Are you referring to Chuck Schumer’s reply about the renaming thing? I absolutely do not equate that with Zuckerberg’s metaphorically bending over and spreading his cheeks.
AIUI, Schumer said we’d go along with renaming the gulf if the 'pubs actually showed a plan for lowering taxpayer’s grocery bills. It wasn’t a serious proposal, because we all know that is not going to happen. Chuck Schumer is not our enemy.
I would think even play-entertaining such a ridiculous idea is playing into their hands.
How does one rename a Gulf? An act of congress? Why can’t Trump executive order it and lock up map-makers who do not comply? If I fly into JFK will the border control quiz me on what that large body of water between Florida, Texas and Mexico is called?
Ugh, there’s a wiki on it
Gulf of America
Shortly after the second inauguration of Donald Trump on January 20, 2025, the U.S. President signed an executive order directing federal agencies to rename as the Gulf of America, “the U.S. Continental Shelf area bounded on the northeast, north, and northwest by the States of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida and extending to the seaward boundary with Mexico and Cuba”, and initiating the formal renaming process
It’s going to be hard to replace those big black letters anchored to its sea floor. The Mayans will pay for that.
I’m referring to his general attitude of “we look forward to working with the Trump Administration on bipartisan solutions” and the like.
FUCK bipartisanship. 16 years ago, McConnell dedicated the Republican party to opposing Obama on everything no matter what, and it’s clear to see that in the long run they WON because of that strategy.
Democrats should be doing the same thing now instead of bending the knee. I’d like to say that some former Democratic Congressional leader would’ve done better, but to be honest, every Democrat who’s been in charge of either house of Congress in my adult life has been an absolute dipshit. Schumer, Reid, Daschle, Pelosi, Gephardt, etc. None of them were worth a shit. Maybe someone older than me can point to one who wasn’t a complete and utter tool.
To be fair, there are contested sea names all over the world. The Sea of Japan is one.
And it is fine if the USA uses one name, I suspect that the IMO - while it is not their job to decide on nomenclature, will stick with the existing “Gulf of Mexico” and the world will follow, even if it is simply because updating millions of maps to reflect the stupid ravings of a wannabe dictator is not worth the effort.
First who came to mind for me was Moynihan, well known for being a beacon of bipartisanship palatable to Republicans yet he’d likely be something of a DINO in terms of bills he supported or did not support and also wasn’t a leader. But at least not an absolute dipshit.
I reckon history will say it’s Pelosi, like it as not, at least since President Denali was assassinated.
Oh, how about Tip O’Neill. I knew I was thinking of an Irish guy and Moynihan, being from NY, was first in mind.
Anyways, Tip could do bipartisanship and he’d never be called a DINO. I don’t hear him being mentioned in “greatest” but for the 70’s and 80’s he was a good guy.
O’Neill even went as far as calling Ronald Reagan "the most ignorant man who had ever occupied the White House
He just didn’t live long enough, he could have said it two more times (and if you count non-consecutive Presidents, three)
Not to mention the song lyrics that’ll need to be rewritten. Conservation of scansion is gonna be hard enough; throw in conservation of rhyme schemes and it’s a bit of a headache.
ETA: A note on my use of bolding and italics. The bolding is to accentuate the logistical issues, while the italics are because it’s always a good to highlight the fact that the America-hating fuckstick is a wannabe dictator who raves stupidly a lot.
I am @scudsucker and I approve this bolding and italicisation.
On the contrary, they are not being played for fools, they know what they’re doing. They are obeying in advance.
Same description I gave to the Russian protests years ago - I do not believe they are allowed at all now: insidious and brilliant all at once on law enforcement’s part: Sure you can protest. The place is the box on this map, the time is a strict 21:00-22:00 and you’ll be aaalll right. No tear gas, or penning you all in on a pier (as happened in NYC years ago).
Schumer would be a hero if he strayed instead of obeyed and was the first protester to be shot in the legs. I never liked him though.
Meh, this is rhetorical pablum. Schuemer is positioning the Democratic party to look like the adults in the room willing to put country first, and support a peaceful transition of power. If he came out swinging even before Trump had taken any action then it would appear as though his opposition to Trump was partisan. Wait until he actually starts acquiescing to supporting some of Trumps policies before you start accusing him of bending over.
Belushi:
Bluto: What? Over? Did you say ‘over’? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!..
It ain’t over now, ‘cause when the goin’ gets tough, the tough get goin’. Who’s with me? Let’s go! Come on!..(He ran to the front door but no one followed him)
Bluto (returning): What the fuck happened to the Delta I used to know? Where’s the spirit? Where’s the guts, huh? This could be the greatest night of our lives, but you’re gonna let it be the worst. ‘Ooh, we’re afraid to go with you, Bluto, we might get in trouble.’ (shouting) Well, just kiss my ass from now on! Not me! I’m not gonna take this. Wormer, he’s a dead man! Marmalard, dead! Niedermeyer…
ETA: Senator Blutarsky
I think we’re well past it mattering how they “appear”. The Democrats have been “appearing” that way in comparison to the Republicans since the Clinton years. How’s that working out for them?
There is some (small) merit to suggesting that legislators can only counteract Trump when he’s acted in an official capacity. i.e. their job is legislation and oversight, so Trump needs to do an official act so they can officially counteract it.
On the other hand, Trump was effectively trying to make policy before he ever took office. Someone should have been speaking against that.
On yet another hand, I’d point out that Democrats being the “adults in the room” has never been as effective as the Republican strategy of “stubborn toddler holding their breath until they pass out”.
I don’t know what to say to anyone who can look at the last election and conclude that there’s a silent majority of Americans who want capable, professional, mature governance.
The minority party is always for “bipartisan solutions” because they have no choice. The majority party, if they are united, can pass anything they damned well please. The ONLY way the minority party can get anything passed (or blocked) is if they can get some of the majority party on their side, or bipartisanship. The majority party only cares about bipartisanship when their majority is razor thin and they can’t afford any defectors.
It’s clear to me that the “silent majority” of Americans (people that are eligible to vote but don’t) do not give a damn what America gets.
Not a majority (36%) but silent.
From US News:
…This would mean an estimated 89 million Americans, or about 36% of the country’s voting-eligible population, did not vote in the 2024 general election….
The problem is that in this regard that two parties aren’t symmetric. The Republican voting base is one foot wide but 10 feet deep, while the Democratic voting base is ten feet wide and one foot deep. Republicans win by plunging to the depths of their base. Democrats win by managing to maintain broad support across a large swath of the political landscape. So being assholes who would gladly burn down the country so long as they got liberal tears works for the Republicans, but if the Dems tried the reverse they would they’d lose all but the far end of the wading pool.
It sucks but its true.
A useful position. (Even if not every suggestion is possible for every person.)
This needs to be carved on the foreheads of every Democratic politician. Well, maybe not literally. But they do need to engage with the reality of this–too many Democrats still talk as though the era of ‘Goldwater and the House and Senate GOP leaders went to Nixon and got him to resign’ is recoverable.
It ain’t.
Again - I refer you to Mitch McConnell.