The "Stay Classy, Republicans" Super Nintendo Chalmers Thread

Lyndon Johnson was planning to get into Vietnam behind closed doors at the same time he was publicly vowing to not get into Vietnam. See "The Pentagon Papers."

Not to take anything away from Nixon's awfulness, mind.
 
Now with budgets on the table and votes starting, we get to see whether people really will put their votes where their mouths are. The purpose isn't to see what actually is going to pass, but is an interesting exercise in forcing members to take stands on individual issues. They'll be interesting ones on both sides. Republicans basically forced Dems to go on record voting against the medical device tax in the ACA. So hey, well done Republicans.

The reason this is in this thread is because Harry Reid caught Senate Republicans in a pretty good one last night.
What went mostly unnoticed, though, is that Dems also forced the GOP to take a position on the single most politically contentious part of the Ryan budget -- its call to replace the Medicare guarantee with a private insurance subsidy. That amendment was written to put members on record over whether to prohibit such a dramatic policy change. And by a vote of 96-3 the Senate answered that question with a resounding "yes." Only Sens. Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and Rand Paul voted to effectively endorse Medicare privatization.
Click to expand...
This is basically the entire premise of the Paul Ryan budget. And once again by a ridonkulous margin, Democrats have proven that Republicans don't actually want to do what they keep saying we have to do.

Surprising exactly no one, I'm sure.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Lyndon Johnson was planning to get into Vietnam behind closed doors at the same time he was publicly vowing to not get into Vietnam. See "The Pentagon Papers."

Not to take anything away from Nixon's awfulness, mind.[/QUOTE]

Not to excuse him, but Nixon did sign a negative income tax bill didn't he?
 
I just got lost for like 2 hours reading Liberal Feminists blogs. I hope to god the rest of you libs do not approve of this self-centered self-important hipster drivel. But that's a stretch.

A lot of snark, a lot of bitching and a giant circle-jerk party.
 
[quote name='cfootball1']I just got lost for like 2 hours reading Liberal Feminists blogs. I hope to god the rest of you libs do not approve of this self-centered self-important hipster drivel. But that's a stretch.

A lot of snark, a lot of bitching and a giant circle-jerk party.[/QUOTE]
Oddly enough, it seems like you're doing the exact same thing that you're accusing them of. Funny how that works!

edit: Even funnier that this has absolutely nothing to do with Republicans being classy, Super Nintendo, or Chalmers.:rofl:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='willardhaven']Not to excuse him, but Nixon did sign a negative income tax bill didn't he?[/QUOTE]

huh? not sure what you're talking about.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']huh? not sure what you're talking about.[/QUOTE]

Well Nixon is thought to be awful but the Democrats in Congress rejected the negative income tax which would have given poor folk $500 a year(or $3,000 in 2012 money).
 
[quote name='cfootball1']I just got lost for like 2 hours reading Liberal Feminists blogs. I hope to god the rest of you libs do not approve of this self-centered self-important hipster drivel. But that's a stretch.

A lot of snark, a lot of bitching and a giant circle-jerk party.[/QUOTE]

Indeed it is a stretch. Liberals cannot escape the comfort zone of mockery, sarcasm, and general labels of 'mental' 'backward' 'stupid' 'racist' 'bigot' mantra. Feminism is seen as a modern thing so embraced, however obnoxious those flying the flag often seem.
 
[quote name='granturismo']Indeed it is a stretch. Liberals cannot escape the comfort zone of mockery, sarcasm, and general labels of 'mental' 'backward' 'stupid' 'racist' 'bigot' mantra. Feminism is seen as a modern thing so embraced, however obnoxious those flying the flag often seem.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. It's also the most hilarious hypocrisy. Championing independence all the while casting the government as daddy. My mother - a conservative and provider of 4 boys whilst not bitching or asking for shit is more independent and stronger than those cry-babies will ever be. So frail.
 
[quote name='willardhaven']What the hell are you guys talking about?[/QUOTE]

I speak several languages. If you struggle with English, which language would you prefer to converse in?:)
 
My guess is that English isn't your first.

Rhetoric aside, the Republican party has worked pretty hard to make itself all of the things you listed. Obama is pretty Republican policy-wise, he simply lacks the veneer of ignorance/sadism of the mainstream Republicans.
 
[quote name='granturismo']Indeed it is a stretch. Liberals cannot escape the comfort zone of mockery, sarcasm, and general labels of 'mental' 'backward' 'stupid' 'racist' 'bigot' mantra. Feminism is seen as a modern thing so embraced, however obnoxious those flying the flag often seem.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='cfootball1']Exactly. It's also the most hilarious hypocrisy. Championing independence all the while casting the government as daddy. My mother - a conservative and provider of 4 boys whilst not bitching or asking for shit is more independent and stronger than those cry-babies will ever be. So frail.[/QUOTE]

pie.gif
 
So 4 parents that didn't like issues that are being discussed voiced their opinion and because it goes against your viewpoint suddenly a giant chunk of the population doesn't care about education? People should just stay silent and never voice their opinion, completely agree :roll:
 
It's in the long line of revisionist history that comes from Conservatives.

Tossing out evolution
Including creationism (or "intelligent design") as an equally compelling scientific theory in classes
Removing contraceptive discussion from sex ed courses

See also, my personal favorite, "The War of Northern Aggression." :lol:
 
I actually remember a teacher using "The War of Northern Aggression" once in school. We're a bunch or sore losers in this part of the country.
 
How dare we treat people of color with respect and not as slaves, how dare the gov't take a aggressive stance against SLAVERY.... LOL at Northern Aggression, seriously.

According to history the South started the War by committing a "terrorist" act. But of course they won't call it that, as they want to be called "independence" fighters. And yet no history book would have called it a terrorist act when it basically is one.

This is the same group of people who approve our wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and possibly Iran, and have no idea why the M.E. is so mad at us?
 
[quote name='Finger_Shocker']How dare we treat people of color with respect[/QUOTE]

First of all, slavery was started by blacks on blacks in africa. Slavery is a huge thing today in the US, of all colors by all colors. In fact there are more black pimps with white teens as their money makers that you regularly hear about after arrest.
In Asia & the middle east as well as Russia slavery is ripe. So this idea that slavery is white people having 'color' people in chains is just you being too stuck up on particular events at a particular time in a particular place. It's a worldwide issue that's long existed and color is almost irrelevant.
 
[quote name='Finger_Shocker']

This is the same group of people who approve our wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and possibly Iran, and have no idea why the M.E. is so mad at us?[/QUOTE]

The M.E hates America due to the Israeli conflict more than anything. But in Afghanistan the police abuct boys, to keep and abuse at night, shooting many when they try to flee. This is the police, the politicans are corrupt as you can get. Why should we be trying to please them? You talk about slavery, yet over there it's common place, have you seen how they treat women? 12 yr olds are married off to 55 yr olds against their will. And you want these peoples approval?
 
http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/...an-uses-ethnic-slur-to-describe-laborers?lite

GOP congressman uses ethnic slur to describe laborers


A Republican congressman from Alaska on Thursday used a slur referring to immigrants, particularly Mexicans, in an interview with a public radio station in his home stage.
Amid a hot-button debate in Washington over how to overhaul the nation's immigration laws, Rep. Don Young, a 21-term lawmaker, referred to immigrant workers as "wetbacks" — a term that could threaten to inflame the debate about immigration reform.
"My father had a ranch; we used to have 50-60 wetbacks to pick tomatoes," Young said in an interview with radio station KRBD. He was discussing the number of jobs that have been made irrelevant due to advances in automation. The interview was first surfaced by Buzzfeed.
"It takes two people to pick the same tomatoes now. It’s all done by machine," Young added.
While the veteran congressman wasn't referring directly to immigration reform, his remarks certainly cut against the broader Republican effort to repair the party's dismal image with Latino voters.
The term "wetback" is a derogatory term sometimes used to refer to migrant workers, particularly Mexicans or Mexican-Americans who now reside in the United States.
Click to expand...


I can't wait to see him defend this. I bet it will be a doozy.
 
I was about to say, just pick something from the articles I posted, too much to quote. We need a :smh: smiley.
 
[quote name='CaseyRyback']http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/...an-uses-ethnic-slur-to-describe-laborers?lite




I can't wait to see him defend this. I bet it will be a doozy.[/QUOTE]


It really won't matter. I used to live in Alaska. Don Young has said even worse things, actually.
He still wins every 2 years no matter what. Many times the democratic party only fields a token canidate.

He's the only US Rep the state has, he's on some major committees and the state is 70% Republican.
 
[quote name='eldergamer']It really won't matter. I used to live in Alaska. Don Young has said even worse things, actually.
He still wins every 2 years no matter what. Many times the democratic party only fields a token canidate.

He's the only US Rep the state has, he's on some major committees and the state is 70% Republican.[/QUOTE]

Republican's say they want to win nationwide. When they talk like this it hurts the chances of this happening. Look at how legitimate rape tainted the chances of Republican successes nationwide.
 
[quote name='CaseyRyback']Republican's say they want to win nationwide. When they talk like this it hurts the chances of this happening. Look at how legitimate rape tainted the chances of Republican successes nationwide.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but Akin still got over a million votes. Makes you wonder...
 
If ever there was a more clueless group of politicians I can't think of them. They want to win, but can't help being what they are. Even when they talk about changing, it usually goes something like "We know that gay marriage is inevitable. It's an abomination blah blah blah, but we know it's inevitable...".

That's supposed to be change? Seriously? That's not change, it's akin to that bullshit apology of "Well I'm sorry if I offended anyone but...". For republicans to have a chance in the next few years, they better look deep and make some fundamental changes, otherwise they're screwed.
 
[quote name='Clak']If ever there was a more clueless group of politicians I can't think of them. They want to win, but can't help being what they are. Even when they talk about changing, it usually goes something like "We know that gay marriage is inevitable. It's an abomination blah blah blah, but we know it's inevitable...".

That's supposed to be change? Seriously? That's not change, it's akin to that bullshit apology of "Well I'm sorry if I offended anyone but...". For republicans to have a chance in the next few years, they better look deep and make some fundamental changes, otherwise they're screwed.[/QUOTE]

The only reason the Republicans struggled this past election and probably wont win future elections, is due to immigration and the hispanics all voting for the party that most benefited them.

Liberals can try and claim it's 'backward' views that prevent them winning, in a way of making them change to the liberal viewpoint but it's simply false. Blacks voting because a guy is black(who wouldn't have voted otherwise) and hispanics voting for the ones that benefit them is what the election came down to. It was all very racial rather than about the important issues. On the economy Romney had Obama over his knee.

If the hispanic vote continues to be democrat then republicans have no chance of winning an election.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Yeah, but Akin still got over a million votes. Makes you wonder...[/QUOTE]

I voted for Akin. His comments were overblown as usual. He was essentially saying that the child shouldn't be punished for the actions of a rapist. That's his view, why can he not have it? What's with the liberal nazism of think one way and only one way or be mocked, persecuted and dismissed? Really he's anti abortion and people pressure him with scenario's to try and challenge this, and he said something a bit off key for the mainstream in response, but so what? Lots of people respect an anti abortion stance, rather than 50 million abortions a year, and nothing thought of it.

Too much politics is sensationalism to try to appeal to a pre rehearsed narrative. 'republicans are backward dinosaurs who still don't believe women should have rights' lets try to blow this up and appeal to that.

It's petty dull journalism. Bottom line is he was anti abortion, and many people support that.
 
The fact that you obviously respect the man means I can't possibly respect you, which guarantees that we can't have a civilized conversation. So have fun with ego, bob, and the rest here on vs.
 
[quote name='Clak']...I can't possibly respect you, which guarantees that we can't have a civilized conversation..[/QUOTE]

Says the owner of CAG's longest ignore list.
 
[quote name='dilemna']I voted for Akin. His comments were overblown as usual. He was essentially saying that the child shouldn't be punished for the actions of a rapist. That's his view, why can he not have it? What's with the liberal nazism of think one way and only one way or be mocked, persecuted and dismissed? Really he's anti abortion and people pressure him with scenario's to try and challenge this, and he said something a bit off key for the mainstream in response, but so what? Lots of people respect an anti abortion stance, rather than 50 million abortions a year, and nothing thought of it.

Too much politics is sensationalism to try to appeal to a pre rehearsed narrative. 'republicans are backward dinosaurs who still don't believe women should have rights' lets try to blow this up and appeal to that.

It's petty dull journalism. Bottom line is he was anti abortion, and many people support that.[/QUOTE]

This is refreshing.

"Hey let me set up this scenario in which your ideals will clearly clash, and then label you as an evil evil man who wants to destroy whatever was the subject of the scenario"

I call it demonization but sensationalism is good too. It doesn't really inform anyone, and only antagonizes/rallies people against someone out of fear/hate/ignorance.

It works all too well in modern day politics.

[quote name='Clak']http://tv.yahoo.com/news/jim-carrey-fox-news-war-words-rages-video-012521029.html

:rofl:


edit- The video mentioned- [URL="http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/0433b30576/cold-dead-hand-with-jim-carrey"]http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/0433b30576/cold-dead-hand-with-jim-carrey [/URL][/QUOTE]

Here is a prime example. I wonder how a parody of a dead person on the left would go? But in this case it's ok because the NRA guy was the devil!

Also it is ironic that you are reading a clearly bias article that is highlighting an actor making fun of a bias news network......
 
[quote name='dilemna']The only reason the Republicans struggled this past election and probably wont win future elections, is due to immigration and the hispanics all voting for the party that most benefited them.

Liberals can try and claim it's 'backward' views that prevent them winning, in a way of making them change to the liberal viewpoint but it's simply false. Blacks voting because a guy is black(who wouldn't have voted otherwise) and hispanics voting for the ones that benefit them is what the election came down to. It was all very racial rather than about the important issues. On the economy Romney had Obama over his knee.

If the hispanic vote continues to be democrat then republicans have no chance of winning an election.[/QUOTE]

Where's the evidence that black people only voted for him because he was black?
 
That poster *can't* be for real. Just sayin' - nobody is overtly that racist unless (a) they're trolling or (b) too backwoods to know how to use the internet.

Good job method acting and/or trolling, friend.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']That poster *can't* be for real. Just sayin' - nobody is overtly that racist unless (a) they're trolling or (b) too backwoods to know how to use the internet.

Good job method acting and/or trolling, friend.[/QUOTE]
There's something familiar about that poster...can't put my finger on what though.
 
[quote name='dilemna']The only reason the Republicans struggled this past election and probably wont win future elections, is due to immigration and the hispanics all voting for the party that most benefited them.

Liberals can try and claim it's 'backward' views that prevent them winning, in a way of making them change to the liberal viewpoint but it's simply false. Blacks voting because a guy is black(who wouldn't have voted otherwise) and hispanics voting for the ones that benefit them is what the election came down to. It was all very racial rather than about the important issues. On the economy Romney had Obama over his knee.

If the hispanic vote continues to be democrat then republicans have no chance of winning an election.[/QUOTE]

I love how you say that bolded portion as if it baffles you somehow as to why someone would vote for someone who has their best interests in mind.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Don't engage the method actor.[/QUOTE]
I know I know, don't poke to hornet's nest. I'm bored, ok?:lol:
 
[quote name='dilemna']I voted for Akin. His comments were overblown as usual. He was essentially saying that the child shouldn't be punished for the actions of a rapist. That's his view, why can he not have it? What's with the liberal nazism of think one way and only one way or be mocked, persecuted and dismissed? Really he's anti abortion and people pressure him with scenario's to try and challenge this, and he said something a bit off key for the mainstream in response, but so what? Lots of people respect an anti abortion stance, rather than 50 million abortions a year, and nothing thought of it.

Too much politics is sensationalism to try to appeal to a pre rehearsed narrative. 'republicans are backward dinosaurs who still don't believe women should have rights' lets try to blow this up and appeal to that.

It's petty dull journalism. Bottom line is he was anti abortion, and many people support that.[/QUOTE]

Akin wasn't mocked because he is anti-abortion. There are plenty of politicians who are anti-abortion and aren't mocked for their views. Akin was mocked because he made completely unscientific and ridiculous claims which many saw as blaming the victim. And let's not pretend like it was only "liberal nazis" that were criticizing him. I recall both Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan calling for Akin to step down, among others. Between Akin and the other candidates that made similar comments (Richard Mourdock, Tom Smith, Roger Rivard, etc), I feel like the Republicans did more to create the narrative this time around.

To try to color this as people being unfair to Akin purely because he's against abortion is entirely disingenuous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top