Jump to content

2023 Republican Government Shutdown: Same Shit, Same Story

horn4life

By horn4life
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, tantric superman said:

Sure.

In this case they should show it, because it deals with the president acting to pursue policies that are harmful to the public, and they will show the response to that policy.

If he wanted to show everyone his weiner, then no, don't show it.

It’s the repeated lies that are harmful to the public.  They should take a stand, tell Trump and the public they’re not going to be part of malicious state sponsored deception.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Pancho
Pancho
Post Oak
Post Oak

He's 3/5ths correct  

SmokeyTheBear
SmokeyTheBear

Can any GOP supporters really outline their platform at this point? Cause all I can see as their platform being is: move money from middle-class and poor up to the top percentages, limit civil liberti

Posted Images

lemonlime

lemonlime 5503

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

Sure.

In this case they should show it, because it deals with the president acting to pursue policies that are harmful to the public, and they will show the response to that policy.

If he wanted to show everyone his weiner, then no, don't show it.

No one is saying they shouldn't show it.  Just that the so called president shouldn't dictate use of airtime.  He shouldn't be able to ask for the networks to cut from their broadcasting so that he can spew political propaganda and lies.  Show the propaganda and lies in the regular news.  This is not a particularly newsworthy event warranting a special report, such as when Bush addressed the nation after 9/11.  It's a glorified political ad.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11360

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, lemonlime said:

No one is saying they shouldn't show it.  Just that the so called president shouldn't dictate use of airtime.  He shouldn't be able to ask for the networks to cut from their broadcasting so that he can spew political propaganda and lies.  Show the propaganda and lies in the regular news.  This is not a particularly newsworthy event warranting a special report, such as when Bush addressed the nation after 9/11.  It's a glorified political ad.

agreed. it's absurdity. it's distraction. i posted this in the indictments thread, but it applies here. trump is putting on one big show as the wizard to distract from the fact he's not a good wizard at all. pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SubliminalHorn

SubliminalHorn 6673

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

I cannot see any reason why I will vote for any of them at this point, even at the local or state level, going forward.  

I will never vote for a republican again in my life and will forever spread the word to those that may not pay much attention to also not vote for them. It will be my life’s mission to try and defeat all republicans I can

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

it's an address by the president. i'm with @tantric superman.

broadcast it. they are. it's done.

and they should broadcast it. this shit is important, even if he stands up and tells baldfaced lies while grabbing his crotch - that's news.

Why aren’t Trump rallies broadcast on every network? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11360

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Why aren’t Trump rallies broadcast on every network? 

because an oval office address to the country from the oval office is substantially different than a campaign rally.

no one is saying that you have to watch it.

it's a weird thing upon which to get hung up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
softlynow

softlynow 1783

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

Sorry, I think the true problem that the left has is the goddamn snowflake attitude in universities and the need to protect the rabble.  Fuck that.  I want to rile up the rabble with truth, and the only way to do that is to the show the lies and then combat them.

I think they should show it, but this is dumb.

1. University policy has nothing to do with any of this.

2. The snowflake attitude isn't confined to any one segment of the electorate.

3. The rabble who don't already know about this clusterfuck won't watch this. Netflix/Hulu/Prime won't be interrupting your stream. However, the olds will watch this. And as we've seen, if they're the FNC olds, they'll lap it up. If they're not, and they'll probably find something else to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

because an oval office address to the country from the oval office is substantially different than a campaign rally.

no one is saying that you have to watch it.

it's a weird thing upon which to get hung up.

I don’t have a problem with the networks deciding to air it, it’s their choice.  Wouldn’t be my choice but I understand. 

I have a problem with others thinking they HAVE to air it as if they don’t have a choice. 

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85095

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

because an oval office address to the country from the oval office is substantially different than a campaign rally.

no one is saying that you have to watch it.

it's a weird thing upon which to get hung up.

If it turns into a campaign speech, should the networks (except Fox News) immediately cut away for it being "too political," considering they wouldn't air Obama's speech on immigration for the same reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tantric superman

tantric superman 4667

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, softlynow said:

 

1. University policy has nothing to do with any of this.

I think it is reflective of the left's tendency to want to limit exposure to bad ideas and dangerous policy.

It's relevant because over the last decade or so I have been trending left, and it's the one thing that really bothers me about their approach to ideas and the need for ideas to get out their in the public forum so that they can adequately be addressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

Sorry, I think the true problem that the left has is the goddamn snowflake attitude in universities and the need to protect the rabble.  Fuck that.  I want to rile up the rabble with truth, and the only way to do that is to the show the lies and then combat them.

This post got a like from Chicken McKnuckleDrag. I'd rethink my position if that's who is agreeing with me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

I think it is reflective of the left's tendency to want to limit exposure to bad ideas and dangerous policy.

It's relevant because over the last decade or so I have been trending left, and it's the one thing that really bothers me about their approach to ideas and the need for ideas to get out their in the public forum so that they can adequately be addressed.

No one is trying to limit anyone’s speech.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28705

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, lemonlime said:

 This,  I have zero desire to hear him lie and sniff for whatever length of time he feels like we should drop everything and make him the center of the universe.  I'm sure whatever either word salad or speech written by Stephen Miller read in monotone he gives, it will be easy enough to read what was said either here, twitter, or the WaPo.  

I'm on the fence. I try to pick and choose when I listen to him speak because it's like getting a root canal. But this is kind of an historic occasion even though I think I know basically what he's going to say. It will be more of the same lies he's already told which have been thoroughly debunked. But that's a first in our nation's history. And what if he goes off script?

The best thing would be if no one watched. I should probably just treat him like the troll that he is and just ignore him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DixonHur

DixonHur 11170

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

I think it is reflective of the left's tendency to want to limit exposure to bad ideas and dangerous policy.

It's relevant because over the last decade or so I have been trending left, and it's the one thing that really bothers me about their approach to ideas and the need for ideas to get out their in the public forum so that they can adequately be addressed.

It has nothing to do with policy.  This is political grandstanding.  He created a fake narrative, and a crisis that doesn't exist.

I agree the President should have a platform to address the nation.  That's what the weekly Presidential Radio Address was for...guess who stopped that?  Don't like radio?  How about C-SPAN?

Save the fake outrage.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
retread

retread 2951

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hopefully Cheeto will reprise his incorrect remarks before Angel families last summer.

"Sixty-three thousand Americans since 9/11 have been killed by illegal aliens."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-migration-immigrant-murders-angel-families-separated-children-a8413601.html

Quote

The data suggest that immigrants, including immigrants in the country illegally, actually commit crimes at lower rates than native-born Americans. But Mr Trump's consistently rejected that idea, instead choosing to hype vague assertions that immigrants are more dangerous.

 As at Friday's event, when he waved away the demonstrable fact that immigrants commit fewer crimes by saying: "You've heard that, fellas, right? You've heard that. I hear it so much, and I say, 'Is that possible?' "

Well, he said: "The answer is it's not true."

It is.

A bit later on, though, Mr Trump cited a statistic of his own.

"Sixty-three thousand Americans since 9/11 have been killed by illegal aliens. This isn't a problem that's going away, it's getting bigger," he said. "Sixty-three thousand and that number they say is very low because things aren't reported. 63,000, and you don't hear about that."

No, you don't. Because it's demonstrably not true, and it wends its way back to a blog post from 2005 written by none other than Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa.

 

Edited by retread
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grade of D as in David

Grade of D as in David 13253

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

We're almost there.  The Senate has been subverted.  We have no Senate confirmed Attorney General or Sec of Defense. Trump has already used the military for domestic operations.  The courts and the press are holding on by a thread.  

The press isn't going to make it IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
austingirl

austingirl 2184

Posted
Posted (edited)

I don't know why this stuff still amazes me, but amaze me it does. A few weeks ago Trump said, on camera, in front of witnesses, that he unequivocally would not blame Democrats for the shutdown, and tonight he unequivocally said the exact opposite, and none of his people give a shit. They just kiss his ass more and defend him more strongly. It's just so nuts to me that this is our reality now.

Sometimes I wonder if he just has some fantastic blackmail material on every GOP senator and that's how he's able to do and say what he does. Maybe they were all members of a secret sex club at one point. Maybe they all bear the Dark Mark and must do as he bids when he calls them. Etc.

ben.gif

ben2.gif

ben3.gif

Edited by austingirl
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ADHD

ADHD 28

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, austingirl said:

I don't know why this stuff still amazes me, but amaze me it does. A few weeks ago Trump said, on camera, in front of witnesses, that he unequivocally would not blame Democrats for the shutdown, and tonight he unequivocally said the exact opposite, and none of his people give a shit. They just kiss his ass more and defend him more strongly. It's just so nuts to me that this is our reality now.

Sometimes I wonder if he just has some fantastic blackmail material on every GOP senator and that's how he's able to do and say what he does. Maybe they were all members of a secret sex club at one point. Maybe they all bear the Dark Mark and must do as he bids when he calls them. Etc.

ben.gif

ben2.gif

ben3.gif

Love your avatar. Love that show. Got 2 more episodes to watch. Oh Jerry ... I mean Gary .. I mean Larry ..

I saw Adam Scott walking down Santa Monica Blvd in West Hollywood by Oprah's studio about a year ago. 

No he was not prostituting. But I was! (for free).

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bateshorn

Bateshorn 9898

Posted
Posted

Whelp, here you go, WSSC joking about shutting off water to the White House due to unpaid bills.  It's chuckles right now, but at some point, this is going to become a very real and massive problem.  The federal government is among the nation's largest renters and utility users. I'm sure they'll be extended grace periods and credit, but this idea of a multi-month/year shutdown is fiction, at somepoint, evictions and shut offs are going to occur.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, austingirl said:

Sometimes I wonder if he just has some fantastic blackmail material on every GOP senator and that's how he's able to do and say what he does.

Trump’s influence over his cult followers IS his blackmail material.  He can break their political careers with a tweet or two.

Imagine if he went after Lindsey Graham or Rand Paul like he does the democrats or the press.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85095

Posted
Posted
Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Trump’s influence over his cult followers IS his blackmail material.  He can break their political careers with a tweet or two.

Imagine if he went after Lindsey Graham or Rand Paul like he does the democrats or the press.

Yup.  Look what he did to a 2 term Senator from Tennessee - got mad at him, tweeted dumb insults, and forced him to retire at age 66 because he was going to end up losing a primary.  66 is a young pup in Senate years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
retread

retread 2951

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, austingirl said:

Sometimes I wonder if he just has some fantastic blackmail material on every GOP senator and that's how he's able to do and say what he does. Maybe they were all members of a secret sex club at one point. Maybe they all bear the Dark Mark and must do as he bids when he calls them. Etc.

I think there has to be some of this. It's incredible to silence an entire caucus. 

I also think there's a lot of truth to Hugo's point. It's really interesting. When voting in '20, a vote against Trump will largely be a vote against his supporters. They are one of the biggest threats to America.

Edited by retread
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29225

Posted
Posted

There's also a good chance he has actual blackmail material on a number of prominent Republicans. This is a man who's been recording other people's phone calls made from his clubs for decades. He had the National Enquirer at his beck and call, and connections with Russian intelligence. We know he had dirt on Schneiderman, it's hardly a stretch to think he's got dirt and has been using it on Republicans as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

There's also a good chance he has actual blackmail material on a number of prominent Republicans. This is a man who's been recording other people's phone calls made from his clubs for decades. He had the National Enquirer at his beck and call, and connections with Russian intelligence. We know he had dirt on Schneiderman, it's hardly a stretch to think he's got dirt and has been using it on Republicans as well.

It’s also safe to say Republicans have blackmail material on Trump.  Who has more political leverage in that scenario? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

There's also a good chance he has actual blackmail material on a number of prominent Republicans. This is a man who's been recording other people's phone calls made from his clubs for decades. He had the National Enquirer at his beck and call, and connections with Russian intelligence. We know he had dirt on Schneiderman, it's hardly a stretch to think he's got dirt and has been using it on Republicans as well.

Ryan was also on record at some point urging his fellow members to not talk about any Russian influence. The RNC was hacked too, just emails were never released.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thrillhammer

thrillhammer 683

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, retread said:

When voting in '20, a vote against Trump will largely be a vote against his supporters. They are one of the biggest threats to America.

yep, that's exactly how I went about the 2018 elections.  anyone and everyone standing by this buffoon deserves to be ousted.  drain the swamp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...