Beware the Ides of March -- U.S. Politics March 2021

The point is that Cubans in Miami don’t get to set policy for Cuba, and Puerto Ricans in NYC don’t get to set policy for Puerto Rico, any more than I get to set policy for Norway.

kinda feel like the hierarchy goes like:

citizens of Puerto Rico
former Puerto Rico residents
people who have never lived in Puerto Rico but have family there
Jeff Bezos
Joe Biden
white male American ILXors who post on the US politics thread
MSNBC content providers
people who bought Puerto Rican influenced food in the past month in Chicago
me
racist Trump supporters

the comparison between these groups is not exactly equivalent as US voters do indeed have more of a direct impact on Puerto Rico than Cuba or Norway. Also, while the opinions of Puerto Ricans is the number one factor to take into account, I'd argue it isn't the only one, as a bunch of non-Puerto Ricans have to vote on it.

The hierarchy is:
Citizens of Puerto Rico


That’s it.

And the questions of whether Puerto Rico wants to be a state and whether the US will admit Puerto Rico as a state are categorically distinct, obviously.

xpost thanks sarahell it's really nice to be included in the process

seems like some politicians have some thoughts on this topic

Puerto Rico can no longer be treated like a colony. The people of Puerto Rico deserve the right to decide their own future, and have their voices heard. https://t.co/Xzg0PnzHOQ

— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) March 18, 2021

I don’t see why he gets any say in who gets a say

Cubans are honorary boricuas to them

Reminded me of this analysis from last fall. There's no certainty Puerto Rico would be blue.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/09/09/puerto-rico-statehood-politics-democrats-republicans-senate-409191

quality politicking:

Sen. @RandPaul: "If we're not spreading the infection, isn't it just theater? You have the vaccine and you're wearing two masks, isn't that theater?

Dr. Anthony Fauci: "Here we go again with the theater. Let's get down to the facts."

Full video here: https://t.co/61RnSUvayG pic.twitter.com/xDWnCuFjjO

— CSPAN (@cspan) March 18, 2021

Theatre is having a fake board certification in opthalmology

http://danbliss.blogspot.com/2011/11/51-star-flag.html

52 is definitely better than 51 here

― 𝔠𝔞𝔢𝔨 (caek), Thursday, March 18, 2021 4:03 PM (four hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

There are other 51-star designs. Namely:
https://preview.redd.it/3ftk3h2wtko51.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=3992f80c70c289789a10ebb92004a40ccdda3192

The old SB/FP flag

That is a literal flag post

kinda feel like the hierarchy goes like:

citizens of Puerto Rico
former Puerto Rico residents
people who have never lived in Puerto Rico but have family there
Jeff Bezos
Joe Biden
white male American ILXors who post on the US politics thread
MSNBC content providers
people who bought Puerto Rican influenced food in the past month in Chicago
me
racist Trump supporters

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/Invisible_Man_%281952_1st_ed_jacket_cover%29.jpg

kinda feel like the hierarchy goes like:

citizens of Puerto Rico
former Puerto Rico residents
people who have never lived in Puerto Rico but have family there
Jeff Bezos
Joe Biden
white male American ILXors who post on the US politics thread
MSNBC content providers
people who bought Puerto Rican influenced food in the past month in Chicago
me
racist Trump supporters

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/Invisible_Man_%281952_1st_ed_jacket_cover%29.jpg

dammit phone

^ omits mention of vast numbers of women in any category above racist Trump supporters. sounds about right.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/biden-white-house-sandbags-staffers-sidelines-dozens-for-pot-use

White House? More like nerd house.

xp: Are women not citizens or something

The most infuriating example of Beltway journalism I've read this year. Nothing matters except who's up and who's down.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/03/18/ron-desantis-profile-covid-florida-2024-476777

Re: PR, about half of the Puerto Ricans I know live in Puerto Rico, the other half are in the states.

Biden tripped climbing stairs, MAGAs finally have their revenge for Rampgate.

That's great ttitt, did the folks in PR vote to make their voices heard against statehood in November, and if so are they aware that they lost that vote? In fact, the margin by which "Yes" won the referendum is larger than the margin in every US presidential election since 2008.

to be fair that's the latest in a string of referenda
1967 39% for statehood
1993 47% for statehood
1998 47% for statehood
2012 54% for change in status; of the 54%, 61% of those chose statehood
2020 52.5% for statehood
OTOH, Congress has traditionally only required a simple majority of both houses to grant statehood

Yeah true, pro-statehood has won 3 out of 5, so what do the anti-statehood folks want exactly? Multiple additional elections so they can try for best 5 out of 9? Surely they don’t want to keep trying until they finally win one and then take their ball and go home claiming victory.

Sorry, you left out 2017, which pro-statehood also won.

Seems unlikely that a Puerto Rican who wants independence is going to be swayed by a referendum to become a state?

Okay, this is one toke over the line:

(CNN)Several White House staffers were asked to resign, were suspended or are working remotely after revealing past marijuana use during their background checks, sources familiar with the situation tell CNN.
Five people are no longer employed at the White House, while additional staffers are working remotely. In many of the cases involving staffers who are no longer employed, additional security factors were in play, including for some hard drug use, the official said...

That last sentence is kinda perplexing. So, five people were reportedly actually fired, but "in many of the cases involving staffers who are no longer employed, additional security factors were in play, including for some hard drug use." So in "many" of the five cases? What number is that, 3? 4? And yet others were just sent to ... work at home? Because they admitted to past marijuana use? Like, we're not firing you, but we don't want you hanging around making us look bad with your past pot smoking?

In order to be granted an exception, staffers must agree to stop using of marijuana, agree to a pledge to not use marijuana during government service, and undergo random drug tests...

So now we're treating federal employees like high school freshmen, got it.

I prefer treating high school freshmen like federal employees

I recently passed up some very good job offers that required drug tests or willingness to get a clearance (not gov but some gov contractors).

Yeah, it may be getting slightly better in terms of forgiveness for past sins, but only if you show contrition and commit to never sin again. No thanks.

Personally, I'll wait until hiring practices catch up with reality. Not everyone has as many choices as I do, I know.

The thing about marijuana use and public service is that there isn’t a rule and it’s applied super inconsistently. I had no problem getting hired despite admitting pot use, but many others (incl for the same role) were disqualified. Its absolutely inconsistent and unfair. https://t.co/AjTcAweCbJ

— jacobian (@jacobian) March 19, 2021

I’m also 99% sure we’ll eventually learn it’s been applied in a racist way. I know a black person who was rejected for pot use while white pot users were hired. Same agency same levels. Perhaps the white people lied but I don’t think so. I’d be amazed if this wasn’t a pattern.

— jacobian (@jacobian) March 19, 2021

former 18F (or USDS, forget which) guy

Stupid and wrong as it is, cannabis is still federally listed as a schedule 1 drug and if being arrested for possession or use is what you call 'being treated like high school freshmen', then there are plenty of US states where the cops will gladly treat you like that.

did you miss this bit?

"Several staffers were informally told by transition officials that some past marijuana use would be overlooked, only to be told later that they were being asked to resign."

on the one hand, yes, that is all otm and bad, on the other, how hard is it to never, ever admit pot use when applying for any job, anywhere

xxp

even when you are literally taking pot to make it easier to do your job lol

The Vice President is on record as having smoked weed IIRC

I admitted pot use and held a top secret clearance in my first post-college job. The primary thing they were looking for was to make sure I couldn't be blackmailed.

are you now or have you ever been a fan of Ned's Atomic Dustbin

feverishly scanning interns' credit card bills for purchases of Phish merch

"no i swear i only visit livephish dot com when i'm sober"

this administration's view on marijuana is just mind-boggling. like 75% of the country wants it legalized. it's already legal in a bunch of states and the ones where it isn't you can just get Delta 8 weed, which is basically just Bud Light (lol). it's already well-established that there's like no downside and a lot of potential upside. just fuckin' do it already

The SF-whatever questions are very slanted toward a specific answer. That answer is "I was around druggies for a while in college and so, yeah, I tried it experimentally a few times. I'm not hanging around those people anymore and I won't ever be tempted into their wicked ways."

They are definitely NOT looking for an answer like, "Yeah I had some completely legal edibles last year in Colorado (or California, or New Jersey, or the District of Columbia) and it was fine and I will probably do it again in a few years when it's legal in my state."

It sucks and it makes no sense but that is the current state of things.

You inhaled pounds of weed in college but you have lost touch with your connection = okay.

Indulging responsibly, from time to time, as an adult (when it is legal in your jurisdiction) = not okay.

I agree that it's dumb, but as Aimless said it's still federally illegal. That needs to go away so this nonsense won't happen anymore.

just fuckin' do it already

otm. it's just not on the radar of old, powerful people as an issue of immediate concern. maybe, if the cards fall right in the mid-terms, they'll manage it in 2023.

they're just trying to keep Dave Matthews Band from being played in the White House, they had to find a way

meanwhile, more state ballot initiatives are the path forward.