ADVERTISEMENT

OOTB's Political Thread . ..

Yeah make no mistake - WW2 ended the Great Depression, I think any rational person realizes that. That said, the programs he implemented stopped the bleeding and at least put us in a position to be the manufacturing superpower we became in the late 30s and early 40s.

Russia's mistrust of us mostly stemmed from us not helping them though. Stalin was always a little leery (as he was with everyone) but him begging us to fight on the Western front and us telling him no for 2 and a half years was really what started the Cold War. It was genius on our part, the Japs were our immediate threat, Hitler was Europe's problem for the time being.

And yeah, we could have absolutely wiped them out before they got the bomb (and after, but it would have been a bit more difficult)...but the last thing anyone wanted was another World War. Our focus was making Western Europe capitalist.
well, two things. They were commies, and that alone was a great part of the antipathy towards us, maybe the greatest part....and that would have been a factor even if we had moved in with them during the war. A clash of philosophies was going to happen no matter what.

The other thing is that wiping them out might not have been the cakewalk you maybe think it would have been. We were still fighting the japs..anese, and Russia was just getting cranked up as they rolled into and over Berlin and that side of Germany. There would very probably have been some of the toughest fighting of the war, a lot of house-to-house kind of stuff. And we would NOT have used the bomb on them.

In our favor...we would not still be sending them materials and weapons, etc. Against us...overwhelming sentiment at home to get the hell away from waging a war.
 
Let’s look at your worldview

hospitals are knowingly murdering people to profit off covid

the Dutch are from denmark

the rioters on Jan 6 didn’t commit any crimes

schools are cutting off kids penises

Putin’s election is more valid than bidens
only one of the above statements is inarguably true. Highlight the inarguably true statement.
 
Mysteriously, they weren't called to testify although the committee was grasping at any straw they could find.
You are referring to guy claiming he was going to make public statements, then decided to retire early? Ornato?
He DID testify before the committee. They'd already talked to him when they chatted with Cassidy Hutchinson.

Ornato told NBC News that he plans “to continue cooperating with the January 6th committee and all other related investigations,”
 
You are referring to guy claiming he was going to make public statements, then decided to retire early? Ornato?
He DID testify before the committee. They'd already talked to him when they chatted with Cassidy Hutchinson.

Ornato told NBC News that he plans “to continue cooperating with the January 6th committee and all other related investigations,”
no, the guys I'm talking about did not testify, I'm pretty sure.
 
LOL at this fool and maybe gullible gunslinger thinking "biology" only means human DNA.

The US needs to keep competing globally in all tech. This includes the field of biotech, and competing includes using tools like AI.

(* AI and genetic engineering scares the crap out of me. Part of the executive order is to ensure ethical, safe, responsible societal impact which is kinda big considering China and who-knows-else is doing cra-cra stuff. )
I’m gonna be honest. All this AI and genetic engineering scares the shit out of me. But mankind is going in that direction, like it or not. You've been blinded into believing or partially giving credence to claims that are simply not true. And you'll go to any lengths to defend them because they represent your interests. Because somehow, a liberal democratic state is in opposition to everything you stand for.
Supposedly. Or am I wrong?
Half of America isn’t afraid of a “liberal democracy”. We simply don’t want to go down the inevitable Socialist path that liberal policies are steering us towards, giving the federal government power over every significant aspect of our lives.
 
no, the guys I'm talking about did not testify, I'm pretty sure.
@blazers

Ornato was the guy who Hutchinson said told her about the Trump behavior that was contradicted by him and others. He did talk to the committee, but I never have been able to determine if that was simply an interview or if he testified under oath. Sorry, the name didn't ring a bell.

I'm not sure why retirement would keep him from being called before the committee and testifying. But I am pretty sure why the other individuals were not called and I suspect the same applies to Ornato....their testimony, as I said, was not going to be helpful to their cause, and it was going to be contradictory to Hutchinson's claims of what she was told.

The interwebs can be amazingly helpful at times but maddeningly useless at times when trying to get the answer to a very simple and straightforward question.
 
Ok, you concede you lost the argument but can't admit your worldview is wrong.

Says the guy who literally has the worldview of an authoritarian fascist. Lol, arguing with you produces nothing of value. It's just fun to see the lengths you'll go to promote your lies.
 
Last edited:
Half of America isn’t afraid of a “liberal democracy”. We simply don’t want to go down the inevitable Socialist path that liberal policies are steering us towards, giving the federal government power over every significant aspect of our lives.

Arch, that's just a lazy talking point you can trumpet from any far right, neo conservative website. It's fear mongering. It has nothing to do with reality. There is almost nothing in this country that says we're 'socialist' which by the way, is a spectrum of beliefs and policies not a monolith. And there is nothing that says we're anywhere close even if that's what I and other liberals did want.

SCOTUS has a conservative super majority. The Senate is a literal check on majority power and empowers red states to disproportionately counter populous blue ones. Various red states have engaged in blatant gerrymandering though even Nate Silver has states the current map is one of the fairest in a long time. Unions are weaker than they ever have been. Your worries are a product of too much mainstream 24/7 headline click bait TV. Not even you faulting you for it. Millions fall under the same spell.
 
right, you are wrong. I didn't call you a knee-jerk liberal for no reason. I don't doubt that you think you're stating things for what they are, but that isn't the case many times, and you severely overstate things that support your agenda, to the point of shrill protest in many cases.

Consider when you claimed repeatedly that abortions due to careless disregard for protection were the exception rather than the rule, and I was claiming the opposite. My purpose was to support tighter abortion laws and regs because it would tend to promote greater responsibility in that regard. You were purely screeching about the 'outrageous' rejection of RvW and all its ramifications.. Then because someone else on your side of things linked to a paper put out by some official entity about a related topic, I read the entire paper and lo and behold, it contained a complete breakdown of reasons for abortions....and guess what? I was right in a big way, the large majority of abortions were due not to rape or incest or ectopic pregnancy or any of that stuff you claimed, but simply as a backup to not having used some form of protection (or failed protection, just to be clear).

I posted it in the midst of a discussion that you were part of. I don't remember if I did so in a reply to you, but you must have seen it as well as my ensuing comments on it. What have I heard from you as a response? Nothing.

I am one-sided in many areas and I make no bones about it. But I either know what I'm talking about or I keep my mouth shut. When you say otherwise, it's YOUR bias overriding the reality of it all. You are often emotional beyond reason.

I hate the current state of affairs for what they are, and I blame the left for the current state of affairs. You can consider that unrealistic and a matter of bias if you want to, but anyone with one eye and half a brain can see that there's a realistically good reason to be biased.

Work got hectic. What do you want from me? I'm not superglued to this site in which we nitpick and argue over the stupidest shit all the day long. It's a venting box for people frustrated with the world, or who can't handle that it's changing.

Restricting abortion does not correlate with increased responsibility. And this is where we differ on the issue. A woman should have the right to get an abortion regardless of circumstance in the first trimester. I believe this should be allowed under the 14th amendment which guarantees the right to due process. As I have also stated, I don't mind severe restrictions at a certain point in the pregnancy. Because abortion deals with one life and one potential for life, we must bear this in mind when considering how to legislate it.

Furthermore, I have never claimed that majority of abortions were rape, incest, or endangerment. My main concern are laws in red states that don't allow for these exceptions: Ohio and Arizona for example. https://www.cincinnati.com/story/ne...inors-were-denied-ohio-abortions/69520380007/. The Texas law is also quite severe. If a red state bans abortion but does allow exceptions in these circumstances, that is preferable but still not ideal. That is my position.

I find it somewhat amusing you consider me overly emotional when your own anger is on display all the time. Yes, I am passionate on these topic and I've been wrong from time to time. It's called being human.

In the meantime, though you are honest about your one sidedness, that does make it correct or objective. Nor does it make me hypocritical. Blaming the left for our current state of affairs is not only useless, but misses the bigger picture. That's what gets my agitated at times with you- you will come up with any long winded monologue or roundabout reasoning to defend anything MAGA, Trump, right wing, etc. Even when it's wrong.
 
Arch, that's just a lazy talking point you can trumpet from any far right, neo conservative website. It's fear mongering. It has nothing to do with reality. There is almost nothing in this country that says we're 'socialist' which by the way, is a spectrum of beliefs and policies not a monolith. And there is nothing that says we're anywhere close even if that's what I and other liberals did want.

SCOTUS has a conservative super majority. The Senate is a literal check on majority power and empowers red states to disproportionately counter populous blue ones. Various red states have engaged in blatant gerrymandering though even Nate Silver has states the current map is one of the fairest in a long time. Unions are weaker than they ever have been. Your worries are a product of too much mainstream 24/7 headline click bait TV. Not even you faulting you for it. Millions fall under the same spell.


LOLOLOLOL. This dude is acting like @Archer2 is the victim of some spell? And that he's the independent thinker?

tenor.gif



That's too rich. The audacity of someone like him having the balls to say such boggles the mind.
 
@bluetoe

And just to prove I'm not a complete partisan, I'd like to list a few things that I despise about far left progressives and/or Democrats.

1. Tankies. These people, who operate under the same political philosophy as Noam Chomsky (another self hating American), are a scourge. America is not perfect. America has made mistakes. America has committed crimes. America is also a hell of a lot better place to live than 98% of the world. We've stood for ideals that did not exist (or did not exist in political affairs of other countries) when they were first recognized in our Constitution. People still come here because they believe in the promises and the opportunities we can give. I love our country. I believe in our country. I would fight for my country. It is not an inherently tainted land of slave owners as those people believe.

2. Democrats suck at exercising power. Plain and simple. I think Obama was a classic example of that. He wasn't the bogeyman the far right liked to paint him as. But he was arrogant, aloof, and believed in the superiority of his own arguments and that it sufficed as President. Biden may be 'Sleepy Joe' to some, however he's at least delivered in some areas. But this is a pattern that's repeated itself with Dems since the Carter administration. They don't have a cohesive message much of the time.

3. There is an increasing amount of cultural authoritarianism on the left. Not political authoritarianism, which is a separate entity, but it's maddening all the same. This is where cancel culture comes from and those on the mainstream left and progressive left who deny it are fools. 'Anti-racism', 'white privilege', 'patriarchy', these are all buzz words and terms invented in left wing academia that have entered the vocabulary of corporations and celebrities. They are purity tests, ideological absolutism that requires you to believe or say certain language on the pain of being ostracized from broader society. It's bullshit and I refuse to bow to such idiocy.

4. A hyperfocus on identity politics as a means of achieving power. And this is something the right has embraced too. But it's worse on the left. Everything must be put into an 'oppression hierarchy' with white men being the controlling villains at the top and black queer women at the bottom. It's enabling a degree of victimhood which becomes narcissistic and vain. It reduces politics to a solely selfish concept where only your skin color, sexuality, gender, and religion matter in looking at a particular issue. And you must only view it through that lens. It eliminates nuance and critical thinking.

5. East and west coast universities have become conceited echo chambers. Optics have become more important than education. Enough said. It's less prevalent away from these bastions on either side of the country. But it's everywhere.

6. Lack of fortitude, especially people my age. I think we have a lot of good ideas and are eager to move away from a society dominated by the baby boomers. But there is a heavy tendency among young progressives to completely miss the mark on how to achieve something as opposed to just talking about it or yelling about it.

Anyway, just my two cents.
 
Last edited:
no, the guys I'm talking about did not testify, I'm pretty sure.
At least not publicly during any of the mini-series. They may well have been deposed which would probably explain why they weren't called by the directors for anything during Season 1. We'll have to wait on the edge of our seats for Season 2's episodes.
 
I'm well aware that the United States is an oligarchy. It has been for quite a while. I mean like for most of its existence. Wealthy people influence the rest of the world. They always have, they always will. Picking out one or the other, and insisting that only those are pulling the levers for some evil Injustice, is just your average right wing q anon nutcase paranoia. That's one of the reasons why I laugh at people that act like Donald Trump is the working man's friend, or the average citizens friend. He's a f****** bloated oligarch that will screw over anybody to get his best interests taking care of
While I appreciate the attack on orangeman, I think all of that was an acknowledgement of my question and a concession that Soros has indeed used his vast wealth to exercise influence over our politics (meaning that he, in fact, DOES have influence and is not a boogieman). So. . . . . . . thanks.
 
This mirrors lots of probs regarding progressives and their beliefs about America :

Liberals have a deep sense of victimhood and fear about a spiritual America and are willing to end democracy to prevent it. As David Frum noted, “If progressives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon liberalism, they will abandon democracy.”
FIFY. Amazing how much it actually applies.
 
@bluetoe

And just to prove I'm not a complete partisan, I'd like to list a few things that I despise about far left progressives and/or Democrats.

1. Tankies. These people, who operate under the same political philosophy as Noam Chomsky (another self hating American), are a scourge. America is not perfect. America has made mistakes. America has committed crimes. America is also a hell of a lot better place to live than 98% of the world. We've stood for ideals that did not exist (or did not exist in political affairs of other countries) when they were first recognized in our Constitution. People still come here because they believe in the promises and the opportunities we can give. I love our country. I believe in our country. I would fight for my country. It is not an inherently tainted land of slave owners as those people believe.

2. Democrats suck at exercising power. Plain and simple. I think Obama was a classic example of that. He wasn't the bogeyman the far right liked to paint him as. But he was arrogant, aloof, and believed in the superiority of his own arguments and that it sufficed as President. Biden may be 'Sleepy Joe' to some, however he's at least delivered in some areas. But this is a pattern that's repeated itself with Dems since the Carter administration. They don't have a cohesive message much of the time.

3. There is an increasing amount of cultural authoritarianism on the left. Not political authoritarianism, which is a separate entity, but it's maddening all the same. This is where cancel culture comes from and those on the mainstream left and progressive left who deny it are fools. 'Anti-racism', 'white privilege', 'patriarchy', these are all buzz words and terms invented in left wing academia that have entered the vocabulary of corporations and celebrities. They are purity tests, ideological absolutism that requires you to believe or say certain language on the pain of being ostracized from broader society. It's bullshit and I refuse to bow to such idiocy.

4. A hyperfocus on identity politics as a means of achieving power. And this is something the right has embraced too. But it's worse on the left. Everything must be put into an 'oppression hierarchy' with white men being the controlling villains at the top and black queer women at the bottom. It's enabling a degree of victimhood which becomes narcissistic and vain. It reduces politics to a solely selfish concept where only your skin color, sexuality, gender, and religion matter in looking at a particular issue. And you must only view it through that lens. It eliminates nuance and critical thinking.

5. East and west coast universities have become conceited echo chambers. Optics have become more important than education. Enough said. It's less prevalent away from these bastions on either side of the country. But it's everywhere.

6. Lack of fortitude, especially people my age. I think we have a lot of good ideas and are eager to move away from a society dominated by the baby boomers. But there is a heavy tendency among young progressives to completely miss the mark on how to achieve something as opposed to just talking about it or yelling about it.

Anyway, just my two cents.
Not a bad list for a start and I can't really disagree except with maybe No. 2. I've always felt like the D's do a much better job of keeping the troops aligned and united than the R's.
 
You really don't see how this applies to far right MAGA christian ideologues as well?
Actually, I do with the correction of not lumping the acronym MAGA into the mix. Contrary to the msm and D agenda, MAGA is not all far right extreme wackos and includes a huge chunk of people similar to what I'd call Kennedy democrats.

This is the problem with fanatics on the fringes with regard to virtually any issue.
 
@blazers

Ornato was the guy who Hutchinson said told her about the Trump behavior that was contradicted by him and others. He did talk to the committee, but I never have been able to determine if that was simply an interview or if he testified under oath. Sorry, the name didn't ring a bell.

I'm not sure why retirement would keep him from being called before the committee and testifying. But I am pretty sure why the other individuals were not called and I suspect the same applies to Ornato....their testimony, as I said, was not going to be helpful to their cause, and it was going to be contradictory to Hutchinson's claims of what she was told.

The interwebs can be amazingly helpful at times but maddeningly useless at times when trying to get the answer to a very simple and straightforward question.
Thanks for correcting yourself.

Ornato said he was going to make a public statement. What happened? Now that he's retired he should have plenty of free time, no obligations.
 
A woman should have the right to get an abortion regardless of circumstance in the first trimester. I believe this should be allowed under the 14th amendment which guarantees the right to due process.
LOL, so now you're a Constitutionalist whereas before you couldn't be placated regarding your outrage over the Constitutional act of shitcanning the unconstitutionally instituted RvW. I am laughing.

I'm going to challenge you again. Please explain in YOUR words how the 14th amendment through a guarantee of due process somehow assures or allows women the right to abort a child in any prescribed manner. DISCLAIMER: I don't want links. and I don't want opinion. I want you, you apparently being a student of the Constitution and law in general, to please illuminate the mechanics of the Constitution, and with reference to any pertinent precedent as regards and applies to the subject at hand.

I want you to demonstrate whatever Constitutional legitimacy there might have been in RvW, since you've spent so much time bemoaning its 'improper' demise..

I honestly don't understand how due process of law translates to 'I should be able to do anything I want, and in the particular manner I want to do it'. I believe the interpretations of RvW are self-serving and expedient rather than principled. Prove me wrong. I'm especially interested in how an amendment to the Constitution that is based on and contains the phrase 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' can be used to legitimize the purposeful destruction of human life.

You've made plain what you believe. Make ME believe it. I think it's probably more correct to say you've made plain what you want.
 
FIFY. Amazing how much it actually applies.
"fear about a spiritual America"
I disagree. There is a difference between "spiritual america" and "church/state conflict of interest". Most Liberals want freedom of religion as long as that religion doesn't conflict with governing and isn't forced upon anyone.

"are willing to end democracy to prevent it"
What have libs done to end democratic processes in this country?
 
  • Like
Reactions: carolinablue34
While I appreciate the attack on orangeman, I think all of that was an acknowledgement of my question and a concession that Soros has indeed used his vast wealth to exercise influence over our politics (meaning that he, in fact, DOES have influence and is not a boogieman). So. . . . . . . thanks.
Of course he does. They all do. This idea that Soros is some master puppeteer is just funny to me. When he dies, I'm sure there are plenty of "liberal commies" with tons of money that will rule the world, all alone.
 
Not a bad list for a start and I can't really disagree except with maybe No. 2. I've always felt like the D's do a much better job of keeping the troops aligned and united than the R's.

Mmm I've always felt it was the reverse. Right wingers get motivated and stick together a lot more than progressives, who constantly infight.

Actually, I do with the correction of not lumping the acronym MAGA into the mix. Contrary to the msm and D agenda, MAGA is not all far right extreme wackos and includes a huge chunk of people similar to what I'd call Kennedy democrats.

This is the problem with fanatics on the fringes with regard to virtually any issue.

The Democrats, by and large, are not all extreme whackos. You contrast this with people like MTG, Lauren Boebert, Paul Gosar, Andy Biggs, Scott Perry, and others in the GOP alongside their acolytes- TV personalities like Tucker Carlson for example- it is a much more serious situation than whatever the NYT comes out with.

The reason I pick on the right more than the left, is that in my view, they were the ones who mainstreamed and accepted disregarding election results as part of their platform. No, they were not the first. 2004 and 2016 saw very small, individual attempts by a couple Dems to throw a cloud of doubt into Bush and Trump's wins. But 139 House Republicans refused to certify the 2020 election. A majority of Republicans still don't think Biden won. 299 major GOP candidates this year are election deniers. That scares the shit out of me. I don't want those people anywhere near power.
 
Thanks for correcting yourself.

Ornato said he was going to make a public statement. What happened? Now that he's retired he should have plenty of free time, no obligations.
No problem.

Why does he need to make any kind of statement unless compelled to do so? How would he benefit? And why weren't he and the others called to testify under oath?

BTW, the correction was only that I didn't recognize who Ornato was and I'm still unclear as to his 'testimony'. There were others (who I think were unnamed) at the time that were supposed to corroborate according to Hutchinson and I know they didn't testify, at least not under oath. I don't even think they were interviewed.
 
Mmm I've always felt it was the reverse. Right wingers get motivated and stick together a lot more than progressives, who constantly infight.



The Democrats, by and large, are not all extreme whackos. You contrast this with people like MTG, Lauren Boebert, Paul Gosar, Andy Biggs, Scott Perry, and others in the GOP alongside their acolytes- TV personalities like Tucker Carlson for example- it is a much more serious situation than whatever the NYT comes out with.

The reason I pick on the right more than the left, is that in my view, they were the ones who mainstreamed and accepted disregarding election results as part of their platform. No, they were not the first. 2004 and 2016 saw very small, individual attempts by a couple Dems to throw a cloud of doubt into Bush and Trump's wins. But 139 House Republicans refused to certify the 2020 election. A majority of Republicans still don't think Biden won. 299 major GOP candidates this year are election deniers. That scares the shit out of me. I don't want those people anywhere near power.
You really don't like Tucker. I wonder if you actually watch him or just get the twitter blurbs of the msm and blue check marks attacking him.

Again, I can agree with you on the stupidity of being an election denier. Joe's our president. Period. But that's marketing to get votes. No different from sleepy telling us he'd end the pandemic. I've got my problems with how the election was conducted and the rules that were broken before they started counting votes, but it's done. They all do a bunch of stupid things and I'll give you one better. I always thought it was stupid when the R's impeached Slick Willy. If the world's smartest woman didn't give him the business for it, well, that's another whole can of worms. I think it would have been a much higher hurdle for the D's on orangeman if that had never happened. We all should be careful what we wish for.
 
At least not publicly during any of the mini-series. They may well have been deposed which would probably explain why they weren't called by the directors for anything during Season 1. We'll have to wait on the edge of our seats for Season 2's episodes.
LOL
 
I don't even think they were interviewed.
You at happy hour? They were all interviewed, maybe informally, maybe off the record, but that absolutely happened. If they had things to say about orangeman that would help the cause, the lackeys would have them up there on tv. Still might happen, it ain't November or 2024 yet.
 
You really don't like Tucker. I wonder if you actually watch him or just get the twitter blurbs of the msm and blue check marks attacking him.

Again, I can agree with you on the stupidity of being an election denier. Joe's our president. Period. But that's marketing to get votes. No different from sleepy telling us he'd end the pandemic. I've got my problems with how the election was conducted and the rules that were broken before they started counting votes, but it's done. They all do a bunch of stupid things and I'll give you one better. I always thought it was stupid when the R's impeached Slick Willy. If the world's smartest woman didn't give him the business for it, well, that's another whole can of worms. I think it would have been a much higher hurdle for the D's on orangeman if that had never happened. We all should be careful what we wish for.
I have refrained from bringing up yet another bone of contention, but since you brought it up.....The republicans went after the Clintons like a pitbull on a meat wagon, and at the time, although I sympathized with the intent of the investigation, I was pretty disgusted and fairly outraged over the relentless doggedness of the effort. It became clear that they were determined to find something, anything, once it was apparent that the original quest wasn't going to bear fruit; and that was unjustifiable and to me unforgiveable....even though it did serve to reveal the Clintons' true character..

But whataboutisms have been banned here, haven't they? So never mind.
 
No problem.

Why does he need to make any kind of statement unless compelled to do so? How would he benefit? And why weren't he and the others called to testify under oath?
Ornato DID testify under oath. It was prior to Hutchinson's date.

And he doesn't need to make a statement but he said he would. And all MAGA's jumped all over the fact that he said he would.

Don't think for a minute that FOX wouldn't devote an entire week to Ornato's words if they brought shade to Hutchinson or the committee. But he's got nothing to say.

Her words weren't even all that impactful. She is painting a pic of Trump wanting to go the Cap, but he already said "let's walk down.... ". Him trying to steer the car that direction isn't that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things, imo. There are so many more interesting things to discuss than his demeanor in the car after helping incite the mob.
 
FIFY. Amazing how much it actually applies.
No kidding. I've been saying for years that if you really want to know what Dems are up to(because the majority of the MSM won't report it), just look at what they accuse the Pubs of doing. Brilliant sleight of hand political strategy only effective because the MSM are complicit in not giving fair and unbiased coverage. I only believe half of what I hear on Fox, almost nothing political that I hear from CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, NYT, etc...
Not a bad list for a start and I can't really disagree except with maybe No. 2. I've always felt like the D's do a much better job of keeping the troops aligned and united than the R's.
No shit. Dem members of Congress take their marching orders from Queen Nancy and vote in lockstep like the lemmings they are. Nancy lets them know that if anyone dares to think independently, they will primary them and give millions of dollars to ensure they are removed from office. Mansion and Sinema's holdouts on the IRA(aka the Green New Deal Act) were political ploys in an effort try to convince their constituents that they were fighting to curb spending as they screwed them over. All the while, most everyone knew they were going to kowtow to Nancy's marching orders eventually. I won a $20 bet on that from a Pub friend of mine. He said the people of WV are not going to be happy if he votes for the IRA, it's bad for WV, he can't afford to vote for it. I knew it was political grandstanding and that both would cave after putting up the appearance of wanting to curb spending when inflation was already soaring due to the trillions already spent by this administration. If Pubs were in a similar situation, a handful of them would have sided with the Dems and it wouldn't have worked. It's despicable but effective. Will the queen never die?
 
At least not publicly during any of the mini-series. They may well have been deposed which would probably explain why they weren't called by the directors for anything during Season 1. We'll have to wait on the edge of our seats for Season 2's episodes.

You at happy hour? They were all interviewed, maybe informally, maybe off the record, but that absolutely happened. If they had things to say about orangeman that would help the cause, the lackeys would have them up there on tv. Still might happen, it ain't November or 2024 yet.

lol, not yet. I'll try to catch up, but looks like you got a pretty good head start.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pooponduke
Ornato DID testify under oath. It was prior to Hutchinson's date.

And he doesn't need to make a statement but he said he would. And all MAGA's jumped all over the fact that he said he would.

Don't think for a minute that FOX wouldn't devote an entire week to Ornato's words if they brought shade to Hutchinson or the committee. But he's got nothing to say.

Her words weren't even all that impactful. She is painting a pic of Trump wanting to go the Cap, but he already said "let's walk down.... ". Him trying to steer the car that direction isn't that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things, imo. There are so many more interesting things to discuss than his demeanor in the car after helping incite the mob.
"Ornato DID testify under oath. It was prior to Hutchinson's date."

yeah, this is the part I'm not sure of.


"Her words weren't even all that impactful. She is painting a pic of Trump wanting to go the Cap, but he already said "let's walk down.... ". Him trying to steer the car that direction isn't that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things, imo. "

well yeah, that's what I was saying at the time; how desperate are you, to try to make a mountain out of this nothingburger of a molehill?


"There are so many more interesting things to discuss than his demeanor in the car after helping incite the mob."

exactly. So why try to make a mountain out of that molehill if you have credible evidence of Trump inciting a riot, is what I said. I could only conclude that making a mountain out of that puny molehill meant that they had no credible evidence of Tump inciting a riot or doing much of anything else. Lunging at a steering wheel? I mean, they barely had a molehill, let alone a mountain. Because if they had even a molehill of evidence about Trump inciting a riot, why wouldn't they be talking about that? I can only conclude that they were desperately making a mountain out of that vanishingly small little molehill because they had nothing else to exaggerate about. And as you suggest, if they have nothing that they can exaggerate, it's because they have nothing at all.

I have to admit, I like it when we can agree on something, like the committee making a mountain out of a molehill because they had nothing else to talk about other than Trump apparently NOT inciting a riot..

 
Lol. He's like the senile version of George Bush if Bush had a speech impediment his entire life -- comical if not embarassing. I like most of the policy stuff coming out of the Biden Admin though.
yeah, me too. Can we have another million illegals please? And that Inflation Reduction Act, more of that please. It must be working, my groceries are down to only twice what they were two years ago. Let's not get too crazy with it though, maybe increase the money supply some more to even things out. The best part though is selling off our oil reserves so we can let the Saudis really bend us over. Stroke of genius there, now we can take sanctions away from Venezuela so they will let us pump their oil. Kinda defeats the purpose of all those years of sanctions, doesn't it..but WTF, right? Great policy stuff.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: randman1
I am far more open minded than you are. You're a walking CNN advertisement. I have been far more critical of Trump than you have of Biden. Since he's the POTUS, care to show open minded you are and critique the job he's done so far?

Biden for me is a mixed bag. I like that he’s gotten Republicans on board for some of his policy objectives. He’s passed what I consider to be sound legislation on gun control, microchip production, climate change, infrastructure, and he pardoned people who were charged with possession of pot. He’s appointing a fair amount of judges too. And arming Ukraine to the teeth while also adding Finland and Sweden to NATO is a major plus. I like that he protects transgender folk

However, he’s fallen short in other areas. His personal shortcomings are the same as they always have been. Prone to gaffes which are worse given his advancing age. I do not think he’s utterly senile like some on here. He also lacks a considerable amount of charisma. There’s nothing about Biden that’s particularly inspiring.

His pick for VP was godawful. The withdrawal from Afghanistan was heavily botched. That’s on him. The Southern border is a shit show. And his administration does bear some responsibility for the current problems with inflation.

The main reason I’m largely comfortable with Biden in office is because he will respect the transfer of power if he runs and loses in 2024. That is my main concern moving forward. Democratic norms. He will hand the keys over in such a scenario.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT