All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Tendrin]

If the Republicans, as the minority party in this country, don't ever have to compromise to pass whatever the hell they want, why should the Democrats?

... I mean, there's some pretty big and obvious structural and demographic reasons.

[JCAll]

If the Republicans, as the minority party in this country, don't ever have to compromise to pass whatever the hell they want, why should the Democrats?

Because the GOP's favorite things to do is Nothing, and you only need to control a part of the government to grind everything to a screeching halt. The Dems have to control everything to do anything.

[worstblogever]

Because the GOP's favorite things to do is Nothing, and you only need to control a part of the government to grind everything to a screeching halt. The Dems have to control everything to do anything.

It's also because they've spent 40 years without any idea how to govern when they get control, save for trying to get more control. They can't stand to be the minority party, but honestly, digging in and keeping the status quo is all they're good at anymore.

Problem for them is the public hate the status quo now.

[worstblogever]

On this date in 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, as well as 2019, “Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day published profiles about Missouri State Senator Paul Wieland, a front-line soldier in the GOP’s “War on Women” that since taking office in 2010, has gone out of his way to try and find ways to undermine the Affordable Care Act, particularly that medical insurance policies can often cover the cost of contraceptive coverage for women. He personally filed a lawsuit against the federal government in 2013 to make sure that he, a good Catholic, wasn’t paying for any potential contraceptives for his daughter on his insurance plan, referring to birth control pills as “abortion inducing drugs” that were “intrinsically evil”. The courts dismissed Wieland’s case as frivolous, not realizing his stunt would do little to deter him. After the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby ruling, Wieland immediately filed another lawsuit against the government, which also got laughed out of court. Paul Wieland also files dimwitted legislation to prevent the implantation of Sharia Law in Missouri, or to prevent the sinister United Nations Agenda 21 treaty. Heck, he’s even voted for efforts to nullify federal firearms laws, drug test welfare recipients, stricter Voter ID laws (to combat the statistically non-existent problem of in-person voter fraud), ag-gag laws to prevent any oversight against livestock farmers, and voted for SJR 39, a special little bill to prohibit any state employee from being penalized for declining to participate in same-sex marriage ceremonies.

In November of 2015, after a series of highly publicized racist incidents at the University of Missouri that school president Tim Wolfe refused to act upon, and in some instances, Wolfe himself dug the hole deeper by chastising protesters, the Missouri Tigers Football Team threatened to boycott games unless Wolfe was fired. Wolfe resigned, and it seemed like that was that. Except, it wasn’t for Paul Wieland, who just couldn’t stomach any kind of improvement in race relations, apparently, on those terms, and needed to go after someone as retribution, choosing Gary Pinkel, the now former head coach of the team, who approved of his players’ choice. Here’s where it gets more grotesque… Coach Pinkel had resigned to seek treatment for lymphoma, and the university had bought out the remainder of his contract so he could do so and for his fifteen year loyal tenure in turning around the football team, they also offered him a job as an ambassador of the athletic department. Well, in true “smaller government” interests, Wieland began to publicly criticize the school for these moves, apparently finding less of a problem with a school president who created an environment of permissive racism to a beloved coach for supporting his players through a hard decision.

Paul Wieland was pursuing a second term in office in 2018, even with a Blue Wave crashing upon the GOP across the country, and while Missouri Republicans were also scrambling and in damage control over the scandal surrounding Gov. Eric Greitens, Wieland still managed to get re-elected with 58% of the vote. Barring any scandals that would force his resignation, he does not face term limits until his new term is up in 2022. He is currently doing whatever he can to sabotage health insurance for Missourians during his lame duck years.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

How COVID-19 Overwhelmed The American State

Decades of poor policy choices and neglect of government agencies have left the U.S. ill-equipped to handle this crisis.

**********

Lawmakers Call Out The Higher Risk To People Of Color As States Reopen

“Once they saw who was dying, it was like, ‘We don’t have a problem here,’” Rep. Karen Bass said of the Trump administration push to open businesses amid COVID-19. Why am I not surprised? When you have a flaming bigot in the Oval Office, no one should be surprised he's willing to let people of color die for the sake of the economy.

**********

Stunned Fox News Host Neil Cavuto Warns: Hydroxy *********** ‘Will Kill You’

“I cannot stress this enough,” warned Neil Cavuto about the anti-malaria drug the president has touted as a coronavirus cure, “this will kill you.” Golly, Neil! Ya think? Meanwhile....

Pelosi Concerned ‘Morbidly Obese’ Trump Taking Unproven Drug To Ward Off Coronavirus

Can a mod explain to us why hydroxy*********** looks like this?

**********

Trump Threatens Permanent Freeze Of World Health Organization Funding

The president also said he would reconsider membership of the United States in the body. Not to worry, after Trump is voted out in November, that funding will be restored.

**********

Trump ‘Will Lie,’ People Will Die: Republican Lincoln Project Releases Ominous New Video

Latest ad launched as U.S. surpasses 90,000 deaths from COVID-19. Can't put it any plainer.

**********

Priest Goes Viral After Using Squirt Gun Full Of Holy Water To Bless Churchgoers

Father Tim Pelc’s creative solution to social distancing has inspired memes and a Photoshop battle his Michigan church called “pretty clever.” I got a chuckle out of that.

[Mister Mets]

There's a rather depressing story about that. After the 2018 election, I was waiting for a bus and a young black woman walked up, also waiting.
I was wearing a button that said I voted. She said, "I turned 18 this year and this is the first time I was eligible to vote. I'm so hyped about that."
We talked for a bit, she talked about how great Obama was, and I eventually said, "I voted Democrat and I'm assuming you did too".
She said, "Oh, I didn't vote".
I said, "Oh, but you were saying how great it was that you're 18 and this was the first time you could vote".
She said, "Yeah, but there was nobody to vote for. There was no Obama running".
I did not say this but I was thinking, "So, because there is not specifically an Obama running, whatever you mean by that, you'd rather let everything he did and stood for be flushed down the toilet rather than get out and vote for people who will try to maintain and continue the things he did and stood for?"

It's anecdotal but I think it illustrates that voters need to feel there is a reason to get out and vote and I'm not sure the issues necessarily get a lot of people to vote as much as who the person running is. I personally think Biden should choose Michelle Obama as his VP or someone who is black and possibly a black woman and I say that because I do believe there are countless people who vote based on who they like more or relate to more rather than policies.

The Democrats also need to really push for at home ballots and against voter suppression.

This isn't exclusive in Obama, but there seem to two conflicting messages top candidates have.

Candidates will generally emphasize what makes them special, to get swing voters to agree that they are uniquely awesome, and deserving of votes. But this conflicts with the message that it's important to get united control.

Even when Democrats have had majorities in both houses of Congress and the Presidency they've still failed to get their major legislation passed, because they fold way too easily to Republican pressure and keep trying to compromise even though the GOP has no intention of doing that. The closest that the Democrats ever came to universal health care was passing a watered down piece of legislation that was originally proposed by Nixon, and even then faced such a heavy backlash for it that they pretty much weren't able to do anything for the rest of Obama's administration, meaning that immigration reform, criminal justice reform, ending the war on terror, etc. all went on the back burner indefinitely. Besides, at least Obama and Clinton pretended like they were going to change how things were done when they were on the campaign trail, the only thing Biden has promised is that he'd veto any Medicare for all bill that came before him, and I have no reason to think that he's lying about that to try and sway swing voters.

Besides, calling out moderate Democrats for opposing "radical" reforms is discrediting them only in the sense that it discredits centrism as an idea. These candidates are only considered more electable in the first place because they have more appeal to conservative voters who are naturally opposed to any hint of progressivism, indeed if they were to turn into social justice crusaders upon reaching office, that would rightfully be considered a betrayal of the promises they made to get elected in the first place. The absolute best case scenario with Biden is that he ends up with majorities in both houses and manages to roll back most of Trump's legislation and resets America back to how it was in 2016 more or less, but there's no chance he'd try to push the envelope any more. If the Republicans manage to retain control of either chamber, there's no chance he can even do that. This isn't slander, this is simply what being a moderate in America means these days, and what all of these Biden supporters are voting for.

One of the reasons we never got Nixon or Carter's universal health care proposal is that people on the left like Ted Kennedy fought against it.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...th-care-reform
https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallp...ealth-overhaul

As health care costs went up, it became more difficult to implement universal health care since it would be more expensive for the government.

[Mister Mets]

I think I wouuld prefer if you wouldn't hand-wave away the fact that your party has casually embraced white nationalism so it's the norm with such a transparent example of "whataboutism", Mets.

Also, it's very telling that you would "both sides" an argument where one side is white nationalists and the other are atheists or socialists.

1. Democratic socialists. i.e. the European model. i.e. Some of them are believing the rich should pay more taxes to equal the burden upon the state like say... THE EISENHOWER model from 60 years ago.
2. Atheists. i.e. The group that even the pope acknowledges can get into Heaven these days. i.e. People who believe in science and wow could we use more of those during a pandemic. Maybe you should read up on some secular humanism, which is when people do the right thing because they believe it's right rather than an invisible sky wizard tells them to.


Now, those are the "far left" parts of the Democratic Party that you're using as boogeymen, and I can tell you what they're really about, and why their beliefs are maligned by wankers on the right.

I'm hoping you're not about to try and explain to the forum how the White Nationalists and conspiracy theorists in the GOP are really just misunderstood, in turn.

Any Republican with any real moral center already left the party, rather than, instead, inexplicably, roll up their sleeves to dig in and do that.

You criticize me for comparing white supremacists to atheist socialists, and left out the portion of my post where I explicitly said that the latter is a morally superior position, albeit an unpopular one. We would not expect Biden or any of his surrogates to say in any speech or interview "you should read up on some secular humanism, which is when people do the right thing because they believe it's right rather than an invisible sky wizard tells them to."

As for white nationalists, I think you greatly exaggerate their role.

I said "rarely" not "never" -- yet again you dodge what was stated directly by misrepresenting my argument.

And aren't you the same individual who claimed that the "left" wants "open borders" because a small number of them promoted the idea in public?

Yet that same logic somehow doesn't apply to the hundreds of right-wing white nationalists repeatedly marching in the streets?

Much less those Republicans elected to the White House and continue to support in Congress?

I can easily argue in "good faith" that your bias overwhelms any real objective discussion to be had with regards to Republicans and Democrats.

Just as I can easily argue that there is no real comparison to be made with regards to extremist "political correctness" on the "left" vs extremist racism, bigotry, homophobia and violence on the "right" -- it took you nearly fifteen pages to even address the fact that your party engages in voter suppression so I'm far beyond the point of expecting objectivity any time I engage in a discussion with you on such issues.

It's also easy to point out that "political correctness" is a direct response to said racism, bigotry, homophobia and violence in our society so if that's your real concern then you should address it at the source -- apparently you don't seem to understand that the lack thereof is exactly why "politically incorrect" (i.e. racist, sexist, and bigoted) individuals like Trump continue to flourish in your party.

Or maybe you do and don't really care -- either way the results are the same.

You said "rarely if ever." That suggests that ever is a possibility.

In a country of hundreds of millions, there are going to be some idiots, so if hundreds of morons are marching, we don't usually need a change in policy.

As for the suggestion that Republican support for white nationalism is as common as Democratic support for open borders, there are quite a few differences.

In a country of 325,000,000+ plus, there will be some idiots, so I don't think we need to make major policy changes due to a few hundred idiots marching.

Open borders does also have significantly more mainstream support than white nationalism. Bryan Caplan is invited to mainstream media outlets to talk about his graphic novel Open Borders. An opinion columnist for the New York Times writes a column about how there's nothing wrong with open borders.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/16/o...migration.html

The New York Times has not recently published any opinion columnist explicitly saying that there's nothing wrong with white nationalism. A counterargument is that open borders is a morally superior position to white nationalism, but that's a justification for dissimilar treatment, rather that the responses from the media and politicians are similar.

It does seem that the most important immigration question is one that Democrats are unwilling to answer: what should the limits on legal immigration be?

With political correctness, it seems we should be able to simultaneously come up with solutions to bigotry while also being clear about the excesses. The contrary view does get to the perspective that what is important is to be on the right side, rather than to be correct on the specifics of a case. The response to that would be if you're not correct on the specifics of a case, how would anyone figure out you're on the right side?

[Kirby101]

One of the reasons we never got Nixon or Carter's universal health care proposal is that people on the left like Ted Kennedy fought against it.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...th-care-reform
https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallp...ealth-overhaul

As health care costs went up, it became more difficult to implement universal health care since it would be more expensive for the government.

Neither of your links tell the real reason Kennedy opposed those bills. And you see no irony that Health care is becoming unaffordable to so many Americans that to say the one way to bring down costs can't be done. So what, the GOP plan of business as usual, except to kill any reform that helps people?

[worstblogever]

You criticize me for comparing white supremacists to atheist socialists, and left out the portion of my post

I leave out non-relevant parts because we don't have time for gish-gallops.

I left out that part because it did not negate the false equivalency you were attempting.

Also, you're still not acknowledging what the Republican Party is becoming.

As for white nationalists, I think you greatly exaggerate their role.

Trump. Pence. Stephen Miller. Steve King. Steve Bannon. Steve Fitzgerald. (This is just the Steves.) Sebastian & Katherine Gorka. Matt Gaetz. Corey Stewart. Jeff Sessions. John Fitzgerald. Seth Grossman. Arthur Jones. Paul Nehlen. Russell Walker. Edwin Duterte. Augustus Invictus. Taylor Rose. Russell Pearce. John Ritzheimer. Warren Love. Dennis Baxley. Kyle Biedermann. Mike Pitts. Laura Loomer. Omar Navarro. Bill Chumley. Adam Hasner. Paul Gosar. Andy Biggs. Matthew Lusk. Jim Lucas. Werner Horn. Bobby Jeffries. Daryl Metcalfe. Phil Jensen. Lou Barletta. Ken Cuccinelli. Kris Kobach. Doug Ducey. Brian Kemp. Ron DeSantis.

That's... a brief smattering. I could go on.

If you need any more proof, ask yourself why the NDAA was altered by Senate Republicans to omit "white nationalism" as a reason to not admit people to the military. Or why the Proud Boys can walk in to campaign events by Republicans as welcome guests.

They are tacitly accepting the worst of their party. Kind of like someone who's bending over backwards to pretend like it's not happening I'm thinking of right now.

[aja_christopher]

As for white nationalists, I think you greatly exaggerate their role.

I'm sure you do since you rarely address them nor their role within the Republican party.

Not going to spend another fifteen pages trying to get you to admit the obvious -- I have better things to do with my time.

Let's just acknowledge that we're at an impasse and the only solution I see at this point is to both prosecute the criminal members of your party and vote them out of offfice.

"It does seem that the most important immigration question is one that Democrats are unwilling to answer: what should the limits on legal immigration be?"

Even more projection -- accuse people of asking loading quetions while constantly doing it to others.

It's not the "most important immigration question at all" -- it's a talking point you repeatedly use to deflect from your party's criminal behavior and moral, ethical, humanitarian, and economic failings.

Enough of the hypotheticals -- Republicans are in power now so let's watch how it plays out.

[InformationGeek]

Not surprising. He's just that petty.

According to a report, Trump will not be unveiling his predecessor Barack Obama’s official White House portrait

Also, again, Trump does not care about the military at all.

Huh: “thousands of [National Guard] members who first deployed in late March will find themselves with only 89 days of duty credit, one short of the 90-day threshold for qualifying for early retirement and education benefits under the Post-9/11 GI bill.”

[The Cool Thatguy]

I leave out non-relevant parts because we don't have time for gish-gallops.

I left out that part because it did not negate the false equivalency you were attempting.

Also, you're still not acknowledging what the Republican Party is becoming.

Is it really 'becoming' when Trump started his presidential campaign with racism, and was elected all the same?

Trump. Pence. Stephen Miller. Steve King. Steve Bannon. Steve Fitzgerald. (This is just the Steves.).

I never knew how racist Steves could be!

[worstblogever]

Is it really 'becoming' when Trump started his presidential campaign with racism, and was elected all the same?

That's the only debate left. If the transformation is still under way, or fully complete.

I think we'll know when the RNC hits Charlotte for sure, if there's any doubt left.

[Tami]

Some light reading

Trump is making Republicans the party of white nationalism. Does anybody in the GOP care?

'Tipping point': In shift, Florida Republicans blame shootings on white nationalism

Conservatives Have a White-Nationalism Problem

Why White Nationalists Are Turning on Trump Republicans

Stephen Miller is no outlier. White supremacy rules the Republican party

After Stephen Miller's white nationalist views outed, Latinos ask, 'where's the GOP outrage?'

Senate removes phrase 'white nationalist' from measure intended to screen military enlistees

The GOP Is America’s Party of White Nationalism

A GOP candidate called himself ‘a proud white nationalist.’ He’s now dropped out.

Column: Tea party white nationalist corruption saves the president from removal

Republicans Want to Make White Grievance Genteel Again

The Republican Party Was Founded to Fight White Supremacy. Here’s How It’s Embraced It Now.

These 7 Prominent Conservatives Have Nothing in Common With White Supremacists, Nothing at All

Still looking for articles that take more of an opposing position. Still looking.

[jetengine]

Why does anyone bother to debate Mets. His party is full of violent white nationalists and hes fine with it. He can dress it up with enough 10 dollar words as he likes but the core truth of it is he doesnt care.