Mama, Mama, talk to you daughter for me.

 The House passed a bill to make Washington, D.C., the 51st state. The Republicans are losing their shit over this because they see it as just an attempt by the Democrats to put two more solidly blue seats in the Senate. For their part, the Democrats aren't really disputing it but counter that not only do the citizens of D.C. want representation in their government, there are enough folks there to make it worthwhile.

 First off, if it's just a power grab... so what? That's politics, isn't it? Are we supposed to believe that if D.C. didn't vote reliable GOP the Republicans wouldn't have a hard-on to make it a state? Because I don't believe that all and anyone who does only has themselves to blame.

 The arguments they give are fairly specious, too, whether it's the dubious claim that it'd require an amendment to the Constitution to the borderline racist jibber-jabber from clowns like Jody Hice and Tom Cotton. The actual government part of D.C. would fit into a ten-square-mile slice of land and they've got that all laid out. Conservatives are also suggesting giving the city to either Maryland or Virginia or splitting between both, despite none of the parties being down with that.

 Maybe the most specious argument is the whole "what the Founders intended" shtick. I want to go on record here: who gives a shit what the Founders intended. That was over 230 years ago and I don't think it's too much of a stretch of the imagination to say whatever the Founders intended would be unable to deal with today's reality.

 I will say this, though. The Founders knew change would come and wrote the Constitution to reflect that. We have 27 amendments that are basically saying, "Well, what we actually meant" after all. That may be the true genius of the document: it allows for something to happen the people who wrote it never considered as long as - and this is important - it falls within the rules of what the government can't do.

 And that's the thing. For the most part, the entire Constitution is full of things that limit the power and scope of the U.S. government. Twitter banning you isn't a First Amendment issue because they're not the government. That sort of thing. In fact, the one time the government tried to use the Constitution to ban something, they had to go back and reverse it because it was such a clusterfuck.

 That's what it boils do to for me: does the Constitution specifically forbid it. If not, I say go nuts if that's what the people of D.C. want. Same thing with Puerto Rico or Guam, and if Republicans are boo-hooing because they won't get the votes from these new states, perhaps they should step back and ask themselves why.

 So much for all that. Until I hear otherwise, it goes into my "haven't heard a good argument why not" pile with expanding the Supreme Court, national legalization of marijuana, and getting rid of the Electoral College. Whatever the "Founding Fathers" meant is an appeal to tradition fallacy in my book and just will not swing.

 Anyhow. Epic dropped its weekly freebies today and one was Hand Of Fate 2. I've been intrigued by it since seeing a Zero Punctuation episode about it, but since I have no background (or interest) in card games, I never pulled the trigger. A Lucky 13 harmonica I order on eBay from a place in California will be a solid week late tomorrow, and I'm starting to get irritated. It's been well over a couple years since I ordered stuff like this and it's striking just how bad Louis DeJoy has fouled up the Postal Service.

 I reckon that's good enough for now. I've spent more time reading some truly dumbass arguments against the whole statehood thing. I'm going to go play some video games and leave you with what Momma said after I told her about the bill passing:

 "Oh. The Mets are giving this game away again. I wonder why the announcers are in different booths?"