Categories For later read

7 days 30 days All time Recent Popular
Going to have to disagree with my learned friend here. If anyone moved on level playing field it was the UK, on the principle of a ratchet, or tariffs for divergence which was still being denied midweek. Changing the way in this might be achieved (many options) is insignificant.


It is the same "I move in principle you move in detail" shift we saw with the Northern Ireland protocol last year, when no PM could accept a border between GB and NI suddenly did, just as recently no PM would accept tariffs for divergence and seems to have done.

So, are we at deal yet? No, and it remains far from certain, but better than the gloom of Saturday. I still think the PM wants his ideal where everyone is happy, still hopes if only he can speak to Macron and Merkel he could get it, still to decide.


And even if there is a deal it is now too late for either business to adjust to it, or the EU to ratify it according to normal procedure. In both cases you'd think we'd need an extension, but there is a big shrug on this whole question. Nobody knows.

And so, yet again on Brexit, we wait. In particular, those who actually do the trade, the businesses we rely on, are forced to wait for a formal outcome while preparing as best they can. Let's see what happens.
I’m afraid I think this definition of sovereignty (“freedom to make your own law”) is either useless or incoherent.


Very large numbers of international treaties require the UK to make, or not make, law. The UN Treaty requires us to impose sanctions. The Antarctic Treaty requires us to prohibit unlicensed operators organising tours to Antarctica. GATT restricts our ability to set tariffs.

appears to think that such provisions do not infringe his definition of “sovereignty”, but he fails to explain why not.

He asserts, without explaining why, that a level playing field term would infringe “sovereignty”. But the LPF terms being discussed simply set out actions that the EU is able to take if the UK legislates (or does not legislate) in certain ways.

Why is that different in legal principle from WTO rules that (for example) allow other states to impose high tariffs on our widget industry if we exercise our sovereign freedom to pass laws that exempt widget-making from UK tax?
i’ll keep saying this but for example look no further than the ku klux klan, theatrical and silly and also deadly serious


we often talk about the overthrow of reconstruction as a singular organized effort, but it should be understood as something more disparate and fractured, with success tied less to martial superiority than the indifference of authorities to intimidation and violence.

a group of guys — maybe the owner of the general store, and the sheriff and some farmers who fought in the war — gets together to gripe and complain and plot a little mischief. they put on masks and grab guns and go beat up a black sharecropper or local clerk or whatever...

everyone knows who did it. but there’s no one to stop them. the army, if it’s even in the state, is tens or hundreds of miles away. and mustering a militia may risk open conflict. the guys realize they can do this and getaway with it. so they do it again.

maybe they have a few more people with them this time. maybe they escalate, not just beating up local blacks and their white allies but killing a few.
I want to break down Lindsey's letter, because it is breathtakingly hypocritical and stoking division with every sentence, despite claiming to be concerned with healing.


1) "But now, in your first act as Majority Leader, rather than begin the national healing that the country so desperately yearns for, you seek vengeance and political retaliation instead."

Trump incited an attack on the Capitol, on Congress, and on a free & fair election.

Trump has yet to concede, to apologize, or to admit he was lying about the outcome of the election. He has done nothing that demonstrates he does not continue to present a danger to our nation.

Trump's supporters continue to conspire to overthrow the government--with Trump's implicit, and quite possibly explicit--support. At this very moment, over 20,000 troops are stationed in our nation's capital to ensure the inauguration of President-Elect Biden can be completed.

It is not "vengeance" or "political retaliation" to insist a man that has fomented and continues to inspire a violent insurrection against the government is unfit ever to hold office again.

This is, in fact, a bare minimum protection for our country against future harm by Trump.
Thread - omnibus, CRs

-Continuing Resolution (CR) is a mechanism to address a budgetary “gap”
Under @senatemajldr (not) awesome leadership CRs have become the norm, which is maddening because that’s NOT what CRs are meant for
-pocket veto
-veto
-President versus Congress


Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution
-any Bill shall not be returned by the President within 10 Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment


Sorry here’s the link - Article 1, Section 7 of our Constitution (sometimes referred to as the presentment clause)
One could infer “pocket veto” +/- 2 days Jan 4th, 5th, or 6th...

https://t.co/8xrbnNLn1V


My educated guess is Trump knows
“might” (operative word) be his “trust the plan” screwing McConnell Senate GOP & nearly ALL Americans
-though lacking a signature and formal objections
-does not become law
-Pocket vetoes are not subject to the congressional veto override process

And here‘s WHY - it is literally the last sentence:

“...unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law”
the massive bill was flown down to FL yesterday so the 10 day clock started yesterday...
https://t.co/8xrbnNLn1V
Alright, 1 hour worth of thoughts on:

Spatial metaphors for human systems

for @threadapalooza


1/ Okay, let's start with BRIDGES!

(first that came to mind)

This is a common human system metaphor, people talking about bridging between cultures or perspectives, or communities/individuals.


2/ In fact it's the metaphor @vgr used in the prompt he gave me for @threadapalooza last year, in a thread I never


3/ The bridge metaphor is kind of an obvious one: forging some kind of translation connection between two different perspectives.

It's a kinda limited connection though. In fact, the word "translation", in the context of mathematics, means "to move across" which matches bridge


4/ So a bridge, as a metaphor, is a way to move one perspective across to another. But let's contrast that with the metaphor of "depth perception", where the two perspectives are integrated into a larger whole.

Way harder than bridging, & more