10 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Not sure where to put this, but Carlson is on the verge of a complete mental breakdown.

 

He is very normal

2 hours ago, Lloyd said:

Yep. But the really stupid thing would be to debate her at all, and give her the platform.

AOC, as annoying as she can be, talks policy. MTG talks Parler. No point in elevating her to the realm of serious political debates. 

MTG could probably kick AOC's ass. Then again, she has the look of the pretend tough who fold when they get hurt.

19 minutes ago, Toastrel said:

MTG could probably kick AOC's ass. Then again, she has the look of the pretend tough who fold when they get hurt.

In a fist fight? Probably. In a Jerry Springer-style shouting match, for sure. In our normal definition of a political debate? Not so sure. 

MTG looks like a used catcher's mitt.

4 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

MTG looks like a used catcher's mitt.

That party is a mess.  Bunch of pedo's, their politics suck, the chicks are all haggard. 

3 hours ago, Lloyd said:

Yep. But the really stupid thing would be to debate her at all, and give her the platform.

AOC, as annoying as she can be, talks policy. MTG talks Parler. No point in elevating her to the realm of serious political debates. 

I think AOC is playing the game to get attention to the GND. Any publicity is good publicity. 

And let’s be real; MTG isn’t reading anything. She will use the debate to talk about dead fetuses, stolen elections, cancel culture, and whatever else gets Trumpers panties in a knot lately. 

4 minutes ago, toolg said:

I think AOC is playing the game to get attention to the GND. Any publicity is good publicity. 

And let’s be real; MTG isn’t reading anything. She will use the debate to talk about dead fetuses, stolen elections, cancel culture, and whatever else gets Trumpers panties in a knot lately. 

Most definitely. They're both doing that. Since they're so low on the totem pole in terms of actual power, they have to say and do whatever it takes to keep their name in circulation. That's half the reason why I don't get outraged by MTG in the first place. She's basically a shock jock - outraging me is the whole point, it's what inspires the base. 

But of course MTG's version of attention-seeking is a little too Third Reich for my tastes, so I can't completely "both sides" this. 

1 hour ago, Toastrel said:

MTG could probably kick AOC's ass. Then again, she has the look of the pretend tough who fold when they get hurt.

I dunno, a feisty 31-year-old puerto rican who tended bar in NYC vs a loud mouth 46-year-old CrossFit conspiracy theorist from the south? 

I might put my money on AOC.

Jewish space laser vs climate change is caused by racism ?   This needs to be on MTV Celebrity Death match. 

1 hour ago, toolg said:

I think AOC is playing the game to get attention to the GND. Any publicity is good publicity. 

And let’s be real; MTG isn’t reading anything. She will use the debate to talk about dead fetuses, stolen elections, cancel culture, and whatever else gets Trumpers panties in a knot lately. 

So in other words... she’d win the debate according to the white nationalist party.

9 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

So in other words... she’d win the debate according to the white nationalist party.

Right. MTG wins the Green New Deal debate by failing to talk about the Green New Deal at all.

On 4/22/2021 at 2:24 PM, Talkingbirds said:

Jewish space laser vs climate change is caused by racism ?   This needs to be on MTV Celebrity Death match. 

Policies like this should be the future of the GOP with men like Hawley leading the way:

Incentivizing marriage and offering a tax break? It's obviously not something democrats would ever support, but I'm here for it.

3 minutes ago, Kz! said:

Policies like this should be the future of the GOP with men like Hawley leading the way:

Incentivizing marriage and offering a tax break? It's obviously not something democrats would ever support, but I'm here for it.

Hawley's built up a lot of goodwill in the Senate, so I'm sure everyone will get behind this.

2 hours ago, Kz! said:

Policies like this should be the future of the GOP with men like Hawley leading the way:

Incentivizing marriage and offering a tax break? It's obviously not something democrats would ever support, but I'm here for it.

Social engineering from big government fascist.

2 hours ago, VanHammersly said:

Hawley's built up a lot of goodwill in the Senate, so I'm sure everyone will get behind this.

Vanhammersly is against incentivizing marriage and tax breaks. Not exactly a shocker. 😂

33 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Social engineering from big government fascist.

Gannan prefers his big government to continue to incentivize single parenthood and fatherlessness. *Libertarian achievement unlocked* 🤣🤣🤣

Perfect timing for this article 

GOP worries fiscal conservatism losing its rallying cry 

The initial shift in Republican political priorities away from belt-tightening coincided with the demise of the Tea Party, the dominant force in the 2010 midterm elections, and the rise of now-former President Trump, who presided over an $8 trillion increase in the national debt.

Now, Republicans are having a tough time generating the same outrage over Biden's multitrillion-dollar spending agenda as they did over former President Obama's signature initiatives: the American Relief and Reinvestment Act and the Affordable Care Act, which cost far less than what Biden is proposing on infrastructure.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/550074-gop-worries-fiscal-conservatism-losing-its-rallying-cry

 

32 minutes ago, DaEagles4Life said:

The initial shift in Republican political priorities away from belt-tightening coincided with the demise of the Tea Party, the dominant force in the 2010 midterm elections, and the rise of now-former President Trump, who presided over an $8 trillion increase in the national debt.

Now, Republicans are having a tough time generating the same outrage over Biden's multitrillion-dollar spending agenda as they did over former President Obama's signature initiatives: the American Relief and Reinvestment Act and the Affordable Care Act, which cost far less than what Biden is proposing on infrastructure

13 hours ago, Kz! said:

Vanhammersly is against incentivizing marriage and tax breaks. Not exactly a shocker. 😂

Gannan prefers his big government to continue to incentivize single parenthood and fatherlessness. *Libertarian achievement unlocked* 🤣🤣🤣

Or you know, people could get married or not, have kids or not, without the government trying to persuade them to live their lives how some bureaucrat with a bad haircut sees fit. Hard for a boot licking fascist to understand but trust me, we libertarians get it. 

On 4/22/2021 at 1:01 PM, Toastrel said:

MTG could probably kick AOC's ass. Then again, she has the look of the pretend tough who fold when they get hurt.

AOC would go NYCPRG on green and it would be a quick end. 

9 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Or you know, people could get married or not, have kids or not, without the government trying to persuade them to live their lives how some bureaucrat with a bad haircut sees fit. Hard for a boot licking fascist to understand but trust me, we libertarians get it. 

Right, we should stick to the current system of incentivizing single parenthood. No need to expand, your views are clear.  

14 hours ago, Kz! said:

Vanhammersly is against incentivizing marriage and tax breaks. Not exactly a shocker. 😂

 

Spoken like a man who's never been married.

Also, nothing in my post implied that I'm against this proposal, but if Hawley's kiss of death is associated with it, you can guarantee it's DOA.  Weirdly, people don't rally behind co-workers who support angry mobs hanging them.

1 hour ago, Kz! said:

Right, we should stick to the current system of incentivizing single parenthood. No need to expand, your views are clear.  

Or don't incentivize lifestyles at all. Social engineering of any kind is stupid, only morons like you embrace it. 

I wonder what effect a bill like that could have on domestic violence or violence towards children?  Imagine couples that do not really want to remain married, doing so because financially they felt that had to?

6 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Or don't incentivize lifestyles at all. Social engineering of any kind is stupid, only morons like you embrace it. 

Yeah, I think that ship may have sailed in America a few decades ago, Mr. principled libertarian.  

The government is going to be involved in "social engineering." The question becomes do we want the to incentivize healthy, productive behavior or continue on the path of complete and utter idiocy. You're a hardcore dem at this point, so that's more of a question for the rest of CVON. No need to answer yourself.