A new DOJ memo argues that immigration judges can be stripped of civil service protections. That could lay the groundwork for firing them if they don’t rule the “right” way.
Nowhere in the job description of being an effective legislator is there a part where they are to “protect us” from anyone
.
…what?
…there is no point in them being there if they aren’t going to do that?
In order to have one party’s job be the “protector”, you need another party that is the villain.
Democrats should exist outside of bad Republican governance. They should have a distinct vision of what society should look like.
Say what you will about these fascists and they’re garbage, but they still think it’s possible to change the country rather than settling for “protecting us” from the opposition.
I would argue that the “protecting us from Republicans” thing is largely what they’ve been campaigning on for basically ten years now, and it’s been an abysmal failure.
You’ve basically gone so “anti-liberal” that you wound up arguing the liberal position.
In order to have one party’s job be the “protector”, you need another party that is the villain.
Democrats should exist outside of bad Republican governance. They should have a distinct vision of what society should look like.
Say what you will about these fascists and they’re garbage, but they still think it’s possible to change the country rather than settling for “protecting us” from the opposition.
I would argue that the “protecting us from Republicans” thing is largely what they’ve been campaigning on for basically ten years now, and it’s been an abysmal failure.
You’ve basically gone so “anti-liberal” that you wound up arguing the liberal position.
I want elected officials to protect me in any way they can.
Republicans are only one threat of many? (climate change?)