Merged USAID: is it really a bunch of crazy leftists? / Trump Was Absolutely Right to Shut Down USAID

[thaiboxerken]

Let's be clear here - they're only upset that the executive and legislative branches are aligned under Republicans. Were the executive and legislative branches aligned under Democrats, it would be considered a good thing.

Nonsense. When Republicans ignore laws, Democrats get upset. When Democrats ignore laws, Republicans AND Democrats get upset. That's a large difference between the parties.

 

[angrysoba]

Let's be clear here - they're only upset that the executive and legislative branches are aligned under Republicans. Were the executive and legislative branches aligned under Democrats, it would be considered a good thing.

Is the Department of Government Efficiency not supposed to be approved by Congress in the first place? Why is it that other heads of departments have to have their cabinet heads approved yet Elon Musk apparently does not? Because it is not a real department? Sure! But isn’t that the very problem? How is it that DOGE agents have the authority to go through the finances of the other departments when that is what the inspectors general are supposed to do?

Let’s be clear here. You cheer this on because you support MAGA and would be throwing a ◊◊◊◊ fit if the Democrats were pulling a stunt like this.

 

[dirtywick]

it's the anti-woke mind virus

 

[theprestige]

The legislative branch is not aligned, it's absent.

Wrong. It's right where it's always been. It's just not legislating the way you want.

An aligned legislative branch would pass a series of bills to support the President and go on record as a result, not run away.

No, that's just how you think alignment should work. The legislature giving the executive its reins is another way to do it.

Remember, democracy is not - and is not supposed to be - an inoculation against misrule.

 

[plague311]

My point was that "Marijuana is a medicine" was never the *objective* of marijuana advocacy. The *objective* was always legalization for recreational purposes. Defensible use as medicine was a mechanism by which to get the foot to decriminalization in the door. It was a tactical move to support the overall strategy.

This isn't true, you're making it up and it needs to be called out. You're claiming ◊◊◊◊, again, with absolutely nothing to back it up, again, as you do all of the time.

 

[jt512]

Many plants have medicinal properties; having medicinal properties does not make them medicine.

Kinda' seems like the definition of a medicine.

 

[plague311]

Kinda' seems like the definition of a medicine.

She also fails to mention that all of those plants she brought up are legal. You can buy them in whatever quantity you want with absolutely no oversight whatsoever. There's just something "special" about weed, despite it coming in products that don't provide a buzz, as well.

It's convenient.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Kinda' seems like the definition of a medicine.

Meh. Depends on whether you want to adopt the meaning from a few centuries ago, or a more modern meaning. Historically, willow bark would be considered medicine... but in modern terms, it would be more likely to be an herbal supplement. We generally expect that modern medicine is standardized in dose, controlled by prescription, with clearly identified indications and (known) side effects. We generally expect that they're regulated by the FDA.

 

[Emily's Cat]

This isn't true, you're making it up and it needs to be called out. You're claiming ◊◊◊◊, again, with absolutely nothing to back it up, again, as you do all of the time.

You not believing it doesn't mean I'm making it up, plague.

There were efforts to legalize pot pretty much from the moment it was made illegal. They were ongoing efforts, with the pretty clear intent of getting it decriminalized. Sometime in the 90s (give or take by state), most of the advocacy shifted to focus on efforts to get it approved for medicinal use. This was fairly successful, and a good foot in the door toward legalization. Once there was sufficient adoption for medicinal use, it was pretty clear that the sky didn't fall and we didn't all devolve into crazy killers ala Reefer Madness. After that, decriminalization and legalization have followed relatively fast.

Why does this bother you? Why are you so adamantly opposed to me referencing the tactics employed to attain legalization and acceptance?

 

[Emily's Cat]

She also fails to mention that all of those plants she brought up are legal. You can buy them in whatever quantity you want with absolutely no oversight whatsoever. There's just something "special" about weed, despite it coming in products that don't provide a buzz, as well.

It's convenient.

Dude, what on earth are you on about here? What view are you imagining that I hold that makes you feel justified in acting like this?

 

[angrysoba]

Meh. Depends on whether you want to adopt the meaning from a few centuries ago, or a more modern meaning. Historically, willow bark would be considered medicine... but in modern terms, it would be more likely to be an herbal supplement. We generally expect that modern medicine is standardized in dose, controlled by prescription, with clearly identified indications and (known) side effects.
We generally expect that they're regulated by the FDA.

In even more modern times, I won't expect that of this administration.

 

[johnny karate]

"Checks and balances" doesn't mean "benevolent referee that ensures things always work out to The Don's preference."

"Unchecked". You're upset because the executive and legislative branches are aligned. This possibility was always intended to be part of the system of government.

The only way they're "aligned" is that the Republicans in Congress have ceded their power and responsibility to the authoritarian in the White House.

 

[angrysoba]

The only way they're "aligned" is that the Republicans in Congress have ceded their power and responsibility to the authoritarian in the White House.

It might be best for them to pretend they have some role rather than to let the Trump admin prove that they don't.

 

[johnny karate]

Let's be clear here - they're only upset that the executive and legislative branches are aligned under Republicans. Were the executive and legislative branches aligned under Democrats, it would be considered a good thing.

When a regular whataboutisms no longer gets the job done, just do a whataboutism using invented hypotheticals.

 

[angrysoba]

When a regular whataboutisms no longer gets the job done, just do a whataboutism using invented hypotheticals.

It's fair enough though. Remember that the Democrats in Congress won't even applaud Donald Trump when he invents a cure for a disease that would exterminate whole populations of people.

Instead of that, the Democrats and their supporters sit around moaning that Donald Trump is actively ending proven disease prevention measures in Africa and Bangladesh, and even appointing people to head up US health who actively propagandize against proven preventation of measles.

Why are Trump's critics so fixated on his actual harm-inducing behaviour and yet so silent on his imaginary achievements? It must be TDS!

 

[Emily's Cat]

In even more modern times, I won't expect that of this administration.

I'm really hoping that basic safety and clinical indications are retained, but I'm not taking any bets.

I do, however, have a really large supply of popcorn to hold me through the circus.

 

[Olmstead]

What I got out of this discussion is that Hitler can totally happen in the US, Trump is totally going to be Hitler, and this is how it's supposed to be, because he got elected.

Oh, and it's totally the Democrats fault for being too progressive.

 

[angrysoba]

A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration from taking any further steps to shut down the US Agency for International Development (USAID)

In a ruling Tuesday, Judge Theodore Chuang said the efforts, led by Trump ally Elon Musk's Department for Government Efficiency (Doge), likely violated the US constitution "in multiple ways".

Chuang ordered Doge to restore access to USAID's computer and payment systems for employees, including those who were placed on leave.

The judge also ruled that termination of USAID employees should stop, but did not order the reinstating of employees previously placed on leave.
The ruling came in a case brought on behalf of 26 unnamed USAID employees who allege in court filings that Musk is following "a predictable and reckless slash-and-burn pattern" in dismantling US government departments.

Link

I know we can't do a poll mid-thread, but I wonder if anyone can chime in on this, particularly those who say that checks and balances are being correctly applied. Do you think:

a) The judge is right to intervene (DOGE's behaviour is unconstitutional).
b) The judge is wrong to intervene (DOGE's behaviour is constitutional).
c) I'll wait to find out from the Trump administration what is wrong with the judge.

 

[theprestige]

Link

I know we can't do a poll mid-thread, but I wonder if anyone can chime in on this, particularly those who say that checks and balances are being correctly applied. Do you think:

a) The judge is right to intervene (DOGE's behaviour is unconstitutional).
b) The judge is wrong to intervene (DOGE's behaviour is constitutional).
c) I'll wait to find out from the Trump administration what is wrong with the judge.

"likely violated the constitution" is appropriate to the preamble of a prosecutor's argument, not a judge's ruling. Unless the judge goes on to spell out the exact constitutional violations they've found, they're abusing their authority.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

NPR reported, "The Trump administration likely violated the Constitution when it effectively shuttered the U.S. Agency for International Development, a federal judge has ruled...In his ruling, [Judge Theodore] Chuang wrote that "the evidence presently favors the conclusion that contrary to Defendants' sweeping claim that Musk has acted only as an advisor, Musk made the decisions to shutdown USAID's headquarters and website even though he lacked the authority to make that decision.""

CNN reported, "The ruling, placing a preliminary injunction on DOGE, is one of the first major rulings to limit Musk’s work in the federal government because of the US Constitution."

This is the right call.