Red_Dragon wrote:

I can't wait until there is enough outrage to push these people back under their rock. Of course, they will scream of the irony that they are being oppressed, but they are just assholes.

Shock as GOP leader moans that history's 'oppressors' don't get celebrated

 Steely_D wrote:

Probably not a coincidence that was also the era of sequels and remakes. New ideas are hard.

 islander wrote:

So.  Your contempt for me has become so all encompassing that you now feel the need to explain what you are trying to say because you doubt your own ability to be make sense or be meaningful.  Pity.  Self doubt is a horrible thing to deal with.  But that is the road you chose to take with you being the self appointed arbiter of truth and last word on what I might say.

Worse for you is the rent in your head is free.  You need to get back into your stash of Pixie Dust.

 islander wrote:

It was painful to support Hillary (winner! The people’s choice!) knowing that our history books would show Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama-Clinton as our presidencies. That just looks like there’s nothing but dynasties going on there.

 rgio wrote:

Unfortunately, money has become a coupon for power fairly universally. It's a bad trend.  Right now representatives are mostly controlling the system so they are effectively electing themselves with an slim/failing illusion of two party choice. Term limits in this situation are about as likely as an epiphany on the failings of gerrymandering or a ban on insider trading. It's not the time, it's the behaviors that need to change. 

I don't know how it started, but the attacks on intelligence and learning have crippled our society. I work with some genuinely talented people in a blue collar environment. I'm astonished at the lengths that smart people will go through not to 'look smart'. So much opportunity lost. 

 Proclivities wrote:

Agreed, that was just me being sloppy entering the conversation and avoiding a certain someone.

Also notable that you are properly calling out while bad, these are not the same. It's not a 'both sides' issue when one side does something mildly bad and the other side disregards democracy entirely. 

 Proclivities wrote:
Good thing the US doesn't lecture everyone on "democracy." ðŸ˜‰

 kurtster wrote:
Yes, the fiefdoms are a major problem, and the widow's succession thing seems more common than it ought to be.

 Proclivities wrote:  
Proclivities wrote:  

Duly noted.

And I was addressing the key point in richard's X post.  A political fiefdom.

Meanwhile on appointing a spouse to fill a vacancy caused by death ...

Appointing or electing a surviving spouse to fill a vacant seat is a well-known U.S. political tradition called "widow's succession". This practice has happened 48 times in U.S. congressional history. It serves to honor the late official's legacy and provides voters with a representative who shares similar views.

Widow's succession

 islander wrote:
I wasn't defending or advocating the presence of family "dynasties" in politics, I was pointing out the weak analogy of comparing a governor-appointed family member taking office to one who was elected to that office.

 islander wrote:
Feature, not bug.

The current administration, with the help of the SCOTUS, are pushing for more and more money without disclosure.  People need to elect representatives who will work for them... yet so few do.  This comes back to an intelligence, education, and critical thinking skills that the administration is also attacking.  Pure insanity.

 islander wrote: 
Not sure how ?  Duh.  The answer is simple.  Term Limits.

Been screaming for them for years.  No one here wants them though.  The proposition is always loudly rejected.

 Proclivities wrote:

Also, still wrong. I have no problem saying that instead of "well they are doing it too, so we should just do the wrong thing".

Even with being elected, this shows how power concentrates. We don't have kings, but we seem to have dynasties - Bushes, Kenedys, ect.  And we have these whole power structures that get stood up around elected officials that become a fiefdom with influence and resource to maintain itself. Feinstein, Pelosi, McConnel... They stay too long because the draw is so strong and the grip is so powerful. These are the things we need to be working on. Not sure how, especially considering the abuse of power that we seem to be willing to tolerate if it favors 'our team'. More and more a revolution seems necessary. 

 R_P wrote:

Save that for when Don Jr, and then Barron run for office.

"God" bless America, this was 2 days before the MAGGOT attack, wonder what Rump plans next   

https://www.npr.org/2021/01/04...

Former Defense Secretaries Call For Quick Transition To Biden Administration

January 4, 20213:41 PM ETHeard on All Things Considered

 kurtster wrote:
Well, Debbie Dingell was elected, not appointed by the governor. Apparently, their family was very popular in that part of Michigan.

 R_P wrote: 
Debbie Dingell

Dingell indicated that she planned to run for her husband's congressional seat after he announced his retirement.^] On August 5, she won the Democratic primary, winning 77.7% of the vote against Raymond Mullins.  On November 4, she won the general election, defeating Republican Terry Bowman with 65.0% of the vote.

When Dingell was sworn in, she became the first U.S. non-widowed woman in Congress to succeed her husband. His father, John Dingell Sr., held Michigan's 12th district for 22 years before his son won it.

Altogether, the Dingells had represented this district,

numbered as the 15th from 1933 to 1965, the 16th from 1965 to 2003, the 15th again from 2003 to 2013, and the 12th from 2013 to 2023,

since 1932.

You were saying ?

Genetic meritocracy?