'Slow-motion insurrection': How GOP seizes election power

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  dig  •  5 months ago  •  224 comments

By:   NICHOLAS RICCARDI (AP NEWS)

'Slow-motion insurrection': How GOP seizes election power

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



In the weeks leading up to the deadly insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, a handful of Americans — well-known politicians, obscure local bureaucrats — stood up to block then-President Donald Trump's unprecedented attempt to overturn a free and fair vote of the American people.

In the year since, Trump-aligned Republicans have worked to clear the path for next time.

In battleground states and beyond, Republicans are taking hold of the once-overlooked machinery of elections. While the effort is incomplete and uneven, outside experts on democracy and Democrats are sounding alarms, warning that the United States is witnessing a "slow-motion insurrection" with a better chance of success than Trump's failed power grab last year.

They point to a mounting list of evidence: Several candidates who deny Trump's loss are running for offices that could have a key role in the election of the next president in 2024. In Michigan, the Republican Party is restocking members of obscure local boards that could block approval of an election. In Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, the GOP-controlled legislatures are backing open-ended "reviews" of the 2020 election, modeled on a deeply flawed look-back in Arizona. The efforts are poised to fuel disinformation and anger about the 2020 results for years to come.

All this comes as the Republican Party has become more aligned behind Trump, who has made denial of the 2020 results a litmus test for his support. Trump has praised the Jan. 6 rioters and backed primaries aimed at purging lawmakers who have crossed him. Sixteen GOP governors have signed laws making it more difficult to vote. An Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll showed that two-thirds of Republicans do not believe Democrat Joe Biden was legitimately elected as president.

The result, experts say, is that another baseless challenge to an election has become more likely, not less.

"It's not clear that the Republican Party is willing to accept defeat anymore," said Steven Levitsky, a Harvard political scientist and co-author of the book "How Democracies Die." "The party itself has become an anti-democratic force."

American democracy has been flawed and manipulated by both parties since its inception. Millions of Americans — Black people, women, Native Americans and others — have been excluded from the process. Both Republicans and Democrats have written laws rigging the rules in their favor.

This time, experts argue, is different: Never in the country's modern history has a a major party sought to turn the administration of elections into an explicitly partisan act.

Republicans who sound alarms are struggling to be heard by their own party. GOP Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming or Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, members of a House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection, are often dismissed as party apostates. Others have cast the election denialism as little more than a distraction.

But some local officials, the people closest to the process and its fragility, are pleading for change. At a recent news conference in Wisconsin, Kathleen Bernier, a GOP state senator and former elections clerk, denounced her party's efforts to seize control of the election process.

"These made up things that people do to jazz up the base is just despicable and I don't believe any elected legislator should play that game," said Bernier.

LOCAL CONTROL

Bernier's view is not shared by the majority of the Republicans who control the state Legislature in Wisconsin, one of a handful of states that Biden carried but Trump wrongly claims he won. Early in 2021, Wisconsin Republicans ordered their Legislative Audit Bureau to review the 2020 election. That review found no significant fraud. Last month, an investigation by the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty came to the same conclusion.

Still, many Republicans are convinced that something went wrong. They point to how the nonpartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission — which the GOP-led Legislature and then-Republican governor created eight years ago to run the state's elections — changed guidance for local elections officers to make voting easier during the pandemic.

That's led to a struggle for control of elections between the state Legislature and the commission.

"We feel we need to get this straight for people to believe we have integrity," said GOP Sen. Alberta Darling, who represents the conservative suburbs north of Milwaukee. "We're not just trying to change the election with Trump. We're trying to dig into the next election and change irregularities."

Republicans are also remaking the way elections are run in other states. In Georgia, an election bill signed this year by the GOP governor gave the Republican-controlled General Assembly new powers over the state board of elections, which controls its local counterparts.

The law is being used to launch a review of operations in solidly-Democratic Fulton County, home to most of Atlanta, which could lead to a state takeover. The legislature also passed measures allowing local officials to remove Democrats from election boards in six other counties.

In Pennsylvania, the GOP-controlled legislature is undertaking a review of the presidential election, subpoenaing voter information that Democrats contend is an unprecedented intrusion into voter privacy. Meanwhile, Trump supporters are signing up for local election jobs in droves. One pastor who attended the Jan. 6 rally in the nation's capital recently won a race to become an election judge overseeing voting in a rural part of Lancaster County.

In Michigan, the GOP has focused on the state's county boards of canvassers. The little-known committees' power was briefly in the spotlight in November of 2020, when Trump urged the two Republican members of the board overseeing Wayne County, home to Democratic-bastion Detroit, to vote to block certification of the election.

After one of the Republican members defied Trump, local Republicans replaced her with Robert Boyd, who told The Detroit Free Press that he would not have certified Biden's win last year.

Boyd did not return a call for comment.

A similar swap — replacing a traditional Republican with one who parroted Trump's election lies — occurred in Macomb County, the state's third most populous county.

The Detroit News in October reported that Republicans had replaced their members on boards of canvassers in eight of Michigan's 11 most populous counties

Michigan officials say that if boards of canvassers don't certify an election they can be sued and compelled to do so. Still, that process could cause chaos and be used as a rallying cry behind election disputes.

"They're laying the groundwork for a slow-motion insurrection," said Mark Brewer, an election lawyer and former chair of the Michigan Democratic Party.

The state's top election official, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, warned: "The movement to cast doubt on the 2020 election has now turned their eyes ... to changing the people who were in positions of authority and protected 2020."

TRUMP'S RETRIBUTION

That includes Benson.

Multiple Republicans have lined up to challenge her, including Kristina Karamo, a community college professor who alleged fraud in the 2020 elections and contended that the Jan. 6 attackers were actually antifa activists trying to frame Trump supporters.

Trump has been clear about his intentions: He is seeking to oust statewide officials who stood in his way and replace them with allies.

"We have secretary of states that did not do the right thing for the American people," Trump, who has endorsed Karamo, told The Associated Press this month.

The most prominent Trump push is in Georgia, where the former president is backing U.S. Rep. Jody Hice, who voted against Biden's Electoral College victory on Jan. 6, in a primary race against the Republican secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger. He rejected Trump's pleas to "find" enough votes to declare him the winner.

Trump also encouraged former U.S. Sen. David Perdue to challenge Gov. Brian Kemp in the GOP primary. Kemp turned down Trump's entreaties to declare him the victor in the 2020 election.

In October, Jason Shepherd stepped down as chair of the Cobb County GOP after the group censured Kemp. "It's shortsighted. They're not contemplating the effects of this down the line," Shepherd said in an interview. "They want their pound of flesh from Brian Kemp because Brian Kemp followed the law."

In Nevada, multiple lawsuits seeking to overturn Biden's victory were thrown out by judges. A suit aimed at overturning his congressional loss was filed by Jim Marchant, a former GOP state lawmaker now running to be secretary of state, and it too was dismissed. The current Republican secretary of state, Barbara Cegavske, who is term limited, found there was no significant fraud in the contests.

Marchant said he's not just seeking to become a Trump enabler, though he was endorsed by Trump in his congressional bid. "I've been fighting this since before he came along," Marchant said of Trump. "All we want is fair and transparent elections."

In Pennsylvania, Republican state Sen. Doug Mastriano, who organized buses of Trump supporters for Trump's rally near the White House on Jan. 6, has signaled he's running for governor. In Arizona, state Rep. Mark Finchem's bid to be secretary of state has unnerved many Republicans, given that he hosted a daylong hearing in November 2020 that featured Trump adviser Rudolph Giuliani. Former news anchor Kari Lake, who repeats Trump's election falsehoods, is running to succeed Republican Gov. Doug Ducey, who stood up to Trump's election-year pressure and is barred from another term.

Elsewhere in Arizona, Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, who defended his office against the conspiratorial election review, has started a political committee to provide financial support to Republicans who tell the truth about the election. But he's realistic about the persistence of the myth of a stolen election within his party's base.

"Right now," Richer said, "the incentive structure seems to be strongly in favor of doing the wrong thing."

HIGH STAKES RACES FOR GOVERNOR

In Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, Democratic governors have been a major impediment to the GOP's effort to overhaul elections. Most significantly, they have vetoed new rules that Democrats argue are aimed at making it harder for people of color to vote.

Governors have a significant role in U.S. elections: They certify the winners in their states, clearing way for the appointment of Electoral College members. That raises fears that Trump-friendly governors could try to certify him — if he were to run in 2024 and be the GOP nominee — as the winner of their state's electoral votes regardless of the vote count.

Additionally, some Republicans argue that state legislatures can name their own electors regardless of what the vote tally says.

But Democrats have had little success in laying out the stakes in these races. It's difficult for voters to believe the system could be vulnerable, said Daniel Squadron of The States Project, a Democratic group that tries to win state legislatures.

"The most motivated voters in America today are those who think the 2020 election was stolen," he said. "Acknowledging this is afoot requires such a leap from any core American value system that any of us have lived through."


Article is LOCKED by moderator [Split Personality]
[]
 
Dig
PhD Guide
1  seeder  Dig    5 months ago
[...] the Republican Party has become more aligned behind Trump, who has made denial of the 2020 results a litmus test for his support. Trump has praised the Jan. 6 rioters and backed primaries aimed at purging lawmakers who have crossed him. Sixteen GOP governors have signed laws making it more difficult to vote. An Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll showed that two-thirds of Republicans do not believe Democrat Joe Biden was legitimately elected as president.

The result, experts say, is that another baseless challenge to an election has become more likely, not less.

"It's not clear that the Republican Party is willing to accept defeat anymore," said Steven Levitsky, a Harvard political scientist and co-author of the book "How Democracies Die." "The party itself has become an anti-democratic force."

In case anyone was wondering...

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  Dig @1    5 months ago

The left's relentless attempts to overturn Trump's fairly won election amounted to a de facto insurrection.

What happened on January 6th was an unorganized demonstration that led to a half assed riot that got out of hand.

The left's pathetic attempts to make it more than it was is failing with the public at large...

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Expert
1.1.1  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1    5 months ago

Hilarious.  Right wing lunatics would like you to believe that if Donald Trump would have won his re-election attempt then criminals would have disappeared.  What idiots are buying this?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
1.1.2  Sparty On  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @1.1.1    5 months ago

A major portion of this country was not happy with how the 2020 election was prosecuted.   Still aren't but no worries.  

You're about to find that out the hard way in 2022 and very likely in 2024 as well.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Expert
1.1.3  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Sparty On @1.1.2    5 months ago

The election was not “prosecuted”.  The snowflakes who were so unhappy with the results of the free and fair election that they literally shit in the halls of congress - now they were prosecuted.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
1.1.4  Greg Jones  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @1.1.1    5 months ago

I'm referring to the 2016 election.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Expert
1.1.5  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.4    5 months ago

I guessed I somehow missed all of the “relentless attempts from the left to overturn the 2016 election.”  How’s that whole rewriting of history thing going for you?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
1.1.6  Sparty On  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @1.1.3    5 months ago

You understanding of the word "prosecuted" appears to be sophomoric at best.

 
 
 
Dig
PhD Guide
1.1.7  seeder  Dig  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @1.1.5    5 months ago
I guessed I somehow missed all of the “relentless attempts from the left to overturn the 2016 election.”

You and everyone else who lives in the real world.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
1.1.8  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @1.1.1    5 months ago

Magats.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.1.9  CB   replied to  Greg Jones @1.1    4 months ago

What a  "f-ked up" (alternative) reality is Trump 'country.' It says. . .a lot that some conservatives won't let Donald Trump have his little delusion all to himself. Quite telling, indeed.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.1.10  CB   replied to  Sparty On @1.1.2    4 months ago

Similar words came out of a right-wing echo chamber in 2020. But, don't ask me to dredge those articles up, because I am not going to indulge any of it.  "A major portion of this country" is not happy with goodness, mercy, compassion, caring, consideration, selflessness, fairness—and we should care because some conservatives can't handle loss? Hey! Some conservatives y'all's perspective and lack of a coherent vision for this country during a major pandemic crisis lost the election! Move on and learn to play fair already!

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
1.1.11  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @1.1.1    4 months ago

Not only would they not disappear, but Trump would have appointed them to key positions....his usual MO.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2  Sparty On    5 months ago

OMG ..... another insurrection?   This one in slow motion?   Scary.

"It's not clear that the Republican Party is willing to accept defeat anymore," said Steven Levitsky, a Harvard political scientist and co-author of the book "How Democracies Die." "The party itself has become an anti-democratic force."

That said, the projection at play here is epic.   People like Levitsky, a Harvard Poli Sci prof, are about as far away from mainstream America as it gets.

They are about to find that out the hard way, once again, in 2022.   We'll see how well partisans like him take the butt whipping that's coming in November.

My guess is the red ass will be even more epic than the TDS pandemic of 2016-2020

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1  CB   replied to  Sparty On @2    4 months ago

TDS? One to talk - wow! I know. I know. Some conservatives project the aforementioned on liberals. However, it truly is Trump supporters that demonstrate and 'mouth' the cray-cray-iest things!

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Principal
3  sandy-2021492    5 months ago
But Democrats have had little success in laying out the stakes in these races. It's difficult for voters to believe the system could be vulnerable, said Daniel Squadron of The States Project, a Democratic group that tries to win state legislatures.

This is a problem - Democratic messaging, or lack thereof.  The Dems need to make sure, where this is happening, that people know that a good portion of the Republican party is working to make sure the voice of the people counts for nothing, if it opposes the GOP.  Elections in those areas will be a facade, as the results will be pre-determined.

Anybody who gives a damn about American values should be alarmed.

 
 
 
Dig
PhD Guide
3.1  seeder  Dig  replied to  sandy-2021492 @3    5 months ago

I can't believe the anti-American depravity of the R's these days. They should just come out and admit they don't want a republic anymore. 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
3.1.1  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Dig @3.1    4 months ago

The same could very much be said about the D's as well. It is a double edged sword.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
3.1.2  JBB  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.1.1    4 months ago

No Ed, it cannot! False equivalencies are false on their faces and at this time in American history only the gop is as a minority actually trying to keep political power away from the majority instead of moving in the direction of the electorate. The problem for the gop is that gerrymandering and voter suppression can only go so far...in a Republic! There has been no liberal equivalent to January 6, 2021!

Yes, people often tell lies, so I guess anything "Could be said". So what? Doesn't make it true!

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
3.1.3  bbl-1  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.1.1    4 months ago

Uh no.  The ( D's ) will never force a 12 year old or anybody else for that matter to bear children against their will.  And many other things too.

 
 
 
Dig
PhD Guide
3.1.4  seeder  Dig  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.1.1    4 months ago
The same could very much be said about the D's as well. It is a double edged sword.

That's ridiculous. What exactly makes you think that? Seriously, please share.

One party wants to safeguard voting rights, the other is actively trying to undermine them. Do you not know which is which? Read the article for a hint.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Principal
3.1.5  sandy-2021492  replied to  Dig @3.1.4    4 months ago

I think false equivalence has become a knee-jerk reaction for some.  "But the Dems are just as bad" is just something they say as a matter of course when Republicans are criticized.  When asked to substantiate their claims, the responses tend to be lacking.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
3.1.6  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  bbl-1 @3.1.3    4 months ago

And just where did I say that was the case? The answer is obviously I did not, so please do try to refrain from putting your words in my mouth. 

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
3.1.7  bbl-1  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.1.6    4 months ago

Of course.  Why would I expect any less---or any more for that matter.  

I've read your posts for quite a while.  That is where you stand.  You stand with those that do exactly that.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
3.1.8  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  bbl-1 @3.1.7    4 months ago

Nice attempt at deflection.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
3.1.9  bbl-1  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.1.8    4 months ago

Where is the deflection?

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
3.1.10  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  bbl-1 @3.1.9    4 months ago

You never answered my question In post #3.1.6 on as to where I stated anything about 12 year olds. Instead you just went off on a tangent in 3.1.7 accusing me of standing with other people. That deflection!

 
 
 
gooseisback
Freshman Silent
3.1.11  gooseisback  replied to  Dig @3.1.4    4 months ago
One party wants to safeguard voting rights, the other is actively trying to undermine them

The problem is who's trying to do what. 

You get one vote. You should vote where you are registered. You should prove who you are so no one steals your vote. You have a window of time to vote. The voter roles should be cleaned up to remove deceased and people no long in the district.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
3.1.12  bbl-1  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.1.10    4 months ago

Not a tangent.  You support the party that supports that.  That is what it is, isn't it?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.2  CB   replied to  sandy-2021492 @3    4 months ago

I agree. It is time for the democratic party to find its 'rowdy' voice in 2022 and magnify it over its 'cerebral' voice. The republics are messaging bull crap; and democrats should have a field day messaging about republican/conservatives weakness and lack of cohesive policy (or any policy platform at all).

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Principal
3.2.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  CB @3.2    4 months ago
democrats should have a field day messaging about republican/conservatives weakness and lack of cohesive policy (or any policy platform at all).

But they probably won't.  Dems are weak on messaging.  They need to work on that, and they need to start yesterday.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.2.2  CB   replied to  sandy-2021492 @3.2.1    4 months ago

Then how the "h" can democrats build consistency in winning (for the right purposes)? The time is now to learn and immediately deploy new ideas and tactics—yesterday!

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
4  Greg Jones    5 months ago

No...the American people are discovering that the Democrats have little regard for traditional American values....or the rule of law.

 
 
 
Dig
PhD Guide
4.1  seeder  Dig  replied to  Greg Jones @4    5 months ago

Americans who STILL support a criminal, a tyrant, and an enemy of the republic have no business whatsoever pretending they give a shit about traditional American values or the rule of law.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.1.1  Sparty On  replied to  Dig @4.1    5 months ago

You are not going to like 2022 come about Nov 9th.    Best you start girding your loins now.    God knows they are going to need a lot of girding.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
4.1.2  JBB  replied to  Sparty On @4.1.1    5 months ago

What make you think the electorate desires a turn to the right? Most of those expressing dissatisfaction and disappointment with the current administration and Congress want a more aggressive approach, not stagnation...

This meme better sums up current attitudes.

original

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.1.3  Sparty On  replied to  JBB @4.1.2    5 months ago

Nah, not even close.   Especially the meme.  

That meme typifies all the liberal sky screamers we've seem the past five years.   The TDS ridden, hate filled, liberal left..

They better stock up on Preparation-h again.   2022 is going to be a very inflamed ride for those fruit-loops.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
4.1.4  JBB  replied to  Sparty On @4.1.3    4 months ago

Whoosh! Americans are not turning towards the right, especially not the far right. The gop as it is today is shrinking. America is getting browner, gayer, less religious and more and more progressive especially economically...

Flat earth supply side knuckle dragging in the modern world is a recipe for future failure...

Face it, intolerance and ignorance are a no go. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.1.5  CB   replied to  JBB @4.1.2    4 months ago

Here! Here!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.1.6  CB   replied to  Sparty On @4.1.3    4 months ago

Hmmph. Jarring. You have your work cut out for you for many months reciting. . .lines.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
4.1.7  bbl-1  replied to  Sparty On @4.1.1    4 months ago

Be wary.  The amendment after the First Amendment still stands and its only purpose is citizens protecting themselves from a vengeful, unresponsive, dangerous group of individuals who hold the reins of power.

This too.  Those who tout the Second Amendment to further and promote a lie will suffer the consequence that amendment guarantees for truth, justice and freedom.  Be wary.  Be very-very wary.  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.1.8  CB   replied to  bbl-1 @4.1.7    4 months ago

'The Western World' will not SUPPORT an America that ignores its own Rule of Law to follow after a psychotic wanna be tyrant!  Some conservatives delude themselves into believing that "any old 'America'" will do in the 21st century for Europe and NATO even should it renege on its policies of working for truth over and above error. It is arrogance to think that lying, backstabbing, double-dealings, aka: CORRUPTION is preferred by nations looking to advance in the world. Also, short-sighted. This nation will be 'deserted' by its friendly nations, its contracts will be compromised, and it will be cut out of its treaties.  Worse, irreparable harm will be done to the reputation which can no longer feign IGNORANCE of deliberately choosing to return to corruption over fairness while looking the CHOICE squarely in its face!

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.1.9  Sparty On  replied to  JBB @4.1.4    4 months ago

I never said Americans were turning right.    

I said the left is going to get its ass kicked in 2022.    And I for one am going to enjoy watch them try rational the ass kicking away somehow.

Better buckle up buttercups ..... you’ve sown the wind and now are about to reap the whirlwind.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.1.10  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sparty On @4.1.3    4 months ago
The TDS ridden, hate filled, liberal left..

I find that ironic. We have our share of the hate filled right here on NT

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.1.11  Sparty On  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.1.10    4 months ago

Nah, that’s not ironic at all but opinions can vary .......

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.1.12  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sparty On @4.1.11    4 months ago

That's getting tiring..."opinions can vary". And if you can't see the hate coming from the right I can't help you

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.1.13  Sparty On  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.1.12    4 months ago

I never said hate didn’t come from the right.    I said my comment (that you quoted) wasn’t ironic IMO.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
4.1.14  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  CB @4.1.8    4 months ago

We are a global laughing stock politically right now.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.2  CB   replied to  Greg Jones @4    4 months ago

"Traditional American Values"?  Like what Greg? (I don't even want to imagine what you label as, 'rule of law.'

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.2.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  CB @4.2    4 months ago

Women back in the home, gays back in the closet, brown people back on the plantation, and 12 year olds working the coal mines.

Need I go on?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.2.2  Sparty On  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.2.1    4 months ago

By all means, keep pushing the hyperbole.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.2.3  CB   replied to  Sparty On @4.2.2    4 months ago

TG is not being hyperbolic. And, though republicans and conservatives no longer have a presentable political platform for any of us to gaze upon, we fall-back on what is being enacted or lack thereof and not (never) what some conservatives say!

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.2.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sparty On @4.2.2    4 months ago

Just wait until I get going. If you think that's hyperbole you ain't seen nuttin' yet

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.2.5  Trout Giggles  replied to  CB @4.2.3    4 months ago

They want to deprive women of their free choice in what to do with our bodies. They don't like women pushing them out of the corporate and academic worlds. Hell, they don't think we need minimum wage or child labor laws!

And God forbid we have Pride Parades!

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.2.6  Sparty On  replied to  CB @4.2.3    4 months ago

This kind of nonsense is getting tiring ..... yawn ....

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.2.7  Sparty On  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.2.4    4 months ago

Yippee  ki yay!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.2.8  CB   replied to  Sparty On @4.2.6    4 months ago

Understatement. I note some conservatives tend to write less when they have nothing (useful) to help build constructive discourse. Between two group or more of Americans.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.2.9  CB   replied to  Trout Giggles @4.2.5    4 months ago

EXACTLY. Some conservatives want girls and women to simply 'want' more babies "just because." Ignoring the uniquely solid fact that EVERYTHING this world labels human beauty or ugliness comes through the womb of a female. That is, every man or woman I have ever gazed upon or read about through 'countless' histories is a product of female 'love' for birthing and making it so.

Yet, some conservatives want even more babies, but promise not a damn thing to them—as if being alive for alive sake is the thing.

Homosexuals, Blacks?  Why should women want to have excess babies just to be abused by culture and society?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
4.2.10  Jack_TX  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.2.1    4 months ago
Women back in the home, gays back in the closet, brown people back on the plantation, and 12 year olds working the coal mines. Need I go on?

I'll need to order more eye-rolls.  

Maybe I'll see if they come in a larger size.  

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.2.11  Trout Giggles  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.10    4 months ago

I read eye rolls as rib eyes and was going to ask you why you need a larger rib eye

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.2.12  Sparty On  replied to  CB @4.2.8    4 months ago

Meh, some us prefer to not bore our audience with long meaningless speech but tend to gravitate towards short and sweet.    Others here like the sound of their own voices entirely too much.

Know what I mean?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.2.13  CB   replied to  Sparty On @4.2.12    4 months ago

"Talking loud and saying nothing." Some conservatives insubstantial?  Never. /s

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.2.14  Sparty On  replied to  CB @4.2.13    4 months ago

Lol .... blah, blah, blah .....

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.2.15  CB   replied to  Sparty On @4.2.14    4 months ago

LOL! GOP 'Regulars' waiting in the wings for the GOP Extremists and Insurrectionists to finish performing and exit the stage! A more stable (and viewable) political platform is waiting on the sidelines!

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
4.2.16  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.2.4    4 months ago

Run Sparty...RUNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
4.2.17  Jack_TX  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.2.11    4 months ago
I read eye rolls as rib eyes and was going to ask you why you need a larger rib eye

Reading eye-rolls as ribeyes is an honest mistake.

Askin why a person needs a larger ribeye??  What kind of question is that?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.2.18  Texan1211  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.17    4 months ago
Askin why a person needs a larger ribeye??  What kind of question is that?

Now, THAT is a Texas answer!

LOL!!

Ask me if I like brisket or ribs!!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
4.2.19  Jack_TX  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2.18    4 months ago
Ask me if I like brisket or ribs!!

If you answer "ribs", you damn well better change your username. 

You could be "Tennessean1211", I suppose. jrSmiley_7_smiley_image.png

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
4.2.20  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.2.11    4 months ago

Did you have a Emily Latilla moment there?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.2.21  Texan1211  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.19    4 months ago

I always answer YES! I don't want to give any smoked meat up!

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
4.2.22  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.19    4 months ago

the correct answer is "both " , with a tomahawk steak thrown in for good measure ....

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.2.23  Trout Giggles  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.17    4 months ago

A stupid one

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.2.24  Trout Giggles  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4.2.20    4 months ago

That and blurry eyes

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.2.25  Trout Giggles  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.19    4 months ago

I like ribs a lot if they're done right

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.2.26  Sparty On  replied to  CB @4.2.15    4 months ago

Lol .... that sad part is that you probably really do believe that steaming pile of partisan bullshit ..... sad indeed

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.2.27  CB   replied to  Sparty On @4.2.26    4 months ago

You might wish those GOP regulars were not there. But, they are there! And they are waiting for your Trump "agitators" all to leave willingly or get the 'boot'!

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.2.28  Sparty On  replied to  CB @4.2.27    4 months ago

Lol .... don’t try to put words in my mouth CB.     Doubtful you’ll ever get it right ....

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.2.29  CB   replied to  Sparty On @4.2.28    4 months ago

Your 'mouth' is not an issue for me, Sparty On. It's January 6, 2022. What significance does it bear for some conservatives? Any event planning? A (high) "hol-i"-day?

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
4.2.30  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.2.25    4 months ago

I saw a tee shirt the other day....REAL MEN SMELL LIKE BBQ.  I want one for a friend of mine. 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
4.2.31  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @4.2.22    4 months ago

I'll take the carne asada ribeye myself...

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Guide
4.2.32  1stwarrior  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @4.2.31    4 months ago

jrSmiley_28_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_28_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.2.33  Sparty On  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @4.2.31    4 months ago

Sous-Vide cooked Filet Mignon to 125 degrees, sear each side and yum!

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Guide
4.2.34  1stwarrior  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @4.2.31    4 months ago

Rare - of course :-)

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
4.2.35  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  1stwarrior @4.2.32    4 months ago

Of course, anything else would be uncivilized!

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
5  bbl-1    4 months ago

Straight out of the FSB.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
5.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  bbl-1 @5    4 months ago

FSB?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6  CB     4 months ago

In the new year, I resolve to do my best to cut through the 'noise' percolating through the political scene. To that end: There is truly something wrong with the republican party which has branded itself property of one stupendously arrogant individual. And what an individual. EVERYBODY with ears and eyes can see EX-president Donald Trump is a prolific liar who has purposed to live out his life in a delusional world of his own creation. It is patently PATHETIC that some conservatives see their fortune living in a 'desolate' mind-melt with a raging fool of a man who is to decency and order what vomit is to fine china.  On being a lying 'wonder':

These some conservatives are not stupid people, per se. How do I know this? Because these same people accepting Trump's lies (they want to) will deny me opportunity to have their blessing for lying to them. They would curse me and condemn me immediately.

Not dumb people; just deliberate!

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
6.1  bbl-1  replied to  CB @6    4 months ago

When 'the profit' no longer arrives from the ( LIE ), the lie will die a thousand deaths.  When that time arrives, to those who promoted it will be the time for them to 'gird' themselves against the following wrath freedom and democracy will wage upon them.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.1.1  CB   replied to  bbl-1 @6.1    4 months ago

My goodness! It is a LIE exposed and effortlessly occurring in the light of day! Everybody knows it is a LIE! And yet. . . some conservatives' PERSIST with the branded LIE to everyone's faces!

I have to ask. HAVE WE LOSE OUR COUTH IN THIS COUNTRY?!  Tired already of doing right by our fellow man, woman, and children?

Whether than live up to our creed, some conservatives are seriously (and hypocritically) thinking about believing delusions of their past GRANDEUR (a lot of it stolen fortunes) from others and crooked deal-making and they buy-in to this **old fart*** that is self-taught in the art of stealing from others (through the help of lawyers and trained enablers).

I NEVER WOULD HAVE BELIEVED IT! I AM SEEING THIS COUNTRY FREE OF GUILE AND DECEIT FOR THE FIRST TIME IN ITS HISTORY TURNING BACKWARD AND 'PINING' AFTER A 'F-KED UP "LEADER"  WHO PROMISES TYRANNY TO HIS FELLOW AMERICANS AND ALL THE LYING THEY CAN BOTTLE AND SELL AS

MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
6.1.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  bbl-1 @6.1    4 months ago

I would rather see them holding signs on freeway exits...WILL BELIEVE LIES FOR FOOD.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
7  Jeremy Retired in NC    4 months ago
"It's not clear that the Republican Party is willing to accept defeat anymore," 

Apparently the Republican party is more willing than the Democrat Party.  Take a look at the actions of the Democrats between 2016 and 2022.  

This time, experts argue, is different: Never in the country's modern history has a a major party sought to turn the administration of elections into an explicitly partisan act.

Did the "experts" forget about the Meuller "Investigation" and subsequent "impeachment"? 

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
7.1  JBB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7    4 months ago

Didnt the gop lose House, Senate and Presidency? 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
7.1.1  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JBB @7.1    4 months ago

Yeah they did, but 2022 and 2024 are coming up sooner than most people think. Enjoy it while it lasts, because it won't be for long...

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
7.1.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JBB @7.1    4 months ago
are coming up sooner than most people think. Enjo

Yes they did.  and the democrats still ran false investigations into the POTUS and anybody associated with him.  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.1.3  CB   replied to  Ed-NavDoc @7.1.1    4 months ago

Ed-NavDoc, is this partisanship on display from you? I'm confused. Are you a centrist? Republican? Republican-leaning? Certainly from what has been coming across your threshold -not a democrat. Clarification needed.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.1.4  CB   replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7.1.2    4 months ago

Ridiculous! Wow. Supporting one of the many worse human beings in existence in 'America' (guess who) and doing so without shame. SHAME! It's 2022 you can come back now!

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
7.1.5  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  CB @7.1.3    4 months ago

I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat. I am a registered right leaning Independent.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.1.6  CB   replied to  Ed-NavDoc @7.1.5    4 months ago

Who knew "right-leaning" is register -able ? Well blow me down! Can you elucidate how this is exchange qualifies as Independent-minded:

7.1 JBB replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @ 7   8 hours ago

Didnt the gop lose House, Senate and Presidency? 

 
 
 
 
_v=63f541506109732
 
7.1.1 Ed-NavDoc replied to  JBB @ 7.1   6 hours ago

Yeah they did, but 2022 and 2024 are coming up sooner than most people think. Enjoy it while it lasts, because it won't be for long...

Do correct me: You have a decidedly right-wing determinant 'bent' - and additionally if sacking the Capitol building in D.C. won't cause you to rule out some conservatives' no-platform for the future as a 'gain'. . . you're bagged already by republicans! Go ahead, let me know where am I wrong on this?

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
7.1.7  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  CB @7.1.6    4 months ago

Agree to disagree.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
7.1.8  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  CB @7.1.4    4 months ago
Supporting one of the many worse human beings in existence in 'America' (guess who)

Just supporting a person who, during his 4 year political career did more for me and my co-workers than Democrats have ever done. 

So what don't you like about him?  Could it be because he embarrassed the Democrats and the left so quickly and easily?  Because he exposed the Democrats and the left's bullshit so quickly and easily?  Because, despite a false investigation and partisan bullshit in the media he was still more successful in 4 years than most Democrats are in their entire careers?  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.1.9  CB   replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7.1.8    4 months ago

You jest. That's all I got for this one. Believe Trump 'truthful hyperbole.' I can't fix. . . that. I like presidents who at least strive to be honest and decent as a general rule, anyway. Suffice it to say - Donald Trump puts the "oo" in cr-oo-ked!

We asked (pleaded even) for some compromise with Trump but no go. You know why? Because he and his CONSTITUENTS wanted and continue to want to try to force us, liberals, no less, to behave and become CONSERVATIVES.  Hell, y'all will first have to convince vanishing members of the GOP to return before you can indoctrinate liberals to give in to 'Donald' and his 'menagerie.'

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Principal
7.1.10  MrFrost  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @7.1.1    4 months ago

Yeah they did, but 2022 and 2024 are coming up sooner than most people think. Enjoy it while it lasts, because it won't be for long...

I wouldn't be so sure. Under trump the GOP lost the senate, the house, the WH and 3.5 million jobs. 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
7.1.11  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  MrFrost @7.1.10    4 months ago

That is true, but the future and election results are never written in stone.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
7.1.12  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  CB @7.1.9    4 months ago
We asked (pleaded even) for some compromise

Crying and stomping your feet isn't asking or pleading.  It's a temper tantrum.  Something you all have been doing since 2016.  Apparently you (as a group) don't fully grasp the problems that the liberals have brought to the table from 2008 - 2016 and since 2020.  But hey, at least you don't have mean tweets from "orange man".

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
7.1.13  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  MrFrost @7.1.10    4 months ago

Plus, his supporters are dying in droves due to the CV.  There won't enough of them to judge a two man pissing contest.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
7.2  Ozzwald  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7    4 months ago
Take a look at the actions of the Democrats between 2016 and 2022.

Yeah let's take a look at those.

Ummm....what actions are we looking at?

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
7.2.1  Ronin2  replied to  Ozzwald @7.2    4 months ago

Start with the calls for Trump's impeachment before he even took office; and then trying to force delegates to change their votes over to Hillary.

Donald Trump isn’t even the Republican nominee yet. But his incendiary rhetoric, most notably about killing the families of terrorists and bringing back torture, has critics on the right and the left discussing the most extreme of countermeasures at an unusually early point in the race.

“Impeachment” is already on the lips of pundits, newspaper editorials, constitutional scholars, and even a few members of Congress. From the right, Washington attorney Bruce Fein puts the odds at 50/50 that a President Trump commits impeachable offenses as president. Liberal Florida Rep. Alan Grayson says Trump’s insistence on building a wall at the U.S.-Mexico border, if concrete was poured despite Congress’s opposition, could lead down a path toward impeachment. Even the mainstream Republican head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce recently tossed out the I-word when discussing the civilian backlash if Trump’s trade war with China led to higher prices on everyday items sold at WalMart and Target. On his radio show last month, Rush Limbaugh even put a very brisk timeline on it: “They’ll be talking impeachment on day two, after the first Trump executive order,” he said.

It’s not unusual for controversial presidents to be shadowed by talk of impeachment, once they’ve been in office long enough to make people mad. But before he’s elected? Before he’s a nominee?

From the moment he took office, Donald Trump’s impeachment was inevitable. Democrats knew it. Republicans knew it too.

Democrats can pretend as though they were willing to give Trump a chance to prove that he could be a better president than they knew in their hearts he was incapable of being. But that would be a lie. Democrats never trusted him — not for a single moment.

This week, House Democrats will get what they have craved for three years. They are expected to vote to impeach the 45th president of the United States.

Supporters of Trump have repeatedly pointed to the fact that Democrats have been urging Trump’s impeachment since he took office — and they’re right. A Democrat-backed website, ImpeachDonaldTrumpNow, launched literally on Inauguration Day 2017. (“From the moment he assumed the office, President Trump has been in direct violation of the US Constitution,” the website reads.)

As Majority Leader Mitch McConnell noted on the Senate floor Thursday, Wednesday’s vote to impeach Trump wasn’t the Democrats’ first. It was their seventh. It’s just the first time they had a majority of members in support.

This impeachment vote was “the predetermined end of a partisan crusade that began before President Trump was even sworn in,” McConnell said.

At least a half-dozen Democratic electors have signed onto an attempt to block Donald Trump from winning an Electoral College majority, an effort designed not only to deny Trump the presidency but also to undermine the legitimacy of the institution.

The presidential electors, mostly former Bernie Sanders supporters who hail from Washington state and Colorado, are now lobbying their Republican counterparts in other states to reject their oaths — and in some cases, state law — to vote against Trump when the Electoral College meets on Dec. 19.

Even the most optimistic among the Democratic electors acknowledges they're unlikely to persuade the necessary 37 Republican electors to reject Trump — the number they'd likely need to deny him the presidency and send the final decision to the House of Representatives. And even if they do, the Republican-run House might simply elect Trump anyway.

But the Democratic electors are convinced that even in defeat, their efforts would erode confidence in the Electoral College and fuel efforts to eliminate it, ending the body’s 228-year run as the only official constitutional process for electing the president. With that goal in mind, the group is also contemplating encouraging Democratic electors to oppose Hillary Clinton and partner with Republicans in support of a consensus pick like Mitt Romney or John Kasich.

Millions of people have signed a petition to demand that the electoral college change their votes to Hillary Clinton. At the time of writing, more than 4.3 million people are asking the electoral college across the US, which meets on 19 December in each state, to vote for the Democrat instead of Donald Trump.

There are large-scale movements afoot, such as a Change.org petition , with 4.9 million people encouraging electors to vote for Hillary Clinton, the popular-vote winner, and another arguing that electors should select a “compromise candidate.” There are also organizations, such as the Hamilton Electors , encouraging electors to act independently of so-called “faithless elector” laws, and at least one lawsuit that argues such laws are unconstitutional. (It’s on appeal to the 9th Circuit.)

In the 2016 presidential election, Trump won 304 electoral votes to Hillary Clinton 's 227. During the joint session on January 6, 2017, seven House Democrats tried to object to electoral votes from multiple states.

According to a C-SPAN recording of the joint session that took place four years ago, the following House Democrats made objections:

  • Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) objected to Alabama's votes.
  • Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) objected to Florida's votes.
  • Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) objected to Georgia's votes.
  • Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) objected to North Carolina's votes.
  • Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) objected to the votes from North Carolina in addition to votes from South Carolina and Wisconsin. She also stood up and objected citing "massive voter suppression" after Mississippi's votes were announced.
  • Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) brought up allegations of Russian interference in the election and malfunctioning voting machines when she objected following the announcement of Michigan's votes.
  • Maxine Waters (D-Calif) rose and said, "I do not wish to debate. I wish to ask 'Is there one United States senator who will join me in this letter of objection?'" after the announcement of Wyoming's votes.
For an objection to be considered, it must be submitted in writing and signed by a member of both the House and Senate . Because no senators signed onto the objections made by House Democrats in 2017, then-Vice President Biden by law denied all of the objections, repeatedly saying "there is no debate."

Hillary still hasn't accept that she lost; she and her minions still rant that the election was "stolen from her". She has never recognized Trump as president. She didn't even have a concession speech written.

Hillary Clinton says she has been telling candidates seeking the 2020 Democratic nomination that even if they run a perfect campaign, the election could be "stolen" from them, implying that was what befell her in 2016. 

Clinton said Saturday that she has been pouring over special counsel Robert Mueller's 448-page report on the Russian government's "sweeping and systematic" interference in the 2016 election and that she fears the same tactics will be "alive and well" in 2020. 

"You can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you," she said to cheers on the Los Angeles stop of her "Evening with the Clintons" tour with her husband, former President Bill Clinton. 

Now throw in the bullshit Mueller investigation- which the FBI used the debunked Steele Dossier paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign to gain FISA warrants to tap Trump campaign lines; and those close to him. Mueller couldn't prove collusion; because none existed- so they switched over to obstruction; which they not only failed to prove- but using the Democrat standards during the Clinton impeachment, Trump didn't even come close to committing.

TDS driven Democrats and their lemmings can try to rewrite history all they want. They will forever fail. 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
7.2.2  Ozzwald  replied to  Ronin2 @7.2.1    4 months ago
Start with the calls for Trump's impeachment before he even took office

Your articles don't mention ANY democrats calling for his impeachment before he took office.  It just claimed that some, unnamed ones did.

Now you want to try some specific verifiable actions, or just continue with right wing conspiracy theories?  Oh, and BTW, even if you do come up with 1 or 2 quotes, it is a very common thing from opposing parties. 

So it is kind of hypocritical to call that action as bad, when you don't call the same action as bad when done by your supported party.

A Brief History of GOP Calls for Obama's Impeachment, From Benghazi to Bergdahl

New group of GOP lawmakers file articles of impeachment against Biden

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
7.2.3  Greg Jones  replied to  Ozzwald @7.2.2    4 months ago

Come December, the Republican controlled House will start impeachment hearings against Biden. The Republican controlled Senate will vote to impeach.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Expert
7.2.4  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Greg Jones @7.2.3    4 months ago

384

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
7.2.5  Snuffy  replied to  Greg Jones @7.2.3    4 months ago

I hope not.  I don't like Biden and really didn't want him in the Oval Office, but this will look too much like playing partisan politics.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.2.6  CB   replied to  Greg Jones @7.2.3    4 months ago

And this is one reason (other is republican legislatures have no good and fair policy prescriptions for this nation but are firing from their shameless lips) why republicans and conservatives do not deserve to be in charge of a damn thing.

Independent voters, c'mon be decent and wholesome in 2022. Show republicans and conservatives who are pushing the extremes the 'back' of your votes for a change!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.2.7  CB   replied to  Snuffy @7.2.5    4 months ago

It will be partisan and a true "witch-hunt" and you know something else- in the ensuing two years all of us (old folks) will have paid professionals to bull patty their way through two more years of our life-lines. This, from people who keep harking about millions wasted and not available for the future generations. What a bunch of lousy, hypocrites who are too engaged in "acting" that they do not even recognize the shame that is encrusted on themselves!

Fools! Some conservatives will not get away with any of it!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.2.8  Texan1211  replied to  CB @7.2.6    4 months ago
Independent voters, c'mon be decent and wholesome in 2022. Show republicans and conservatives who are pushing the extremes the 'back' of your votes for a change!

Biden certainly doesn't seem too concerned about independent voters. His ratings with them have taken a serious nosedive, and I see no efforts by the Administration to alleviate the problem.

It is very telling that you seem to think that only a vote for any Democrat is "decent and wholesome".

Ah, tolerance!

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
7.2.9  Ozzwald  replied to  Greg Jones @7.2.3    4 months ago
Come December, the Republican controlled House will start impeachment hearings against Biden.

Sure they will, if that makes you feel better, you go just ahead and keep believing that.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
7.2.10  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.8    4 months ago
Biden certainly doesn't seem too concerned about independent voters. His ratings with them have taken a serious nosedive, and I see no efforts by the Administration to alleviate the problem.

Should any Trump supporter really be talking about ratings?  Just asking.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.2.11  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @7.2.10    4 months ago
Should any Trump supporter really be talking about ratings?

Of course. We can recognize two different subjects of the ratings. 

BTFW, does supporting Trump make Biden's ratings change?

Or just couldn't help yourself from blurting out "Trump" again?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
7.2.12  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.11    4 months ago
We can recognize two different subjects of the ratings.

2 different subjects, or 2 different perceptions?  (i.e. ratings don't count for Trump, but they do count for Biden?)

BTFW, does supporting Trump make Biden's ratings change?

Does supporting Biden make Trump's ratings change?

Or just couldn't help yourself from blurting out "Trump" again?

Don't care about Trump, but just absolutely love rubbing hypocrites noses in their hypocritical examples.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.2.13  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.8    4 months ago

And what do "do as we say and not as we do" some conservatives tolerate, please clarify the republican platform ahead of 2022, Texan! Do try (anyway).

I, we, liberals, try to not mind conservatives and even show love in this life, but y'all ain't having any of it from us! It's opposition and trafficking in trashiness and counterprogramming all the time from the Right.

We're not kissing backsides this year (too much at stake for the nation and the world) and we can't get down on the floor to be walked (stomped) on, therefore, I guess COMPROMISE is something we all need to get back (use) to as progress.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.2.14  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @7.2.12    4 months ago
2 different subjects, or 2 different perceptions?  (i.e. ratings don't count for Trump, but they do count for Biden?)

Well, ratings for Biden are separate from ratings for Trump. Ratings count for either equally.  Not sure why you think they wouldn't count equally. What do you base that on? Say, did you think we were talking about Trump's ratings? Why on earth would you think that?

Does supporting Biden make Trump's ratings change?

Not that I'm aware of. Then again, I do not blurt out "Biden" randomly on articles about Trump, either, so there is that.

Don't care about Trump,

Sure, sure. I'll let the evidence proving otherwise stand.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.2.15  Texan1211  replied to  CB @7.2.13    4 months ago
And what do "do as we say and not as we do" some conservatives tolerate, please clarify the republican platform ahead of 2022, Texan!

What are you going on about? You claim you know all there is about "some conservatives" (whatever the heck THAT crap means!) so of course you would shoot down anything not conforming to your preconceived ideas.

I, we, liberals, try tonot mind conservativesand evenshow love in this life,

My, oh my, how very magnanimous  of ya'll!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.2.16  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.15    4 months ago

Noise: definition: 'A big waste of time and energy.' 

Texan, this year I am not into "empty can sounds."

Empty Aluminum Cans Rattling Sound Effect Free High Quality Sound FX
 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.2.17  Texan1211  replied to  CB @7.2.16    4 months ago
Noise: definition: 'A big waste of time and energy.' 

Now I see a problem.

I won't invent new definitions for words commonly known to all.  

But you have fun doing so!

THIS is why I need to ask you to explain some of your posts. When you use different definitions than the rest of the world does, it creates confusion. Perhaps instead of attempting to be somewhat cryptic and getting your digs in, you could just clearly and PLAINLY say what it is you think you are saying while posting the cutesy stuff.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Principal
7.2.18  MrFrost  replied to  Greg Jones @7.2.3    4 months ago
Come December, the Republican controlled House will start impeachment hearings against Biden.

For what? Please be specific.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
7.2.19  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.8    4 months ago

Yep, Independents be decent. It's almost like hearing just make sure you vote our way or not at all, otherwise you are not relevant! I find that highly comical and hypocritical at the same time...

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.2.20  Sparty On  replied to  MrFrost @7.2.18    4 months ago

No problem.    

They’ll follow the template created by Democrats in the previous four years and just make some shit up.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Principal
7.2.21  MrFrost  replied to  Sparty On @7.2.20    4 months ago

So in other words, you have nothing. Got it. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.2.22  Sparty On  replied to  MrFrost @7.2.21    4 months ago

Nah but you are clearly in serious denial there Frosty ..... no other realistic  way to look at it.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Principal
7.2.23  MrFrost  replied to  Sparty On @7.2.22    4 months ago

Nah but you are clearly in serious denial there Frosty ..... no other realistic  way to look at it.

I asked for specific charges for impeachment. You gave me nothing at all. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.2.24  Sparty On  replied to  MrFrost @7.2.23    4 months ago

Nah, not nothing.

 
I gave you the Democrat “make shit up” template.

Worked for those crackpots.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8  CB     4 months ago

Congress - the "people's house" is a damn joke. State houses are a damn joke. Life in 'America' is becoming a proverb! Oh how low the mighty nation that once was has fallen even soon to be the last great nation in a listing of nations.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.1  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8    4 months ago
Congress - the "people's house" is a damn joke. State houses are a damn joke. Life in 'America' is becoming a proverb! Oh how low the mighty nation that once was has fallen even soon to be the last great nation in a listing of nations.

Some of us still have hopes for America and refuse to buy into the Chicken Little-like prattling on by some progressive liberals.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.1  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.1    4 months ago

That's bull patty and you should know it. My hope is not in a losing, lying, INDIVIDUAL that 'sacked' this country and made the world take stock of what a SHITHOLE we have become. We suffered a 'near-miss' to drop out of the league of democracies! Almost had to turn in out democracy card. No thanks to some conservatives and the bull patty they fully represent!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.1.1    4 months ago
That's bull patty and you should know it.

Yes, THIS certainly falls under the category of bull patty! "Congress - the "people's house" is a damn joke"

I won't entertain yet more Chicken Little shenanigans.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8    4 months ago
Congress - the "people's house" is a damn joke.

I am sure sorry you don't seem to like the people in charge of Congress.  Maybe it is time to vote Republican in 2022, and get  new leadership in Congress, since obviously you agree the old ones aren't anything more than a joke.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.1  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2    4 months ago

Well, you know what? It is a brand spanking new year and hope springs eternal!  Moreover, some conservatives can get off their 'duffs' and 'elbows' and WORK to make COMPROMISE a less dirty word in 2022!  Less grift and more legislatin' in 2022 for the good of all I say!

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
8.2.2  Snuffy  replied to  CB @8.2.1    4 months ago
Moreover, some conservatives can get off their 'duffs' and 'elbows' and WORK to make COMPROMISE a less dirty word in 2022!

LOL,   don't forget that it's a two way street.  The Democrats have been just as dead set at no compromise for many years now too.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.1    4 months ago
Well, you know what? It is a brand spanking new year and hope springs eternal! 

Yep!!! 2022---the year Pelosi gets put out to pasture! Yay!!

Moreover, some conservatives can get off their 'duffs' and 'elbows' and WORK to makeCOMPROMISEa less dirty word in 2022! Less grift and more legislatin' in 2022 for the good of all I say!

This may well come as a total shock, but that compromise thingy works both ways. I refuse to pretend it is only one sided.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.4  CB   replied to  Snuffy @8.2.2    4 months ago

Let's test that theory of yours in today's environment under President Joe Biden. BTW, you and me are going to age a year by 2022 (that with make us each - rhetorical.)

Apparently, people want to vote more freely and have more diversity in doing so. Since, according to republicans and conservatives, this is a "free" country where we should have all the freedoms we can amass, President Joe Biden, House and Senate democrats want to offer all this nation's citizens freedoms to vote liberally as they can.

Where are republicans and conservatives on this specific liberty? And, do you agree with no republicans voting to liberate voting laws at the federal level?

Take your time. Be clear. Be profound even.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.5  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.4    4 months ago
And do you agree with no republicans voting to liberate voting laws at the federal level?

What the heck does that even mean? Liberate voting laws at the federal level? Are the laws imprisoned? Do federal voting laws discriminate? Why and how do federal laws need liberating, and from WHAT???????????

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.6  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.3    4 months ago

COMPROMISE. Sat at the damn table and get down to business. Don't get asses out of seats until something worthwhile is agreed upon by all! Operative words: Get something done!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.7  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.5    4 months ago

I am not in the mood for 'noisiness' in 2022. If you can't figure out the comment-slow your role-and perhaps the proper addressee can clarify it for you.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.8  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.6    4 months ago

Shouldn't both sides be clear as to what they want and are willing to support?

"Get something done!" makes for nice buzzwords but carry no real meaning.  

It is not wise to just hope to "get something done" for the sake of getting something done instead of focusing on the quality of passing something worthwhile.

Personally, I have seen Congress muck up more things than they actually get right in my opinion, so I am in no hurry for Democrats to ram something through all by themselves to make the progressive liberal kiddies all happy.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.9  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.7    4 months ago
I am not in the mood for 'noisiness' in 2022. If you can't figure out the comment-slow your role-and perhaps the proper addressee can clarify it for you.

And I am not in the mood for little "cutesy" posts by members who refuse to speak plainly.

BTW, the proper addressee would BE the person who the post was directed to. Why would I ask someone else to explain what YOU wrote? That is silly.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.10  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.8    4 months ago

COMPROMISE or Bust!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.11  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.9    4 months ago

You're trolling me and the real meaning of this thread is getting absorbed into background. Can you be kind enough to stop now?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.12  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.11    4 months ago

That is a spectacularly weak response.

Some progressive liberals seem to think that every time they are challenged, they are trolled.

They aren't.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.13  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.10    4 months ago
COMPROMISE

And how do YOU define compromise today?

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
8.2.14  Snuffy  replied to  CB @8.2.4    4 months ago
And, do you agree with no republicans voting to liberate voting laws at the federal level?

This is a confusing statement.  What exactly do you mean by this?  I ask for a better definition as I reviewed your posting history and it appears that you have a hard time separating partisan rhetoric from your statements and you also have shown a history of argument over a difference in definition by other people in how they view a confusing statement. So I feel it's better to fully understand what you are asking.

As for this...

Apparently, people want to vote morefreelyand have morediversityindoing so. Since, according to republicans and conservatives, this is a "free" country where we should have all the freedoms we can amass, President Joe Biden, House and Senate democrats want to offer all this nation's citizens freedoms to voteliberallyas they can

I can only assume you mean the 'For the People' act.  The US Constitution is fairly clear in that the power to manage elections is at the state level. Yes Congress can pass laws but I feel this act is an over-reach by one party for partisan reasons.  Oh they dress it up in pretty words (much like the Republicans do when they are pushing their bills) but the end result is to federalize elections which I do not agree with.

Some of the pieces of the democrat package I can agree with.  I would like to see all states set up and allow for both early voting and mail-in ballots,  provided the states also must set up the proper safeguards to insure proper voting.  As the states have to manage it and pay for it I feel they should get to set the process.  Both mail-in voting and ballot drop boxes need to be properly set up and managed to insure secure voting. I do not like ballot harvesting, especially when handled by any political party. At most it should only be allowed for people in the immediate family or household.  And to aid in managing the security of voting, the voting roles need to be cleaned up. That's another partisan football that does not do anything good for the people. I have a friend who's son moved from Phoenix to Las Vegas well over 15 years ago and they still get his mail-in ballot every election cycle. They have sent it back several times noting that the person had moved out of state and the next election cycle they get the ballot again.  They have just started to throw it out because it's obvious that the election commission is not going to clean up the voting roles.  This needs to be a mandatory fix. I would even like to see federal management of this in data sharing, but based on other data management issues I doubt the federal government is up to handling this any better. 

However I do not like same-day registration, I feel that is insufficient time to allow for proper vetting and is open for abuse. At best I could agree to allowing them to register and cast a provisional ballot.

really at all levels) want something back for their money. We have too much special interests involved in politics and government now and IMO should be removed. But politicians are people too and they are also interested in what they can get out of it so I doubt if we will ever be able to get that fixed. And it's a shame, because it leads to this partisan bullshit rather than governing for the people's best interests. 

I don't like gerrymandering, never did. Republicans have been more successful in controlling state houses so have been more successful in gerrymandering but by no means is it just a Republican thing.  Again it's human nature to want to control your environment so which ever political party is in charge of the process when it comes time to realign voting districts will manage it to their benefit. 

I hope my responses are clear enough. I wish you would also endeavor to be clear.  This is not an all encompassing posting but it covers some of the major points I think. What are your thoughts and why do you think that federalizing elections is a better approach than what we have now? 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.15  CB   replied to  Snuffy @8.2.14    4 months ago
And, do you agree with no republicans voting to liberate voting laws at the federal level?
This is a confusing statement.  What exactly do you mean by this?  I ask for a better definition as I reviewed your posting history and it appears that you have a hard time separating partisan rhetoric from your statements and you also have shown a history of argument over a difference in definition by other people in how they view a confusing statement. So I feel it's better to fully understand what you are asking.

Let me simplify it for you. NEVERMIND. I have my answer already.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.16  CB   replied to  Snuffy @8.2.14    4 months ago
I can only assume you mean the 'For the People' act.  The US Constitution is fairly clear in that the power to manage elections is at the state level. Yes Congress can pass laws but I feel this act is an over-reach by one party for partisan reasons.

The U.S. Constitution is certainly clear that federal law is superior to state law; as it is the union of fifty states, presupposed to working together for the good of the whole country. Not this 'back-water' reality of states 'warring politically' to outdo each other. I digress, nevertheless.

Over-reach? Feelings? Which party is repeatedly "over-reaching" on the state level? One? both? All (others)?

Snuffy:

  1. Should states allow a majority of voters to decide elections (not legislatures) and vote as they see fit as long as it is a fair and balanced election?
 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.17  CB   replied to  Snuffy @8.2.14    4 months ago
What are your thoughts and why do you think that federalizing elections is a better approach than what we have now? 

I agree with your thoughts from: "Some of the pieces of the democrat package I can agree with. . . . " onward. As to the question I quote above?

I am a Black man. I am a homosexual man. I am a liberal. I am a Christian. All my life, and I do mean all of it (60 plus years) I have been "messed with" about some version of my reason for being. Can you just imagine that I am simply 'sick and tired' of states 'f-ing' with me?

I am, and want to be, as "American as apple pie," but there has always been some YAHOOS (in states) who question:  my integrity, my worth, my 'service,' my ability to love, and definitely yes my 'skin.'

I don't have the luxury of aging out and waiting on local and state YAHOOS who apparently live to hold my black 'butt' in the fire - for sport and profit.

Is that clear? Or do I need to be plainer still?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.18  CB   replied to  CB @8.2.17    4 months ago

One more thing: As for cheating in elections. This nation should REACT to evidence of cheating. The curious thing about evidence is it is definite-not aspirational or subjective. That is, not democratic, republican, liberal, conservative, or progressive. DEFINITE.

What so-called "red" and "blue" state leaders are doing is causing great conflict among ordinary rank and file citizens. All we want is efficiency and fairness. It is not too much to ask-certainly not over the course of hundreds of years (to get and "do" the right thing once and for all).

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
8.2.19  Snuffy  replied to  CB @8.2.16    4 months ago
Over-reach? Feelings? Which party is repeatedly "over-reaching" on the state level? One? both? All (others)?

I thought my reply was fairly clear in that I was stating that I felt the 'For the People' act was overreach,  and that was at the federal level because the act is coming out of Congress and not any state house.  

As for which party is repeatedly 'over-reaching', that would all depend on which political party controls the state house in question as they both fucking do it when they have the power to do so. 

  1. Should states allow a majority of voters to decide elections (not legislatures)andvote as they see fit as long as it is a fair and balanced election?

They already do have that set up.  It's called the next election where the majority of the voters in that state get to vote and decide who will lead them in their state legislative bodies.  Now is that completely fair and open, no it's not.  Which ever party is in power gets to control the districts and gets to gerrymander to aid in keeping them in power. So as a private citizen about the only other choice you have if  you don't like the system you are living in is to move to another state. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
8.2.20  Snuffy  replied to  CB @8.2.17    4 months ago
agree with your thoughts from: "Some of the pieces of the democrat package I can agree with. . . . " onward. As to the question I quote above?

I am a Black man. I am a homosexual man. I am a liberal. I am a Christian. All my life, and I do mean all of it (60 plus years) I have been "messed with" about some version of my reason for being. Can you just imagine that I am simply 'sick and tired' of states 'f-ing' with me?

I am, and want to be, as "American as apple pie," but there has always been some YAHOOS (in states) who question:  my integrity, my worth, my 'service,' my ability to love, and definitely yes my 'skin.'

I don't have the luxury of aging out and waiting on local and state YAHOOS who apparently live to hold my black 'butt' in the fire - for sport and profit.

Is that clear? Or do I need to be plainer still?

If you are waiting for universal love and acceptance, you'll never get it.  Bigotry and racism have been around for as long as man has been around on this planet.  I don't think we will ever get away from it entirely. The world has gotten better over time but the issues are still with us and still impact us. But any federal law is not going to change this so trying to tie the 'For the People' act to your feelings as listed is really a waste of time.  Murder is illegal, has been illegal for many years. But it doesn't stop people from committing murder. A law is not going to make people more civil or behave in a more christian fashion or eliminate bigotry from your daily life.  So perhaps you do need to be a bit clearer, what do you expect any federal law to do about what you listed in 8.2.17?

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
8.2.21  Snuffy  replied to  CB @8.2.18    4 months ago
One more thing: As for cheating in elections. This nation should REACT to evidence of cheating. The curious thing about evidence is it is definite-not aspirational or subjective. That is, not democratic, republican, liberal, conservative, or progressive. DEFINITE. What so-called "red" and "blue" state leaders are doing is causing great conflict among ordinary rank and file citizens. All we want is efficiency and fairness. It is not too much to ask-certainly not over the course of hundreds of years (to get and "do" the right thing once and for all).

I agree with this completely, when cheating in elections is found the nation should react. The problem I see (and I'll admit I'm not an educated man in all the issues around voting) is where there is a lack in the security process around voting.  When a person goes into a polling station and verifies their identity and votes,  that is one thing.  But when a person gets a ballot thru the mail, fills it out and drops it into a drop box there is a higher chance of something going wrong.   So as the state is responsible for voting integrity I believe that the states need to insure they have the proper process set up to manage voting security.  Voter rolls need to be kept clean,  I personally see nothing wrong with a voter ID requirement provided there is the ability for everybody to get voter ID and there is also a process to work around the ID as there can be times when the ID is lost / misplaced just when it's needed. The states should manage that based on the needs of their citizens.  And when cheating is found it needs to be prosecuted, not ignored.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.22  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.15    4 months ago
Let me simplify it for you. NEVERMIND. I have my answer already.

Now that makes it seem that you can not explain what you meant in your post.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.23  CB   replied to  Snuffy @8.2.19    4 months ago

Truth is complex, isn't it? I won't belabor the point: There are states (some enacting constrictions more than others) rigging the system so their paltry numbers can have an OVERSIZED impact on society whether than change for the betterment of the whole. I digress. Use your discernment, and I leave it with you.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.24  CB   replied to  Snuffy @8.2.20    4 months ago
But any federal law is not going to change this so trying to tie the 'For the People' act to your feelings as listed is really a waste of time. 

Federal law is people representative democracy at work! Don't you dare try to 'leverage' what is good for the nation against my feelings about being mistreated as a category and type time and time again in this country. I won't stand for it.

What is needed is for this nation of fifty states to GROW UP AND MATURE and stop THE ABUSE of all its good and proper citizens by making allowance for some over others.  ALL OF US PAY INTO THE SYSTEMS OF THIS COUNTRY WITH OUR LIVES/BLOOD/TIME/TREASURE.

It is about time that we all get EQUALLY REWARDED and forego the "universal love and acceptance" kumbaya rhetoric. Aspire to do what is right and right just my bust you in the. . . chops!

We don't need federal law if people were better. But, since some Americans are EVIL AND BASTARDS - federal law encompassing fifty states will have to hold some of that Evil BASTARD in check!

"The struggle continues."

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.25  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.23    4 months ago
There are states (some enacting constrictions more than others) rigging the system so their paltry numbers can have an OVERSIZED impact on society whether than change for the betterment of the whole.

Sounds like leftwing hysteria far more than any actual crisis.

Fearmongering won't win Democrats elections amongst independents because most of them will be able to see fearmongering for exactly what it is--a desperate attempt to "preserve" democracy even when it isn't being threatened.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
8.2.26  Snuffy  replied to  CB @8.2.23    4 months ago

Agreed.  There are some states governed by Republicans who are going too far in their attempt to push the system to favor their party.   And in states where Democrats are in power, they are also pushing to favor their party.  I see where Michigan is being sued for it's recent gerrymandering process for disenfranchising black neighborhoods.  Each party where it is in power is pushing hard to further their power simply because there is too much money in that power. And until we the people take back the power, the two party system will continue to do what they have been doing for years.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.27  CB   replied to  Snuffy @8.2.21    4 months ago

No 'buts.' Evidence of cheating. That is not what is happening in states and you should know this. No evidence sufficient to altering the path of elections has been put on display. And moreover, no courts have taken the 'case.'

Thus, this is hype being advanced to rig elections.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
8.2.28  Snuffy  replied to  CB @8.2.24    4 months ago
Federal law is people representative democracy at work! Don't you dare try to 'leverage' what is good for the nation against my feelings about being mistreated as a category and type time and time again in this country. I won't stand for it.

You're trying to tie the 'For the People' act as good for the nation?  I did state above that while I agree with some of the pieces, the totality of the bill is IMO an overreach by the Democratic party.   

What is needed is for this nation of fifty states to GROW UP AND MATURE and stop THE ABUSE of all its good and proper citizens by making allowance for some over others.  ALL OF US PAY INTO THE SYSTEMS OF THIS COUNTRY WITH OUR LIVES/BLOOD/TIME/TREASURE.

This sounds like you are talking equity rather than equality.  I'm all for equality, IMO it starts with the schooling.  For those of us at our age, it's very probably too late to make any meaningful change. But we can change the education system, enhance money to failing schools, remove teachers and administrations that do not work to better the experience for the children, and teach children not just facts and figures but how to think and how to succeed.   But I do not agree with the push for equity.  Equal outcomes should not be mandatory, your outcome should rely on what you put into it. Where there are outside forces that impact your outcome, that should be prevented. But  by no means should you receive extra benefits just because your outcome is not the same as mine. 

Sorry but my feelings are just as valid as yours so any threat to bust me in the chops is wrong.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.29  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.27    4 months ago
Thus, this is hype being advanced to rig elections.

Do you have ANY real evidence of this, or just ASSUMING something invented and tossed up by some progressive liberals?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.30  CB   replied to  Snuffy @8.2.28    4 months ago

You been a minority anytime recently? Help me understand how that feels for you? Maybe I have a misperception of who "Snuffy" is as a human in this country.

Yes, I am talking equity. And it has little to nothing to do with reliance on what you put into it. Many Blacks, women, homosexuals, people of color, others "put in"ffor their whole lives over centuries and got CHEATED/ABUSED/KILLED for doing things as they were told "properly."  Our physical wealth BY LAW LANDED IN COFFERS FOR OTHER PEOPLE SAKE!

I won't recite (maybe I will) examples on the timeline. You should be able to draw down on your lifetime of living to make conclusions of what happened to get us to today.

So don't lecture me about self-reliance. It did not help minorities in a RIGGED SYSTEM where THE MAJORITY kept and presently uses its narrow status as majority to KEEP doing its best to set-back fellow citizens it opposes. BTW, if you can't see outside of your own privileged class it may explain why you think everybody (else) is doing or "OUGHT" to be doing as well or worse as you.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
8.2.31  Snuffy  replied to  CB @8.2.30    4 months ago

Well it's obvious to me that you and I will not come to agreement on this.  Perhaps you missed above where I already stated that bigotry and racism has been with us from day 1 and while it's better today than it was 50 years ago it's still a problem and one I doubt will ever be eliminated.  And yes I do know that many minorities have been cheated / abused / murdered by racists and bigots in the past,  and I also am confident that sort of action will continue in the future.  We can never completely eliminate it I'm afraid as it's part of human nature. 

I don't need you to draw a map of what happened to get us to where we are today. While I did live a very protected life in my childhood I have been around this world for a few years now and have seen a lot of different issues. I've also seen where things have gotten better.  But I'm not going to apologize for my life any more than I am going to blame you for your life.  Any times in the past where bigotry or racism has prevented  you from moving forward was just wrong. But I cannot change  your past any more than  you can change your past.  All either one of us can do is move forward and live our lives as they should be lived.  But just because I'm white and didn't have to contend with some of the prejudice and bigotry you did doesn't mean I'm guilty of building any system against you.  

Equity vs equality to me is similar to the old give a man a fish / teach a man to fish.  Equity is to give everybody a fish so they can eat tonight.  Equality is teaching everybody to fish so they can have the ability to maybe feed themselves for the days to come providing the fish are biting in that pond.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.32  CB   replied to  Snuffy @8.2.31    4 months ago
Perhaps you missed above where I already stated that bigotry and racism has been with us from day 1 and while it's better today than it was 50 years ago it's still a problem and one I doubt will ever be eliminated

Why do you "doubt" racism (in general) can be eliminated? Do you just give up? Is it chic to not try and be rid of racism? Just how long should a country, a 'melting pot' of world tribes and peoples continue to be just 'odds and ends' to each other?

Your 'solution' to this vexing set of questions is a version of fatalism.

Or maybe you view the white majority as being fixed at the top above all that goes on 'beneath' - I don't know. You tend not to open up to 'say.'  But, I hear the numbers are in flux-majority/minority -wise.

It is time for us to start 'blending' into each other finally. Let's try to wish and aspire for unity even when all that returns is division.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.33  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.32    4 months ago
Why do you "doubt" racism (in general) can be eliminated?

Because of reality and history.

Do you just give up?

Not what he stated, clearly.

Is it chic to not try and be rid of racism?

Not that I know of. Is it?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.34  CB   replied to  CB @8.2.32    4 months ago

BTW, this 'give and take' neglects recent arguments 'delivered' by some conservatives that we are living in a 'color-blind' society nowadays. No more (White) guilt and shame! We are pass all that. 

I guess it depends on which some conservative is writing. Eh? I knew it was spoken for expediency alone. Bunch of pretenders.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.35  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.34    4 months ago
No more (White) guilt and shame!

And what, in your mind, should I be guilty about, or ashamed about?

We are pass all that. 

We should be, but can't be as long as people still push collective white guilt, equal outcomes, and racist policies favoring one race over another. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.36  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.35    4 months ago
8 .2.33   Texan1211   replied to  CB @ 8.2.32     43 minutes ago
Why do you "doubt" racism (in general) can be eliminated? Because of reality and history.

PRICELESS (rhetoric).

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.37  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.36    4 months ago
PRICELESS (rhetoric).

As opposed to useless rhetoric regarding white guilt.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Principal
8.2.38  Split Personality  replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.37    4 months ago

Like yours?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.39  Texan1211  replied to  Split Personality @8.2.38    4 months ago
Like yours?

C'mon, man!

If you choose to participate in the whole "white guilt" thingy, have fun!

I certainly won't be wasting my time on that crap.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Principal
8.2.40  Split Personality  replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.39    4 months ago

You have done it here countless times, don't you remember?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.41  Texan1211  replied to  Split Personality @8.2.40    4 months ago

What exactly are you going on about??

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.42  CB   replied to  Split Personality @8.2.40    4 months ago

Yes, that 'Texan' should remember. He trots it out for a 'work-out each and every time a white NTer expresses support for historical records. Of course, there is 'expectation' (all) whites will 'surrender' to arguing kind over any other consideration. See, "Texan" I 'get' you (really well)!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.43  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.39    4 months ago

Of course you will be silent about what happened in history, even as some conservatives pull out all the stops on the same shit=21st century.

We SEE some conservatives and the games you play. We're working hard to shut it down too! Bet that!

Same Old Shit Different Day. . . .

See here is the tricky part that some conservatives hope (too late) noone comprehend:

Some conservatives choose to pretend to not feel shame for a past history of violations against minorities and people of color-because to admit to being. . . . ASHAMED OF DOING ALL THAT SHIT IN THE PAST-BELIES THE FACT THAT SOME CONSERVATIVES ARE ACTIVELY ENGAGING IN DOING THE SAME SHIT -EVERY LAST 'STITCH' OF IT- IN THE PRESENT.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.44  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.43    4 months ago
Some conservatives choose to pretend to not feel shame for a past history of violations against minorities and people of color-because to admit to being. . . . ASHAMED OF DOING ALL THAT SHIT IN THE PAST-BELIES THE FACT THAT SOME CONSERVATIVES ARE ACTIVELY ENGAGING IN DOING THE SAME SHIT -EVERY LAST 'STITCH' OF IT- IN THE PRESENT.

And exactly what have you dreamed up that I have done?  I suggest you actually back your examples up with some facts. 

One can certainly feel empathy for those discriminated against without having to feel a false sense of guilt.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.45  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.44    4 months ago

Who are you? I am talking about a class of villains! AKA: Some conservatives. And, the shame is real, not imagined. Some conservatives attempts to 'cement' them out of time and present as conscience-less 'borgs' will fail-might even be harmful to their human physiques and minds!  History will shame wrongdoers accordingly. (Whole families will be embarrassed at their ancestry-again.)

The 'scribes' of time record everything for future writers to pound out and dramatize in its right order. After all, its been done before.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
8.2.46  Snuffy  replied to  CB @8.2.32    4 months ago
Why do you "doubt" racism (in general) can be eliminated?

Gee,  kind of like I already said,  human nature. Will some future come about where racism is gone?  Perhaps in several thousand years but based on history I doubt it. People, especially today, seem loath to give up on their racism. Even victims of racism provide evidence of their own racist behaviors and beliefs, we can see it in news stories all around the country and the world.  I don't give up but I can only control what I can control and I don't try to control what someone else thinks.

Just how long should a country, a 'melting pot' of world tribes and peoples continue to be just 'odds and ends' to each other?

Nice thought but it doesn't change human behavior. Racism exists in humans from all around the world so even if they come here to the US they don't just leave their racism back home. 

Or maybe you view the white majority as beingfixedat the top above all that goes on 'beneath' - I don't know. You tend not to open up to 'say.'  But, I hear the numbers are in flux-majority/minority -wise.

Personally I don't care or worry about this mix. This country is still ruled by the government with the oligarchs hidden behind them, that's the real enemy. As far as which race is the majority,  I don't worry about that too much as I try to deal with people as individuals rather than by their race. But as whites, according to the last census, make up 61% of the US population and the next largest identified group is Hispanic or Latino at 18.5%,  somehow I don't think either you or I will be around to see the white population become a minority in this country.

It is time for us to start 'blending' into each other finally. Let's try to wish and aspire for unity even when all that returns is division.

As my father used to say,  you can shit in one hand and wish in the other and see which one fills up first. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.47  CB   replied to  Snuffy @8.2.46    4 months ago
I don't give up but I can only control what I can control and I don't try to control what someone else thinks.

Spoken like a "happy camper." Snuffy, all bull patty aside, I don't have this luxury life has blessed you.  Presuming you are a White man of a certain age, one might think you easily could be tired of coping with 'chronic' hatred brought on by carrying racism across generations of citizens!  The annual historical accountings of wrongs done past and yes-present.

If you won't come to the table to end chronic racial hatred (and its 'bright future) in the United States for yourselves some conservatives; think about your grandchildren. They don't have to 'toil' in the slave-house of racial hatred if today's generation LEGISLATE INSTITUTIONAL RACISM AWAY!

I. Can. Not. Make. It. More. Clearer. 2022 RESET!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.48  CB   replied to  Snuffy @8.2.46    4 months ago
Nice thought but it doesn't change human behavior. Racism exists in humans from all around the world so even if they come here to the US they don't just leave their racism back home. 

Oh come now. Where is that good old, "can-do" spirit? Sure! You can 't fix every broken 'hardcase' in this country. But you can halt it and make it "undetectable." Instead, you just poo-poo it? Really, Snuffy? I am disappointed and shocked by this attitude.

2022 Reset!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.49  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.45    4 months ago

You are always free to act the victim and martyr.

Not my speed, so I won't encourage such low behavior.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.50  CB   replied to  Snuffy @8.2.46    4 months ago
I don't worry about that too much as I try to deal with people as individuals rather than by their race.

Riggght. Says one of the white majority fixed on top. That is, in your "generations" in this country have you ever been not 'highly favored'?

Sadly, we can't all exist in your OR MY attitude about this for the lot of us. For that, in the meantime, we need better tools and a working (compromis-able) congress!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.51  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.49    4 months ago

And some conservatives are always free (and of course they do choose) to be only and just discourse poo-pooers!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.52  CB   replied to  Snuffy @8.2.46    4 months ago
As my father used to say,  you can shit in one hand and wish in the other and see which one fills up first. 

Why would you SHIT in a perfectly good hand, Snuffy? What wrong-headed imagery to cast forth. If 'America' wants to have a permanent hostility between peoples who interact and 'blend' (clumsily and lumpily) all their lives together-that is just ridiculous on its face. It's a lousy standard. And, it's the very definition of inefficiency.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
8.2.53  Snuffy  replied to  CB @8.2.51    4 months ago

wow...   ok then.  Tex had it right.  You give every appearance that you just want to be a victim and a martyr.  

I'm done with this conversation as you have no desire to actually converse, you want to play the pity game about how rough your life has been.  I would wish you a happy life but from your replies you don't want one, you want to be a victim of the world. Rather than control what you can control you want to sit and bitch about how rough your life is.  Have at it, I'm done and will no longer respond to you.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.54  CB   replied to  Snuffy @8.2.53    4 months ago

GRANDSTANDING is INAPPROPRIATE. You're done, because you have stock in our system the way it is—STUCK. And so does Tex. No one is ignorant of what is happening in this exchange.

Don't respond. It fits. See if I care.  No kiss-ups just to get along, some conservatives!

Onward and Up!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.55  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.54    4 months ago

shouldn't martyrs wear cases or something?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.56  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.55    4 months ago

Dissolution comment. No one is kissing some conservative 'ass' to get along.  Onward and Up!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.57  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.56    4 months ago

I don't see where anyone asked you to kiss their ass.

if you choose not to get along, that's on you.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.58  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.57    4 months ago

 UNDEFEATED.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.59  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.58    4 months ago

Delusional

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
8.2.60  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @8.2.47    4 months ago
LEGISLATE INSTITUTIONAL RACISM AWAY!

Be specific.  What law do you want to see passed?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.61  CB   replied to  Jack_TX @8.2.60    4 months ago

It would be a SERIES of laws, not just one comprehensive law as racism has 'tenacles' which metaphorically writhe and thrust themselves into the nooks and crannies of citizen lives. (You should know this, having live here any length of time.)

We pay legislators to fix what broken, make whole what is incomplete, and otherwise create and maintain a SAFE and relatively WHOLESOME set of institutions for a variety of people groups here. Therefore, if you need specifics about legislation->>>>head to INSTITUTIONAL storehouse and 'brain' for them. I don't get paid by state or federal systems to fix problems. Moreover, if they need me-hire me as Analyst.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.62  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.61    4 months ago
We pay legislators to fix what broken, make whole what is incomplete, and otherwise create and maintain a SAFE and relatively WHOLESOME set of institutions for a variety of people groups here

Since we have been paying them for a very long time, everything must be done by now, right?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
8.2.63  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @8.2.61    4 months ago
It would be a SERIES of laws, not just one comprehensive law as racism has 'tenacles' which metaphorically writhe and thrust themselves into the nooks and crannies of citizen lives. (You should know this, having live here any length of time.)

Such as?  Surely you have put at least some thought into this.

We pay legislators to fix what broken, make whole what is incomplete, and otherwise create and maintain a SAFE and relatively WHOLESOME set of institutions for a variety of people groups here. Therefore, if you need specifics about legislation->>>>head to INSTITUTIONAL storehouse and 'brain' for them. I don't get paid by state or federal systems to fix problems. Moreover, if they need me-hire me as Analyst.

You have a wildly more optimistic view of legislators than I do.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.64  CB   replied to  Jack_TX @8.2.63    4 months ago

Well since you feel that strongly about what thoughts I might have: lead with your own thoughts. Let me follow afterwards: Yea or Nay.

As for me, I expressed myself in a general sense! Congress can expertly manufacture laws that work for all the people and leave racism 'wanting.' For men and women of goodwill that can be achieved admirally. For dogs and scoundrels stalling is a strategic and a tactic.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.65  CB   replied to  Jack_TX @8.2.63    4 months ago
You have a wildly more optimistic view of legislators than I do.

I don't see why you can't demand more seriousness from the people you trust to "govern" our shared existences. "Wildly" - indeed. I simply want those overstuffed, old, fossils, and 'relics' to earn their damn 'keep,' retire, or quit! That last goes for all of them accordingly!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
8.2.66  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @8.2.64    4 months ago
Well since you feel that strongly about what thoughts I might have: lead with your own thoughts. Let me follow afterwards: Yea or Nay.

That sounds very much like you haven't put any thought at all into how we might actually go about improving the situation.

As we've discussed before, my focus would be on public education.  I would change what we teach and how we teach it.  I would also raise standards and remove many of the loopholes that enable public schools to hide just how poorly they educate minority students.

Congress can expertly manufacture laws

I'm trying to think of a single example of this happening.  

I simply want those overstuffed, old, fossils, and 'relics' to earn their damn 'keep,' retire, or quit! That last goes for all of them accordingly!

So once again, you're long on rhetoric and short on tangibles.  "Earn their keep" sounds perilously close to other liberal rhetoric like "pay their fair share" or "resist".  They are the words of people who have convinced themselves they are unhappy but don't know what they actually want.

What does "earn their keep" mean to you?  What would they need to do for you to believe they have "earned their keep"?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.67  Texan1211  replied to  Jack_TX @8.2.66    4 months ago

facts and real solutions don't matter, only the chance to pillory some conservatives.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.68  CB   replied to  Jack_TX @8.2.66    4 months ago
What does "earn their keep" mean to you?  What would they need to do for you to believe they have "earned their keep"?

Pay me. To give legislation advice is costly and time-consuming. Pay up, and I will get cracking on it.

Otherwise, you can lead with your thoughts about how to fix White hatred and it in high places. Afterall, somebody started the whole "domination" model and somebodies are powering it onward non-stop.

You can nay-say all you want; but "nuh-uh" ain't going to change the fact that recently a subset of redneck ASSHOLES took a "son of the South" rebel confederate flag into the capitol symbolizing the South (with its traditions and property 'entanglements') will rise again.

Lookit here! You lucked up on an advice freebie! Here is a jumping off point for your discussion on ending racism through legislation: 1. Write a bill. Pass a law stating this, 

"It is a misdemeanor" to enter onto federal property with a symbol, any known or detail symbol, of the treasonous confederacy of 1861 thereabouts. Punishable up to a one year in jail.

Pay me if you wish more advice.

One more thing. Since you think blacks and other people of color are under-educated by the system, I would ask you to explain the root causes of the substandard treatment from people who SAY with words of "equality" and "unity" and "brotherhood" dripping from their lips everyday apart from racism and hatred. After all, the monies are put up, the "asses" are in chairs, and all that should happen-happens once the 'spigot' of knowledge is turned on in the storehouse of learning.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.69  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.67    4 months ago

Hey you! How about that insurrection January 6, 2021? I have been engaged on other actions today. Did I miss former Donald Trump's statement on the solemnity of January 6, 2021? Please tell me if I did! 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.70  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.68    4 months ago
"It is a misdemeanor" to enter onto federal property with a symbol, any known or detail symbol, of the treasonous confederacy of 1861 thereabouts. Punishable up to a one year in jail.

Wow, now THAT will certainly change people's lives for the better.

/s

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.71  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.69    4 months ago
Hey you! How about that insurrection January 6, 2021? I have been engaged on other actions today. Did I miss former Donald Trump's statement on the solemnity of January 6, 2021? Please tell me if I did! 

I can not ever believe you would ever miss a single sentence Trump utters. Not possible when he lives rent-free in your head 24/7

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.72  CB   replied to  CB @8.2.69    4 months ago

Oh lookit:


Statement by Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States of America

01/06/22
To watch Biden speaking is very hurtful to many people. They're the ones who tried to stop the peaceful transfer with a rigged election. Just look at the numbers. Does anybody really think that Biden beat Obama with the Black population in select Swing State cities, but nowhere else? That he would lose 18 out of 19 bellwether counties, and 27 out of 27  “toss up” House races, but somehow miraculously receive the most votes in American history with no coattails? That he would lose Florida, Ohio, and Iowa and win, even though it has never been done before?

They spread a “web of lies” about me and Russia for 4 years to try to overturn the 2016 election, and now they lie about how they interfered in the 2020 Election, too. Big Tech was used illegally.

Where did all those votes show up from in Georgia, where it was just revealed they sold ballots for $10 a piece, or in Pennsylvania, and Arizona, and Wisconsin. He acts like he's aggrieved, but we're the ones who were aggrieved and America is suffering because of it with poisonous Borders, record Inflation, a humiliating surrender in Afghanistan, $5 a gallon gas and higher, empty stock shelves, and rampant crime. America is a laughingstock stock of the world, and it's all because of the real insurrection, which took place on November 3rd, but this is an election year and MAGA Republicans should get elected and work with me to fix this horror that Joe Biden and the Democrats have brought us.

Never forget the crime of the 2020 Presidential Election. Never give up!


How 'numb-nuts' and tone-deaf is these remarks?

Responsibility. Donald Trump is a former president who served on a day of infamy (brutality) in the closing of his presidency. Some will even say Trump directed, manipulated, and 'shepherded' his supporters to stage an assault on the Capitol, its house and senate, and this nation's presidency. But, I digress.

Five souls were lost in Washington, D.C.'s capitol activities of January 6, 2021.

Donald Trump in his statement 'recognizing' the day takes no responsibility for any lives lost, in the capitol setting, due to word he delivered.

A reasonable person, considered a leader of our great nation, choosing of his own volition to address this sorrow day of infamy, whether he feels responsible or not for the deaths ought to have acknowledged with some favorable words the death of five Americans and citizens in D.C.

Why didn't Donald Trump do it?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.73  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.72    4 months ago

I KNEW you were hanging on Trump's every word!

I KNEW it!!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.74  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.73    4 months ago

Shame of you (for missing an honest opportunity to honor five dead citizen-patriots).  You have 'played' yourself!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
8.2.75  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @8.2.68    4 months ago
Pay me. To give legislation advice is costly and time-consuming. Pay up, and I will get cracking on it.

That would obviously be a massive waste of money, as you clearly have zero ideas.  

Hmm.... wasting money..... no ideas.....  You may very well have a future in Congress.

a subset of redneck ASSHOLES

And you imagine these people to be in "high places", do you?

"It is a misdemeanor" to enter onto federal property with a symbol, any known or detail symbol, of the treasonous confederacy of 1861 thereabouts. Punishable up to a one year in jail.

There are worse laws on the books.

Since you think blacks and other people of color are under-educated by the system,

Every scrap of empirical data we have says that's a fact.  Personally, I'm amazed there aren't a thousand lawsuits already filed. 

I would ask you to explain the root causes of the substandard treatment

It comes down to two things.  The first is how schools are measured at the institutional level, the second is the "soft bigotry of low expectation". 

We decided in the 1980s that "dropout rate" was the holy grail of educational statistics.  When a school has a high dropout rate, principals get fired, state agencies come in, federal funds are in jeopardy, and all sorts of other terrible things happen.  In order to keep the dropout rate low, schools simply lower the academic requirements to the point where they issue a diploma to pretty much anybody who can sit upright.

Schools can use Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as an excuse to identify any low-performing student and lower academic requirements, including modified standardized testing.  These kids can go through their educational career being told that they're doing reasonably well.  They graduate with a diploma that says "modified inclusion", which basically means "we let you sit next to the white kids, but we didn't expect you to be able to keep up with them". 

The institution does not care what they learn, as long as they don't become a dropout statistic.

In 30 years of coaching, I worked with literally thousands of these kids.  I lose track of the number of black kids I've coached who knew less as high school graduates than the white players did as 8th graders.  So then....we pretend to be surprised when these kids come out into the workplace and cannot compete with the white kids we actually educated.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.76  CB   replied to  Jack_TX @8.2.75    4 months ago
Since you think blacks and other people of color are under-educated by the system,
Every scrap of empirical data we have says that's a fact.  Personally, I'm amazed there aren't a thousand lawsuits already filed. 

You do agree that there are white youths traversing K-12 schools; are they undereducated right alongside the blacks and other minorities? Yes. Oh, why don't you mention them in your little "travesty" tale of loss and not coping?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.77  CB   replied to  Jack_TX @8.2.75    4 months ago
In 30 years of coaching, I worked with literally thousands of these kids.  I lose track of the number of black kids I've coached who knew less as high school graduates than the white players did as 8th graders.  So then....we pretend to be surprised when these kids come out into the workplace and cannot compete with the white kids we actually educated.

Now you are compelling me to respond: Coach, you were "in and of" the problem and behold you were stuck unable to correct the broken-ness of your obvious discontent. Boo-hoo. Cry me a river. Maybe, those 'floaters' got out and got skilled labor jobs (or better) after they discovered the school of hard-knocks further down the road.

Hope springs eternal.

The problem was too big for you then, I guess. But, you 'sorrow' over it now in retirement? Those losers you associated with, hopefully are winners in some area of their lives (without your ability to help change their miserable education). Take them out of your 'pocket holder' and set them free (for me). It will do you good to be free of the guilt of under-serving your fellow human beings when they highly probably needed you and other adults in their lives most!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.78  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.74    4 months ago
Shame of you (for missing an honest opportunity to honor five dead citizen-patriots).  You have 'played' yourself!

Sorry, I won't be succumbing to your piousness or play your game.

As the lady from SNL might say, "Not today, Satan, not today!"

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.79  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.78    4 months ago

As I said: We are going to find some conservatives consciences. Bet.

Donald Trump (the Loser) did not treat Ashley Babbitt (and others who perished by events on January 6, 2021) with respect. And apparently, some conservatives made a CONSCIOUS CHOICES to follow where Trump leads!

Trump makes it all about 'Donald' and his old tired shtick! 2022 same as the old 2021 in Trump world. Me. Me. Me.

SHAME. SHAME. SHAME. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.80  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.79    4 months ago
As I said: We are going to find some conservatives consciences. Bet.

Seems like a false sense of righteousness there.

Donald Trump (the Loser) did not treatAshley Babbitt(and others who perished by events on January 6, 2021)with respect.

If that is truly upsetting to you, join me in not voting for Trump in 2022!

Trump makes it all about 'Donald' and his old tired shtick! 2022 same as the old 2021 in Trump world. Me. Me. Me.

He damn sure does! And the media seems to eat it up!

Must be all that revenue they make off of viewers (probably much like yourself) desperate for anything Trump, eh?

Kind of ironic.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.81  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.80    4 months ago

Okay, I hope you will join me and other NTers reading this in honoring the Capitol Hill dead on January 6, 2021 today. 

How about it, Texan1211?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.82  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.81    4 months ago

Gladly.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.83  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.82    4 months ago

Gladly, WHAT please?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.84  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.83    4 months ago

Oh, C'MON, dude!!!

You asked  a question, I answered, and now you want to argue about it?

Why?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.2.85  Sparty On  replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.84    4 months ago

Lol ... SOSDD

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.86  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.84    4 months ago

Argue? Asking for elaboration on the point you GLADLY accept is not aggressive or metaphorically 'pulling teeth.' I digress.

The moment passed and I want to assent the point that former president Donald J. Trump in a prepared statement (by himself or his 'advisement' team) notably neglected to respect and honor the five dead Americans at the Capitol incident on January 6, 2021.

It is a shame.

It says something instructive about this man, Donald J. Trump, who aggressively bothers to speak up on the anniversary as a former leader, but tempers his words to EXCLUDE those individuals who perished on his Watch. Responsible leadership and following requires we be better than this.

Onward and upward.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.2.87  Texan1211  replied to  CB @8.2.86    4 months ago

bitch about Trump to someone who cares.

you asked something specific and I answered. if that isn't enough, tough.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.88  CB   replied to  Sparty On @8.2.85    4 months ago

Weighing in? Since you choose to insert yourself; the former president Donald J. Trump, in his remarks @8.7.2 above was not attentive to honorably mention the five dead 'victims' of the Capitol incident of January 6, 2021. I conclude this lack of mention was deliberate and irresponsible.

What say you?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.89  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.87    4 months ago

I come here to make sense out of daily events with others in discussion; not just to poo-poo and discount fellow commenters. It's a higher standard, than reckless aggression. In 2022, we can do better as commenters, because well, we're 'citizens' of this online community. Until we choose to vacate. . . .

 
 

Who is online

Waykwabu


62 visitors