Republicans: continued

Post Reply
User avatar
Seabass
Posts: 4669
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
About me: Natural instinct for science
Location: DPRNA
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Seabass » Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:45 pm

JimC wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:09 pm
Which brings me to ask this question, Seabass; would you rather have had Bernie as your candidate rather than Hillary?
Sure, I was rooting for Bernie in the primary. I'm not a "Bernie bro" though. I'm generally not one to get emotionally attached to politicians, nor do I demand ideological purity from them. I'm primarily concerned with secular liberalism winning out over religious conservatism. My main problem with Hillary was her vote for the Iraq war.
The demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots. ―H.L. Mencken

Bad government is the natural product of rule by those who believe government is bad. —Thomas Frank

Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. —Einstein
I’m a nationalist. —Trump

The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country. —Hermann Göring

User avatar
Cunt
Lumpy Vagina Bloodfart
Posts: 8270
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Cunt » Tue Oct 23, 2018 2:48 pm

I know you are asking Seabass, but I think the way Hillary cheated during the primaries should have disqualified her. It shouldn't have been about one or the other, once one showed themselves a villain.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists


Hermit aka Seraph wrote:
Wed Jul 24, 2019 7:25 pm
placed himself within a swinging arm's distance from said antifas

User avatar
Scot Dutchy
Posts: 12573
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:07 pm
About me: Dijk beschermer
Location: 's-Gravenhage, Nederland
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Scot Dutchy » Wed Oct 24, 2018 7:21 am

Who is not racist?

'Show us your passport': woman's racist rant in Virginia restaurant goes viral
White woman abused Spanish-speaking family including girl, 7

Tirade is latest anti-immigrant incident caught on video
"Wat is het een gezellig boel hier".

User avatar
Sean Hayden
Microagressor
Posts: 11734
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:55 pm
About me: philobarbaros
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Sean Hayden » Wed Oct 24, 2018 10:11 am

Russians.
"The world is nonsense bro"

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 29153
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Tero » Wed Oct 24, 2018 12:47 pm

Republicans shitting in pants, as polls are totally unreliable. Blame Trump!
:funny:
https://www-m.cnn.com/2018/10/23/politi ... cnn.com%2F
http://karireport.blogspot.com/ (:_funny_:)
http://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 2527
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Wed Oct 24, 2018 2:41 pm

Many in the Trump/Republican party have adopted one of his primary tactics: the bald-faced lie.

"Republicans test whether ‘lying to the voter’ is a pre-existing condition"
The Affordable Care Act of 2010 banned the long-standing practice of health insurers discriminating against customers on the basis of their pre-existing conditions. The Trumpcare legislation that narrowly passed the House of Representatives last May would have repealed these protections and replaced them with a system in which insurers could charge much higher premiums to those patients. Now, vulnerable House Republicans who voted for the wildly unpopular bill have to defend their votes this midterm election. Several of these representatives have chosen an interesting strategy: lie to the voters about it.

Republican Rep. George Holding, who represents North Carolina’s 2nd Congressional District, voted for the American Health Care Act, the House GOP’s Obamacare repeal proposal. A July ad by the North Carolinians for a Fair Economy, an advocacy group that opposes Trumpcare, featured families who would be “devastated by Congressman George Holding’s vote to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions.”

In a response spot posted a few weeks ago called “Answer,” Holding actually shows part of the spot misleadingly describing it as an “ad to elect Linda Coleman,” the Democratic nominee against him. On Holding’s behalf, an unidentified woman shakes her head and scolds, “Don’t be fooled. The fact is George Holding voted to make insurance companies cover people with pre-existing conditions. The ad is false and Linda Coleman knows it.” On the screen, the sourcing for the claim is revealed to be his vote for the Trumpcare bill.

The claim is false: Trumpcare bill did away with protections for patients with pre-existing conditions.
The instance described above is just an example. Republicans up for re-election all over the country have created similar advertisements in which they piously affirm their support for non-discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions, directly contradicting their previous actions. Among them, several Republican politicians who are party to a lawsuit whose aim is repealing the Affordable Care Act and its protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

'Hawley under fire on pre-existing conditions as pressure from Dems mounts'
Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley won’t offer details about his role in the Republican lawsuit that could strike down insurance protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

The threat of a big change in the law governing pre-existing conditions is the biggest, arguably most effective weapon Democrats have in the extremely tight race for U.S. Senate in Missouri.

Hawley is one of 20 GOP state officials who joined a federal lawsuit earlier this year that could end Obamacare and those protections. But Hawley and his top aides have refused to explain any details of his involvement.

He proudly touted his role in the case in February, announcing in a news release that his office “will continue to fight to take health care choices out of the hands of bureaucrats and return them to the hands of Missourians and their physicians.”

Eight months later, Hawley’s decision to join the Texas-led case has become a political headache as Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill and her allies have launched a series of attacks on Hawley over the lawsuit’s impact on pre-existing conditions.

...

Hawley has previously stated on his campaign Twitter account that he supports protections for pre-existing conditions, but his campaign did not immediately make him available for an interview Thursday to discuss his health care positions more thoroughly and square this position with the lawsuit, which could strike down the Affordable Care Act.

The ACA bars insurance companies from denying people coverage based on pre-existing conditions.

After McClatchy posted a story online, Hawley’s campaign issued a statement reasserting his support for protecting pre-existing conditions that did not offer details on how to accomplish that if the ACA goes away.

User avatar
Cunt
Lumpy Vagina Bloodfart
Posts: 8270
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Cunt » Wed Oct 24, 2018 3:07 pm

Scot Dutchy wrote:
Wed Oct 24, 2018 7:21 am
Who is not racist?
Since the most racially equal countries in the world are regularly accused of systemic racism, it seems there is not a 'non-racist' anywhere.

It's a good reason to ignore the accusation when it blurts out. It's as classy as common as calling people kike, wop or canuck.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists


Hermit aka Seraph wrote:
Wed Jul 24, 2019 7:25 pm
placed himself within a swinging arm's distance from said antifas

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 2527
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Wed Oct 24, 2018 4:09 pm

Several celebrities whose political views are on the left have invited scorn through their public endorsements of the anti-vaccination idiocy. Smarmy dipshit Republican Rand Paul also supports it and now there are other Republican politicians pushing that same idiocy. The title of the article is needlessly alarmist, but it's describing a genuine phenomenon.

'The Anti-Vaxxer Disease Is Now a Republican Epidemic'
What was once the provenance of a few fringe weirdos—mostly on the loony left—has now migrated into the mainstream. At least three Republican candidates for governor—in Oklahoma, Oregon, and Connecticut—are now open skeptics of requiring vaccinations for school kids.
A survey from a few years ago showed that Republicans were more likely to take an anti-vaccination stance than Democrats. No good will come if Republicans decide to politicize this issue the way that they have with climate science.

User avatar
Cunt
Lumpy Vagina Bloodfart
Posts: 8270
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Cunt » Wed Oct 24, 2018 4:36 pm

I remember seeing some actors, who play 'leading lady' roles, cuddling, tonguing and lauding Harvey Weinstein. They are still taken seriously about womens issues...

Currently, the left loves Gwynyth Paltrow, and doesn't even know the name of Dr. Jen Gunther.

It's astounding how accepting the lefties are of aggressive stupidity. GP will not be vilified as much as she deserves for exploiting the public. Dr. JG will be continually vilified by those defending Goop and similar horseshit.

It recently occurred to me that while facebook et al say they want to address 'fake news', they sure don't mind accepting HUGE ad revenue from known pseudoscience cheats. It isn't all that hard to write an 'algorythm' to identify such nonsense (I use the venn diagram of irrational nonsense, and include anyone who shares office space with those known cheats)
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists


Hermit aka Seraph wrote:
Wed Jul 24, 2019 7:25 pm
placed himself within a swinging arm's distance from said antifas

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 62489
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by JimC » Wed Oct 24, 2018 8:05 pm

Cunt wrote:
Wed Oct 24, 2018 3:07 pm
Scot Dutchy wrote:
Wed Oct 24, 2018 7:21 am
Who is not racist?
Since the most racially equal countries in the world are regularly accused of systemic racism, it seems there is not a 'non-racist' anywhere.

It's a good reason to ignore the accusation when it blurts out. It's as classy as common as calling people kike, wop or canuck.
So, you imply that no one should ever be called racist.

KKK?

The neo-Nazis who chant "kill the Jews"?
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Cunt
Lumpy Vagina Bloodfart
Posts: 8270
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Cunt » Wed Oct 24, 2018 8:41 pm

JimC wrote:
Wed Oct 24, 2018 8:05 pm
Cunt wrote:
Wed Oct 24, 2018 3:07 pm
Scot Dutchy wrote:
Wed Oct 24, 2018 7:21 am
Who is not racist?
Since the most racially equal countries in the world are regularly accused of systemic racism, it seems there is not a 'non-racist' anywhere.

It's a good reason to ignore the accusation when it blurts out. It's as classy as common as calling people kike, wop or canuck.
So, you imply that no one should ever be called racist.
Not at all, JimC, but it is used so often, that it doesn't catch my attention anymore. It certainly doesn't convince me I am going to see racism.

KKK?

The neo-Nazis who chant "kill the Jews"?
Sure, but I'm not exactly sure where the line needs to be. For me, I think about actions, not beliefs. I'm used to lots of distinctions in life which are based on race. Some positive, some negative. Some against minorities, some against majorities.

I choose to think, for example, that Milo isn't racist. So many accuse him of it, I'm confident that many would call me racist for simply not seeing it.

I don't think Trump checks out as racist. How long do you think before Trump Derangement Syndrome causes someone to rush in to provide evidence, with no effort or willingness to show how to earn the label, or how one would acquit themselves if innocent?
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists


Hermit aka Seraph wrote:
Wed Jul 24, 2019 7:25 pm
placed himself within a swinging arm's distance from said antifas

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 25117
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Brian Peacock » Wed Oct 24, 2018 11:06 pm

L'Emmerdeur wrote:Many in the Trump/Republican party have adopted one of his primary tactics: the bald-faced lie.

"Republicans test whether ‘lying to the voter’ is a pre-existing condition"
The Affordable Care Act of 2010 banned the long-standing practice of health insurers discriminating against customers on the basis of their pre-existing conditions. The Trumpcare legislation that narrowly passed the House of Representatives last May would have repealed these protections and replaced them with a system in which insurers could charge much higher premiums to those patients. Now, vulnerable House Republicans who voted for the wildly unpopular bill have to defend their votes this midterm election. Several of these representatives have chosen an interesting strategy: lie to the voters about it.

Republican Rep. George Holding, who represents North Carolina’s 2nd Congressional District, voted for the American Health Care Act, the House GOP’s Obamacare repeal proposal. A July ad by the North Carolinians for a Fair Economy, an advocacy group that opposes Trumpcare, featured families who would be “devastated by Congressman George Holding’s vote to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions.”

In a response spot posted a few weeks ago called “Answer,” Holding actually shows part of the spot misleadingly describing it as an “ad to elect Linda Coleman,” the Democratic nominee against him. On Holding’s behalf, an unidentified woman shakes her head and scolds, “Don’t be fooled. The fact is George Holding voted to make insurance companies cover people with pre-existing conditions. The ad is false and Linda Coleman knows it.” On the screen, the sourcing for the claim is revealed to be his vote for the Trumpcare bill.

The claim is false: Trumpcare bill did away with protections for patients with pre-existing conditions.
The instance described above is just an example. Republicans up for re-election all over the country have created similar advertisements in which they piously affirm their support for non-discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions, directly contradicting their previous actions. Among them, several Republican politicians who are party to a lawsuit whose aim is repealing the Affordable Care Act and its protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

'Hawley under fire on pre-existing conditions as pressure from Dems mounts'
Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley won’t offer details about his role in the Republican lawsuit that could strike down insurance protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

The threat of a big change in the law governing pre-existing conditions is the biggest, arguably most effective weapon Democrats have in the extremely tight race for U.S. Senate in Missouri.

Hawley is one of 20 GOP state officials who joined a federal lawsuit earlier this year that could end Obamacare and those protections. But Hawley and his top aides have refused to explain any details of his involvement.

He proudly touted his role in the case in February, announcing in a news release that his office “will continue to fight to take health care choices out of the hands of bureaucrats and return them to the hands of Missourians and their physicians.”

Eight months later, Hawley’s decision to join the Texas-led case has become a political headache as Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill and her allies have launched a series of attacks on Hawley over the lawsuit’s impact on pre-existing conditions.

...

Hawley has previously stated on his campaign Twitter account that he supports protections for pre-existing conditions, but his campaign did not immediately make him available for an interview Thursday to discuss his health care positions more thoroughly and square this position with the lawsuit, which could strike down the Affordable Care Act.

The ACA bars insurance companies from denying people coverage based on pre-existing conditions.

After McClatchy posted a story online, Hawley’s campaign issued a statement reasserting his support for protecting pre-existing conditions that did not offer details on how to accomplish that if the ACA goes away.
Don't mind me, I'm just listening to the deafening silence here.
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Seabass
Posts: 4669
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
About me: Natural instinct for science
Location: DPRNA
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Seabass » Sat Oct 27, 2018 11:56 pm

Both sides. :bored:

The demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots. ―H.L. Mencken

Bad government is the natural product of rule by those who believe government is bad. —Thomas Frank

Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. —Einstein
I’m a nationalist. —Trump

The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country. —Hermann Göring

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 29153
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Tero » Sun Oct 28, 2018 1:55 am

I know you are asking Seabass, but I think the way Hillary cheated during the primaries should have disqualified her. It shouldn't have been about one or the other, once one showed themselves a villain.
Shows what weak candidates the Republicans had. Trump was not going to attract any from the middle, but had more appeal than Ted Cruz. Though it's all show, trump is no more human than Ted.

Any of the Democratic candidates would have made rational leaders. Hillary probably the least likable. But I would trust her to run politics that she outlined. That nobody read as they did not fit into a tweet.
http://karireport.blogspot.com/ (:_funny_:)
http://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 25117
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Brian Peacock » Sun Oct 28, 2018 9:02 am

Brian Peacock wrote:
L'Emmerdeur wrote:Many in the Trump/Republican party have adopted one of his primary tactics: the bald-faced lie.

"Republicans test whether ‘lying to the voter’ is a pre-existing condition"
The Affordable Care Act of 2010 banned the long-standing practice of health insurers discriminating against customers on the basis of their pre-existing conditions. The Trumpcare legislation that narrowly passed the House of Representatives last May would have repealed these protections and replaced them with a system in which insurers could charge much higher premiums to those patients. Now, vulnerable House Republicans who voted for the wildly unpopular bill have to defend their votes this midterm election. Several of these representatives have chosen an interesting strategy: lie to the voters about it.

Republican Rep. George Holding, who represents North Carolina’s 2nd Congressional District, voted for the American Health Care Act, the House GOP’s Obamacare repeal proposal. A July ad by the North Carolinians for a Fair Economy, an advocacy group that opposes Trumpcare, featured families who would be “devastated by Congressman George Holding’s vote to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions.”

In a response spot posted a few weeks ago called “Answer,” Holding actually shows part of the spot misleadingly describing it as an “ad to elect Linda Coleman,” the Democratic nominee against him. On Holding’s behalf, an unidentified woman shakes her head and scolds, “Don’t be fooled. The fact is George Holding voted to make insurance companies cover people with pre-existing conditions. The ad is false and Linda Coleman knows it.” On the screen, the sourcing for the claim is revealed to be his vote for the Trumpcare bill.

The claim is false: Trumpcare bill did away with protections for patients with pre-existing conditions.
The instance described above is just an example. Republicans up for re-election all over the country have created similar advertisements in which they piously affirm their support for non-discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions, directly contradicting their previous actions. Among them, several Republican politicians who are party to a lawsuit whose aim is repealing the Affordable Care Act and its protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

'Hawley under fire on pre-existing conditions as pressure from Dems mounts'
Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley won’t offer details about his role in the Republican lawsuit that could strike down insurance protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

The threat of a big change in the law governing pre-existing conditions is the biggest, arguably most effective weapon Democrats have in the extremely tight race for U.S. Senate in Missouri.

Hawley is one of 20 GOP state officials who joined a federal lawsuit earlier this year that could end Obamacare and those protections. But Hawley and his top aides have refused to explain any details of his involvement.

He proudly touted his role in the case in February, announcing in a news release that his office “will continue to fight to take health care choices out of the hands of bureaucrats and return them to the hands of Missourians and their physicians.”

Eight months later, Hawley’s decision to join the Texas-led case has become a political headache as Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill and her allies have launched a series of attacks on Hawley over the lawsuit’s impact on pre-existing conditions.

...

Hawley has previously stated on his campaign Twitter account that he supports protections for pre-existing conditions, but his campaign did not immediately make him available for an interview Thursday to discuss his health care positions more thoroughly and square this position with the lawsuit, which could strike down the Affordable Care Act.

The ACA bars insurance companies from denying people coverage based on pre-existing conditions.

After McClatchy posted a story online, Hawley’s campaign issued a statement reasserting his support for protecting pre-existing conditions that did not offer details on how to accomplish that if the ACA goes away.
Don't mind me, I'm just listening to the deafening silence here.
Echo... ...echo... ...echo... ...co... ...co...
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests