Current Affairs General US politics (ie, not POTUS related)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Think about this for a minute: we have already (repeatedly) made the argument that we have every right to invade another country if we don't like their leader and policies, then capture and execute or imprison that person. One side of the political divide has taken the logical next step, and is arguing that they have every right to do the same thing at home.

Perhaps giving up the crusading and giving more than lip service to Westphalian sovereignty is the wiser course after all. I don't much like conceding turning a somewhat blind eye to certain human rights abuses, but we might want to reconsider the means by which we pursue those goals. If we want our governments elected by free and fair elections to be sacrosanct, we probably have to respect the right of governments holding power by other means to exist. Otherwise, we put those governments in a bind where they need to topple our governments before we topple theirs.
 

This is nuts. The right-wingers are making a false analogy. A corporate CEO has a golden parachute. It is expensive to make one go away. That is the lever that ensures some stability, while still permitting the board to remove the CEO at will for sufficient gross incompetence.

The extreme right-wing wants to install the ejection seat, but not the speed brake. The composition of the House absolutely guarantees that there would be chaos. Either a coalition of the left and the more moderate GOP members removes McCarthy if he gives in to the right, or the right and left wings remove him if he governs not to the liking of the right. The left plays ball because it produces chaos and makes the most problematic members of the opposition look like idiots.

A full membership no-confidence vote works in the Westminster system because the speed brake is an immediate electoral referendum on the members, which they generally do not want. Like the hypothetical corporate board, they'll do it if the situation is dire enough, but not otherwise.
 

This is nuts. The right-wingers are making a false analogy. A corporate CEO has a golden parachute. It is expensive to make one go away. That is the lever that ensures some stability, while still permitting the board to remove the CEO at will for sufficient gross incompetence.

The extreme right-wing wants to install the ejection seat, but not the speed brake. The composition of the House absolutely guarantees that there would be chaos. Either a coalition of the left and the more moderate GOP members removes McCarthy if he gives in to the right, or the right and left wings remove him if he governs not to the liking of the right. The left plays ball because it produces chaos and makes the most problematic members of the opposition look like idiots.

A full membership no-confidence vote works in the Westminster system because the speed brake is an immediate electoral referendum on the members, which they generally do not want. Like the hypothetical corporate board, they'll do it if the situation is dire enough, but not otherwise.
Had to laugh at this comparison too “ "They vetted candidates for Miss America more than they do the speaker," Norman said. ”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top