At this stage, does anyone believe that the 'principles' Republicans claim to hold are actually sincere, rather than ciphers for the political unpalatable things they actually think?Originally Posted by Lewkowski
A party that cared deeply about the sanctity of human life wouldn't have just failed to pass a bill because it wasn't going to kill *enough* Americans.
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/...ers-conference
Now the GOP is actively trying to destroy science.
Hope is the denial of reality
Trump Says He Never Promised to Quickly Repeal Obamacare. Here’s a Bunch of Times He Promised Exactly That.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate..._of_times.html
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
The failure of the ACA-repeal bill was the best outcome for Trump. This makes Trump look better than Congress but it doesn't make Trump or Republican legislators look as bad as they would've looked if the bill had passed and their voters would have been able to experience, firsthand, the consequences of the new policy for their healthcare access and costs. Some will object and claim that this was bad for Trump because populists and authoritarians have to keep winning in order to maintain credibility. But the fact is that this was a victory for Trump. He comes out looking sincere and forceful but opposed by shortsighted, incompetent and dishonest Republicans who will end up shouldering all of the blame for this fiasco. This plays perfectly into their victim complex. Ryan is the biggest loser here, which I expect will also be to Trump's advantage.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Trumpets are already spinning the clusterfuck as a successful attempt to damage Ryan. Trump destroys his enemies with "sunlight"
The saddest part were the ads from last night
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Twitter Link
Hilarious if true.
Hope is the denial of reality
Indeed. Now are you willing to admit that you were maybe a tad premature in claiming that the GOP in Congress were Trump's lackeys that would unanimously do what they were told?
Um, here we have 20-30 GOPers who thought Trump wasn't going far enough. The argument was always that they wouldn't challenge Trump, not that they'd abandon their own legislative agenda.
Hope is the denial of reality
But they did challenge Trump where it suited them to do so.
"This Bill to Murder Puppies Doesn't Go Far Enough, Should Also be Extended to Kittens and Baby Seals" wasn't really the kind of 'opposition' we had in mind.
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
When they wanted to be worse than Trump. Good job.
Hope is the denial of reality
It's the best you'll get when the anti-murdering puppies party decides to put up a woman who acted like she was allergic to puppies and was rejected by the electorate.
GOP Congressmen will reject Trump when it suits their own interests to do so, same as any other incumbent party Congressmen rejecting their own incumbent President when it suits them to do so. Don't like it, then elect someone else.
This "opposition" strengthens Trump.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Eh, some people think this proved that Trump's threats are meaningless. He said the bill wouldn't be changed, it was. He said there would be a vote and those who opposed it would suffer, there wasn't. Republicans are now realizing opposing trump comes with zero consequences. He's a weak man who has no clue what he's doing.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Yeah, anything, anything, but hold Republicans accountable for their bullshit, or the real, living people that bullshit materially harms, right?
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Who was materially harmed here, again? They can't get their material passed without the slightly less crazy types and if they prevent the slightly less crazy types from implementing their own bad agenda. . .
I have absolutely no truck with demanding ideological purity and rectitude from my own side, I'm certainly not going to expect it from my opposition.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
You'll have to explain that logic. I agree with OG, such a major defeat early on makes Trump look impotent now all powerful.
This looks like an ignoble defeat to Trump's opponents. To Trump's supporters, it looks like cunning (Trump's just playing the long game by letting the ACA implode and letting Democrats take all the blame for its failure) or like the unjust outcome of Republican incompetence or obstructionism (Trump is, like God, the wise father who tried to persuade Republican congressmen to do the right thing but they just wouldn't listen). Of course, I some of Trump's voters are probably kinda relieved the ACA wasn't repealed because it's the one thing Obama did that they actually liked
Legislators already knew that there's little Trump can do to punish them right now, but there's a lot Trumpists and Trump's voters can do in the upcoming elections to ensure a more compliant congress in the future. I dunno whether the constituents represented by the Freedom Caucus are going to want to punish their representatives but I think they'll see this as a failure.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
That some Trump supporters are delusional does not mean we need to buy into their delusions. This week was nothing other than a humiliating disaster for Trump and Ryan.
Trump gotta Trump: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ge...ence-dl7dk629k
Hope is the denial of reality
If your requirement is for something a partisan can't spin or rationalize, then you're never going to be satisfied. Trump being beaten at the ballot box isn't a defeat, it's just more voter fraud. And that's about as bald-faced as a defeat can get.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Um, they just tried to pass a bill that would remove coverage from, like, 20 million Americans. And it only failed because 20 million was not a high enough number for the tea party mob. That's 1/3rd of the population of my country, nearly. Not even going to get into working out how many people have died over the years for want of access to healthcare, which is directly attributable to Republican resistance to universal healthcare. People dead from gun violence because they won't move an inch on gun control?
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Actually it didn't get pulled until some of the more influential Reps among the mainstream Republicans declared they wouldn't support the bill because of the damage it would inflict on their constituents. But regardless of which group was the precipitating factor behind the failure, you still haven't told me where the material harm is. The bill did fail. If it fails because the crazies wanted something more extreme then good for them, they're managing to block even the partial implementation of their own agenda. I want them to keep on doing what they're doing. Let them be as obstreperous and inflexible as possible. That's a GOOD thing for us when their party is in power.
And four times that of Denmark. Only a little more than 1% for China though. Why are we making pointless statistical observations though?That's 1/3rd of the population of my country, nearly.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Us?
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
Behind a paywall.
All the credible sources are linking to that, and I'd prefer not to link to the less credible ones.
Hope is the denial of reality
Different source, same subject:
Donald Trump branded 'international embarrassment' after handing made-up Nato invoice to Angela Merkel
President claims Berlin owes Washington money for 'the powerful, and very expensive, defence' it provides
Donald Trump has been branded an “international embarrassment” after he reportedly presented Angela Merkel with a bill for what he thought Germany “owed” Nato during her recent trip to the White House.
The bill – which was reportedly given to the Chancellor during private talks last weekend – was described as “outrageous” by one unnamed German minister.
They told The Sunday Times: “The concept behind putting out such demands is to intimidate the other side, but the chancellor took it calmly and will not respond to such provocations”.
All Nato countries have previously agreed to spend two per cent of GDP on defence spending but only five countries – the US, the UK, Greece, Poland and Estonia – are currently meeting that target.
Germany, which currently spends around 1.23 per cent, previously pledged to increase its defence spending in 2002 and it is believed that Mr Trump’s team calculated the amount Berlin has fallen short of the 2 per cent target from that point then added interest.
But the move has been condemned by many Americans who said the move showed Mr Trump failed to understand how Nato worked.
Former Secretary of Labor under Bill Clinton Robert Reich said: “Trump is an international embarrassment. To our allies around the world: He doesn’t represent most Americans, and we’re doing all we can."
The alleged gesture came as Mr Trump tweeted that Germany owed the US and Nato “vast sums of money” for the “powerful, and very expensive, defence it provides to Germany”.
White House spokesman Sean Spicer subsequently denied that Mr Trump had handed the invoice to Ms Merkel, Business Insider reported.
Under the terms of Article 5 of the Nato agreement, member states must come to the aid of each other if one is subject to military attack.
It was originally signed in 1949 as a way to combat the dominance of the Soviet Union in Europe.
As tensions have increased between Russia and the West over its annexation of Crimea, its support for rebels in the Donbas region of Ukraine and its intervention in Syria, vulnerable Eastern European states have seen their defences bolstered by Nato troops.
Countries which share a border with Russia – including Poland, Lithuania and Estonia but not Germany – have seen one of the biggest deployments to Eastern Europe since the Cold War in recent weeks.
But this does not mean the US is funding the defence of other countries.
As Ivo Daalder, the US ambassador to Nato between 2009 and 2013, explained on Twitter last week Washington decides how much it spends on defence on its own and has chosen to provide a large military commitment to Europe for its own security as well as that of its allies.
But Mr Trump has repeatedly suggested he may roll back the US commitment to Nato.
On the campaign trail he called it “obsolete” and suggested he would cut spending – but since his inauguration he has attempted to reassure European leaders that he understood its strategic importance.
During a Nato summit in February, US Secretary of Defense James Mattis suggested the US would “moderate its commitment” unless other members increased their own spending.
He said: “No longer can the American taxpayer carry a disproportionate share of the defence of Western values. Americans cannot care more for your children’s security than you do.
“Disregard for military readiness demonstrates a lack of respect for ourselves, for the alliance and for the freedoms we inherited, which are now clearly threatened.”
The bill was a further embarrassment during Ms Merkel's first trip to the Trump White House after the President was roundly criticised for refusing to shake her hand during their initial meeting and then trying to suggest they had being hacked by Barack Obama "in common" – before receiving a withering stare from the Chancellor.
Twitter Link
Americans call this cringey
Germans call it Fremdschämen
Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 03-27-2017 at 03:05 PM.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
That's the less than credible source I didn't want to cite.
Edit: The House investigation is on track.
Twitter Link
Last edited by Loki; 03-27-2017 at 03:31 PM.
Trying to do something malicious and failing due to your own towering incompetence still makes you a bad person, at least where I grew up.
Honestly? Because this entire line of argument doesn't merit a serious response. I don't even know where you're trying to go with it.And four times that of Denmark. Only a little more than 1% for China though. Why are we making pointless statistical observations though?
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Most politicians are bad people, on any side of an aisle. It tends to go with professional egomania. So? What does that have to do with people Trump lickspittles or interfering with the actual enactment of whatever his agenda is? That WAS the topic to which you made your earlier response, if you'll recall.
You'd rather defeat came at the hands of the ideologically pure, I get that, we've had that part of the discussion repeatedly over years. It's not just naive, it's politically ignorant. Democracies do not, can not function that way, no matter what their structure. No matter what the policy or issue is, you are never going to be able to get a majority that not only takes the correct position but does so for the same reason in their hearts that you have.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
