welcome back to the cloak room, surly conservatives

[Ag with kids 581]

4 hours ago, Sawbonz said:

Name 5 conservative principles that have been shit on by the majority of posters here

Pro-Life views (note, this is not my position, but it fulfills your request)

Gun rights

Immigration restrictions

Voter ID

Republican opposition to spending trillions of dollars on the BBB bill

Hell, I bet I get at least 6 neg reps just for this post itself.  I know Penelope can't help herself so, that'll be one for sure...I've really just posted on this one thread had have gotten over 160 neg reps - now the ones from last night, ok - I shit back on some posters so I'll take those.

But it's not just shitting on principles...look at the threads you have on here:

1. Lauren Boobert - Tits and a gun
2. Ted Cruz is a piece of shit
3. Beefcake Cawthorn is a proselytizing jackass who needs his own thread

And even the threads that don't just start out shitting on Republicans right from the title are nothing more than attack fests on Republicans/conservatives/non-liberals

 

[DDD Dad 14243]

Pro-Life views (note, this is not my position, but it fulfills your request)
Gun rights
Immigration restrictions
Voter ID
Republican opposition to spending trillions of dollars on the BBB bill
Hell, I bet I get at least 6 neg reps just for this post itself.  I know Penelope can't help herself so, that'll be one for sure...I've really just posted on this one thread had have gotten over 160 neg reps - now the ones from last night, ok - I shit back on some posters so I'll take those.
But it's not just shitting on principles...look at the threads you have on here:

1. Lauren Boobert - Tits and a gun
2. Ted Cruz is a piece of shit
3. Beefcake Cawthorn is a proselytizing jackass who needs his own thread

And even the threads that don't just start out shitting on Republicans right from the title are nothing more than attack fests on Republicans/conservatives/non-liberals
 

I like mine better.

[Ag with kids 581]

2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

This single sentence captures the insane dichotomy perfectly.

There are 1,000 things that George will has said or written in the past 5-8 years that if one of us posted the exact quote here, AWK and his buds would call us “libtards.” Let that sink in. The dominant wing of the GQP thinks George Will is a “libtard.”

Before you go putting words in my mouth, why don't you post some of those 1000 things that you claim would cause me to call you a libtard?

FWIW...I don't do the name calling (except JimmyJames last night but I lost my patience with his attack posts - mea culpa).  So, I would NEVER call you nor anyone else that word...

[Shaddie 1637]

5 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Before you go putting words in my mouth, why don't you post some of those 1000 things that you claim would cause me to call you a libtard?

FWIW...I don't do the name calling (except JimmyJames last night but I lost my patience with his attack posts - mea culpa).  So, I would NEVER call you nor anyone else that word...

You are such a tool. 
 

Few pages back you were accusing everybody here calling you a fascist, nazi right winger and so on. I asked 2 times to show me the post. As usual you don’t answer when it makes you look bad. 

[Brisketexan 104537]

Pro-Life views (note, this is not my position, but it fulfills your request)
Gun rights
Immigration restrictions
Voter ID
Republican opposition to spending trillions of dollars on the BBB bill

 

Cool, policies. I like talking about those.

Pro life: I’ve always been a “safe, legal, and rare” pro choice person. To accomplish that, I’ve always supported readily available contraception and realistic sex education. I’ve also long respected the Catholic Church for their consistency: opposition to the death penalty, saving the lives of refugees, etc. There used to be some room in the Repub party for such views. Not anymore.

Gun rights: awesome. Lifelong gun owner here. By number, I’m probably in the top 1-2% of gun owners in the country. I have long believed that with owning guns, particularly primarily anti-personnel weapons, should come with some measure of responsibility. I support a robust system of instant background checks. I support red flag laws with proper due process. I would support limits on mag capacity size. Just like we have some limitations on other “sacred” rights, like freedom of speech. There is no room for that in the GOP today. Any regulation at all is reflexively opposed.

Immigration reform: I would, right now, 100% support adopting the immigration plan of a two term GOP president, GWB. It was an ear perfect blend of efficient, effective, pragmatic, and humane. It is DOA with the GQP.

Voter ID: this wasn’t a GQP priority until they realized that poor and minority voters were largely a lost cause to them. It’s a fake issue, with the real purpose being gaining an electoral advantage. If the GQP proposed a two-element approach on voting to 1) make it very easy for all eligible voters to register and vote, and have their voice heard, along with 2) a robust system to protect election security, I’d be fine with it. They don’t propose that. And we all know why.

Opposition to spending trillions on BBB: the past several decades of history on the GQP makes it rather clear that they are ONLY “fiscal conservatives” when a Dem is in office. They lost all credibility. But I’m all for doing a better job of keeping our fiscal house in some order. That means improving revenue (and “trickle down” tax cuts don’t do that, and actually do the opposite), as well as looking to trim spending on some of the biggest ticket items - defense, where our budget dwarfs something like the next 10 nations below, would be a great place to start.

My platform above remains rather conservative. You can actually find prominent Repubs and entire platform sections from recent decades that mirror what I posted. Twicehorn and DDD Dad hold some similar views. Yet to modern MAGAs like you, we are “far-left.” The more you think you are refuting our points, the more you make them for us.

[Sawbonz 27392]

18 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Republican opposition to spending trillions of dollars on the BBB bill

Love how you throw in specific spending. I previously asked you to show the changes in the federal debt and yearly deficit for each admin since Nixon and unsurprisingly you ignored it. 

56% of republicans polled in 2017 were for abortion in some instances and another 14% in ALL instances 

 

You had control of both houses and the WH and did nothing on immigration reform or voter ID

 

So basically you’ve got gun rights

 

you’re a clown 

 

[Biff Tannen 45491]

17 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Voter ID

When I saw this one, my immediate reaction was, "this is about to get stupid".

[mchookem 16184]

so somebody start a "Liz Cheney is an American hero" thread to make surly 'conservatives' more comfortable 🤔 

[Neonmoon 38127]

53 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

 

But it's not just shitting on principles...look at the threads you have on here:

1. Lauren Boobert - Tits and a gun
2. Ted Cruz is a piece of shit
3. Beefcake Cawthorn is a proselytizing jackass who needs his own thread

 

 

Do you believe these three do not deserve contempt and derision? 

All three supported an insurrection, and one left his own state during a horrible crisis when 200 of his constituents died. 

 

[JimmyJames 12271]

21 minutes ago, mchookem said:

so somebody start a "Liz Cheney is an American hero" thread to make surly 'conservatives' more comfortable 🤔 

Apparently if you’re a “conservative” the surly format prevents you from starting a thread in the cloak room and they automatically get rerouted to the daily Texan board. It’s a unique feature of the site. 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13545]

We won't tell you what we're going to do if you vote for us, but you should vote for us.

https://www.businessinsider.com/mcconnell-no-republican-legislative-agenda-before-2022-midterm-elections-2021-12

[Biff Tannen 45491]

9 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

We won't tell you what we're going to do if you vote for us, but you should vote for us.

https://www.businessinsider.com/mcconnell-no-republican-legislative-agenda-before-2022-midterm-elections-2021-12

It’s pretty nuts that they just completely admit this now. Same as 2020. Whatever orange man wants to do. Literally. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

1 hour ago, Ag with kids said:

Before you go putting words in my mouth, why don't you post some of those 1000 things that you claim would cause me to call you a libtard?

FWIW...I don't do the name calling (except JimmyJames last night but I lost my patience with his attack posts - mea culpa).  So, I would NEVER call you nor anyone else that word...

When you called me a fucking idiot I did have a brief cry, but I quickly got over it. 
 

Not sure how my posts “attacked” you but I’ll go buy melanie’s new audio book in an attempt to “be better.”

 

[Neonmoon 38127]

1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

It’s pretty nuts that they just completely admit this now. Same as 2020. Whatever orange man wants to do. Literally. 

It is pretty hard to describe a platform that just turns back time 70 years 

[JimmyJames 12271]

Y’all better watch out because I’m going on the attack tonight and my posts are gonna smoke all you fools. Especially if you’re aggy. 

[fattyflattie 4636]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

I support a robust system of instant background checks.

Cool 

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

I support red flag laws with proper due process.

Absolutely lost me unless someone with ability to keep them safely (not govt) can take custody in interim. Even then I think the burden needs to be big and extremely clearly defined. 

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

I would support limits on mag capacity size.

Agreed that we don’t need anything >30.  Drum mags and the like are dumb af.  
 

While we’re at it, need to make suppressors less of a burden to purchase.  They are safer and it’s dumb it takes a year and a stamp to purchase. 
 

 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11802]

Quote

Pro-Life views (note, this is not my position, but it fulfills your request)

Gun rights

Immigration restrictions

Do you even see the disconnect and hypocrisy  in those things?

 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11802]

1 hour ago, Ag with kids said:

Pro-Life views (note, this is not my position, but it fulfills your request)

Gun rights

Immigration restrictions

Voter ID

Republican opposition to spending trillions of dollars on the BBB bill

Hell, I bet I get at least 6 neg reps just for this post itself.  I know Penelope can't help herself so, that'll be one for sure...I've really just posted on this one thread had have gotten over 160 neg reps - now the ones from last night, ok - I shit back on some posters so I'll take those.

But it's not just shitting on principles...look at the threads you have on here:

1. Lauren Boobert - Tits and a gun
2. Ted Cruz is a piece of shit
3. Beefcake Cawthorn is a proselytizing jackass who needs his own thread

And even the threads that don't just start out shitting on Republicans right from the title are nothing more than attack fests on Republicans/conservatives/non-liberals

 

They are attack-fests  on shitty human beings.  The fact that shitty human beings make up the bulk of the GOP base is YOUR fault.  

Edited December 4, 2021 by Judge Roybeanbag

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19092]

1 hour ago, Ag with kids said:

Pro-Life views (note, this is not my position, but it fulfills your request)

Gun rights

Immigration restrictions

Voter ID

Republican opposition to spending trillions of dollars on the BBB bill

Hell, I bet I get at least 6 neg reps just for this post itself.  I know Penelope can't help herself so, that'll be one for sure...I've really just posted on this one thread had have gotten over 160 neg reps - now the ones from last night, ok - I shit back on some posters so I'll take those.

But it's not just shitting on principles...look at the threads you have on here:

1. Lauren Boobert - Tits and a gun
2. Ted Cruz is a piece of shit
3. Beefcake Cawthorn is a proselytizing jackass who needs his own thread

And even the threads that don't just start out shitting on Republicans right from the title are nothing more than attack fests on Republicans/conservatives/non-liberals

 

If Republicans or Conservatives were truly pro-life, then they wouldn't be anti-vaccine, anti-science idiots.  Their stance is more about control, and for a lot of them, keeping women in their place.  It is pretty fucking obvious how a lot of you feel about women when you make fun of women who choose to be single or not have kids.  By taking a woman's autonomy over her own body, you are making her a second class citizen.  Just because someone is pro-choice does not mean they are pro-abortion, but that fucking gets lost by the idiots on the right.   

On guns, most of us believe there should be reasonable restrictions on guns.  Having to wait three days to buy a fucking gun for a background check isn't infringing on any rights. However, Republicans/Conservatives don't want ANY reasonable restrictions, and because of that stance, we keep having the problems that we have.

Voter ID as most Republicans have tried to enact it, is basically a poll tax, which is fucking illegal.  However, I have said I am ok requiring ID, but it needs to be free and easy to obtain.  That isn't something that Republicans are willing to do however.  The reality of Voter ID is that Conservatives/Republicans want fewer people to vote because they know with a politically engaged population, their tired, outdated ideas (when they fucking have them) won't win.  

I find it funny that the Republicans were ok spending Trillions on tax cuts for Corporations (i.e. corporate welfare) and the rich, but fuck helping the people who actually vote.  After the last 4 years of Trump, no Republican better lie and say they are concerned about the debt or defecit.

And now let's come to immigration.  GWB had a comprehensive plan that made a whole lot of sense.  His original plan actually was even more impressive, but it did get cut down a bit (in numbers of Guest Workers allowed each year and some other things) by the Republican Party, but the extreme left and the extreme right banded together to fuck that one up.  Immigration and immigrants are what has made this country great.  There are now a lot of people who want to shut that door down for really fucking stupid reasons.  

I know @Ag with kids, @Bravo and the other Surly Trumpers probably think I am a libtard or one of those other stupid monikers they like to use, but like most of the other "libtards" on here, I am pretty fucking far from it.  However, I do not believe in cruelty, and I have long acknowledged that equal opportunity is very fucking important, and there are a lot of unfortunately people that need some additional help.  I am not sure why people who claim to be good Christians are so opposed to providing that help.  Oh yeah, because they aren't fucking Christians.  They are fucking hypocrites.

 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11802]

And just to put things on equal footing so you don’t accuse me of trolling, name one piece of legislation or positive thing about Lauren Boebert, Ted Cruz, or Madison Cawthorn that have advanced the principles you hold so dear to your tiny white heart?   Can you?  

Edited December 4, 2021 by Judge Roybeanbag

[Cacti 191]

5 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well he did try to actually do some stuff.  Dumb stuff....Trade war with China using tariffs.....

To say that China is engaging in unfair trade practices is an understatement, and is mostly recognized by both parties. However, it seems that neither party has a solution, nor do our allies. Whatever the solution is, it’s clear that we can’t bully China, at least not by ourselves.

And it’s equally clear Trump’s bull-in-the-china-shop approach (pun intended) has done more harm to our economy than to the economy of our adversary. But if Trump’s China tariffs were a fiasco, then the fiasco continues under Biden. And that’s because he has—for all practical purposes—left Trump’s tariffs in place.

It’s fair to criticize Trump for his actions; it’s also fair to criticize Biden for his inactions.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19092]

2 minutes ago, Cacti said:

To say that China is engaging in unfair trade practices is an understatement, and is mostly recognized by both parties. However, it seems that neither party has a solution, nor do our allies. Whatever the solution is, it’s clear that we can’t bully China, at least not by ourselves.

And it’s equally clear Trump’s bull-in-the-china-shop approach (pun intended) has done more harm to our economy than to the economy of our adversary. But if Trump’s China tariffs were a fiasco, then the fiasco continues under Biden. And that’s because he has—for all practical purposes—left Trump’s tariffs in place.

It’s fair to criticize Trump for his actions; it’s also fair to criticize Biden for his inactions.

Completely agree.  China is absolutely a bad actor.  But it is not something we can go at alone.  Tariffs are destructive, and it was stupid.  I thought that was something Biden would reverse, and I am not sure why it hasn't been done yet.

[Nivek 16843]

4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Guys like Will and Krauthammer kept me a political conservative for years despite the GOP doing hardly anything that they espoused.  They made sense to me.

Guys like Will only helped confirm the at republican party was a oligarchic-coup in disguise.   The actions never matched the rhetoric of their thought leaders.   

George Will also wrote opinion pieces about the courts should stay away from redistricting, which would be fine if we had a system that wasn't being abused.    So fuck him too.   He is basically a susan collin with a furrowed brow and writes sternly worded letters.   If he had any ovaries he might ask to speak with the manager.  

Edited December 4, 2021 by Nivek

[bolverk 29394]

29 minutes ago, Cacti said:

To say that China is engaging in unfair trade practices is an understatement, and is mostly recognized by both parties. However, it seems that neither party has a solution, nor do our allies. Whatever the solution is, it’s clear that we can’t bully China, at least not by ourselves.

And it’s equally clear Trump’s bull-in-the-china-shop approach (pun intended) has done more harm to our economy than to the economy of our adversary. But if Trump’s China tariffs were a fiasco, then the fiasco continues under Biden. And that’s because he has—for all practical purposes—left Trump’s tariffs in place.

It’s fair to criticize Trump for his actions; it’s also fair to criticize Biden for his inactions.

Then one can assume you were in favor of the Trans-Pacific Partnership that we ditched?

[Ag with kids 581]

1 hour ago, Shaddie said:

You are such a tool. 
 

Few pages back you were accusing everybody here calling you a fascist, nazi right winger and so on. I asked 2 times to show me the post. As usual you don’t answer when it makes you look bad. 

Can you show me that post?  Because IIRC, I said something along the lines of conservatives/Republicans get called that - not me specifically....although I'm pretty sure there's been at least one fascist thrown my way

 

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Cool, policies. I like talking about those.

Pro life: I’ve always been a “safe, legal, and rare” pro choice person. To accomplish that, I’ve always supported readily available contraception and realistic sex education. I’ve also long respected the Catholic Church for their consistency: opposition to the death penalty, saving the lives of refugees, etc. There used to be some room in the Repub party for such views. Not anymore.

AWK:  I'm agnostic on abortion.  Except that I do not try to rationalize away the fact that an abortion is terminating the life of a human being.  I get why people who support abortion try to minimize that fact because it's uncomfortable to admit that what you're doing is not just "your body" but someone else's body.  That said, I understand why people do it and I realize that maybe that's the best thing for everyone...

Gun rights: awesome. Lifelong gun owner here. By number, I’m probably in the top 1-2% of gun owners in the country. I have long believed that with owning guns, particularly primarily anti-personnel weapons, should come with some measure of responsibility. I support a robust system of instant background checks. I support red flag laws with proper due process. I would support limits on mag capacity size. Just like we have some limitations on other “sacred” rights, like freedom of speech. There is no room for that in the GOP today. Any regulation at all is reflexively opposed.

AWK:  Fair enough.  Although I would, like with the first amendment, make any restrictions very limited.  But, the GOP has also learned that most regulations ARE a slippery slope.  You mentioned "red flag laws".  While I understand the goal behind them, they could be an easy way for an overbearing government to overstep the limits in order to achieve what would normally be an unconstitutional goal...

Immigration reform: I would, right now, 100% support adopting the immigration plan of a two term GOP president, GWB. It was an ear perfect blend of efficient, effective, pragmatic, and humane. It is DOA with the GQP.

AWK:  I somewhat supported the GWB plan, too.  https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/stateoftheunion/2007/initiatives/immigration.html

However, allowing approximately 12 million people to possibly gain citizenship after breaking the law in order to be in the US would be a hard pill to swallow.  

However, it wasn't the GOP that blocked it, it was the Democrats.  The Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act of 2005 (S. 1438) was proposed by Cornyn.   The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (S. 2611) was sponsored by Arlen Specter.  The latter passed the Senate but never passed the Democratic House.

Voter ID: this wasn’t a GQP priority until they realized that poor and minority voters were largely a lost cause to them. It’s a fake issue, with the real purpose being gaining an electoral advantage. If the GQP proposed a two-element approach on voting to 1) make it very easy for all eligible voters to register and vote, and have their voice heard, along with 2) a robust system to protect election security, I’d be fine with it. They don’t propose that. And we all know why.

AWK:  Voter ID bills have been around since the 50s, but the modern history has been since 1999.  Are you claiming that your cute term "GQP" has been around since then? 

I disagree with your position about WHY the GOP is for the voter ID proposals.  It's no different than the right accusing the left of opposing the voter ID programs because they want to ensure easier ways to implement voting fraud.

BTW, can you explain exactly how you would implement your two-element approach in the real world?

Opposition to spending trillions on BBB: the past several decades of history on the GQP makes it rather clear that they are ONLY “fiscal conservatives” when a Dem is in office. They lost all credibility. But I’m all for doing a better job of keeping our fiscal house in some order. That means improving revenue (and “trickle down” tax cuts don’t do that, and actually do the opposite), as well as looking to trim spending on some of the biggest ticket items - defense, where our budget dwarfs something like the next 10 nations below, would be a great place to start.

AWK:  I'm not saying the GOP is a bunch of fucking saints when it comes to spending.  In fact most of the GOP - and ESPECIALLY the group you're labeling "GQP" don't like it. 

Now the number ONE and number TWO expenses of the federal government are Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid.  They DWARF everything else, including defense.  And they are NON-discretionary.  You could eliminate the Defense budget completely and we'd still run deficits.  If not, today, very soon, since both of the former expenses are continuing to grow.  But, there's a reason why we pay what we pay for our defense department and the bloat on it isn't anywhere as huge as most people think.

As for tax cuts, last year 61% of workers paid NO federal income tax.  https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/18/61percent-of-americans-paid-no-federal-income-taxes-in-2020-tax-policy-center-says.html.  So any discussion about "fair share" for paying paxes seems kind of tainted when the vast majority pays zero.

BTW, I think right now both parties are having some struggles with the more extreme ends of their parties with regards to spending and everything else.

My platform above remains rather conservative. You can actually find prominent Repubs and entire platform sections from recent decades that mirror what I posted. Twicehorn and DDD Dad hold some similar views. Yet to modern MAGAs like you, we are “far-left.” The more you think you are refuting our points, the more you make them for us.

AWK:  Based on what you've posted, and based on the historical GOP positions, you seen to be very close to the center.

My views haven't really changed much over the past 30+ years.  I may have refined or slightly adjusted them but I still hold the vast majority of the same positions I held when Reagan was in office.

And please refrain from the stupid name calling.  I'm not a "MAGA".  Just because I don't lockstep with your positions doesn't mean that I think you're "far left" either.

BTW, for the rest of the Cloak Room...

This is how civil discourse is done.

You should try it sometime.  It's cathartic....

[hobbes2702 12791]

1 minute ago, Ag with kids said:

Can you show me that post?  Because IIRC, I said something along the lines of conservatives/Republicans get called that - not me specifically....although I'm pretty sure there's been at least one fascist thrown my way

 

BTW, for the rest of the Cloak Room...

This is how civil discourse is done.

You should try it sometime.  It's cathartic....

You should try being honest and you’ll get some civil discourse. Until you show you can do that then you can fuck right off

[AnTiM 1657]

1. Lauren Boobert - Tits and a gun
2. Ted Cruz is a piece of shit
3. Beefcake Cawthorn is a proselytizing jackass who needs his own thread                                                          These three are on the hit list because they are all despicable people who have absolutely no business making decisions that affect the people of this country.   If you think they are being unfairly singled out, then you are a bigger moron than I ever thought.

[Biff Tannen 45491]

1 hour ago, bolverk said:

Then one can assume you were in favor of the Trans-Pacific Partnership that we ditched?

Yep.  But it was an Obama-era idea, so MUST BURN TO THE GROUND.

[Cacti 191]

1 hour ago, bolverk said:

Then one can assume you were in favor of the Trans-Pacific Partnership that we ditched?

I’m in favor of any economic partnership to thwart China. But to be effective the partners must include the majority of western democracies.

[Ag with kids 581]

3 hours ago, Sawbonz said:

Love how you throw in specific spending. I previously asked you to show the changes in the federal debt and yearly deficit for each admin since Nixon and unsurprisingly you ignored it. 

AWK: This does not address what I posted.  BTW, I posted a response to that question WAY back in this thread.

56% of republicans polled in 2017 were for abortion in some instances and another 14% in ALL instances 

AWK:  The GOP position has been consistently against abortion for 5 decades.  Can you please cite your source?

You had control of both houses and the WH and did nothing on immigration reform or voter ID

AWK:  When?  There were very short windows, but when the GOP proposed laws, they were voted down by Dems.  I cite my sources above.

So basically you’ve got gun rights

AWK:  What's your point on this one?

you’re a clown 

 

[workswithseed 2033]

5 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Yep.  But it was an Obama-era idea, so MUST BURN TO THE GROUND.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/23/tpp-trans-pacific-partnership-bernie-sanders-john-mccain

Bernie was also in favor. It was bipartisan.

[Biff Tannen 45491]

5 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/23/tpp-trans-pacific-partnership-bernie-sanders-john-mccain

Bernie was also in favor. It was bipartisan.

Well Bernie was fucking wrong.  McCain was right.  And the very idea that the dotard had any clue what any of it meant is laughable.

[bolverk 29394]

1 minute ago, Cacti said:

I’m in favor of any economic partnership to thwart China. But to be effective the partners must include the majority of western democracies.

Do you not think having Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, and us in a trade pact would've been a great start and also would've gone a long way in eventually getting our European partners, along with India, to divert trade from China?

We fucked ourselves in trashing that trade pact, and I don't know how you go about rebuilding it after losing our credibility. We can't be seen as a good faith negotiator when one of our two parties is seen by the rest of the world as being so unsupportive of our allies as evidenced by continued support for MAGA, which is essentially a nationalistic and isolationist movement.

[Ag with kids 581]

1 hour ago, Nivek said:

Guys like Will only helped confirm the at republican party was a oligarchic-coup in disguise.   The actions never matched the rhetoric of their thought leaders.   

George Will also wrote opinion pieces about the courts should stay away from redistricting, which would be fine if we had a system that wasn't being abused.    So fuck him too.   He is basically a susan collin with a furrowed brow and writes sternly worded letters.   If he had any ovaries he might ask to speak with the manager.  

The Dems use gerrymandering just as much as the GOP does.  George Will is correct.  Wait?????  Does that mean I called myself a "libtard"?  SMDH

[StassneyHorn 6535]

I wish Dems gerrymandered as much. The stupid ass commission they insist on using when in any kind of power holds them back

fully applaud Illinois and NY

Edited December 4, 2021 by StassneyHorn

[Ag with kids 581]

7 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

as a matter of fact, this is why people who totally didn't vote for trump republicans left this forum in the first place. they were called out for actual policy shit. they had nothing, like ag with kids here. so they left.

AWK:   I didn't "leave" for several years...

I just got very busy around late 2017.  I moved to take on a totally new job which consumed a lot of my time...When I'd peek in from time to time after mid 2019 this place was toxic - like it is now.  Didn't feel like engaging.  But, I went to the Food and Travel board and that was cool.

For some stupid reason recently (probably induced by alcohol) I decided to try to re-engage here.

it's one of the more frustrating things about the trump era. at least with reagan, bush sr, and bush w, we had some illusion of policy. they were trying to do things. and hell, most of the time, at the time, i agreed with those things. 

AWK:  I agreed with most of them too...

trump didn't try to do things. he tried to undo things. that was his sole purpose. undo the obama administration, because of a white house press correspondents' dinner. he spent four years trying to undo obama's birthplace before even entering the race. then he was humiliated. so he made it his sole purpose to undo everything the man did.

AWK:  I disagree.  He a bloviating egomaniac but that doesn't mean many of the policies he implemented or at least tried to implement weren't GOP/conservative policies.  He did try to roll back regulations that any conservative would find too restrictive.

he's a negative space. he's a black hole. and to be a republican supporter today, you have to essentially be a nihilist. must be exhausting.

AWK:  No you don't.  And calling people names is a poor man's argument...

 

[Nivek 16843]

30 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

The Dems use gerrymandering just as much as the GOP does.  George Will is correct.  Wait?????  Does that mean I called myself a "libtard"?  SMDH

Sorry, I didn't realize you were being intentionally stupid.  

[Sawbonz 27392]

55 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Somehow you fucked up the reply so it’s not quotable

 

Regarding the spending, go ahead and link your reply. I haven’t seen it.

Regarding abortion, the majority of Republicans are for keeping Roe v. Wade. 
https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/730183531/poll-majority-want-to-keep-abortion-legal-but-they-also-want-restrictions

 

 

Did you really ask when did the Republicans have majority in both houses and the White House?republicans don’t want to do shit on immigration or voter ID. They had majorities and didn’t even bring it up. They didn’t need dem votes. That’s just bullshit.

 

Again, the only point you made regarding Republican principles is regarding unfettered gun access. I’m not sure what you’re having trouble understanding about that

 

Edited December 4, 2021 by Sawbonz

[Sawbonz 27392]

4 minutes ago, Nivek said:

Sorry, I didn't realize you were being intentionally stupid.  

Not stupid, just dishonest

[Ag with kids 581]

3 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Cool 

Absolutely lost me unless someone with ability to keep them safely (not govt) can take custody in interim. Even then I think the burden needs to be big and extremely clearly defined. 

Agreed that we don’t need anything >30.  Drum mags and the like are dumb af.  
 

While we’re at it, need to make suppressors less of a burden to purchase.  They are safer and it’s dumb it takes a year and a stamp to purchase. 
 

 

Cars that can go 190+ are dumb af...like Corvettes, etc.

Doesn't mean they should be banned.

So what if I want a 100 round drum (I don't currently).

What's the business case to restrict them to 30 rounds?  Be specific.

Edited December 4, 2021 by Ag with kids

[Ag with kids 581]

8 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Somehow you fucked up the reply so it’s not quotable

 

Regarding the spending, go ahead and link your reply. I haven’t seen it.

Regarding abortion, the majority of Republicans are for keeping Roe v. Wade. 
https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/730183531/poll-majority-want-to-keep-abortion-legal-but-they-also-want-restrictions

 

 

Did you really ask when did the Republicans have majority in both houses and the White House?republicans don’t want to do shit on immigration or voter ID. They had majorities and didn’t even bring it up. They didn’t need dem votes. That’s just bullshit.

 

Again, the only point you made regarding Republican principles is regarding unfettered gun access. I’m not sure what you’re having trouble understanding about that

 

Maybe it's your fault.  My tech seems to work fine...

[Biff Tannen 45491]

3 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Cars that can go 190+ are dumb af...like Corvettes, etc.

Doesn't mean they should be banned.

So what if I want a 100 round drum (I don't currently).

What's the business case to restrict them to 30 rounds?  Be specific.

Cars and guns are absolutely the same thing.

[workswithseed 2033]

4 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Cars and guns are absolutely the same thing.

Yeah, both are tools. One protects you and your family most effectively the other gets you to places faster. They both can kill intentionally, and unintentionally.

[Neonmoon 38127]

14 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Cars that can go 190+ are dumb af...like Corvettes, etc.

Doesn't mean they should be banned.

So what if I want a 100 round drum (I don't currently).

What's the business case to restrict them to 30 rounds?  Be specific.

What’s the business case to restrict the selling of armored tanks to citizens? You don’t have to be specific, just let me know you’re in the general fucking ballpark of understanding the goddamn issue 

[Bojack 2073]

21 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Cars that can go 190+ are dumb af...like Corvettes, etc.

Doesn't mean they should be banned.

So what if I want a 100 round drum (I don't currently).

What's the business case to restrict them to 30 rounds?  Be specific.

@fattyflattie is perilously close to be being labeled a libtard here.  

[Sawbonz 27392]

21 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Maybe it's your fault.  My tech seems to work fine...

See if your tech can find your response to the question about increase in debt and deficit spending over the last 50 years

[Nivek 16843]

1 hour ago, bolverk said:

Do you not think having Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, and us in a trade pact would've been a great start and also would've gone a long way in eventually getting our European partners, along with India, to divert trade from China?

We fucked ourselves in trashing that trade pact, and I don't know how you go about rebuilding it after losing our credibility. We can't be seen as a good faith negotiator when one of our two parties is seen by the rest of the world as being so unsupportive of our allies as evidenced by continued support for MAGA, which is essentially a nationalistic and isolationist movement.

I think the treatment of our Kurdish allies clearly demonstrates the value of our commitments.  

[Nivek 16843]

39 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Not stupid, just dishonest

Is not willful stupidity a form of dishonesty?  

[Cacti 191]

1 hour ago, bolverk said:

Do you not think having Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, and us in a trade pact would've been a great start and also would've gone a long way in eventually getting our European partners, along with India, to divert trade from China?

We fucked ourselves in trashing that trade pact, and I don't know how you go about rebuilding it after losing our credibility. We can't be seen as a good faith negotiator when one of our two parties is seen by the rest of the world as being so unsupportive of our allies as evidenced by continued support for MAGA, which is essentially a nationalistic and isolationist movement.

Sure, it would have been a great start but it doesn’t follow that our European partners could be convinced to join us. Unfortunately they don’t view China as either an imminent economic or military threat.

As you pointed out, Trump was viewed as untrustworthy by the Europeans—and with good reason. But it doesn’t appear that Biden has done much to reestablish that trust (if there was any to begin with).  In fact, several of our NATO allies complained about the lack of communication from the administration concerning the withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the Australian/American/British submarine deal has set back relations with the EU.  

So, no, the Europeans didn’t trust Trump, but they don’t trust Biden, either. But that’s o.k., our European allies are also untrustworthy.

[Ag with kids 581]

9 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Somehow you fucked up the reply so it’s not quotable

 

Regarding the spending, go ahead and link your reply. I haven’t seen it.

Regarding abortion, the majority of Republicans are for keeping Roe v. Wade. 
https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/730183531/poll-majority-want-to-keep-abortion-legal-but-they-also-want-restrictions

AWK:  The GOP position on abortion hasn't changed all that much since I was a kid in the 70s.  They're against it.  As I noted earlier, that not my position.

Did you really ask when did the Republicans have majority in both houses and the White House?republicans don’t want to do shit on immigration or voter ID. They had majorities and didn’t even bring it up. They didn’t need dem votes. That’s just bullshit.

AWK:  The GOP tried.  The Senate put up and passed several immigration reform bills during GWB's term only to have them shut down in the House.  Hell, Cornyn-Kyl and Specter put bills out that got passed in the Senate.  So don't say the GOP didn't do shit.  That's completely incorrect.

Again, the only point you made regarding Republican principles is regarding unfettered gun access. I’m not sure what you’re having trouble understanding about that

AWK:  WTF does this even mean as a response to anything I've posted.