POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

[The Rube]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

The problem is that the Right has shifted *so* far right that what is actual middle ground *feels* like it's some leftist utopia dream. And left of the old center is made out to be a whack-a-doodle ultra leftist fetish.

Bernie is whack-a-doodle. AOC, not as much, a level or two less. She has massive potential, though, once she gets through the growing pains (psst, listen to Nancy, listen to everything she says, you will learn many lessons). Beto has my ear, at the current time.

 

[aparch]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

Speaking of our dear conservatives, after three years of tax cuts to the 1%, inflation of the budgets, waving away spending limits... NOW is when they're finally concerned with the budget. They are continually stalling a $19 Billion Federal Aid package because the House is in recess for a break and there are very few lawmakers in town so:

“This was about process today,” Rose told reporters after blocking the bill. “I think proceeding with this action that expands over $19, almost $20 billion of taxpayer money without debate and without votes of the 432 current members would be a disservice to the American taxpayers.”

Because *now* they're concerned about the budget. Oh, and the other two times it was blocked this week?

Rose’s objection followed two previous successful efforts by Republicans to delay the vote. Representative Thomas Massie, Republican from Kentucky, blocked the bill on Tuesday over a similar objection to the absence of lawmakers. Prior to that, freshman Representative Chip Roy, Republican from Texas, blocked the same measure due to a lack of lawmakers and the lack of billions of dollars in funding previously requested by the White House for Trump’s southern border wall.

That's right, there are GOP members blocking this simple act from going through while the house is on break because IT DOESN'T CREATE BUDGET CUTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS NOR DOES IT PROVIDE FUNDING FOR TRUMPS WALL.

That's right. After ramming through the Tax Cuts a year and a half ago, THIS FEDERAL DISASTER AID BILL DOESN'T DO MORE FOR THEM TO CONTINUE TO HARM AMERICANS.

 

[aparch]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

Bernie is whack-a-doodle. AOC, not as much, a level or two less. She has massive potential, though, once she gets through the growing pains (psst, listen to Nancy, listen to everything she says, you will learn many lessons). Beto has my ear, at the current time.

If AOC is living rent free in your head, that speaks volumes. She's two full presidential cycles from being in any presidential talk. Any mention of her in 2020 or 2024 is FOX News -esque levels of spin. She's going to take a thumping, and there will be growing pains. But, she's a representative of one area of NY. Those on the board from much closer to her district can describe how the locals feel about her.

All you, Scooby, myself, and anyone not in her district or even her area code see is the national spin that is given to her. And Paul Ryan never proposed wild a** legislation? Pardon me while I take a trip in my Google Time Machine and see that Paul Ryan once suggested in the summer of 2003, in the middle of Bush's Iraq War, that to stabilize the Iraqi economy, the US takes over their currency and then gives the Iraqi government the profit from the difference (minus a cut for the US). In essence, PAUL RYAN WANTED TO ANNEX IRAQ AS A US TERRITORY.

Don't forget, Paul Ryan, mere years before being a US Representative was ALSO A BARTENDER TO MAKE ENDS MEET.

Why is Paul Ryan championed as the model young representative, when AOC has done the exact same things and gets shunned?



Put your hand down Scooby, we all know the answer is what you have typed in the reply box but haven't hit submit yet.

 

[The Rube]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

If AOC is living rent free in your head, that speaks volumes. She's two full presidential cycles from being in any presidential talk. Any mention of her in 2020 or 2024 is FOX News -esque levels of spin. She's going to take a thumping, and there will be growing pains. But, she's a representative of one area of NY. Those on the board from much closer to her district can describe how the locals feel about her.

All you, Scooby, myself, and anyone not in her district or even her area code see is the national spin that is given to her. And Paul Ryan never proposed wild a** legislation? Pardon me while I take a trip in my Google Time Machine and see that Paul Ryan once suggested in the summer of 2003, in the middle of Bush's Iraq War, that to stabilize the Iraqi economy, the US takes over their currency and then gives the Iraqi government the profit from the difference (minus a cut for the US). In essence, PAUL RYAN WANTED TO ANNEX IRAQ AS A US TERRITORY.

Don't forget, Paul Ryan, mere years before being a US Representative was ALSO A BARTENDER TO MAKE ENDS MEET.

Why is Paul Ryan championed as the model young representative, when AOC has done the exact same things and gets shunned?



Put your hand down Scooby, we all know the answer is what you have typed in the reply box but haven't hit submit yet.

Today's Republicans are nuts.
That being said, I don't pay attention to the BS trash they throw at AOC. They are scraping the bottom of the barrel to rip her. While I don't agree (to the extreme extent) of her views, she does have good basic ideas. She definitely has the "it" factor. Get some seasoning, learn from her veteran leaders who have been through the muck, and I think she could turn out grand.

You mistake "living rent-free" and "disagreeing with her levels of extremism" for actual dislike and obsession. Nope. I'd love to see her succeed, I simply wish she would drift back more to the center.

 

[aparch]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

...she does have good basic ideas...
...I simply wish she would drift back more to the center...

I just find this funny.

I see her (and others with similar) ideas and co-opted ideas as Moonshots, more a direction and not an outcome. They feel like more accelerated pushes that we saw previous presidents enact. A lot of the ideas that were bundled in the Green New Deal were just ramped up Obama-era ideas. Hell, even some of those ideas were holdovers from the Bush era. Side note, how terrible has the GOP been in the last 11 years when the Bush era is looked back upon as "Eh, it wasn't that awful," anymore?

I would honestly like to have more Representatives like her in the party, if for the simple fact that it forces a left of Center Dem Presidential Candidate to be the person you're looking for. Without AOC (and similar) shooting for the Moon, your (the general your, not you specifically) Center Dem Presidential Candidate can't take the middle position. All of a sudden, that CDPC is now a Democrat in Name Only hanging out on the right side.

The Dems and GOP aren't just two people fairly haggling over the prices of things each other is selling. In the current political climate, the GOP are holding a gun to the head of the Dems, demanding the Dems wallet while haggling over the price of whatever only the GOP is selling.

 

[The Rube]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

And I think that the haggle to gain the Presidency would be a huge step (obvs) in the Dems having SOME power to sway some things, since Trump set some precedents. Gotta get that seat first, though. Otherwise it's no good to even bother to shoot the moon, as you phrase.

That being said, in hindsight, Obama did what he had to do to get stuff done. He caved on some things, but got some other things. He was a true president. Nowadays, it's either THIS or THAT. FU if you even mention a compromise/give things up to get stuff.

 

[aparch]

...Nowadays, it's either THIS or THAT. FU if you even mention a compromise/give things up to get stuff.

Cue Scooby with a true yet snarky comment about how the Dems continue to negotiate but the GOP won't.


I get where you're coming from, and I don't mean to pile on, but the next few years need (to continue to crappy analogies) to be solid blue no matter if we're centrists or Bernouts to counter the half century of GOP tilt on this pendulum.

 

[The Rube]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

Cue Scooby with a true yet snarky comment about how the Dems continue to negotiate but the GOP won't.


I get where you're coming from, and I don't mean to pile on, but the next few years need (to continue to crappy analogies) to be solid blue no matter if we're centrists or Bernouts to counter the half century of GOP swing on this pendulum.

That's the thing, though. We all saw what happened when the Bern Bros stuck with him and didn't vote Hill. Hill lost. If they unified...different result. And if the Dems nominate an equally divisive candidate (this time it would be in a very different dynamic, obviously) the same thing could happen. Get that 15-20% to swing back, and it's a slam dunk. Then start pushing things through like Trump did.

 

[Handyman]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-dnt="true"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">GOP senator blasts Trump over Mexico tariff threat <a href="https://t.co/Wv9iLJ3NCq">https://t.co/Wv9iLJ3NCq</a> <a href="https://t.co/HFNzmyNXkn">pic.twitter.com/HFNzmyNXkn</a></p>— The Hill (@thehill) <a href="https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1134354096373338113?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 31, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[MinnesotaNorthStar]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-dnt="true"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">GOP senator blasts Trump over Mexico tariff threat <a href="https://t.co/Wv9iLJ3NCq">https://t.co/Wv9iLJ3NCq</a> <a href="https://t.co/HFNzmyNXkn">pic.twitter.com/HFNzmyNXkn</a></p>— The Hill (@thehill) <a href="https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1134354096373338113?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 31, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Obviously, this is Mexico paying for the wall...

 

[rufus]

Um, no. I simply am hoping for someone not so extreme as Bernie. That's why I like Amy K (for now; lotta things can change between now and then). Not a huge fan of hers, but I think she can get the pendulum back to the middle and actually get stuff done.

And who cares what Trump says besides the MAGAs? They are lost anyways. What I *actually* said was the media will label someone a socialist, correctly or not, and some of the middle will cling to that as truth, or flock to it as truth, and vote that way.

Some of you are hoping for an uber-extreme lefty, because that will get everything you want. However, that particular candidate increases the chances of the Dems losing, and then you get nothing.

My whole point is to concentrate on nominating someone who will win the Presidency, THEN start working on getting what everyone wants.

Again, why will the media label them a socialist? You act as if that's just how it is, that stuff springs up out of a vacuum.

That evil media, just slapping labels on people left and right for no reason whatsoever.

Or maybe its just common knowledge, everyone knows they're socialists. They just know. No idea where they could have gotten the idea from. They just know.

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

That's the thing, though. We all saw what happened when the Bern Bros stuck with him and didn't vote Hill. Hill lost. If they unified...different result. And if the Dems nominate an equally divisive candidate (this time it would be in a very different dynamic, obviously) the same thing could happen. Get that 15-20% to swing back, and it's a slam dunk. Then start pushing things through like Trump did.

Because Dump wasn't a divisive candidate.

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

From a completely different part of the forest (advice about good writing) I read this quote today.

2 quick definitions:

"Dialectic" here means the logical strategy of testing an idea by pushing it into the world of real experience rather than keeping it locked up inside your head and imposing solely rationalist criteria against it. The intent is that the idea merges with reality and is thus tested by something outside itself, helping to free it from its own pretensions, and it is also joined up with the very situations in which it could be useful rather than solely an intellectual exercise.

"The Echtenacht Dancing procession" is a Luxembourg parade where the marchers go 3 steps forward, then take 2 steps back.

The Echtenacht Dancing procession is not the march of the World Spirit; limitation and reservation are no way to represent the dialectic. Rather, the dialectic advances by way of extremes, driving thoughts with the utmost consequentiality to the point where they turn back on themselves, instead of qualifying them. The prudence that restrains us from venturing too far ahead in a sentence is usually only an agent of social control, and so of stupefaction.

Liberals have been taught to continually undercut and second guess themselves with the consequence that we never just go for what we want and chance the consequences. When has a liberal administration in this country ever actually gone too far? Now, how often have liberals pulled themselves up short for whatever fears and thus prevented the actual world of experience from testing our convictions?

If we believe in Left ideas we should have the courage of our convictions. If those ideas are untenable in the real world, or if the electorate will never accept an experiment of them, we should find out about that for sure. What exactly are we afraid of? That we'll lose elections and the forces of evil will be empowered? Look around!

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-dnt="true"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">GOP senator blasts Trump over Mexico tariff threat <a href="https://t.co/Wv9iLJ3NCq">https://t.co/Wv9iLJ3NCq</a> <a href="https://t.co/HFNzmyNXkn">pic.twitter.com/HFNzmyNXkn</a></p>— The Hill (@thehill) <a href="https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1134354096373338113?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 31, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Hollow coming from Grassley. He's swallowed more than most.

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

Hollow coming from Grassley. He's swallowed more than most.

Is this a Rod Stewart reference? Does that make Lindsey Clara Bow?

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

When has a liberal administration in this country ever actually gone too far?

FDR: Court packing and internment. Way, way too far on both.

But I get your point

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

FDR: Court packing and internment. Way, way too far on both.

But I get your point

Internment wasn't going too far in a left policy, it was going too far in War Fever and racism, which are both right wing.

Court packing... going forward we may have to revisit this. Mitch and Dump violated all norms and there has to be some way to fight back. We can't suffer under an illegitimate Court makeup for 20 years because the Russians got away with it.

It would be nice if Gorsuch and Kavanaugh actually had a conscience and stepped down but... yeah, right.

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

This ad from a conservative group is running on Fox News.

 

[Rover]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

Liberals have been taught to continually undercut and second guess themselves with the consequence that we never just go for what we want and chance the consequences. When has a liberal administration in this country ever actually gone too far? Now, how often have liberals pulled themselves up short for whatever fears and thus prevented the actual world of experience from testing our convictions?

If we believe in Left ideas we should have the courage of our convictions. If those ideas are untenable in the real world, or if the electorate will never accept an experiment of them, we should find out about that for sure. What exactly are we afraid of? That we'll lose elections and the forces of evil will be empowered? Look around!

Again, I think this fits with your victim mentality but I'd ask you to step outside of that for a minute. I think your complaint is not with "liberals" but with "Democrats" so lets explore that.

1) Dems screwed themselves for eons with the push for Civil Rights. LBJ said as much at the time. It essentially was the birth of the Republican party you see today. Instead of being the party of Dad's Country Club, it became a home to air racial grievances. 50 years ago some Goopers were instrumental in passing civil rights legislation. Now the party is basically a front for the KKK.

2) The Gun Lobby has lost exactly once on Capitol Hill in the last 50 years. That was the Brady Bill, still in effect. A lot of rural Dems paid the price with their careers for that vote in the next election (1994). But, it was the right thing to do.

3) The ACA legislation wasn't the result of some weird cowardice that you like to claim. It was the result of a tenuous 60 seat majority that rested on the votes of people like Joe Leiberman and Ben Nelson. From Obama on down Dems wanted to include a public option. Not passing a bill that extended health insurance to 30M plus people over that one issue wasn't a hill anybody felt like dying on, for good reason. A lot of people lost their jobs over this.

So again you come off as the guy who broadcasts that he's lost every heavyweight fight over the last 40 years, so you're 0-40, but we should bet the mortgage on your next fight because this year is the year.

Lastly, the grim reality facing President Bernie Sanders, or President AOC, is that they have to get their legislation through Congress. If the Dems do obtain a Senate majority next year along with the White House, it will rest upon people like Joe Manchin and Jon Tester (and perhaps Doug Jones if conservaperv Roy Moore runs again).

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: POTUS 45:53: I Didn't Appoint That Judge So It Doesn't Matter.

Lastly, the grim reality facing President Bernie Sanders, or President AOC, is that they have to get their legislation through Congress. If the Dems do obtain a Senate majority next year along with the White House, it will rest upon people like Joe Manchin and Jon Tester (and perhaps Doug Jones if conservaperv Roy Moore runs again).

No, not really. You don't have to pass anything anymore. Just declare a national emergency. Write an executive order. The door is open.