The Sewer That Is The GOP: With All The White Supremacists, Conspiracy Nutters, And Other Malicious Whacko Subgroups, How Does It Get Fixed?

[CobraCommander]

That's nice that's there's a 20 dollar fee per fetus. So if you were carrying twins and you miscarry both it's 40 dollars?  But if you are military it's free? What the hell is wrong with people?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

 

[LD0506]

1 hour ago, Florgon79 said:

What the hell is wrong with people?

 

<sigh>

 

How much time do you have?

[Cooked Crack]

 

 

[Jumbo]

35 minutes ago, LD0506 said:

 

<sigh>

 

How much time do you have?

 

i'd need an hour to properly describe the condition and about two seconds to describe the proper cure

 

 

 

 

yup, that's right, you guessed it: "pray for them" 

 

 

 

 

 

[Cooked Crack]

 

 

[NoCalMike]

I guess Paul Ryan gave some big "we need to return the party to Reaganism" speech today in an effort (likely futile) to remind everyone I guess that the modern GOP were awful way before Trump?

[Larry]

7 hours ago, NoCalMike said:

I guess Paul Ryan gave some big "we need to return the party to Reaganism" speech today in an effort (likely futile) to remind everyone I guess that the modern GOP were awful way before Trump?

Frankly, Reagan in many ways started what are now the Republican positions. 

Edited May 28, 2021 by Larry

[LadySkinsFan]

1 hour ago, Larry said:

Frankly, Reagan in many ways started what are now the Republican positions. 

 

Actually it was Nixon who started it but Reagan brought it into fruition.

[Larry]

5 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

 

Actually it was Nixon who started it but Reagan brought it into fruition.

 

I don't recall Nixon doing the "massive tax cuts, huge increase in military contracting, and then when the deficit explodes, act surprised and demand that somebody else cut social spending to make up for it" plan.  

 

Or the "why should we do anything about that disease?  It's mostly killing Democrats." plan.  

 

Yeah, Nixon did give us the 'Southern Strategy" plank.  And the "Laws don't apply to the President".  And enemies lists.  

 

And I guess Trump did give us the "Russia good, NATO bad" part.  

[Jabbyrwock]

56 minutes ago, Larry said:

I don't recall Nixon doing the "massive tax cuts, huge increase in military contracting, and then when the deficit explodes, act surprised and demand that somebody else cut social spending to make up for it" plan.  

 

The Republican plank of "eliminate as much of FDR's new deal as possible" existed even before Nixon.  Methodical tax cutting to starve out the new deal has just been one of the more successful strategies because tax cuts are easy to sell to the populace.  Same plank different methodology.  Also do remember the times: Nixon was in power during the peak of liberalism after the war.  There was only so much he could actually do in furthering the kill the new deal plank.

 

56 minutes ago, Larry said:

Or the "why should we do anything about that disease?  It's mostly killing Democrats." plan.  

 

According to Johnson's tapes, Nixon encouraged the South Vietnamese to walk out of peace talks effectively prolonging the war.  Why?  To get Nixon re-elected on his anti-war platform.  Callous disregard for human life in the pursuit of political ends is by no means confined to the Trump administration.

[PeterMP]

1 hour ago, Jabbyrwock said:

According to Johnson's tapes, Nixon encouraged the South Vietnamese to walk out of peace talks effectively prolonging the war.  Why?  To get Nixon re-elected on his anti-war platform.  Callous disregard for human life in the pursuit of political ends is by no means confined to the Trump administration.

 

There are more than tapes from Johnson.  Records from the Nixon library back it up.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/us/politics/nixon-tried-to-spoil-johnsons-vietnam-peace-talks-in-68-notes-show.html

 

(Now, I don't think they would have actually achieved peace, so I don't think it would have effectively prolonged the war.  When the Paris Peace Treaty was signed  Thieu objected and only agreed after Nixon promised to withdraw unliterally (and that took 3 months) if they didn't sign.  That any sort of peace treaty could have been signed in 1968 that  Thieu would have agreed to is very unlikely.  The difference between '68 and '73 was the attitude of the US public.  By '73 essentially anything that allowed the US to withdraw forces was acceptable.

 

The talks in '68 were probably pretty much doomed to fail.

 

And interestingly, the only reason they had a chance was because the Soviets didn't want Nixon to win.  The Soviets supported peace talks because they felt that would reduce the chances of Nixon becoming President.)

Edited May 28, 2021 by PeterMP

[NoCalMike]

Right, FDR's New Deal was a big turning point in America and the wealthy didn't like.  It's been non stop trying to reverse every piece of it and take things to the other libertarian extreme ever since.  It has taken a long time and a lot of lobbying money to poison the minds of half this country into thinking Reaganomics has been a good thing, including not just tax policy but the money's role in politics.  It is becoming an almost impossible fight as we see that a guy like Biden needed to turn out 80 million voters against a cretin like Trump who in his own right, received the second most votes ever.    

[Cooked Crack]

 

 

[Larry]

Guess the (fourth?) recount didn't produce the results they wanted.  

[China]

Marjorie Taylor Greene Condemns Kevin McCarthy, Steve Scalise and Elise Stefanik for Not Defending Her

 

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) condemned Republican House leadership on Wednesday for not defending her amid fallout over her recent comparisons of mask mandates to the treatment of Jews in Nazi Germany.

 

Greene said that it was "a shame" that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) and GOP Conference Chair Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) denounced her Nazi analogy during a Wednesday appearance on Newsmax TV's Greg Kelly Reports.

 

Click on the link for the full article

[China]

Tom Cotton sees Chinese propaganda in the strangest places

 

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) is apparently on the lookout for Chinese communist propaganda, and he finds it with great regularity. Is the New York Times publishing propaganda from Beijing? According to the Arkansas Republican, it certainly is. Are Senate Democrats also helping push propaganda from China? To hear Cotton tell it, they're guilty, too.

 

This week, the GOP senator saw the imagined problem reach the White House.

 

Quote

"Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) claimed on Tuesday that advocating for dismantling systemic racism is propaganda in service to the Communist Party of China. On Tuesday afternoon, White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan wrote, "On the anniversary of George Floyd's murder, we reflect on the fact that dismantling systemic racism is also a national security priority. The fight for racial justice at home and abroad is foundational to our future [and] to how the world sees us."

 

At face value, Sullivan's statement did not seem especially controversial. Dismantling systemic racism should be "a national security priority." Fighting for racial justice really is foundational to our international credibility and moral standing.

 

But Tom Cotton apparently disapproved. "This tweet is approved by the Communist Party of China," the Arkansas Republican tweeted minutes later, in response to the White House national security advisor's brief statement.

 

Click on the link for the full article

 

Edited May 28, 2021 by China

[PleaseBlitz]

Does anyone in the entire world give a **** about what Paul Ryan thinks?

[Larry]

Quote

"Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) claimed on Tuesday that advocating for dismantling systemic racism is propaganda in service to the Communist Party of China. 

 

Right. 

 

Eliminating systemic racism is the hallmark of the Chinese government.  

[Ball Security]

30 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

Does anyone in the entire world give a **** about what Paul Ryan thinks?

You laugh, but if someone gave me decent odds, I’d put money on him being the 2028 nominee.  
 

And, no, I don’t give a **** what he has to say.  Lol. 

[PleaseBlitz]

12 minutes ago, Ball Security said:

You laugh, but if someone gave me decent odds, I’d put money on him being the 2028 nominee.  
 

And, no, I don’t give a **** what he has to say.  Lol. 

I’m game. 10 to 1?

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

18 minutes ago, Ball Security said:

You laugh, but if someone gave me decent odds, I’d put money on him being the 2028 nominee.  
 

And, no, I don’t give a **** what he has to say.  Lol. 

What kind of odds do you want? He’s got no chance after failing to bend the knee to Trump.

[Ball Security]

1 minute ago, PleaseBlitz said:

I’m game. 10 to 1?

That’s a little short.  For example, the favorite for MVP is Mahomes at 5:1.  Allen is third at 11:1.  So if you were to say something like 25-20:1, I think I’d jump on that.

 

He knew what he was doing when he retired in 2018 to get away from the Trump mess.  He can pick his spots to join or avoid the fray between now and then.  He’s young enough to jump back in after the GQP burns down.

[PleaseBlitz]

8 minutes ago, Ball Security said:

That’s a little short.  For example, the favorite for MVP is Mahomes at 5:1.  Allen is third at 11:1.  So if you were to say something like 25-20:1, I think I’d jump on that.

 

He knew what he was doing when he retired in 2018 to get away from the Trump mess.  He can pick his spots to join or avoid the fray between now and then.  He’s young enough to jump back in after the GQP burns down.

Yea, he gambled that his intellectual conservatism would win the day with the GOP base. As such, I think 25:1 is fair odds. 

Edited May 29, 2021 by PleaseBlitz

[TK]

On 5/25/2021 at 6:05 PM, Riggo-toni said:

This thread is getting very weird....

I wonder if WE WILL SEE MORE from ol Buffalo butt..... Maybe he's just been hangry & needs a sammich.