Avatar: Here's to the late, great Steve Dillon. Best. Punisher. Artist. EVER!
Yeah, but that's absent insinuation of scandal, WPP.
It was on this day in both 2015 as well as 2016 that “Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day” profiled Dave Agema, a former Michigan state legislator and former member of the Republican National Committee from Michigan who served three terms before being done in by term limits, and since becoming a member of the RNC, has only narrowly avoided having his resignation forced upon him after a series of controversial and bigoted remarks over the past several years. Among Agema’s worst quotes that we covered in that first profile were comparing gays to alcoholics and claiming that they only want free health care because they're all dying of AIDS, the time he questioned whether anyone of the Muslim faith have ever made positive contributions to America, and the time he circulated the inaccurate and mathematically-challenged claim that President Obama is "50% white, 43.75% Arabic and 6,26% black." There was also the time when Agema posted what he called a “very enlightening” article from a white supremacist magazine on African-American crime about how by their nature, people of that race are “violent and prone to violence”. Needless to say, he comes off as quite the hate-monger. Agema decided to not run for re-election to the Republican National Committee after helping write the most extreme party platform in the history of the GOP at the 2016 RNC, meaning his career has likely come to an end.
One year ago today, "Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day" published its first profile of Jim Wheeler, a three-term member of the Nevada State Assembly who represents District 39, and was first elected in 2012. Wheeler’s district leans just a wee bit conservative, to say the least, so much so that no Democrat to this point has bothered running to challenge him for his seat. It was back during his first term in August of 2013 at a town hall where Wheeler was touting his dedication to catering to the whims of his constituents, and someone asked him if he would vote for slavery if they wanted… and Wheeler said YES HE WOULD. (This is one of those easy trick questions you should probably still say “HELL NO!” to, Jim.) And, like many a Republican that we’ve covered at CSGOPOTD caught literally on tape making racist statements, Jim Wheeler insisted he was just being “taken out of context”. Well, in context, his remarks were revolting enough that he earned the criticism of even higher-ranking Republicans like Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval and Sen. Dean Heller. It was shocking enough that he even made the Colbert Report for it, where Stephen Colbert suggested that his constituents should all hypothetically suggest Wheeler punch himself in the balls, and he’d do it, because that’s how he works.
That controversy barely had time to die down, however, before Wheeler again made the papers, this time on allegations that his financial disclosure forms prior to running for office were inaccurate, and failed to mention a tax lien he owed in Michigan, as well as a challenge to his residency within his district. To the former, Wheeler plead ignorance to the rules, and then amended the report. For a while, Wheeler was also blogging his deep thoughts on politics, and you can kind of see how he’s deeply partisan when he discusses gun control and those who support it like this:
Without irony, ladies and gentlemen. But how about some hypocrisy for you? Back in May of 2013, Wheeler voted against Nevada’s SB 139, which would have made crimes committed based on the victim’s gender identity or expression a felony. Okay, so apparently Jim doesn’t like the idea of an assault on a transgendered citizen simply for that reason being a hate crime. But guess what he DOES qualify for a hate crime? When people attack police dogs, THAT is a hate crime. Think about that… he’s prioritizes police dogs over actual people. Wheeler also voted against AB 284, which would allow victims of domestic violence to terminate rental agreements and not fear any financial repercussions of fleeing their abusers. Apparently, the inconvenience of a landlord having to find a new tenant should take priority over a spouse being beaten by their husband or wife. At least in Jim Wheeler’s twisted mind.
Our latest check-in with Wheeler’s voting record shows that he voted against the police being required to wear body cameras, and that he voted against automatic voter registration for anyone getting a driver’s license, because he hates the idea of democracy (because when more people vote, Republicans lose).
And, apparently the Nevada GOP have no interest in ever winning the minority vote again, because over the summer, they chose Jim Wheeler, a man who once stated his willingness to vote for slavery if that’s what his constituents wanted, to be the Minority Leader of the Nevada Assembly. We’re sure that decision will in no way harm the electoral chances of Nevada Republicans going into a blue wave election in 2018. Not one bit, right? (LOL. They’re so screwed.)
X-Books Forum Mutant Tracker/FAQ- Updated every Tuesday.
It's gonna be hard for the GOP to find somebody as handsome and likable as Gowdy in this media-driven age.
Yeah, I've seen a handful of articles about Gowdy quitting the committee, but the explanation given is that he's had less time for multiple committees since becoming chairman of the House Oversight Committee.
There are some generic comments on twitter asking about suspicious stuff, but I haven't found anyone with a Washington Post/ Wall Street Journal byline saying it's about an incoming probe.
Sincerely,
Thomas Mets
I know you might be just saying this for effect but I did want to say that I (personally) don't think conservatives are inherently "evil" in the traditional sense -- I don't think Mets (or Mitt Romney or George Will) are intentionally malicious towards others, I just think that we all have a different perspective on things based on our respective backgrounds and social circles.
I think it could easily be argued that conservatives like Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfield, Joe Arpaio (etc) could be labeled as "evil" based on their actions, but I also think the article puts it best when it calls many of them "willfully ignorant" of how the "conservative" party of today (the Republicans) is helping to erode the democratic principles of our country via gerrymandering, voting purges, and by systemically denying -- or attempting to deny -- individual American citizens -- black, Latino, gay, Muslim, female, etc -- their rights to be treated as equals in our society.
That doesn't mean I think everyone should agree with that viewpoint, as I also think that it's fair to hold individual conservatives who support (i.e. vote for) said party as responsible for the actions of their party as a whole, but (in my opinion) it's a little dangerous for either side to point at the other and label them as "evil" especially given the fact that "conservative" evangelicals have been practicing that game for centuries now, whether it was to burn witches, attack Muslims, "convert" homosexuals, or justify slavery.
A lot of political discourse has become so polarized that it's easy to lose sight of the fact that most people are just looking out for themselves and their immediate family -- granted that doesn't excuse harming others in the process, but I don't think that justifies calling conservatives "evil" just because they have a different ideology.
That said, if they are voting people like Cheney, Arpaio, and Trump into office, I also think that it's fair to judge them by their works.
Last edited by aja_christopher; 01-14-2018 at 06:54 AM.
Trump was right about his words playing well with some of his "base".
------
"WHITE NATIONALISTS PRAISE TRUMP FOR ‘SHITHOLE’ COMMENT: ‘IT’S OBVIOUSLY ALL ABOUT RACE’"
"President Donald Trump’s already infamous “shithole” comment is among several remarks the commander in chief has made that have energized white supremacists, rights groups fear.
Trump made the comment Thursday in the context of asking why America should accept more immigrants from Haiti and Africa—instead of places like Norway—while discussing a bipartisan immigration deal with lawmakers. The remark reinvigorated accusations that Trump is a racist, and it was embraced online by white supremacists David Duke and Richard Spencer.
[Richard] Spencer, who in an apparent nod to the president’s remarks put the Norwegian flag in his Twitter handle, complimented Trump for focusing on immigration from a race-based perspective.
“It’s obviously all about race, and to their credit, liberals point out the obvious,” Spencer wrote on Twitter, referring to the blowback to the president’s remark.
On Twitter, [David] Duke called what Trump said “perfect,” adding that the president “spoke Blunt, hard truth that makes PERFECT TRUTH! So, Mr. Prez -ACT ON IT - DON'T CAVE IN!”
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-shitho...-praise-779958
Watching Joy Reid, she has three on her panel including a Trump spokesperson talking about immigration. Joy let that person speak first, and things got crazy. Favorite comment from Joy, 'This is not Fox News, we don't deal with conspiracy theories, we deal with facts.'
Original join date: 11/23/2004
Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.
American Politics is dominated by the idea of a 2-party system. yet there seems to be a backlash forming against it.
If America eliminated the 2-party system in favor the system I'll outline below, could it work?
Alternative:
Imagine an alternate version of American Politics where all political parties are illegal. Instead, candidates run on their own for public office.
In the case of Presidential Elections, there are still two voting periods. However, the first one is designed to eliminate the majority of candidates, leaving only the top 2. The 2 who received the most votes will then have time to campaign until another vote is held to choose which of the two wins.
As for Congress, there is no majority or minority. At the start of each Congressional session, the members will vote to elect A House Speaker and a Senate Leader. Members of Congress can form alliances based on shared interests or in opposition to the actions of others.
Original join date: 11/23/2004
Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.
I was gonna say. I think it'd just end up a 2 party system again.
Though, it could be interesting to get rid of the D or R next to a name and just run on policy. Maybe with shorter terms, so you can vote someone out sooner if they don't come through on their campaign promises.
Getting rid of those party designations would require voters to actually read up on candidates, and vote accordingly, instead of checking the box marked D or R.