Allahu Akhbar. Sounds like he believes in a good traditional Islamic Saudi Arabian version of women's rights.
Allahu Akhbar. Sounds like he believes in a good traditional Islamic Saudi Arabian version of women's rights.
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
I actually don't think it does. Until the dumbass (and yeah he's a dumbass) actually proposes legislation to the effect of not being able to drive if your a woman, not be able to get a job if your a woman, etc he's just saying how he would like things and the comparison to KSA is not appropriate. For example I think the Kardashians are pretty stupid and don't really want to see them on TV or hear about them on the radio, but I would never propose a law against it.
If a candidate seeking election says that's his version of rights then yes I would be suspicious of any legislation he might get involved in once elected.
"Yes he believes that but it won't affect his role as a legislator" is hard to believe unless he's at least said so himself which he hasn't.
Just because he won't enact that specific legislation (because he couldn't) doesn't mean his shitty attitude won't inform how he does his job in other areas.
The game is over
No more rounds left play
It's time to pay
Who's got the joker?
Yeah, that attitude towards women spells problems for pretty much anything he touches.
"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 present and indefinite future of American conservatism?
Twitter Link
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/9...?refreshed=yes
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/9...?refreshed=yes
Now watch as the semi-domesticated Lewkowski regurgitates & sprays partially-digested reflublican talking-points in self defense.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
https://www.thedailybeast.com/kathle...s-good-for-you
These people are fucking idiots.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
some very fine people among the new conservatives:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...e-of-the-union
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I'd ask if the GOP can get any lower, but we all know the answer to that.
Hope is the denial of reality
They can--once the Muslim infiltration is complete.
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5...b05253b2752e90
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
But Gorsuch.
Hope is the denial of reality
"But I will continue to content that a bad Republican is still far better than a Democrat of any stripe who will turn the judiciary to the left."
There it is. You'd rather have anyone with an (R) behind their name, than any moderate or conservative Democrat. Authoritarians and religious extremists are fine, so long as they're (Christian) Republicans. Because all Democrats are evil libruls, and can't be trusted to interpret the constitution *properly*.
as long as they claim to be christian. they hardly have to act like it.
"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."
Nah I'm good with Democrats who would back court appointments like Gorsuch. I don't care about the R and the D I care about conservative issues. The judiciary is a generational power shift. When Clinton failed her layup up she prevented the courts leftward turn. I really don't think people understand how huge of a deal that was. Every 5-4 decision that is a conservative win would have been a 5-4 decision liberal win."But I will continue to content that a bad Republican is still far better than a Democrat of any stripe who will turn the judiciary to the left."
There it is. You'd rather have anyone with an (R) behind their name, than any moderate or conservative Democrat. Authoritarians and religious extremists are fine, so long as they're (Christian) Republicans. Because all Democrats are evil libruls, and can't be trusted to interpret the constitution *properly*.
I think you're abusing/misusing the term 'conservative'.
As does the entire Republican Party, with their identity crisis. They can't decide between social or fiscal conservatism, or what basic human rights means. They're the party that wants to give equal rights to embryos (in Personhood Amendments) before they've recognized the same equal rights for women. They're the party that won't kick out the KKK or white nationalists from their ranks. They're the party that wants to diminish government but control it at the same time. The GOP has become a broken party, grasping for power in its death rales. Conservatism has no ideology, or party; it just has a bunch of money sloshing around under the GOP name.
Last edited by GGT; 02-03-2018 at 06:53 AM.
Actually the Democrats up until recently were the ones who had a member of the KKK among their ranks. The KKK is universally revived by all major national Republican figures. The rank and file hate the KKK so much that they regularly talk about Clinton's mentor being a member of the KKK. If conservatives like them so much they wouldn't be associating them with Clinton now would they?
The GOP has always had different wings. We've had the Religious Right, the Libertarian Wing, the Anti-Immigration, the Tough on Crime, the Lower Taxes, Strict Constitutionalism, Hawkish Pro Defense Spending and yes even some Corporate Welfare a-hole Iowa corn subsidy punks. Not everyone is in favor of each part of the Republican platform. The Libertarians tend to not get along with the Religious Right, the Tough on Crime folks spar with the strict constitutional folks (specifically 4th amendment). There is a lot of good healthy debate in conservative circles. That isn't a bad thing at all.
Clinton's mentor who disavowed the KKK and spent much of his life publicly expressing his regret for his affiliation with that organization?
Okay, sure. Meanwhile, you have white supremacists in a "Republican" cabinet, and a Republican rep. defending a Holocaust denier. But sure.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/hou...s-adam-schiff/
This is so fucking dumb I can't even laugh.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Yes, spelling matters.
Don't forget the deficit/debt hawks. Sure, healthy debate is a good thing. But there's so much disagreement that it's not unifying the party into a cohesive whole, and it makes a (R) controlled government a dysfunctional mess. Just being against Democrats or liberals or 'The Establishment' may have gotten Trump elected, but it's no way to run a country.The GOP has always had different wings. We've had the Religious Right, the Libertarian Wing, the Anti-Immigration, the Tough on Crime, the Lower Taxes, Strict Constitutionalism, Hawkish Pro Defense Spending and yes even some Corporate Welfare a-hole Iowa corn subsidy punks. Not everyone is in favor of each part of the Republican platform. The Libertarians tend to not get along with the Religious Right, the Tough on Crime folks spar with the strict constitutional folks (specifically 4th amendment). There is a lot of good healthy debate in conservative circles. That isn't a bad thing at all.
http://cpac.conservative.org/agenda/#menu
Marion the hobby-Nazi.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Twitter Link
CPAC.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Sick woman.
This is the new American conservatism. VP-endorsed.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
This isn't even the worst thing out of CPAC: http://observer.com/2018/02/michael-...ions-director/
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
CPAC is a joke. It's been called TPAC (defending Trumpism) for good reason.
The "lock her up" chant was especially hypocritical
Twitter Link
This... seems kinda dodgy.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
It is. I don't see it any worse than sin taxes on things like tobacco or subsidies for things like hybrid vehicles. The government shouldn't be deciding economic winners and losers and the government shouldn't be trying to curb or encourage behavior based on their moral view of things.
Big government conservatives are just as bad as big government liberals. Sadly there are too few people who realize the cyclical nature of politics and that power corrupts.
I meant legally, not ethically.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Subsidies for things like hybrid vehicles [or less taxes on them] make sense. Pollution isn't morals it is a deadly, harmful negative externality which isn't dealt with fully by the free market. Pollution from petrol and diesel vehicle exhausts especially in big cities causes immense damage to non-users of those vehicles. By taxing polluting vehicles more than non-political vehicles the government is nudging the pollution away while letting the consumers in the market choose the winners and losers.
Similarly for tobacco. Since the government spends a fortune on healthcare [your government spends a higher proportion of tax dollars on healthcare than ours does on our NHS!] it makes sense to capture some of that back by the heaviest users of healthcare. Tobacco and gambling taxes are voluntary taxes anyway, don't be a fucking moron and you can avoid all of those taxes. If we could fund our entire government with voluntary taxes we could easily avoid I'd be happy.
I recall that tobacco users actually cost the government less money due to them dying off faster.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote