All Purpose News and Politics Thread Part IV: The Center Cannot Hold

[numberthirty]

That "business as usual" person served under a president who won both election and re-election and who turned the our nation around from record recession levels to the strong economy that we have today -- meanwhile, you're promoting a candidate who we're not even sure can pay for all of the things he's promising the American public.

Sanders couldn't even win the primary against a "Clinton" and in fact lost to her by millions of votes despite having unprecedented Russian support.

And I wouldn't even be making this comment if you didn't keep attacking candidates like Beto and Kamala -- you are being divisive, even if you won't admit it.

If we are going to go by "Wins"/"Losses". you might as well quit. The logical end of that is that Trump beat both HRC and the support that the President that you mentioned put behind her.

As for "Divisive", come on. Since I've actually said I could vote for Beto even though he looks like an accident waiting to happen, it doesn't amount to much.

[aja_christopher]

If we are going to go by "Wins"/"Losses". you might as well quit..

No -- I might as well "quit" because it's useless to argue with you, especially with regards to anything involving Sanders or Clinton.

The fact remains: you repeatedly attack Democratic candidates you disagree with and leaders like Pelosi -- you're being divisive, even if you won't admit to it.

[numberthirty]

No -- I might as well "quit" because it's useless to argue with you, especially with regards to anything involving Sanders or Clinton.

The fact remains: you repeatedly attack Democratic candidates you disagree with and leaders like Pelosi -- you're being divisive, even if you won't admit to it.

Since folks in this thread pointed out that Sanders said what needed to be said about the treatment of Rep. Omar and Rep. Tlaib even saw that Pelosi needed to be called out(even if she was polite enough not to do so by name), I'm fine with what I said about Pelosi.

If someone wants to look at pointing out the obvious and see "Divisive"?

Their call.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Well that's just awful.

But, not unexpected. I suppose all the service academies will eventually follow suit. That disappoints me.

====================

Here’s What To Look For In The Mueller Report

Attorney General William Barr’s redacted doc may reveal new info about Trump obstruction, Russian election meddling and more.

**********

North Korea Tests New ‘Tactical Guided Weapon,’ State-Run News Agency Says

The reported launch comes after Kim Jong Un and President Donald Trump failed to reach a deal earlier this year at their second international summit. So, Rocketman is at it again. Can't wait to hear how this affects Trump's love affair with Un.

**********

Ted Cruz Gets Burned For Tasteless Disney Princess Tweet About Notre Dame

The GOP senator’s apparent attempt at humor didn’t go over so well. Knuckleheaded Republicans like Cruz need to just SHUT. THE. ****. UP. Every time these insensitive asshats open their mouths, stupid **** spills out. Meanwhile, speaking of houses of worship....

**********

Black Churches Burned By Arson See Donations Surge After Notre Dame Fire

“It’s all working out for the greater good,” said a pastor at a Louisiana regional Baptist organization that includes three churches burned in alleged hate crimes. Meanwhile, STILL not so much as ONE word on this tragedy on OUR soil from Trump. I guess that razed BLACK churches don't rate to him since he's a bigot and doesn't want to dump on the white supremacist shitstain who torched them.

**********

House Oversight Committee Asks Stephen Miller To Testify On Immigration Plan

Rep. Elijah Cummings, the committee chairman, invited the senior White House adviser to testify about the Trump administration’s border policies. It would be interesting to see Kid Jackboot grilled on his racist policies.

[worstblogever]

So again, there's a rumor that he was making a comeback?

YES. You could Google "Aaron Schock comeback" and discover that, if you're inclined.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/prosecu...-aaron-schock/

[numberthirty]

YES. You could Google "Aaron Schock comeback" and discover that, if you're inclined.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/prosecu...-aaron-schock/

Uh, No. Jeez...

Since Mets posted this exact same nonsense, I'll just quote that sequence and then wrap up.

This was covered a bit after the charges against him were dropped.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/prosecu...-aaron-schock/

Someone being dumb enough to think they could beat Mike Tyson back in the day is not even remotely the same thing as someone starting a rumor that said person actually could.

"Apple"/"Orange"

In summary...

Some fool being so deluded that they are not "Ruling Out" a future run does not constitute a "Rumor Of His Comeback..."

It is just some fool trippin' out loud. Not a rumor.

[worstblogever]

Seems that some folks only acknowledge how rumors work when they're decades-old ridiculousness about the Clintons.

But let's not bury the lede and miss the point altogether. Aaron Schock, Anti-Gay Republican, is caught making out with a dude and trying to shove his hand down the crotch of his pants in public.

Full stop.

[worstblogever]

It was on this date in 2015 that “Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day” had a profile of Kim Lehman, a former Republican National Committee member who in 2010, called for Americans to rise up in armed revolt as courts began to uphold same sex marriages. She would later also start ranting on social media about how President Obama was secretly Muslim, and when Politico reported her claims, and debunked them, she accused the media of participating in a cover up of Obama’s true faith and allegiances. The Republican Party then tried forcing her to resign prior to their 2012 National Convention, but she refused, sticking around to help write the party platform, and then bragging to the media about how she personally had made sure it included mentions of the dreaded Agenda 21, thus confirming she was a nutty conspiracy theorist, in case there was still any doubt that she deserved to be shown the door.



In 2016, 2017, as well as 2018, “Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day” presented its original profile of the U.S. House Representative from Pennsylvania’s 12th Congressional District, Tom Marino. During the Bush administration back in 2007, Marino was elevated to be the U.S. Attorney in Pennsylvania’s Middle District, but he resigned while under investigation for ethics violations. After that, Marino spent three years working as a six-figure lawyer at a private practice, and then like many of the chuckleheads that we’ve covered at CSGOPOTD he was elected in 2010, in the Tea Party Wave. Maybe someone should have paid attention to the fact that Tom Marino’s as dumb as a post when it comes to a great many things. For starters, geography. You see, back in his first 90 days in office, Marino decided to criticize the Obama administration’s strategy in Libya, asking, “Is there a plan? Is the mission to take Gadhafi out? Where does it stop? Do we go into Africa next? " which indicates he’s not aware that Libya is actually in Africa. What made that statement even more sad for our country was that Marino was placed by Republican House leadership on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, which is a great place for a guy who doesn’t know where the foreign countries actually are. Where Tom Marino really stands out, however, is how much he loved, LOVED to talk about impeachment. However, he doesn’t seem to understand how that works, or who it is that can be impeached. The first instance where he did so was back in February of 2013, when he was talking about impeaching Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, for… reasons. (Where he’s a bit off…Senators don’t get impeached. They can be expelled, however, by a 2/3 majority vote.) A few months later, in July 2013, after President Obama announced he wanted to delay the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (which supposedly the GOP wanted so they could try to repeal it before it took effect), Marino again seemed to stumble with the concept of how impeachment worked, talking about indicting Obama for his decision, comparing it to Watergate. (Again, Rep. Marino is not just a lawyer, but a former U.S. Attorney, albeit a Bush administration appointee, who doesn’t seem to know that that’s in no way a crime, let alone an impeachable offense.) Marino called for the impeachment of both President Obama AND Attorney General Eric Holder in February of 2015, insisting that HE wasn’t talking about impeachment, he just kept hearing questions about it at town halls. He then proceeded to talk about how both men were “approaching impeachment” because they were not “enforcing the laws”. He gave no specific laws, that he would have a case for impeachment hearings, of course. Mind you, Marino imagined a lot of wrongdoing by Obama and Holder, though, to be sure, like when in January of 2015, when he accused them of using the Justice Department to illegally fund “activist groups”. And he of course, provided no evidence of that.

But, in our introduction to Tom Marino, we are proud to include his most partisan and cowardly moment in his three terms in office, from August of 2014. Republicans were in lockstep, campaigning hard on two issues in the mid-term elections… fears about Ebola Virus, and of course, anti-immigrant sentiment. And as debate in the House over immigration reform and how to help migrant children from South America being detained was ongoing, Tom Marino took to the House floor, and laid the blame solely on… Nancy Pelosi? It seems that in the warped mind of Marino, it was not Republicans in the House and Senate voting against immigration reform at every opportunity who were responsible for the DREAM Act not passing, nor was it House Speaker John Boehner blocking later versions of the bill from coming up for a vote for almost two years. By not getting her entire caucus to work together to pass EVERYTHING they wanted, including that legislation, she was at fault. Well, unfortunately for Rep. Marino… Nancy Pelosi was in the room, and she went right after him for invoking her name in such a manner, yelling at him and calling him a liar, as he retreated from her up the aisle like a coward. After the incident, Pelosi’s aides reported she received an apology, Marino of course denied it, and said Pelosi is “a prime example of why we need term limits”.

When last we left Rep. Tom Marino, he was sucking up to the Trump administration, hoping for an appointment to be the drug czar for it, and combat the opioid crisis. There’s just one problem with that… he withdrew his name from the running in shame after an investigation by The Washington Post and "60 Minutes” detailed his years-long efforts to pass a law that critics say allowed the drug industry to profit off people addicted to opioids. Can you believe that? Donald Trump wanted to nominate someone to a post who was revealed to have a financial interest in not just failing to do the job, but a track record of profiting by working against the mission statement of that position? THE HELL YOU SAY. (Also, the latest ethical lapse from Marino).

So instead, Tom Marino ran for a fifth term in Congress in 2018. He won the election with 66% of the vote, mostly because of the partisan lean gave a +11 Republican advantage.

However, about two and a half weeks into the new session of Congress, Tom Marino resigned to go take a job in the public sector, likely enraged at the prospect of operating as a member of the minority party in the House.

We here at CSGOPOTD would like to wish Marino our heartiest of “GOOD RIDDANCE!” greetings.

[KOSLOX]

Attention Black People: It’s Your Fault Should Donald Trump Get Re-Elected in 2020

Narrator: It's really not. The writer is being facetious.

[Kirby101]

Attention Black People: It’s Your Fault Should Donald Trump Get Re-Elected in 2020

Narrator: It's really not. The writer is being facetious.

It's white men, it's always white men.





The only group that really supported Trump. (white women also have something to answer for, especially how anti-woman Trump is)
That 30% difference is embarrassing.

[KOSLOX]

It's white men, it's always white men.





The only group that really supported Trump. (white women also have something to answer for, especially how anti-woman Trump is)
That 30% difference is embarrassing.

Oh, for sure. I mostly just posted that because there is almost always a narrative that develops to account for some progressive defeat that lays the blame on black people either not voting in our* best interests, or being ill informed.

Nah, we understand the game just fine. We are the most reliably left voting block.

*for some reason 22 year old white guys seem to be so much more keyed in to the problems affecting us.

[worstblogever]

*for some reason 22 year old white guys seem to be so much more keyed in to the problems affecting us.

I honestly believe it's because of the age demographics for Fox News viewership. Old people watch Fox News, and support Trump. Young people see the Republican Party demonizing the LGBTQ Community, Trump disparaging women, and seeing Trump being openly racist, and aren't down with it because they won't play the "it was okay when I grew up" theory, because they just grew up.

His approval rating with people under age twenty-five is only 33%.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

It's white men, it's always white men.





The only group that really supported Trump. (white women also have something to answer for, especially how anti-woman Trump is)
That 30% difference is embarrassing.

This is just my opinion, but I attributed that to a couple of factors:

A) White women were just as invested on keeping minorities down on the societal ladder as white men, thus their support for Trump, despite his rampant misogyny, they just weren't as out in the open about it
B) Their general dislike of Hillary and blatant refusal to vote for her, regardless of her gender. I distinctly remember seeing quotes that said, in so many words, that women refused to "vote with their (body part)"

[ed2962]

This is just my opinion, but I attributed that to a couple of factors:

A) White women were just as invested on keeping minorities down on the societal ladder as white men, thus their support for Trump, despite his rampant misogyny, they just weren't as out in the open about it
B) Their general dislike of Hillary and blatant refusal to vote for her, regardless of her gender. I distinctly remember seeing quotes that said, in so many words, that women refused to "vote with their (body part)"

I mostly agree...

[Kirby101]

This is just my opinion, but I attributed that to a couple of factors:

A) White women were just as invested on keeping minorities down on the societal ladder as white men, thus their support for Trump, despite his rampant misogyny, they just weren't as out in the open about it
B) Their general dislike of Hillary and blatant refusal to vote for her, regardless of her gender. I distinctly remember seeing quotes that said, in so many words, that women refused to "vote with their (body part)"

But even then it was almost 50/50. And i am very sure it is the older white women who voted for Trump. The ones that birth control and abortion don't matter. The ones screaming at black and brown people on their block.

I worked the Census in 2010, Older white woman were the angriest people I ran into.