On 11/30/2021 at 3:57 PM, toolg said:

MTG picked a fight on Twitter with her colleague Nancy Mace R-SC, who didn't back down:

There is hope for the future of the GOP?

this is a perfect example of how there is no equivalency between the parties when it comes to the lunatic fringe.

the lunatic fringe on the right is running the party now. or at least is much more in control of leadership.

say what you will about Pelosi, but she's never allowed "the Squad" to contaminate or dominate the entire party, even as the right often successfully paints the entire left with the sins of this small group. 

look at the infrastructure bill ... can you imagine McCarthy getting legislation through with the support of moderate dems over objections of the bat-ish crazies like MTG/Boebert/Cawthorn/Gosar/Jordan/Gohmert? I don't think he'd get the vast majority of the Republican caucus to vote for a bill without the endorsement of those idiots, which is basically because their endorsement = Trump's endorsement.

On 11/30/2021 at 3:57 PM, toolg said:

MTG picked a fight on Twitter with her colleague Nancy Mace R-SC, who didn't back down:

There is hope for the future of the GOP?

Lol at that "your". And none of the grammar clowns caught it. They are even ultra partisan when it comes to checking grammar lol.

1 hour ago, DrPhilly said:

what like ghosts and witches and graveyard stuff?

Lol, yeah

1 hour ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

this is a perfect example of how there is no equivalency between the parties when it comes to the lunatic fringe.

the lunatic fringe on the right is running the party now. or at least is much more in control of leadership.

say what you will about Pelosi, but she's never allowed "the Squad" to contaminate or dominate the entire party, even as the right often successfully paints the entire left with the sins of this small group. 

look at the infrastructure bill ... can you imagine McCarthy getting legislation through with the support of moderate dems over objections of the bat-ish crazies like MTG/Boebert/Cawthorn/Gosar/Jordan/Gohmert? I don't think he'd get the vast majority of the Republican caucus to vote for a bill without the endorsement of those idiots, which is basically because their endorsement = Trump's endorsement.

No one in the middle in here says the current status is the same.  Clearly the Repubs have been taken over while the Dems have some level of control over their crazy fringe.

On 11/30/2021 at 9:57 PM, toolg said:

There is hope for the future of the GOP?

17 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

She looks nice enough in a dress, but she voted to boot Liz Cheney and against the Jan 6 committee.

This after she sent her kids home in January because she felt they were unsafe with threats to her and others in Washington who weren't in lockstep with Trump.

She was on the right track in January but backed down because... well, because Trump owns the Republican party. Because Trump owns the base.

I’m pretty sure the 2024 VP is going to be Kid Rock, not MTG

36 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

I’m pretty sure the 2024 VP is going to be Kid Rock, not MTG

Vince McMahon or bust

45 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

She looks nice enough in a dress, but she voted to boot Liz Cheney and against the Jan 6 committee.

This after she sent her kids home in January because she felt they were unsafe with threats to her and others in Washington who weren't in lockstep with Trump.

She was on the right track in January but backed down because... well, because Trump owns the Republican party. Because Trump owns the base.

Any action against the idiots is a plus and she just took one but yeah I just put her pic up because of the nice dress

1 hour ago, DrPhilly said:

54 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Any action against the idiots is a plus and she just took one but yeah I just put her pic up because of the nice dress

I'm not complaining about the dress. it's very, uh, flattering. 

To be fair, all of these reps are political animals so I'm not surprised many are kowtowing to Trump because it's what their base is demanding of them. 

But it's the Liz Cheneys and Adam Kinzingers of the Republican party that are actually standing up for their principles. Neither of these reps should be confused in any way with being liberals. They are more conservative than Trump - by a healthy margin.

But the Trump base has sought to redefine what it means to be "conservative" as well as what it means to be Republican. To them it's one in the same.

Bah, who cares. Time for a beer.

given the lack of actual policy debate here, I guess this thread suffices for this: https://reason.com/2021/12/03/politics-has-too-much-posturing-and-not-enough-problem-solving/

 

Politics Has Too Much Posturing and Not Enough Problem-Solving

During a speech to a conservative group this month, Hawley depicted a decline in masculinity as one of the nation's foremost problems. Really?

STEVEN GREENHUT | 12.3.2021 8:30 AM

 

As someone who tries to evaluate specific public policies based on their merits and adherence to my long-held libertarian philosophy, I've been increasingly dispirited by the crazy partisanship that has consumed our political debates. These days, we're supposed to simply pick a team and cheer as it runs up the score on the other team.

"Don't you know that politics is binary?" conservative friends would ask whenever I criticized some misbegotten Trump administration policy (e.g., tariffs). In their view, Republicans always are better on balance than the Democrats, so I need to join their side and fight—even when they promote idiocy. To partisans, it's always about winning the next election.

When I call balls and strikes—those Supreme Court justice nominations are great, but trying to steal an election endangers our democracy—I'm apparently a sellout. Even though I routinely criticize California's Democratic politicians, I'm thrilled on the rare instances that they advance sensible ideas—such as when Gavin Newsom signed a package of long-overdue police reforms.

The end goal is good public policy, and it shouldn't matter who champions it. But when we view politics as a grudge match, we lose our leverage to change the way that "our" allies operate. Perhaps holding both Republicans and Democrats accountable for routinely violating their stated principles might push them to reconsider the positions they take. Well, hope springs eternal.

Writing about Democratic responses to the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse in the Kenosha, Wis., shootings and a police shooting in the city, The Bulwark's Charlie Sykes complained about "The tyranny of ideological narratives." That's a crucial observation. Indeed, both sides jump to tribe-based conclusions about specific events and their hot takes always are so banal and predictable.

Yet when everything is hardened ideologically, we lose the ability to make nuanced distinctions. We can never even agree on the basic facts of any given situation (even if it's caught on video) and end up advancing morally dubious and even clownish positions.

This self-imposed ideological tyranny leads politicians to spend their time posturing rather than governing. They mainly try to energize their base. They eschew reasonable ideas but seek only to heighten the partisan anger. Few politicians do this more consistently than the populist Republican Sen. Josh Hawley (R–Mo.).

During a speech to a conservative group this month, Hawley depicted a decline in masculinity as one of the nation's foremost problems. "I want to focus tonight on the deconstruction of men, not because men are more important, but because I believe the attack on men has been the tip of the spear of the Left's broader attack on America. And because this attack on men is already far advanced," he said.

The populist right has long had a weird, almost adolescent view of manliness. Men are half the population and some of them always have struggled with something, so it's goofy to depict us as the targets of some orchestrated attack. The politics of victimization, whether it comes from conservatives or liberals, has become so tiresome.

There's a legitimate argument that, say, a rapidly changing economy, a government-run educational system that sees college (rather than trades) as the one-size-fits-all approach and the spread of government-assistance programs, has led many men into a life of idleness, substance abuse, and despair. That pox has devastated some poor and working-class communities.

But instead of addressing a cultural/economic problem that's been analyzed for decades, Hawley is using it to bludgeon his opponents and accuse them of attacking half the population. He takes a serious societal conundrum and turns it into a political battle cry rather than a search for practical solutions.

Of course, leftists aren't looking for solutions to any problem beyond their go-to answer of increasing government spending. When that spending leads to an easily predictable and painful bout of inflation, they stick to their usual ideological narratives. First, they told us there is no real inflation, then they cast blame on everything other than their own policies.

Now, with oil prices up 59 percent, meat and poultry prices up 12 percent, and overall inflation up 6.3 percent, they can't ignore reality. They tell us that inflation actually isn't such a bad thing. "It's the predictable product of the economy's rapid recovery, and its cost has been offset, to a large degree, by robust wage growth and government policies," argued MSNBC columnist James Surowiecki.

We obviously can't address an inflation crisis if we're arguing that the erosion of Americans' savings and their inability to buy homes and cars actually isn't that big of a deal. But that's what happens when politics becomes totally binary. The "inflation is OK" crowd would no doubt make the opposite argument if the GOP team were in power.

There's not much we can do other than commit ourselves to viewing the world more as a referee and less like a cheerleader.

3 hours ago, Dave Moss said:

I’m pretty sure the 2024 VP is going to be Kid Rock, not MTG

In all seriousness, I'd be surprised if it isn't Don Jr. or Ivanka. Once he gets in, there's no getting him out until he dies, and he'll want to pass the crown to one of his offspring. 

16 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

given the lack of actual policy debate here, I guess this thread suffices for this: https://reason.com/2021/12/03/politics-has-too-much-posturing-and-not-enough-problem-solving/

 

Politics Has Too Much Posturing and Not Enough Problem-Solving

During a speech to a conservative group this month, Hawley depicted a decline in masculinity as one of the nation's foremost problems. Really?

STEVEN GREENHUT | 12.3.2021 8:30 AM

 

 

Good article. Josh Hawley has one of the most punch able faces I’ve ever seen. It looks like his mouth over excretes saliva and punching him in the face every few minutes would help him by clearing that out… Or is that just me?

Hawley aside, voters are going to have to realize the political games being played that pits party vs party before it becomes citizen vs citizen. None of these politicians are worth the "civil war” some of the fringe loonies are starting to whisper occasionally. 

This is the masculine way to kiss your wife

Sen. Bob Dole is dead.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/bob-dole-dies-at-98-170812702.html

the repug party, folks....

 

Devin Nunes is retiring. 

13 hours ago, toolg said:

Devin Nunes is retiring. 

Oh happy days !

On 12/3/2021 at 11:25 AM, Dave Moss said:

I’m pretty sure the 2024 VP is going to be Kid Rock, not MTG

 

 

 

Word is Nunes is leaving Congress to become CEO of Trump Media & Technology Group. The merger is already under scrutiny from regulators; it might be sunk before they even get off the ground. Interesting that a "Trump" company isn't being led by Trump himself.

So a far-right politician leaves his seat because he's too extreme to be re-elected, to lead extremist media group for extremist consumers, that could be shut down by regulators before it even starts. That's a good one... And the far-right crazies will be screaming "unfair" again.

11 minutes ago, toolg said:

Word is Nunes is leaving Congress to become CEO of Trump Media & Technology Group. The merger is already under scrutiny from regulators; it might be sunk before they even get off the ground. Interesting that a "Trump" company isn't being led by Trump himself.

So a far-right politician leaves his seat because he's too extreme to be re-elected, to lead extremist media group for extremist consumers, that could be shut down by regulators before it even starts. That's a good one... And the far-right crazies will be screaming "unfair" again.

Lol, Nunes probably thinks Trump will actually pay him for his work.