Facts about Republican support for our enemies

[funjumper101 15]

Facts are stubborn things. No matter how much you like to think and believe that Republicans are on the side of the USA's best interests, the facts show something entirely different than your beliefs.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/04/republicans_siding_with_america_s_enemies_john_mccain_mitch_mcconnell_and.html

[Anvilbrother 0]

[start reading] President Obama says republicans [\stop reading]

Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along,

[skycop 0]

Who says they all suck, and we should start over.....

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[normiss 806]

Yessiree!

[Rick 67]

I agree

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

skycop

Who says they all suck, and we should start over.....

It sounds nice, but who would we replace them with?

And what would be the difference.

Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

There was a bad 80s movie, The Final Option, about terrorists and the SAS (very loosely based on the takeover of the Iranian Embassy in London). One of the better exchanges between a terrorist and the US SecState goes something like:

SecState: You kill all of us, then they come in and kill all of you. What does that accomplish?

Terr: Well, at least it rids the world of all of you.

SecState: Ah yes. The "Powerseekers." Don't you realize there are many more powerseekers waiting in the wings? And they won't be any different than us?

IMDB page

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[funjumper101 15]

Anvilbrother

[start reading] President Obama says republicans [\stop reading]

Too tough a subject?

Deliberate ignorance is nothing to be proud of.
It is required if one is to be a Reich Wing Conservative.
One must never view or read anything that presents facts that conflict with beliefs.

[lawrocket 3]

From the beginning of the article:

Quote

Another is Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s warning to foreign leaders that Obama’s domestic opponents won’t cooperate in any climate change plan he approves.

So the allegation is that climate change negotiations are speaking with the enemy?

Here is an idea: your subjective impression is not objective reality. Perhaps you should examine the differentlce between opinion and fact. As should the writers and editors of the article.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[DanG 1]

Quote

[start reading] President Obama says republicans [\stop reading]

I only made it far as "funjumper01"

- Dan G

[tristansdad 0]

The Democrats and the lame stream media did everything they could to sabotage the war effort and tarnish the image of the military when Bush was in office. Dingy Harry stood on the senate floor and proclaimed the war is lost. They called Petraeus a traitor, Kerry said the troops are lazy and not very bright yada yada yada. Ask your self why Washington DC is one of the, if not the richest metropolitan areas in the country when the only thing they produce is government with other peoples money.

[normiss 806]

[Anvilbrother 0]

One must never blah blah blah -funjumper101...101

Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along,

[billvon 3,006]

>I only made it far as "funjumper01"

"the lame stream media" is another sure sign that what follows will be fact-free.

[winsor 236]

funjumper101

***[start reading] President Obama says republicans [\stop reading]

Too tough a subject?

Deliberate ignorance is nothing to be proud of.
It is required if one is to be a Reich Wing Conservative.
One must never view or read anything that presents facts that conflict with beliefs.

I need a new irony meter. Mine just broke.

[winsor 236]

billvon

>I only made it far as "funjumper01"

"the lame stream media" is another sure sign that what follows will be fact-free.

As is referring to people as "deniers."

[billvon 3,006]

>As is referring to people as "deniers."

Alas, I am usually not politically correct enough to make everyone happy. I tend to call them as I see them.

[winsor 236]

billvon

>As is referring to people as "deniers."

Alas, I am usually not politically correct enough to make everyone happy. I tend to call them as I see them.

Who does make everyone happy?

Some phrases tend to discredit content. When someone has to tell you how honest they are, you had better count your fingers after shaking hands with them. Similarly, when someone goes to the trouble to point out how 'open minded' they are (or 'fair and balanced' or that they're 'not an idiot' or whatever), you can bank on their self-estimation being wide of the mark.

When I hear cries of 'racism!' or 'blasphemy!' I suspect that the target of the charge does not view things in that light.

Anyhow, I am on the skeptic side of things. This is to say that, even though I take it as a given that our species has a measurable impact on our planet, it strikes me that those who take a SISO (single input - single output) standpoint of the matter are somewhere between clueless and blithering idiots (Al Gore is a clueless blithering idiot - albeit one made wealthy by virtue of having co-opting the climate change movement).

Is overpopulation and bad resource management a factor in the heat balance of our planet?

Most assuredly.

Is said heat balance the greatest problem faced by mankind?

Not in the top ten; we will be lucky to survive as a species long enough for it to be a major concern.

Does holding that view make me a 'denier?'

According to those with more zeal for the issue than technical expertise, I expect it does.

Anyone familiar with the history of medicine should have a certain amount of skepticism for something that involves so much hand waving. What constitutes 'the truth' from a medical standpoint is constantly evolving, and is destined to do so for some time. The same is true for physics.

If someone says that humanity has no impact on climate, I call bullshit. If someone claims that humanity has control of climate, I call bullshit as well.

I guess calling someone a denier is not as clear a PA as would be calling them an idiot.


BSBD,

Winsor

[billvon 3,006]

Quote

Who does make everyone happy?

Certainly not me.

Quote

Is overpopulation and bad resource management a factor in the heat balance of our planet?

Most assuredly.

Is said heat balance the greatest problem faced by mankind?

Not in the top ten; we will be lucky to survive as a species long enough for it to be a major concern.

Agreed with all the above.

Quote

Does holding that view make me a 'denier?'

Since you're not denying the science behind climate change, I'd say it doesn't.

Quote

If someone says that humanity has no impact on climate, I call bullshit. If someone claims that humanity has control of climate, I call bullshit as well.

I tend to agree there as well.

Quote

I guess calling someone a denier is not as clear a PA as would be calling them an idiot.

As some call _themselves_ deniers, I don't see it as a PA at all.

[winsor 236]

billvon

As some call _themselves_ deniers, I don't see it as a PA at all.

Good point.

I knew someone who referred to herself as 'retarded' (she was special-ed, and attached no value judgment to the descriptor).

OTOH, I heard people self described as 'nigger' in my youth enough that I did not realize it was a big deal until I lived in the suburbs. Boy, was that enlightening.

After years in the Occupied Confederacy, it took some getting used to people blithely referring to themselves as 'yankees.' I still flinch when I see 'Yankee Candle' shops.

It's all a matter of perspective, I suppose. It's like the old saw "I didn't expect you to get upset when I referred to you as an idiot - I thought you knew."


BSBD,

Winsor

[wmw999 2,457]

In New England, real Yankees are from Maine

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[skycop 0]

Quote

It sounds nice, but who would we replace them with?

Regular people who have an interest in serving the greater good, not their self interest. I believe in term limits, because Washington corrupts even the good ones after a lengthy time.

We do it for the president, why not congress?

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[billvon 3,006]

>Regular people who have an interest in serving the greater good, not their self interest.

Most politicians really do try to serve the greater good. Unfortunately, to get to that greater good they often have to make the sort of compromises (i.e. "support the party if you want money, votes and any chance at passing your bills") that people come to associate with Washington.

And that's not something you can fix just by getting new people in. Getting rid of the two-party system might do some good.

[skycop 0]

But career politicians create a ruling political class, not the intention of the founders IMHO.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[billvon 3,006]

>But career politicians create a ruling political class, not the intention of the founders IMHO.

Agreed that it is not the intention of the founders. But the ruling political classes are the democrats and republicans, and replacing them with new democrats and republicans doesn't solve the underlying problem.

[sfzombie13 324]

it was exactly the opposite of what at least washington wanted, we all know that when he turned down the offer of being a king, or something like that. and it is exactly what term limits would help curb, eliminating career politicians. the two party system may or may not have much to do with it, it is hard to tell how much it would impact, unless you do away with parties altogether or limit it to 3 or 5 or something.

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes