HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » XacerbatedDem » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Hometown: Missouri
Home country: USA
Member since: Mon Jan 3, 2022, 09:52 AM
Number of posts: 511

About Me

I am a 66 year old, retired Democrat who lives in the red state of Missouri (gawd help me!) and I have been following the articles here for quite some time. I genuinely love the camaraderie and fellowship of your site and hope that in some way I may contribute to your message. I am also a veteran who is appalled at the direction this country took with the last president and want to do what I can to see that that never happens again (gawd help us all!).

Journal Archives

Another AG plays politics with children's lives.

Mo AG sues 45 school districts over mask mandates

Forty-five mask-requiring school districts in Missouri face lawsuits from Attorney General Eric Schmitt, and some school leaders and elected officials are questioning if he really has the best interest of the state at heart.

Schmitt on Friday filed suit seeking to halt 36 districts from requiring masks amid a record surge in COVID-19 cases. On Monday, he added nine more. Most of the districts are in the Kansas City and St. Louis areas.

Schmitt, in a news release, said parents — not bureaucrats — should be making health decisions for children. He questioned the effectiveness of masks, although experts agree that masks slow the virus' spread and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has found strong evidence that mask mandates help.

“Masking children all day in school is ineffective and these endless pandemic restrictions lead to lasting, negative psychological impacts on children and teens," Schmitt, a Republican running for the U.S. Senate, said. "This is a fight worth fighting, and I’m not going to back down.”


What a monster, this guy, like schools don’t have enough problems, now they have to spend a lot of taxpayer money in court over this crap. Oh, and then I see why, running for Senate are we, have to please the anti-vax crowd to get your foot in the door, no matter how many children’s or teacher’s lives are lost. What a world, what a f***ing world.
Posted by XacerbatedDem | Wed Jan 26, 2022, 08:34 AM (1 replies)

SCOTUS takes up a case, brought by Ted Cruz, that could legalize bribery

The case concerns federal campaign finance laws, and, specifically, candidates’ ability to loan money to their campaigns. Candidates can do so — but in 2001, Congress enacted a provision that helps prevent such loans from becoming a vehicle to bribe candidates who go on to be elected officials. Under this provision, a campaign that receives such a loan may not repay more than $250,000 worth of the loan using funds raised after the election.

When a campaign receives a pre-election donation, that donation is typically subject to strict rules preventing it from being spent to enrich the candidate. After the election has occurred, however, donors who give money to help pay off a loan from the candidate effectively funnel that money straight to the candidate — who by that point could be a powerful elected official.

That decision could potentially enable any lawmaker to make a high-dollar, high-interest loan to their campaign, and then use that loan as a vehicle to funnel donations directly into their pocket.

And even if lawmakers do not enrich themselves by making high-interest loans to their campaign, the fact remains that every dollar a campaign donor gives to help a campaign pay back a loan from the candidate goes straight into that candidate’s pocket. As the Justice Department argues in its brief defending against Cruz’s lawsuit, “a contribution that adds to a candidate’s personal assets (and that can accordingly be used for personal purposes) poses a far greater threat of corruption than a payment that merely adds to a campaign’s treasury (and that can accordingly be used only for campaign purposes).”


I had no idea this was a thing.
Posted by XacerbatedDem | Thu Jan 13, 2022, 06:57 AM (4 replies)

Red State Conundrum

I live in Missouri (pronounced mis’ery) and every time I vote for a Democratic candidate, his opponent always seems to win, which is, need I say, somewhat disconcerting. A friend of mine feels the same way, but suggested that maybe it would be best if we voted for the repug candidate running against the favored repug candidate instead of seeing our vote go to waste (not in the Presidential elections, of course, but in the local elections). I don’t know, can’t really say I agree with that, but after that damned HEE-Hawley idiot beat out Claire McCaskill, I’m ready to try anything.

What do you think?
Posted by XacerbatedDem | Sun Jan 9, 2022, 08:55 AM (16 replies)
Go to Page: 1