From the middle last year, I had a working hypothesis. Formulated immediately after the Democrat Party’s Leftist base stood down and got behind Joe Biden as their presidential nominee.
The Deal was made. The Left got behind Biden — but would then get to drive The Agenda after he addled his way into the White House.
Which was, after all, the Left’s only way into the White House. Biden being so incredibly old, he is the only tether all the way back to when the Party wasn’t insane. He could campaign as a calming, “moderate” candidate — the only Democrat left with any chance of pulling that off.
The Left would then use “moderate” Biden as their ideological icebreaker. He’d be the figurehead on the SS Left and its hyper-partisan and exceedingly awful legislation and policies. “How could our Agenda be radical? Good ol’ Joe is proposing it.”
Except…there are also some Republicans elected. There are many of them. But Democrats don’t need no stinking Republicans. Democrats have razor-thin majorities in both houses — and they decided they’ll abuse the heck out of their tiny advantages rather than work even a little with the other Party. Which additionally puts the lie to the “moderate” Biden messaging.
And when they’d milked totally dry the Biden “moderate” motif — and his poll numbers had fully tanked — Phase II of The Deal would kick in.
Biden left-mandated Kamala Harris to be his vice president. Biden would wait impatiently for his Party to fire him and put her in office. Remember when Biden slipped and said he would “fake illness and resign” over a disagreement with Harris?
The Deal is facing (at most) two major problems.
One: Harris’ poll numbers are actually worse than Biden’s. The plan was to flip the switch — and pick up some polling ground. Now they’d actually be losing it.
And Two: The Party couldn’t get all of their Donkeys in a row. The lockstep Agenda votes of two Democrat Senators, and a few members of the Donkey House have been slow to come.
It’s now mid-November. It was required that Democrats pass at least five or six horrendous pieces of legislation within the time frame set out by Agenda. But they have only passed two — February’s third (or fourth) China Virus spend-a-palooza and this month’s fake infrastructure bill.
DC hasn’t legislated in election years in decades. The off-year was enough time to accomplish nothing. And we’ve wasted nigh its entirety beating the dead horse that is the fake “Build Back Better” bill.
I have a sense that if a Republican majority was myopically stuck on a piece of partisan legislation, the entirety of the planet would have in Week II begun chastising them for wasting everyone’s time. Republicans would find themselves incessantly coerced to return to bipartisan work that is actually possible.
This, as it stands today, is great advice. There is very good and very helpful bipartisan legislation — rotting on the vine whilst all of DC wastes months staring at its Build Back Never navel.
These are just two examples.
Privacy Internet Data
To pass a bipartisan federal privacy law, Congress must act now
“The future of a comprehensive federal privacy bill is in jeopardy. Progress towards a comprehensive federal privacy law has slowed, despite a growing patchwork of state laws, which have been passed two more bills so far in this year.
“As the optimism that a bipartisan-minded president might broker a compromise fades, it is more clear by the day that the lack of movement towards a federal bill is a problem for corporations and consumers alike.”
This bill was created July. It is still necessary to pass privacy legislation. It has been a long-standing requirement to pass one.
One of the reasons Big Tech is so very big (and obnoxious, and market-murdering, and….) Their ability to sell data without any restrictions on privacy is a major reason why Big Tech is so big.
It’s correct. We are into Decade II of Big Tech’s crushing planetary dominance — and DC still can’t get its act together on legislation to protect us and our data from them.
(Gee, I wonder if Big Tech’s crushing crony-donation dominance has anything to do with their success impeding privacy law progress…?)
You don’t want a patchwork quilt of fifty different state laws smothering the Internet. On privacy, or Net Neutrality, or…. It’s a regulatory nightmare mess. It’s a WORLD Wide Web. We need one national slate of Internet policies — the better to mesh with the rest of the world’s Web.
Since years, there has been bipartisan DC privacy legislation. Here’s a latest example….
Senators introduce bipartisan bill on data privacy
It’s just that DC hasn’t prioritized any of it. It has done Big Tech its crony favors — and instead keeps getting sidetracked and bogged down with idiotic hyper-partisan nonsense like Build Back Never.
You should stop being so stupid and move on. Instead, they should spend their time on legislation regarding data privacy that helps real Americans.
Big Tech is not just about data privacy. DC is a great example of a jurisdiction that has tried to solve the problem but failed.
We don’t need any new antitrust legislation — bipartisan though it may be. We can do plenty with existing law — and don’t want to further open that awful can of worms.
There’s been some bipartisan discussion of Section 230 reform. That’s getting closer to the solution. But what we actually need is….
Section 230 Repeal
Why did Big Tech become so big? Massive Government Cronyism – Like Section 230:
“Speaking of unfair…behold Section 230. Which gives Big Tech companies blanket amnesty from libel, slander, and intellectual property lawsuits resulting from third-party actions…..
“If I owned a small neighborhood bar, I would have to purchase liability insurance to protect me should one third-party patron punch another third-party patron in my place. Or I would have to go to court and convince a judge or jury that it took place in my place — but not because of my place.
“Why do the biggest and richest companies in the history of Planet Earth get government-imposed blanket third-party-action immunity?…
“The quintessential example of how unfair Section 230 is? Nick Sandmann’s debacle.
“Sandmann was the Kentucky high school kid who, when visiting DC and wearing a Donald Trump hat, was harangued by a radical Leftist activist.
“Nigh every major media outlet lied about the incident and blamed Sandmann for the confrontation. And did much of their lying on Big Tech social media — which deleted none of this quite obviously fake news.
“Sandmann successfully sued nigh every major media outlet. But couldn’t even file against Big Tech — because of Section 230. That’s ridiculously unfair and anti-equality-before-the-law.”
Oh: And Section 230s massive, ever-expanding crony protections were added to 1996’s Communications Decency Act (CDA) — as an offset to the “indecency” speech limitations the CDA emplaced.
Except the Supreme Court in 1997 (rightly) dumped the CDA’s “indecency” speech limitations. However, Section 230’s ever-expanding, massive crony protections were left intact.
So Big Tech has retained its unique, massive crony protectionism payoff — without the downside the payoff was supposed to pay off.
Section 230 must be deleted.
However, I do have a fallback plan.
Section 230s Protections are necessary for small Tech businesses, but no other company in small-sized companies has anything even remotely comparable. Ok: We’ll cap Section 230 protections at a $500 billion market cap. It gets the protections if a company has a value less than that. If a company is worth more than, it doesn’t.
Section 230s protects all Big Tech companies, but not the most powerful.
Which are big enough to buy small countries — and therefore can afford to buy lawsuit insurance.
These are just two examples of many great bipartisan opportunities in DC.
DC is almost certain not to avail themselves of it.
We should let them know that they have the ability. It should.