Marjorie Taylor Greene: House votes to remove her from committees | khou.com

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  sister-mary-agnes-ample-bottom  •  one month ago  •  97 comments

By:   khou. com

Marjorie Taylor Greene: House votes to remove her from committees | khou.com
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene said Thursday she regrets some "words of the past," but did not explicitly apologize for her racist and violent rhetoric.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



At least 11 Republicans joined Democrats in removing Greene, who has been criticized for past racist comments and embracing conspiracy theories.

WASHINGTON —

BREAKING NEWS


The House of Representatives has voted 230-199 to remove Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., from both the House Budget Committee and the House Education and Labor Committee. At least 11 Republicans joined Democrats in favor of removing Greene.

Check back for updates on this breaking story.

PREVIOUS STORY:

Congress was debating Thursday whether to strip far-right Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of her committee assignments over past comments Greene made that were racist, embraced conspiracy theories or endorsed violence directed at Democratic officeholders.

A Democratic measure removing Greene from her posts was all but certain to pass after it was brought to the House floor for a vote, forcing Republicans to go on the record either supporting or rebuking Greene.

Rather than defending Greene's remarks, Republicans complained bitterly about the precedent that the Democratic effort would set by meddling in the affairs of a rival party.

"Never before in the history of this House has the majority abused its power in this way," lamented House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., who also condemned Greene's comments and said they "do not represent the views of my party."

"You'll regret this, and you may regret this sooner than you think," he added.

Earlier, Greene said during a floor speech that she regrets some "words of the past," but she did not explicitly apologize for her racist and violent rhetoric.

Alternating between contrition and defiance, the newly elected Georgia Republican asserted that she was "a very regular American" who posted conspiracy theories from QAnon and other sources before she began campaigning for Congress, but said those views did not represent her own.

She also looked to shift blame while falsely equating her own endorsement of violence against Democrats with those in the party who supported racial justice protests over the summer, which sometimes turned violent.

She pronounced the media "just as guilty as QAnon of presenting truth and lies." QAnon's core theory embraces the lie that Democrats are tied to a global sex trafficking ring that also involves Satanism and cannibalism.

House Rules Committee Chairman Jim McGovern noted that while Greene expressed regret over her remarks and claimed to have had an epiphany that QAnon was false in 2018, many of her comments, including those endorsing violence against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, were more recent.

"I did not hear an apology or denouncement for the insinuation that political opponents should be violently dealt with," said McGovern, a Massachusetts Democrat. "It's not ancient history. She continues to fund-raise off this stuff."

The vote will force Greene's Republican colleagues to go on the record to defend or rebuke her after she has drawn bipartisan condemnation over her past remarks. The political dilemma for Republicans underscores the tension that has riven the party over its future since Donald Trump lost the White House.

Democrats gave Republicans an ultimatum this week: Strip Greene of her committee assignments, or they would. Bipartisan pressure built after Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., called Greene's "loony lies" a "cancer" for the party.

But McCarthy ruled out taking action. Instead, he accused Democrats of a "partisan power grab" for targeting Greene.

Pelosi told reporters Thursday that she was "profoundly concerned" by Republicans' "acceptance of an extreme conspiracy theorist."

"If any of our members threatened the safety of other members, we'd be the first ones to take them off a committee," Pelosi, D-Calif., said hours before the planned vote.

A few Republicans probably will side with Democrats and many have denounced Greene's past remarks. But some warn that the Democratic majority is setting a bad precedent by meddling with Greene's committee assignments, a process that the parties have long controlled.

McCarthy's decision to back Greene comes when the GOP has been ideologically adrift after Trump's loss, struggling over whether to embrace his norm-busting divisiveness or the party's more traditional, policy-oriented conservative values.

Credit: AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

RELATED: Support for Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene in her district, despite push for committee oustings

RELATED: House GOP keeps Cheney as No. 3 leader, stands by Greene

House Republicans blocked an effort Wednesday by conservative hard-liners to oust their No. 3 leader, Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo. The daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney had enraged Trump supporters by voting to impeach him over the riot at the U.S. Capitol.

In sticking by both women, McCarthy was attempting to placate both traditional conservatives and populists, like Greene, who emulate Trump. The moves were typical of McCarthy's preference to avoid ruffling feathers as he charts his hoped-for path to becoming House speaker some day.

Greene has made a wide range of racist remarks, while breathing life into conspiracy theories. Many of them were online and recently deleted after the liberal group Media Matters unearthed them.

Greene once said Black people "are held slaves to the Democratic Party" and suggested that the Parkland, Florida, school shooting was staged to disguise the perpetrators — a so-called false flag operation.

She was seen in an online video harassing Parkland survivor David Hogg at the U.S. Capitol, accusing him of "trying to take away my Second Amendment rights."

"He has nothing to say because he's paid to do this," Greene said after Hogg ignored her. "He's a coward. He can't say one word."

She made similar remarks after a gunman opened fire from a Las Vegas hotel room in 2017, killing 58 people at an outdoor music festival, which she suggested was a secret plot to build support for gun control legislation.

"I don't believe (gunman Stephen Paddock) pulled this off all by himself, and I know most of you don't either," Greene said in a video. "What's the best way to control the people? You have to take away their guns."

In 2018, she speculated in a Facebook post that a Jewish-owned financial firm may have been involved in a plot to spark California wildfires. She suggested the motive could have been to fast-track a high-speed rail project favored by then-Gov. Jerry Brown, using "lasers or blue beams of light" fired from space.

"There are too many coincidences to ignore," she wrote.

Greene once called Pelosi a "traitor" who was guilty of "treason," a "crime punishable by death." She also "liked" a Facebook post where a commenter called for "a bullet to the head" of Pelosi.

The conspiracy theories Greene has embraced came up during the closed Republican caucus meeting Wednesday. Some said Greene apologized to her colleagues, though there were conflicting, vague versions of exactly what she'd said.

That's at odds with recent statements Greene has made on Twitter, where she has vowed to never back down or apologize and labeled her critics traitors, while using the Democratic push to punish her to raise money for her campaign.

McCarthy condemned Greene's past endorsements of conspiracy theories — after weeks of saying little critical of her — and said the first-term congresswoman had recognized in a private conversation that she must meet "a higher standard" as a lawmaker.

It's unusual for party leaders to strip lawmakers of committee assignments, which can help them address their districts' needs, raise campaign contributions and shape legislation.

In 2019, House GOP leaders removed Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, who had a history of racist comments, from the Agriculture and Judiciary panels after he was quoted as wondering when "white supremacist" became an offensive term. He lost the Republican primary for his seat in 2020 and is out of Congress after serving nine terms.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
1  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom    one month ago

Good.

 
 
 
Gordy327
PhD Principal
1.1  Gordy327  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1    one month ago

I concur. I wonder if anyone here would actually defend her?

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
1.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Gordy327 @1.1    one month ago

[removed, member is not the topic]

 
 
 
Tacos!
PhD Guide
1.1.2  Tacos!  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.1    one month ago
removed for contex by charger
 
 
 
devangelical
Masters Expert
1.1.3  devangelical  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.1    one month ago

I've seen TV news clips of greene's local goober klan constituents supporting her. jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
1.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @1.1.3    one month ago

Inbreds

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Masters Quiet
1.2  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1    one month ago

The woman is a raving lunatic who should never have been elected to office in the first place. She should be removed from office.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.2.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.2    one month ago

That will take her constituents.

 
 
 
Thomas
Freshman Guide
1.2.2  Thomas  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.2    one month ago
The woman is a raving lunatic who should never have been elected to office in the first place. She should be removed from office.

I agree wholeheartedly with that sentiment. However, as noted by TG, it will take her constituents to realize this and vote accordingly. Unless, of course, she goes full on crazy and does something so outrageous that her peers decide to discipline her. That would be, apparently from the looks of things, something very, very, very bad...

 
 
 
MrFrost
Masters Principal
1.2.3  MrFrost  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.2    one month ago

The woman is a raving lunatic who should never have been elected to office in the first place. She should be removed from office.

Batshit crazy usually gives me a boner but in MTG's case...NADA. 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Masters Quiet
1.2.4  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  MrFrost @1.2.3    one month ago

🤣

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2  JohnRussell    one month ago

In the real world this was a no brainer.  Not sure what it was in Q Anon/Republican world.

11 Republicans joined the Democratic majority in punishing Greene. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3  JohnRussell    one month ago

I watched the entire House debate about this.  I would recommend that NT members watch it on video but I realize that anyone who was interested has seen it. It was extraordinary. Numerous Republicans tried to minimize her remarks. One even said he was glad she is "fighting socialism".  Rep. Jim Jordan, a Trump favorite, said that punishing Greene was an example of the "cancel culture". These people are truly despicable. 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
3.1  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  JohnRussell @3    one month ago
These people are truly despicable.

!!!!!

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
3.1.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @3.1    one month ago

I wonder how far Jordan would shove the knife into McCarthy's back to become Minority leader?

The results of this vote....and the one for impeachment confirms that the GOP now supports and embraces armed insurrection, white supremacy, and all manner of conspiracies...

The 2022 midterm ads should be fun to watch for GOP incumbents.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
3.1.2  1stwarrior  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @3.1.1    one month ago

Quite a bit of supposition there Fly.  Sounds like a bit of "Sweeping Generalization" by trying to lump ALL GOP to a few - ya think?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
3.1.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  1stwarrior @3.1.2    one month ago

How many actually voted with the Democrats last night? Eleven. How many GOP are in the House?

I'll go look

Answer: 211....there are 435 seats in the House with 3 currently vacant. So let's go with a total of 432.

11/432 X 100% = 2.5%

Not even 10%. So I think Fly is spot on with his comment

 
 
 
devangelical
Masters Expert
3.1.4  devangelical  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.1.3    one month ago
How many GOP are in the House?

not enough to further their criminal intentions, bwah ha ha ha...

 
 
 
Dulay
PhD Principal
3.1.5  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @3.1.2    one month ago

Well gee 1st, maybe not ALL but 199 out of 211 GOP Congressmen voted in support of Greene. That's more than 'a few' don't ya think? 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
3.1.6  Trout Giggles  replied to  Dulay @3.1.5    one month ago

I even went to the trouble to do the math to prove Fly and you right

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
3.1.7  1stwarrior  replied to  Dulay @3.1.5    one month ago

And, of course you remember - always choose your battles. 

Not many here actually do that - they just blather to hear/see themselves blather.  Fly?  No, he doesn't blather - damn smart fella for a former Squid - but I trust him and believe him - mostly :-).

Right now, JMHO, the Dems/Libs are so anxious to rip apart anything in the country that doesn't "walk their way".  Many of the politicians understand that there is a lot of mending that needs to be done and slamming the shyte outta one person ain't gonna get that mending done.  All it is doing, other than ego pacification, is causing/enlarging the gaping holes in the fabric that most of us call government "by the people, for the people and of the people".

I wanna see this "Unity and peace" shyte - but the Dems/Libs folks in Congress aren't really interested in that - it's all about "ME ME ME ME ME" and most of the Congressional members need to be bounced outta office which would, truthfully, enable the "Unity and peace" so many of us actually want, which could start creeping back in with our newly "elected" officials. 

I mean, as Thomas alluded to above, we, the constituents, can hold their feet to the fire and we can make them "gone".

Choose your battles Dulay - folks will win more with honey than with vinegar.

Again, JMHO.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
3.1.8  1stwarrior  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.1.6    one month ago

And, does that make you feel more comfortable - that 1stWarrior is wrong????

Wow - what a goal.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
3.1.9  Trout Giggles  replied to  1stwarrior @3.1.8    one month ago

no need to get nasty. I pointed out facts. Not my fault you don't like facts

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
3.1.10  Tessylo  replied to  1stwarrior @3.1.8    one month ago

What's your goal?  Pissing off libs?

"Choose your battles Dulay - folks will win more with honey than with vinegar."

Which is yours - the former or the latter?  It appears to be the latter . . . . 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
3.1.11  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.10    one month ago

You're the one that's supposed to use the honey, Tessy. But expect to get vinegar flung in your face

 
 
 
Dulay
PhD Principal
3.1.12  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @3.1.7    one month ago
Choose your battles Dulay - folks will win more with honey than with vinegar.

I do.

There are a plethora of people in Congress that I disagree with ideologically and on policy. Yet I recognize that some of them are trying to make a substantive and cogent argument based on what they believe will help their constituents. I can try to refute them based on the same process. My Congresscritters and Senators know that all too well. I find it humorous to see how quickly my Senators have backtracked on their 'stalwart' defense of Trumpism. 

But when it comes to someone like MTG, there is NO evidence that she is anything but self promoting. Her recent mea culpa indicates to me that she was willing to say and do anything to gain notoriety and get elected and now to keep her seat. She now claims that much of what she said she didn't really believe. Her voters must be proud to have been so bamboozled. It's not a hard choice to oppose her and everything she stands for and to call out her supporters for defending the indefensible. 

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
3.1.13  1stwarrior  replied to  Dulay @3.1.12    one month ago

Just read her "response" to the ouster - am truly glad I'm not in her district 'cause, in this case, I would join in attempting to get her defeated in the next election.

What a selfish child.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
3.1.14  1stwarrior  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.1.9    one month ago

Depends on the discussion and reasoning behind the need for action.

"Facts" are interesting little/big things.  They can be used to show both sides of the discussion are correct - and incorrect.  The mind makes the determination as to whether or not it will accept the "facts" as presented.

As stated to Dulay - choose your battles - and that is what many on both sides of the aisle are starting to do.

Example - the Senate voted on 41 "actions" yesterday.  One passed, which was 50/50, by Harris's tie breaking vote, and that was on the COVID package.  41 "actions" - choosing your battle.

Ms. Greene is going to learn, the hard way, that words have a tendency to slap you in the face when played with improperly.  Who knows - maybe a Recall vote is being played with in her district - but we don't know, do we?

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
3.1.15  1stwarrior  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.10    one month ago

Appearances can be deceiving.  Try thinking on that one for a while.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
3.1.16  FLYNAVY1  replied to  1stwarrior @3.1.2    one month ago

How many didn't vote to certify the electoral college vote 1st.....?  147  of the 210?  70%

How many didn't vote to strip Green of her committee assignments thus approving of her actions....?  199 of 210 was it? 95%

I'm painting with broad strokes, because that is what is called for.   The shoe fits buddy.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
3.1.17  FLYNAVY1  replied to  1stwarrior @3.1.13    one month ago

I would join in attempting to get her defeated in the next election.

We are aligned then....

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4  JohnRussell    one month ago

EtarOxlWgAcp0ZC?format=png&name=small

Alexandra Limon
@AlexLimonNews   Replying to @AlexLimonNews
In an impassioned speech  @LeaderHoyer  uses this image he says  @mtgreenee  posted on facebook a few months ago.
It depicts Greene holding an AR15 and says "squad's worst nightmare" it also depicts  @AOC   @IlhanMN   @RepPressley
Hoyer asks, what message is this supposed to send?
 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
4.1  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  JohnRussell @4    one month ago

Probably the same message she was sending when she went in search of her favorite Muslim targets to force them to re-state their oath using her bible instead of the...Quran.  Straight.  Up.  Idiot.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Sophomore Principal
5  Gsquared    one month ago

She is ugly inside and out.

 
 
 
bbl-1
PhD Quiet
6  bbl-1    one month ago

Yes, Greene is removed from 'the committees'.  

However, Greene was elected to serve garnering more than 70% of the voters in her district.

And generally, with a very few exceptions, the GOP caucus supports Greene.

The question to this riddle is----------------Does the Q have a significant future within the American political system through the GOP and the corpulent brand of Trump? 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
6.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  bbl-1 @6    one month ago

Hopefully they go the way of the Tea Party

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
6.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.1    one month ago

The teabaggers

 
 
 
Thomas
Freshman Guide
7  Thomas    one month ago

In the moment we can see that removing her from her positions for cause is already painted as removing her because she thinks differently, because she is of another party, because she is supposed to be muzzled, because she wants to speak her mind. 

This is a mistake with magnitude of the first order. She is only one voice. Call attention to her and what she says. Show that what she says is untrue and illogical. Hold her up and give her the ridicule that her ideas deserve. Let her dig her own hole for interment. This action, no matter how justified it may seem at the present time, is destined to backfire. The House has now made a martyr instead of just another congressperson, and everything that any opponent says to contradict her in the future will be cast as more of the Democratic elites blah blah blah (insert MAGA and Trump 2024 description here) censoring free speech and the American ideal. 

Way to go, guys. You just fucked up royally.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Thomas @7    one month ago

Who fucked up royally ? 

 
 
 
Thomas
Freshman Guide
7.1.1  Thomas  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1    one month ago

The House.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
7.1.2  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Thomas @7.1.1    one month ago

I don't think so Thomas.  Now that she has no real work to do in the house, she will have more time to find and make use of the same political rope to hang herself with.

You know she won't be able to keep her mouth shut.  As you said... she is one voice.  Let her speak loud and clear to make her insanity a thing of national record..... with time/date stamped video if possible.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
7.1.3  1stwarrior  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @7.1.2    one month ago

And, let her constituents make the decision to see if she is really worth falling on their swords over.

 
 
 
Dulay
PhD Principal
7.1.4  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @7.1.3    one month ago

They can still do that without her being gifted with another venue to spew her garbage. 

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
7.1.5  1stwarrior  replied to  Dulay @7.1.4    one month ago

The "gifting" will not occur - she done pizzed too many people off.

 
 
 
Dulay
PhD Principal
7.1.6  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @7.1.5    one month ago

I hope that includes those that elected her. 

 
 
 
bbl-1
PhD Quiet
7.1.7  bbl-1  replied to  Thomas @7.1.1    one month ago

How?  Why?

 
 
 
Thomas
Freshman Guide
7.1.8  Thomas  replied to  bbl-1 @7.1.7    one month ago

See 7.2.1  

 
 
 
bbl-1
PhD Quiet
7.1.9  bbl-1  replied to  Thomas @7.1.8    one month ago

Explained nothing.

 
 
 
Thomas
Freshman Guide
7.1.10  Thomas  replied to  bbl-1 @7.1.9    one month ago
The reason that I think that the Democrats made a mistake in removing her is that it takes the positioning of committee members and weaponizes it, and it lends credence to the claim of silencing voices who the majority of the other party (whomever that may be) do not agree with.

Regardless of the initial motivation, this will play to the people who are screaming that they are being silenced by the majority.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
7.1.11  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Thomas @7.1.10    one month ago

Thomas, did you see/read any of her social media statements yesterday?  She was attempting to squeeze her bovine buttocks into both groups; those who constantly complain they they have been silenced by the majority, and those who feel quite comfortable showing their asinine selves with gusto.  

Here's what she had to say yesterday after learning she was removed from her committee assignments:

 
 
 
Thomas
Freshman Guide
7.1.12  Thomas  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @7.1.11    one month ago

I watched the statement where she felt freed of all responsibility. I don't go to social media unless I have to research something. You all feel that the D's were appropriate in their removal of her from committees because she said and did some very vile things. I see where you are coming from and do not totally disagree that not having her in those positions is a good thing for the functioning of the house. However, I think that the way that she was removed will lead to more divisiveness within the House and within our own ranks here at NT. It will not, IMO, provide anything like a balm for the wounds which our country has suffered recently. 

 
 
 
Dulay
PhD Principal
7.1.13  Dulay  replied to  Thomas @7.1.12    4 weeks ago

As 1st stated earlier, we have to pick our battles. 

IMHO, this is a good battle to fight because allowing MTG taxpayer funded venues to express her vitriol is worse that the small shallow wounds it may inflict. 

Covering a festering wound won't heal it. The suffering needed to expose healthy flesh and let in air and sunshine is a small price to pay for real healing. 

 
 
 
JBB
PhD Principal
7.2  JBB  replied to  Thomas @7    one month ago

Base levels of honesty, integrity and decorum are demanded of those who serve this nation or else there would be nothing honorable about service...

 
 
 
Thomas
Freshman Guide
7.2.1  Thomas  replied to  JBB @7.2    one month ago

Base levels of votes are required, anything else is optional, unfortunately.

Look, there were enough voters to turn the electoral college map Red in 2016, and we had 40 years of that dufus strutting around and showing people just how many lies he could tell with one breath before he got in. The fact is, she was the person who the voters chose to be their representative, for whatever reason, and until she commits some action in office that is illegal or so far beyond the pale of a House member, she is entitled to represent her district and occupy any committee upon which her peers place her. It is her peers, in this case, the balance of her party members, who should decide whether or not to censor her. 

I personally do not like the individual. I personally would not have voted for her. I personally would have voted for her removal from the committees if I had been a member of her caucus. I am not. The reason that I think that the Democrats made a mistake in removing her is that it takes the positioning of committee members and weaponizes it, and it lends credence to the claim of silencing voices who the majority of the other party (whomever that may be) do not agree with.

Regardless of the initial motivation, this will play to the people who are screaming that they are being silenced by the majority.

 
 
 
Dulay
PhD Principal
7.2.2  Dulay  replied to  Thomas @7.2.1    one month ago
The reason that I think that the Democrats made a mistake in removing her is that it takes the positioning of committee members and weaponizes it, 

That is nothing new for Committee seats or Chairmanships. 

and it lends credence to the claim of silencing voices who the majority of the other party (whomever that may be) do not agree with.

The thing is that it's not just 'the majority' who disagrees with Greene's statements. The GOP, even prior to her election, did so yet since she was sworn in, they have stated that they aren't defending her while doing just that and then gifting her with an even broader venue. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.2.3  JohnRussell  replied to  Thomas @7.2.1    one month ago

Thomas, with all due respect, you seem to be advocating a "see no evil" approach in the hope that if we dont look at it it will all go away. 

If there were no social media expanding and growing every day maybe there would be a chance that people would get tired of all the craziness and normality would return in a few months. 

Sadly, there is no chance of that. People make good money separating duped and unstable people from their cash and its not going to stop because Trump lost. 

QAnon is the product of connecting gullible people with an endless supply of ideas, beliefs and organizations trying to influence them. Marjorie Taylor Greene said it herself yesterday, she was upset that government wasnt fulfilling her expectations so she went on the internet to find answers. The "answers" she was attracted to turned out to be far right conspiracy theories, and she got involved and made an international fool out of herself. Multiply Marjorie Taylor Greene by a few million. 

Because social media is always growing and expanding, and there will always be con men and those with delusions of glory trying to create followers and movements, things like QAnon will be here thriving until the consumers of conspiracy thought realize that THEY are wrong. THEY are wrong, not us, them. 

The idea of letting MTG be, and she will go away on her own is a very bad idea, imo. 

There is the opportunity for all this to get a lot worse before it resolves itself on it's own. The future of America is in the balance, and will be for some time to come. 

 
 
 
Thomas
Freshman Guide
7.2.4  Thomas  replied to  JohnRussell @7.2.3    one month ago

 I do not espouse a "see no evil" policy at all. When I see it, I say something. The problem, as I see it, is that half of America sees the other half as less than smart, less intelligent, or dumb, or crazy, or worse. The politicians, be they D's or R's, have taken note of this fact (a long time ago when it was not so bad as today) and bent public opinion to exacerbate this feeling, playing people against each other. What we are left with right now is a di-polar society that thinks if the other party governs, EVER, that the world will go to hell in a handbasket and the Devil will come marching down Main Street.

If the leadership of both parties were to call out MTG's variations from normal thinking and raise them as an issue together, ie, tell the truth that DJT lost the election fair and square, disavow the conspiracy theories such as Q anon, we would be a lot closer to being able to bridge this manufactured gap in politics. But so far, not many on the R side of the isle seem to be able to pull up their big boy britches and tell the people of America what a a liar DJT was and how crazy all of those conspiracy theories are, probably because they are afraid that after having driven the R party so far to the right voters would realize that they too have been played.  

 
 
 
Dulay
PhD Principal
7.3  Dulay  replied to  Thomas @7    one month ago
She is only one voice.

One voice which the VAST majority of GOP House members are willing to amplify. 

Call attention to her and what she says. Show that what she says is untrue and illogical. Hold her up and give her the ridicule that her ideas deserve. Let her dig her own hole for interment.

The issue I have with that is that a seat on a committee gives her additional 'face time' and then requires a 'truth teller' to use their voice and their TIME in committee to refute her lies. That alone could be a full time job which isn't something that the Democrats should be responsible for. We  all know that the GOP can't be counted on to do so. 

IMHO, the Republican leadership should be called out for failing to mitigate the damage that MTG has already done and deny her an additional venue to continue her lunacy. 

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
7.3.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Dulay @7.3    one month ago

Happy Friday Duly....!

The only people that are going to be listened to with respect to the Republican leadership are the voters....  Let them keep on going down this conspiracy rabbit hole.  Trump managed to piss off white educated suburban voters enough to lose the election along with the two critical Georgia senate seats.  They lose enough elections....  they just might come back from the dark side....

 

 
 
 
Thomas
Freshman Guide
7.3.2  Thomas  replied to  Dulay @7.3    one month ago
IMHO, the Republican leadership should be called out for failing to mitigate the damage that MTG has already done and deny her an additional venue to continue her lunacy. 

I agree. But they did not remove her from committee because the Dem. leadership signalled that they were going to. The Dem. leadership got played.

 
 
 
Dulay
PhD Principal
7.3.3  Dulay  replied to  Thomas @7.3.2    one month ago

Instead of taking responsibility for leading, the GOP punted and relied on the Democrats to do their dirty work. 

That doesn't mean that the Democrats shouldn't have done what needed to be done. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
7.3.4  Tessylo  replied to  Dulay @7.3.3    one month ago

We always have to clean up after prior republican 'administrations'.  Just get the fuck out of our way gop/republicans.  

We're tired of cleaning up your messes, especially the gargantuan one, the prior occupant of the White House left on 1/20/21

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8  Vic Eldred    one month ago

I don't expect to hear any complaining when a Republican majority does the same to democrats who have made outrageous statements.

 
 
 
Dulay
PhD Principal
8.1  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @8    one month ago

Why not? The GOP is steeped in hypocrisy, why shouldn't the Dems follow suit? 

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
8.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Dulay @8.1    one month ago

We don't have the ability to go so low down and dirty and filthy and deplorable.  We're not able to plumb such low depths . 

We have morals, shame, empathy, a conscience, values . . . . we care about others.  

 
 
 
devangelical
Masters Expert
8.2  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @8    one month ago

with regards to most of the mentally challenged neanderthals on the right, time is definitely on our side.

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
8.2.1  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @8.2    one month ago

Tick, tock, tick, tock

 
 
 
Tacos!
PhD Guide
8.3  Tacos!  replied to  Vic Eldred @8    one month ago

I would hope (as I hoped in vain for Democrats) that Republicans would have better things to do with their time than dictate to the other party who should be on committees. I hope they have too much dignity to hold kangaroo court inquisitions to either punish people for their lives before they were in Congress or for supporting the wrong person politically.

Clearly the Democratic House is where free speech goes to die.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
8.3.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Tacos! @8.3    one month ago

Unlike the Republican House where truth has already died.....?

Come on Tacos.... You are way better than that comment, and we both know it.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Masters Principal
8.3.2  MrFrost  replied to  Tacos! @8.3    one month ago
Clearly the Democratic House is where free speech goes to die.

When they start screaming, "fake news", every time the right wing MSM says something negative, let us know.

 
 
 
Tacos!
PhD Guide
8.3.3  Tacos!  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @8.3.1    one month ago

Uh sure, whatever. All I see in that comment is deflection. It's sad to see people call themselves "liberal" while cheering on censorship and punishment for speech.

 
 
 
Tacos!
PhD Guide
8.3.4  Tacos!  replied to  MrFrost @8.3.2    one month ago
When they start screaming, "fake news", every time the right wing MSM says something negative, let us know.

Why? I don't care who screams fake news. The whole point of free speech is that it's free. People are supposed to be free to be wrong or deluded. You counter their speech with better speech. Only a coward or a tyrant (same thing, really) tries to block the speech or punish speech they don't like.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
8.3.6  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.4    one month ago
The whole point of free speech is that it's free. People are supposed to be free to be wrong or deluded. You counter their speech with better speech. Only a coward or a tyrant (same thing, really) tries to block the speech or punish speech they don't like.

Quick question...  How many comments would you say that you flag in a week here on NT?  

 
 
 
Tacos!
PhD Guide
8.3.7  Tacos!  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @8.3.6    one month ago

I don't have power over what anyone says, nor do I have the power to punish for speech. So if you're trying to put me in that role, it doesn't work.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
8.3.8  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.3    one month ago

Have it your way then.... Enjoy having her as the poster child for what is the current GOP.  Enjoy guilt by association from letting her proverbially yell fire in a theater.

If you aren't part of the solution.... you will be associated with the problem.

 
 
 
Dulay
PhD Principal
8.3.9  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.7    one month ago

Deflections doesn't answer the question. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
PhD Guide
8.3.10  Tacos!  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @8.3.8    one month ago
Enjoy having her as the poster child for what is the current GOP.

You misunderstand how this works. I don't enjoy her at all. My opinion on her is entirely beside the point.

 
 
 
Tacos!
PhD Guide
8.3.11  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @8.3.9    one month ago

Not interested in being harassed by you with nonsense posts. See ya.

 
 
 
devangelical
Masters Expert
8.3.12  devangelical  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.11    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8.3.13  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.7    one month ago
Quick question...  How many comments would you say that you flag in a week here on NT?

Sisters question to you sounded like a numerical one to me. Since you clearly dodged the question I wonder why you dont want to say. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
PhD Guide
8.3.14  Tacos!  replied to  devangelical @8.3.12    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Tacos!
PhD Guide
8.3.15  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @8.3.13    one month ago
Sisters question to you sounded like a numerical one to me.

It sounded like an irrelevant one to me. 

Since you clearly dodged the question I wonder why you dont want to say. 

And I'd say you are dodging the reality of what I previously have written. Get on to that and stop riding in the deflection train.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8.3.16  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.15    one month ago

I dont know what her reason was for asking you how times a day you flag. But I know Sister and know she has a reason.  You dont want anyone to know how many times a day you flag. Oh well. 

 
 
 
Dulay
PhD Principal
8.3.17  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.11    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Tacos!
PhD Guide
8.3.18  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @8.3.16    one month ago
You dont want anyone to know how many times a day you flag.

I answered you on this already. I could not guess what the number is nor do I find it relevant. Nor would it be anyone's business. Do not tell me what I want and do not address me over it further.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8.3.19  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.18    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
8.3.20  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  devangelical @8.3.12    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
8.3.21  Split Personality  replied to  devangelical @8.3.12    one month ago

Going for the One?

Global Foreign trade organization?

Global federation of Telemedicine organization?

or the official Acronym for the International Airport in Sierra Leone ?

jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

Read more at
 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
8.3.22  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.7    one month ago

People are supposed to be free to be wrong or deluded. You counter their speech with better speech. Only a coward or a tyrant (same thing, really) tries to block the speech or punish speech they don't like.

So...it's bad when people call out a bully like Marjorie Taylor Greene with her death threats and Jewish fire-starting laser beams.  But on some social media sites, it's ok to flag...with gusto... comments one doesn't like.  Lovely double standard! 

I don't have power over what anyone says, nor do I have the power to punish for speech.

Fair enough.  But how do you feel about those who hide behind others who do have the power to punishdeleteblock the comments of others?  Seems rather cowardly to me.    

The practice of frugal flagging on a social site like NT is always a good idea, if for no other reason than to keep one from consistently looking like a hypocritical cowardly jackass of a tyrant.  But it's our duty as citizens of the United States to call out public representatives like Ms. Greene.

    

  

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
8.3.23  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @8.3.20    one month ago

How can it be taunting?  I don't even know what he said!  I was simply showing support for my very thoughtful and highly sensitive fellow frugal flagger! jrSmiley_20_smiley_image.gif

[ In the interests of impartiality.  Similar comments supporting violations, even deleted ones, have been moderated as taunting.  Sorry, Sis, and thanks for flagging frugally. ]

 
 
 
Dulay
PhD Principal
8.3.24  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.11    one month ago

I'm not interested in in listening to your whining. 

 
 
 
Dulay
PhD Principal
8.3.25  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.18    one month ago

The more you avoid answering, the more relevant it seems to become. 

Oh and you don't get to decide who 'addresses' you or when. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Principal
8.3.26  sandy-2021492  replied to  Dulay @8.3.25    one month ago

This isn't to Dulay.  The slapfight has gotten out of hand.  This thread is now unlocked after a cooling-off period.  Please be civil.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Principal
8.3.27  Raven Wing  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @8.3.6    one month ago
How many comments would you say that you flag in a week here on NT?  

Amennn!!!

 
 
 
Thomas
Freshman Guide
8.3.28  Thomas  replied to  Split Personality @8.3.21    one month ago

 
 
 
MrFrost
Masters Principal
8.4  MrFrost  replied to  Vic Eldred @8    one month ago
who have made outrageous statements.

Like injecting bleach? 

 
 
 
MrFrost
Masters Principal
9  MrFrost    one month ago

When I heard her say, "...is this the world I want my kids to grow up in??!!", my first thought was, "Someone mated with her??? Really??!!!". 

I was half waiting for her to say that Muslims had a satellite that was shooting globs of baby gravy from space to impregnate women with Muslim babies. 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online



Texan1211
Gazoo


35 visitors