecise, while the commission, with an equal number of Republican and Democratic allied members, was born to fail … The proposed constitutional amendment gave Democrats, Republicans, and Cuomo cover to do whatever they wanted in 2012 while postponing any real test until 2022.”
After the New York state legislature drew new congressional lines in 2012, O’Donnell explained, Democrats were optimistic that the blue state would be a counterweight to the blatantly partisan redistricting processes happening elsewhere. But, he added, that hope was built on a shaky foundation. And the responsibility for the state-constitutional amendment that created the redistricting commission was clear. Former New York State Assembly Speaker and convicted felon Sheldon Silver and former New York State Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos “were the sponsors of the proposed amendment,” O’Donnell said, “but the architect of it was Governor Cuomo.”
snip
August 5, 2022
https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2022/08/the-rights-rising-authoritarian-ally-viktor-orban/671059/
https://archive.ph/c5FUJ
Fringe Benefit
Today in Dallas, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán gave a speech at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference. You heard that correctly! The leader of an Indiana-sized European country traveled 5,000 miles to speak at an American political gathering best known for its fringe characters and own-the-libs merchandise. If it sounds strange, that’s because it is. Strange and bad.
What Orbán said was strange too. He described Republicans and Democrats as at war with each other, and called on the right to take lessons from him. “We must find friends and allies in one another. We must coordinate a movement of our troops because we face the same challenge,” he told the audience. Coming elections in the U.S. and in Europe “will define the two fronts in the battle being fought for Western civilization.”
You might have read about Orbán already in The Atlantic, or maybe you’ve been avoiding stories about him because foreign politics can sometimes be difficult to care about. Or maybe all that autocracy talk just seemed too heavy. But you should know who Orbán is, and you should know why some on the American right admire him. Orbán has become a kind of soft autocrat in Hungary. He’s not known for killing or threatening his political opponents; instead, he simply changes the rules to cement his power.
A few things to know about Orbán’s leadership:
He’s parlayed his election victories into constitutional changes that make it harder for his electoral opponents to win. Elections are free, in a sense, but they are not fair, experts say. He’s cracked down on the Hungarian media. Orbán and his allies now own many of the papers in the country, and few independent outlets survive. This means less airtime for his opponents and less criticism of him. He’s a socially conservative Christian nationalist. He’s staunchly anti-immigration, and in a recent speech, he said that he wanted to keep Hungary from becoming a “mixed-race” country.
snip
The Right's Rising Authoritarian Ally
In Dallas, Viktor Orbán endorses “the culture war.”https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2022/08/the-rights-rising-authoritarian-ally-viktor-orban/671059/
https://archive.ph/c5FUJ
Fringe Benefit
Today in Dallas, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán gave a speech at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference. You heard that correctly! The leader of an Indiana-sized European country traveled 5,000 miles to speak at an American political gathering best known for its fringe characters and own-the-libs merchandise. If it sounds strange, that’s because it is. Strange and bad.
What Orbán said was strange too. He described Republicans and Democrats as at war with each other, and called on the right to take lessons from him. “We must find friends and allies in one another. We must coordinate a movement of our troops because we face the same challenge,” he told the audience. Coming elections in the U.S. and in Europe “will define the two fronts in the battle being fought for Western civilization.”
You might have read about Orbán already in The Atlantic, or maybe you’ve been avoiding stories about him because foreign politics can sometimes be difficult to care about. Or maybe all that autocracy talk just seemed too heavy. But you should know who Orbán is, and you should know why some on the American right admire him. Orbán has become a kind of soft autocrat in Hungary. He’s not known for killing or threatening his political opponents; instead, he simply changes the rules to cement his power.
A few things to know about Orbán’s leadership:
He’s parlayed his election victories into constitutional changes that make it harder for his electoral opponents to win. Elections are free, in a sense, but they are not fair, experts say. He’s cracked down on the Hungarian media. Orbán and his allies now own many of the papers in the country, and few independent outlets survive. This means less airtime for his opponents and less criticism of him. He’s a socially conservative Christian nationalist. He’s staunchly anti-immigration, and in a recent speech, he said that he wanted to keep Hungary from becoming a “mixed-race” country.
snip
August 4, 2022
https://www.thrillist.com/eat/nation/best-ice-cream-shops-in-america
It’s quite possible that we are living in the golden age of ice cream innovation. Old-school creameries are churning out vanilla bean masterpieces honed over generations while new shops are tossing the term “chef” into the mix to challenge the very notion of what ice cream is. It’s a win-win for everyone, especially when temps outside aren’t letting up. These ice cream shops represent everything that is well and good: new-wave artisan shops challenging the very notion of what should be placed on a cone (or stick, or between cookies), old-school parlours learning new tricks, boozed-up scoops, plant-based creameries, and much more. So grab a napkin. It’s going to be a glorious mess.
Awan
Los Angeles, California
The brainchild of Indonesian-Australian chef Zen Ong, Awan—which means “cloud” in Bahasa—is an homage to his Indonesian roots. After years of recipe experimentation and testing, Ong nailed the formula for a non-dairy ice cream. The secret? A combination of Indonesian coconut cream and coconut water, which produces a rich, creamy mouthfeel and gelato-like texture. Made with specially imported Balinese vanilla beans, the original vanilla flavor is a beloved standby, but Ong drops new flavors often. Some of his latest releases include aromatic lemongrass (a customer favorite) and caramelly gula jawa, named for the unrefined sugar that’s made by collecting the sap from the flowers of a coconut palm tree.
Find more of the best ice cream in Los Angeles.
Creole Creamery
New Orleans, Louisiana
NOLA’s undisputed go-to for dairy-related indulgences sets a somewhat old-timey tone with the vintage neon bakery sign adorning the exterior and the parlor pink adorning the inside. But it’s certainly not shy about innovation (think flavors like Goat Cheese & Mission Fig and Lavender Honey). For something seriously, albeit subtly, different, try the signature Creole Cream Cheese, which employs a slightly sweet farmhouse cheese to achieve a level of creaminess that might almost seem a little too indulgent, until you remember what city you’re in again.
Sweet Republic
Scottsdale, Arizona
The Scottsdale favorite—known for using recycled materials—has expanded to Phoenix, Tempe, and various Whole Foods throughout the state. But the funky, inventive creamery has remained committed to its high-quality, impeccably crafted offerings, among them a Belgian Chocolate masterpiece that would stand out in Brussels just as much as it does in the desert and a horchata number that you might be tempted to let melt and drink in a cup. And though we’re usually partial to pure ice cream, we recommend you mix it up and opt for one of the Brown Cows, which use delicious Madagascar Vanilla ice cream and Mexican Coke.
Little Man Ice Cream
Denver, Colorado
This shop quickly became a Denver icon after it first opened in 2008 thanks in large part to its unique architecture—the 28-foot-tall, 14,000-pound cream can from which scoops are served. Lines will almost inevitably get long, but it’s well worth the wait for the most famous flavor: Salted Oreo. But you can’t go wrong whether you opt for a banana pudding float, seasonal honey almond in a waffle cone that’s made on site, or one of their sorbets or vegan options. It also gives back through the Scoop to Scoop initiative which donates a scoop of rice, beans, or other essentials to those in need for every scoop of ice cream sold.
See all of the top ice cream shops in all of Denver.
snip
The 40 Best Ice Cream Shops in the U.S.
In the land of milk and honey scoops—and mint chocolate chip and salty caramel—treat yourself.https://www.thrillist.com/eat/nation/best-ice-cream-shops-in-america
It’s quite possible that we are living in the golden age of ice cream innovation. Old-school creameries are churning out vanilla bean masterpieces honed over generations while new shops are tossing the term “chef” into the mix to challenge the very notion of what ice cream is. It’s a win-win for everyone, especially when temps outside aren’t letting up. These ice cream shops represent everything that is well and good: new-wave artisan shops challenging the very notion of what should be placed on a cone (or stick, or between cookies), old-school parlours learning new tricks, boozed-up scoops, plant-based creameries, and much more. So grab a napkin. It’s going to be a glorious mess.
Awan
Los Angeles, California
The brainchild of Indonesian-Australian chef Zen Ong, Awan—which means “cloud” in Bahasa—is an homage to his Indonesian roots. After years of recipe experimentation and testing, Ong nailed the formula for a non-dairy ice cream. The secret? A combination of Indonesian coconut cream and coconut water, which produces a rich, creamy mouthfeel and gelato-like texture. Made with specially imported Balinese vanilla beans, the original vanilla flavor is a beloved standby, but Ong drops new flavors often. Some of his latest releases include aromatic lemongrass (a customer favorite) and caramelly gula jawa, named for the unrefined sugar that’s made by collecting the sap from the flowers of a coconut palm tree.
Find more of the best ice cream in Los Angeles.
Creole Creamery
New Orleans, Louisiana
NOLA’s undisputed go-to for dairy-related indulgences sets a somewhat old-timey tone with the vintage neon bakery sign adorning the exterior and the parlor pink adorning the inside. But it’s certainly not shy about innovation (think flavors like Goat Cheese & Mission Fig and Lavender Honey). For something seriously, albeit subtly, different, try the signature Creole Cream Cheese, which employs a slightly sweet farmhouse cheese to achieve a level of creaminess that might almost seem a little too indulgent, until you remember what city you’re in again.
Sweet Republic
Scottsdale, Arizona
The Scottsdale favorite—known for using recycled materials—has expanded to Phoenix, Tempe, and various Whole Foods throughout the state. But the funky, inventive creamery has remained committed to its high-quality, impeccably crafted offerings, among them a Belgian Chocolate masterpiece that would stand out in Brussels just as much as it does in the desert and a horchata number that you might be tempted to let melt and drink in a cup. And though we’re usually partial to pure ice cream, we recommend you mix it up and opt for one of the Brown Cows, which use delicious Madagascar Vanilla ice cream and Mexican Coke.
Little Man Ice Cream
Denver, Colorado
This shop quickly became a Denver icon after it first opened in 2008 thanks in large part to its unique architecture—the 28-foot-tall, 14,000-pound cream can from which scoops are served. Lines will almost inevitably get long, but it’s well worth the wait for the most famous flavor: Salted Oreo. But you can’t go wrong whether you opt for a banana pudding float, seasonal honey almond in a waffle cone that’s made on site, or one of their sorbets or vegan options. It also gives back through the Scoop to Scoop initiative which donates a scoop of rice, beans, or other essentials to those in need for every scoop of ice cream sold.
See all of the top ice cream shops in all of Denver.
snip
Profile Information
Gender: FemaleHometown: London
Home country: US/UK/Sweden
Current location: Stockholm, Sweden
Member since: Sun Jul 1, 2018, 07:25 PM
Number of posts: 43,339
