didn't take long

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Didn’t read the Mueller Report

I read Mueller's conclusions. I've read that the Russiagate thing has been "debunked."

Didn’t see Trump say that

Say what?

Didn’t see any of the terrorists on J6

Wasn't there but saw videos of the rioters.

Nothing may disturb the narrative
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I try, but you're too steeped in it that nothing can disturb it. You even have to resort to repetitive lying, deceit, propaganda, supposition, conjecture, and ridiculous memes to support it.

You once asked me if I ever thought I could be wrong. I answered honestly that I always consider that I might be. I didn't return the favor by asking you the same question. It just doesn't seem plausible that someone who so easily, remorselessly, resorts to constant deceptions could possibly, if he had a functioning conscience, admit that he might be wrong.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

I try, but you're too steeped in it that nothing can disturb it. You even have to resort to repetitive lying, deceit, propaganda, supposition, conjecture, and ridiculous memes to support it.

You once asked me if I ever thought I could be wrong. I answered honestly that I always consider that I might be. I didn't return the favor by asking you the same question. It just doesn't seem plausible that someone who so easily, remorselessly, resorts to constant deceptions could possibly, if he had a functioning conscience, admit that he might be wrong.

Social science will reveal that as the Republican Party became increasingly conservative, building a base with the religious right, it became the authoritarian party. That authoritarianism revealed itself to be undemocratic and un-American.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Social science will reveal that as the Republican Party became increasingly conservative, building a base with the religious right, it became the authoritarian party. That authoritarianism revealed itself to be undemocratic and un-American.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

the party that wants smaller federal government reach, less federal intrusion, the party that wants to give people more liberty and choice, is the authoritarian party.

That’s just brilliant Pete. You have a dazzling intellect.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

the party that wants smaller federal government reach, less federal intrusion, the party that wants to give people more liberty and choice, is the authoritarian party.

That’s just brilliant Pete. You have a dazzling intellect.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trying to overthrow the government, banning the teaching of history, banning books, these things are not “conservative”, they are truly radical
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Trying to overthrow the government, banning the teaching of history, banning books, these things are not “conservative”, they are truly radical
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

when leftists act this way you dummies call it democracy

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Trying to overthrow the government, banning the teaching of history, banning books, these things are not “conservative”, they are truly radical
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

trump is one guy. he’s not “the republican party”

pete, biden is a pathological
liar, he obviously sold
influence to profit his son, a plagiarist, said republicans want to put blacks in chains, a weird woman sniffer with a rape allegation against him.

are you responsible
for that? are all democrats? do you get painted with biden’s personal
flaws?

this is what people
do, when they don’t want to talk about policy.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Banning books,
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

books such as the one showing young boys blowing each other. not banning them entirely, just from public schools.

but when the left forces christian businesses out of business because they won’t participate in gay weddings, that’s not authoritarian. trying to shut down joe rogan, firing Gina Carano, etc…

unbelievable.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

the party that wants smaller federal government reach, less federal intrusion, the party that wants to give people more liberty and choice, is the authoritarian party.

That’s just brilliant Pete. You have a dazzling intellect.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the (Republican) party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them."

Guess who
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

"Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the (Republican) party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them."

Guess who
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

hillary was a goldwater girl....ssssooooooo

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Social science will reveal that as the Republican Party became increasingly conservative, building a base with the religious right, it became the authoritarian party. That authoritarianism revealed itself to be undemocratic and un-American.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sorry Mister Nostradamus, but the Republican Party has become increasingly Progressive and therefor catching up with the cloaked but still evident authoritarianism of Progressives. This current hiccup in the trend toward Republican Progressivism has been a small retreat back to the original conservatism of the earlier supporters of our founding principles--the conservation of individual liberty against the intrusive power of the Federal Government.

And the "religious right" is openly very much against the Progressive notion of an unimpeded central government. And very much for a return of federally stolen power back to the states--the original conservatism of power being held mostly by the people and their communities, not by some distant all powerful central government.

As for "social science" revealing who is authoritarian, you appear to view social science as some unified authority. Actually, social scientists are diverse in fields of study and in political persuasion which has historically changed from time to time. Economists certainly don't represent some monolithic view on what is authoritarian and which party represents that. Same for historians. Sociologists may not even think about the differences between the parties on authoritarian lines, rather, academics, and workers in the field such as social workers, may fundamentally view government as necessarily being authoritarian in order to impose what they consider necessary for social cohesion and what social experts recommend for their notion of social progress. Which is what you have admitted that you believe.

No doubt, the unabated Progressive pedagogy in our educational institutions will more and more tip the scale in the classrooms from any existing remnants of original conservatism in the social sciences toward authoritarian Progressivism in the minds and souls of future social scientists. And you may be making a distinction between "good" and "bad" authoritarianism. For you the emphasis on individual freedom at the expense of government power to do what you think is good is a bad sort of authoritarianism--the authority of the selfish individual eclipsing the power of government to dictate what is good.

As of today and the near past, there are many economists and historians who view Progressives as the greater authoritarians. You have admitted that government must be authoritarian in order to pass Progressive legislation. Which is admitting that Progressives are authoritarian.

So if Republicans become THE AUTHORITARIAN PARTY when they finally succeed in becoming bona fide Progressive Republicans, their undemocratic and un-American "good" authoritarianism should make you happy.

[Pete F.]

Jonathan Last on The GOP Is an Authoritarian Regime

(1) This unanimously-approved censure document has to be viewed in conjunction with the RNC’s 2020 platform.

You will recall that in 2020, the RNC declined to create a platform.

Instead, the RNC passed a 1-page resolution which concluded that the party stood for . . . literally whatever Donald Trump wanted:

RESOLVED, That the Republican Party has and will continue to enthusiastically support the President’s America-first agenda.

That was the party platform.

This inverted the traditional relationship between a president and his party. Historically, the party had a bunch of ideas and the president was their elected champion, the guy who would support the party and carry its banner forth.

Trump switched it so that the president was his own state and the party existed purely to support him in the perpetuation of his power.

Now put the RNC platform’s pledge of fealty to Trump next to the unanimous censure of Cheney and Kinzinger and what you see looks more like juche than anything we’re used to in the history of American political institutions.

(2) Buried in the censure of Cheney and Kinzinger is a revealing phrase:

. . . they are both using their past professed political affiliation . . .

“Professed.”

This isn’t a stray word. It’s an assertion that Cheney and Kinzinger were never real Republicans—that they were impostors the whole time, whose actions over the past year represented not a break in behavior but a revelation of their true selves.

This is Stalinist. Like, literally. There’s simply no other way to read it.

And it is extraordinary in American politics.

It is nice that a handful of elected Republicans are pushing back against this censure document. But I do not understand—and I mean this, genuinely—how someone could remain in the GOP. It is not a political party in any meaningful sense. It is an authoritarian machine.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

CPAC is holding their conference n Hungary , an authoritarian regime under the thumb of Putin tells you the conservative Republican Party no longer exist . It’s no longer a matter of policy differences
For Republicans it’s a matter of changing our democracy to a different governance
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Reporters barred from Gorsuch’s appearance at Orlando Federalist Society conference


So let me get this correct a SCJ is willing to speak at an event where his speech is not allowed to be Heard by the Press?

and we have another whose Wife is knee deep in Jan6th and other cases in front of the court and he refuses to recuse himself

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Virginia's new Republican governor, who banned critical race theory in schools, is launching a tip line for parents to report their kids' teachers


He said parents can report public-school teachers if they believe they're "behaving objectionably."


Gotto love the GOP facts need not apply all you need is a feeling

Youngkin banned the teaching of "inherently divisive concepts" on his first day in office. The order didn't define "divisive concepts, amazing

The party of big government and executive control

Limiting the power of local school districts, Virginia Gov. Youngkin signs law barring school mask mandates.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

The party of big government and executive control

Limiting the power of local school districts, Virginia Gov. Youngkin signs law barring school mask mandates.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

yes, barring mandates is good, nothing is stopping anyone from wearing masks, double masking, double masking and wearing gloves or from parents masking their children if they have concerns

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by scottw

yes, barring mandates is good, nothing is stopping anyone from wearing masks, double masking, double masking and wearing gloves or from parents masking their children if they have concerns

Yes, for the benevolent authoritarian, mandates are freedom, liberty is oppression.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Yes, for the benevolent authoritarian, mandates are freedom, liberty is oppression.

All 3 Republicans running for Michigan Attorney General just stated that they oppose the ruling in Griswold v Connecticut which outlawed prosecuting married couples for using contraception.

You read that right.

We spent 20 years fighting the Taliban and they were here hiding under rocks all along. Good luck Michigan.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

All 3 Republicans running for Michigan Attorney General just stated that they oppose the ruling in Griswold v Connecticut which outlawed prosecuting married couples for using contraception.

You read that right.

We spent 20 years fighting the Taliban and they were here hiding under rocks all along. Good luck Michigan.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You quote verbatim, without quotation marks nor attribution, a one-sided, uncomprehensive tweet by hyperpartisan, hyperauthoritarion Democrat Mich. AG Dana Nessel and think you've really given us some important and incisive information?

[Pete F.]

BREAKING: Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares accepted multiple large campaign donations during this past month of session, which is illegal under Virginia law.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

In case you aren't following along, Florida Republicans —#^&having pushed through a ban on rape & incest victims getting abortions —#^&are now coming after birth control:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

In case you aren't following along, Florida Republicans —#^&having pushed through a ban on rape & incest victims getting abortions —#^&are now coming after birth control:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sounds like it's time for one of your "poor victims" type memes.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

In case you aren't following along, Florida Republicans —#^&having pushed through a ban on rape & incest victims getting abortions —#^&are now coming after birth control:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

From a good friend who moved to FL 2 years ago...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

In case you aren't following along, Florida Republicans —#^&having pushed through a ban on rape & incest victims getting abortions —#^&are now coming after birth control:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The ban is only after the unborn baby is past 15 weeks of development. You forgot to mention that. That's kind of a lot of time, isn't it?

If you believe the unborn baby is a human being, that belief would not depend upon the circumstances of conception.

I think getting an abortion after one had consensual sex (the vast majority of abortions) and getting an abortion after being raped, are not morally equivalent. Those are two very different situations. But if you believe life begins at conception, it's totally consistent to not offer an exception for rape. Many people believe the baby is a human being, period, and that abortion is infanticide regardless of the circumstances of conception.

What are they doing with birth control?

[Got Stripers]

Pro choice about masking and vaccines, but if your a women your rights to choose are going backwards, seems the GOP is loosing touch with how many women vote and are pro choice.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Pro choice about masking and vaccines, but if your a women your rights to choose are going backwards, seems the GOP is loosing touch with how many women vote and are pro choice.

then it should help you in November and you should be happy...

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by scottw

then it should help you in November and you should be happy...

Only if they are smart and acknowledge how important the mid term races at all levels are, but as we all know the mid terms are historically not kind to the incumbent party.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Only if they are smart and acknowledge how important the mid term races at all levels are, but as we all know the mid terms are historically not kind to the incumbent party.

oh that's right...most Americans are stupid...we learned that the other day


it's going to be much worse than "not kind"

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Pro choice about masking and vaccines, but if your a women your rights to choose are going backwards, seems the GOP is loosing touch with how many women vote and are pro choice.

i’m about to destroy that stupid argument.Ready?

Do you believe women have the right to choose to hurt others?

No you don’t. We all agree no one has that right.

So the abortion issue has absolutely zero to do with a woman’s right to choose. It’s about one thing and one thing only…is the unborn a person?

Because if you beiueves it was a person, you’d also be opposed to abortion.

your side can’t frame this debate honestly for one second. So you pretend it’s about enslaving women, because that’s easier for you to defend.

you and i both agree that women can choose whatever they want as long as they don’t harm someone else. The abortion debate, then, only comes down to whether or not the unborn baby represents “someone else.”

would it kill you to be honest for a fraction of a second?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

I wonder if leftists would support mandated pregnancy protection and a mandatory abortion vaccine...but I don't want to give them any ideas

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

i’m about to destroy that stupid argument.Ready?

Do you believe women have the right to choose to hurt others?

No you don’t. We all agree no one has that right.

So the abortion issue has absolutely zero to do with a woman’s right to choose. It’s about one thing and one thing only…is the unborn a person?

Because if you beiueves it was a person, you’d also be opposed to abortion.

your side can’t frame this debate honestly for one second. So you pretend it’s about enslaving women, because that’s easier for you to defend.

you and i both agree that women can choose whatever they want as long as they don’t harm someone else. The abortion debate, then, only comes down to whether or not the unborn baby represents “someone else.”

would it kill you to be honest for a fraction of a second?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You are entitled to your opinion, but row wade proved your opinion isn’t held by the majority, so that argument is a fail.