State of the Discussion

I won't be of any help here. I have a piece of JavaScript that runs on every page that I download. It forces my own choice of fonts, sizes, vertical spacing, and color adjustments on the text. I've already changed the small part that is specific to Obsidian Wings. Between a good adblocker and my script, my view of the Web is much more consistent and less garish than what non-fanatic people see. Y'all may decide that Papyrus is the official Font of Moderation, but I'll still see Noto Serif.

The JavaScript thing got started one day when I encountered too many pages that made you want to find the designer so you could ask, "Did you study ugly and unreadable in school, or are you just naturally gifted?"

I'm a believer in the original spirit of HTML -- the writer gets to specify structure, but presentation decisions belong to the reader. If it's important that the text be rendered in some obscure spidery gothic font, well, that's what PDF is for.

Wading in here. LJ's comment on amendments prompted me to weigh in on something that I've been thinking of for some time now. Here it is, as scattershot as it looks:
The first thing I've thought of is that the Emoluments Clause, as it has been, is now dead in the water. It will have to become at least law, and if possible, an amendment. I would even, in a Panglossian Best of All Worlds projection, tie it in to the proposals to ban stock trading by members of Congress and extend it down from the executive to the legislative - no running businesses or stock trading, or even sitting on boards of directors of any corporation, whether you're in the WH or the House or the Senate.
Some other things: Term limits for SCOTUS. Abolish, or at least, claw back, the War Powers Act. A cap on EOs - make the prez present their case to Congress for this, that, or the other.
There's a whole bunch of other things that could be enumerated, but these are what I can come up with.

lj - Mostly muscle stiffness in my legs and back, because I am deliberately doing difficult-for-me hikes. Predictable, explicable, and - so far, knock wood - non-permanent.

I have a history of getting banged up and not paying much attention to it, unless (1) I need to go to an ER; or (2) the hurt doesn't go away after a few days. I've fallen on trails (have a patch of numb on my right leg from a fall that smashed a nerve). I have a tricky knee from bending and twisting while over-enthusiastically ripping up invasive blackberry vines. I've been kicked, bitten, and stepped on by horses; broke my arm riding. (Well, not *riding* per se; it was the falling-off-the-horse part that did the actual breakage.)

One impairment that might be age-related, or due to my history as an ex-smoker/current vaper, or a combo of the two, is I have to stop and rest frequently to catch my breath if I'm going upslope. Doesn't happen on the flat, only if I'm climbing. Stairs or trails. It's been that way for a few years now, and at least doesn't seem to be getting worse (knock wood, again).

Not sure that answers what you wanted to know...?

Lest anyone think I'm asserting that I'm immune to aging, I have a list of things to demonstrate that I'm not. It's just that none of them hurt.

I'm in pretty good shape for 71--meaning I didn't have weight gain with menopause; don't have cancer; I can see, hear and think; my hair is still brown; and I can walk three or four miles without collapse (if the weather is cool).

As mentioned above, fast movement or sudden movement is jarring and painful. I'm not flexible anymore. I can't remember names. I can't walk very far if the temp is over 80 without getting ill. This is a big change from my previous baseline which included 20 mile mountain hikes wearing a backpack and weekend bike trips of 60 miles or so plus occasional bike trip vacations.

Mostly I'm okay so far. I'm kind of afraid I will follow the pattern with my family which is to lose my sight and hearing while continuing to live into my nineties. I don't want to keep going when it stops being fun.

Thanks so much for posting that. I'm tempted to post Rick Blaine's line at the end of Casablanca, but I don't want to scare you off.

I wonder if it is a possibility that, after all the dust has settled (if it does) and the MAGAists are cast out (if they are), we would have a round of amendments. ERA, possibly expanded to deal with the Roberts court's assaults on it, something dealing with tariffs, an amendment specifically about environmental protection, possibly couched in terms of the rights of future generations, would be what I would hope for. I realize this is improbably optimistic, but that's what's for dinner.

Interesting article. The narrative of how the Supreme Court came to be so weaponized is good, and the role that Originalism played in it is plausible. I'd like a much more solid set of grounds laid out for that, but that would likely push the length of the article beyond what a popular venue like The Atlantic would support - more of an academic press book argument than a middlebrow magazine argument.

The part I found weakest, though, was the connection implied between Originalism and the abandonment of constitutional amendment as a path to change. It seems to me that the procedures for amendment codified in the Constitution themselves account for why that process has been abandoned. The threshold of support required for amending the Constitution is excessive.

https://www.californialawreview.org/print/the-worlds-most-difficult-constitution-to-amend

The only times it has ever worked, it did so because of either war or an extension of franchise to a broader group of Americans that created the potential for new cross-cutting alliances which could overcome those difficulties. I don't see that Originalism has altered anything with regard to amendment. What it has done is given conservative legal activists a recognizable brand on which to build a legal sophistry that can provide cover for a judiciary coup.

The Constitution is deeply flawed and limiting. It probably should have failed in 1860 or in 1929, and only extraordinary extra-Constitutional means preserved the nation in both instances, but the flaws remain. We would probably be better off with a new governing document, but there is no way that the nation would ever go back together as a 50-state union if the document went away. We've lost our sense of a common good.

For someone soon to turn 72, I seem to have remarkably few aches and pains. My sister is younger, and I have quit comparing notes with her because I feel guilty. Given our two histories, I'm the one you would expect to have painful worn-out joints*. All of mine seem to be cranking along fine. She's replaced both knees, one hip, one shoulder, and had an ankle rebuilt.

For the record, last time out on the bicycle I did 20 miles. I have had to admit that I will be the slowest person on the trail from now on, because the people I used to pass have all got e-bikes. I'm old-fashioned, I guess -- the goal is to conquer the uphill bits on your own, not to pass the job over to some batteries.

* Bicycling since I was six with the inevitable falls, plus off-and-on golf, racquet sports, soccer, basketball, softball, hiking/climbing, fencing, lugging around children (and now grandchildren). A variety of joints occasionally sprained, with only amateur stretching and PT routines during recovery. Tossed down the side of a mountain by a horse once.

I normally disable what cookies I can when on any new site. I do not recall being asked about this when I first logged on here. Apparently, I have "Third Party Cookies" enabled, for what that's worth.

OK, just got up and posted the pending comments, which were only GftNC and wonkie. I'll contact you both off list this weekend and try to figure out what's up.

To remarkable degree, Republican messaging uses the precepts set out by Goebbels. One is to give people the thrill of fear, basically something to be outraged about that isn't real. Kind of like the fun of being scared at a horror movie. For literally decades, Republican messaging has consisted of telling people to be afraid of not-real while also telling them that the real is fake. So "They are going to take your guns!!!!" and "There is no climate change." War on Christmas, trans kids, white people are going to be a minority!!!! ect. From the safety of their armchairs, life becomes an exciting experience of being scared/outraged over imaginary threats, which is a reinforcing experience. It's fun. Allows the participant to feel virtuous and vicariously heroic by voting for the party that will smite the evil enemy without ever being in any real danger. Meanwhile, I'm sure that those people worry about real problems, but election after election they vote to fight the imaginary ones.

I think leading Dems are sort of hoping that the economy will be the real problem that breaks through this bullshit and gets enough voters to vote D to give the Dems some power in Congress and at the state level. Hence "kitchen table issues" versus R culture war bullshit. It worked in Sioux City at a special election.

On the other hand, Missouri, which is a hell hole of bad government, just keeps electing Republicans over and over.

I keep thinking of the Depression, when enough voters were suffering enough to give a reform politicians real power. Once the suffering receded to being mostly minorities, that desire for reform and improvement, that desire for government as a service for the common good, started losing elections to "I got mine, screw you, and besides you are just a (fill in the hater crap du jour)."

It is a privilege to be outraged all the time about imaginary shit.

Until now none but my first comment (as announced) went into moderation, and I just entered name and email address without opening any account.
I did not click the box "save my name..."