ADVERTISEMENT

OOTB's Political Thread . ..

I absolutely did it.

Thats cool. Ill keep reporting your racism. Its fun for me.
Dude. Fvck you. I realize I'm catching up on this shitshow kinda late, and you've already been universally smacked around for this bitch boi stunt of yours by everyone else, on both sides, but I still felt the need to tell you to go fvck yourself.

Haven't seen you spewing your bullshit since it went down, so hopefully you've fvcked off to your safe space. Which is good, because you can't handle it here. You're a bitch.
 
What exactly is something "significant?" We're probably all different in what we find to be significant.

Just to be fair (clear, whatever), I have no doubt that Trump's opposition is using as much of that factor as possible to garner favor for them and away from him. Of course they are, they're politicians.

It would be like mega-woke think tanks creating a "plan" and offering it to a more liberal ticket, in detail, before an election against an incumbent Republican administration.

I guess we can go one-by-one and argue each aspect. But that could take a while.
You are probably right, but Right-wingers have this ability to rally in unison or concert behind christianity (and to an extent racism and guns) that the left side doesn't have.

The heritage type folks live and breath politics and policy and "control".
 
Can anything of significance be implemented without Congress? I haven't read the whole thing, so I'm not sure.
Some can, yes. The reclassification of civil servants into political appointees (the "Schedule F" stuff), thus stripping them of protections is a big one. It makes the whole gov much more "lackey" and less bipartisan.

Others require some congress. Of course the gop House and Senate 100% would do this stuff. A few could require scotus... guess which side they're picking.

And this is more than typical think-tank-ideas or policy recommendation, it is a road-map for implementation ( the key starts with firing all civil servants that don't kiss the ring of the king).
 
Some can, yes. The reclassification of civil servants into political appointees (the "Schedule F" stuff), thus stripping them of protections is a big one. It makes the whole gov much more "lackey" and less bipartisan.

Others require some congress. Of course the gop House and Senate 100% would do this stuff. A few could require scotus... guess which side they're picking.

And this is more than typical think-tank-ideas or policy recommendation, it is a road-map for implementation ( the key starts with firing all civil servants that don't kiss the ring of the king).
Which step is it that the world ends?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: gunslingerdick
You are probably right, but Right-wingers have this ability to rally in unison or concert behind christianity (and to an extent racism and guns) that the left side doesn't have.

The heritage type folks live and breath politics and policy and "control".
This is probably a more "extremist view" of the document, but... at this point, it's hard to gauge extremist or moderate on this thing.

It's a bunch of old white dudes that think we can solve all of our problems if women and men were the only "marriages" and women let the men do all the working and decision-making. Get rid of abortions, gay people, trans people, and illegal immigrants... and everyone goes to the same church... then, all the problems go away.
 
Last edited:
The reclassification of civil servants into political appointees (the "Schedule F" stuff), thus stripping them of protections is a big one.
That doesn't sound like something that he could just do on his own. I will say that the little bit I've read of it doesn't sound good.
 
Some can, yes. The reclassification of civil servants into political appointees (the "Schedule F" stuff), thus stripping them of protections is a big one. It makes the whole gov much more "lackey" and less bipartisan.

Others require some congress. Of course the gop House and Senate 100% would do this stuff. A few could require scotus... guess which side they're picking.

And this is more than typical think-tank-ideas or policy recommendation, it is a road-map for implementation ( the key starts with firing all civil servants that don't kiss the ring of the king).
That is where Trump plays a major role. His whole understanding of the world is filtered through obedience and loyalty. Everything is transactional.

I will never err on the side of "noooo, no way would they ever go back to that!" Christian fundamentalists and Christian Nationalists worship a man in the sky... a celestial king. It's Bronze Age thinking that is still making their decisions.
 
What exactly is something "significant?" We're probably all different in what we find to be significant.

Just to be fair (clear, whatever), I have no doubt that Trump's opposition is using as much of that factor as possible to garner favor for them and away from him. Of course they are, they're politicians.

It would be like mega-woke think tanks creating a "plan" and offering it to a more liberal ticket, in detail, before an election against an incumbent Republican administration.

I guess we can go one-by-one and argue each aspect. But that could take a while.
In this case I would define significantly as anything that fundamentally changes government and/or a normal person's daily life. I tend to ignore these grand plan type of things, kinda like the green deal or whatever it was called. They seem to always die because they try to do too much at the same time and it just dies because even it's supporters can't agree on all of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strummingram
That doesn't sound like something that he could just do on his own. I will say that the little bit I've read of it doesn't sound good.
I’ve scanned through it and I would call it a christian nationalist rw fuk nut Christmas list. Most of it is just pie in sky thinking which will never see light of day but just the fact there are people out there that have influence with elected officials that think like this is horrific. And if anyone actually believe trump when he claims he “knows nothing about it” you’re an idiot. I’m not saying he supports it or wants it implemented (I would not in the least be surprised if he does though) but he definitely is familiar with it.
 
He's not organizing shit. He's not complex or difficult to understand. If you turn his handle and tell him "Mr. Trump, you are so smart and I admire you so much", and you do it over and over, god only knows what kind of gumballs fall into the slot.

Well then my suggestion is for liberals to start telling him how smart he is and how much they admire him.
 
Well then my suggestion is for liberals to start telling him how smart he is and how much they admire him.
It would be ideal, yes.

The whole system produced the shithead, to begin with. They tacitly glorify the man. And, I will admit to getting a lot of laughter at his expense.

It's not some big secret how you gain his favor.
 
This is probably a more "extremist view" of the document, but... at this point, it's hard to gauge extremist or moderate on this thing.

It's a bunch of old white dudes that think we can solve all of our problems if women and men were the only "marriages" and women let the men do all the working and decision-making. Get rid of abortions, gay people, trans people, and illegal immigrants... and everyone goes to the same church... then, all the problems go away.

1a5c6f86f7ff833a92f2520f2433e6c3.gif
 
  • Haha
Reactions: nctransplant
That doesn't sound like something that he could just do on his own. I will say that the little bit I've read of it doesn't sound good.
@tarheel0910 an interesting read https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/inside-project-2025s-plan-to-reprogram-the-government/ says

"Mandate for Leadership’s final set of tactics for hijacking the administrative state have to do with limiting or evading congressional oversight. Several chapters, for instance, describe how the administration can manipulate the Federal Vacancies Reform Act by installing political appointees in key agency leadership positions—a gambit whose practical effect is to enable politically loyal personnel to carry out official agency business without being subjected to the lengthy, and potentially embarrassing, Senate confirmation process."


Schedule F is "grounded in a provision of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act that exempted from civil service protections any employee “whose position has been determined to be of confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating character.” And it takes and extremely broad intepretation of that. He issued it as an executive order a week before the last election when he finally realized lots of his officials were disobeying his whims. here is the exec order. Biden revoked it.

Regarding congress, a bill, here, was actually proposed to help prevent the schedule F executive order from happening, but has gone nowhere. So it is clearly a big enough deal that people (Dems) are trying to create some protection that Congress can act on.
 
This is probably a more "extremist view" of the document, but... at this point, it's hard to gauge extremist or moderate on this thing.

It's a bunch of old white dudes that think we can solve all of our problems if women and men were the only "marriages" and women let the men do all the working and decision-making. Get rid of abortions, gay people, trans people, and illegal immigrants... and everyone goes to the same church... then, all the problems go away.
that's as ridiculous a summary as the idiotically biased woman in the video is wanting you to understand. Just take the four basic tenets at the beginning and try to convince me or most reasonable people that there isn't a ton of merit in them. In order to do so, be certain to assert things like wanting to stop the crazy flood of illegals into the country is 'hating immigrants'.

Then criticize all you want to whatever approach enhances the support of those tenets without twisting simple love of freedom into the return of the Third Reich, and I'm all ears. Well, I'm maybe half ears and half that other part, and the rest is brains. So much brains.
 
But, if it does, it's okay with you. If they shut-down who you hate, you're cool with it.

See, that's another thing we differ on. If some lefty-woke think tank created some kind of "proposal" that allowed a Democrat president to IMPOSE their ideology, based on their "feelings", I'd oppose that, too. They'd be shutting-down any dissent, if they could. There would be no recourse for any opposition. That's just not healthy for a self-governing society. If they could put "racists" in prison, or anyone who praises religion is given a distinct "mark"for surveillance? I would vehemently oppose radical fascist shit like that.
 
But, if it does, it's okay with you. If they shut-down who you hate, you're cool with it.

See, that's another thing we differ on. If some lefty-woke think tank created some kind of "proposal" that allowed a Democrat president to IMPOSE their ideology, based on their "feelings", I'd oppose that, too. They'd be shutting-down any dissent, if they could. There would be no recourse for any opposition. That's just not healthy for a self-governing society. If they could put "racists" in prison, or anyone who praises religion is given a distinct "mark"for surveillance? I would vehemently oppose radical fascist shit like that.
Pretty sure kameltoe did that today.
 
that's as ridiculous a summary as the idiotically biased woman in the video is wanting you to understand. Just take the four basic tenets at the beginning and try to convince me or most reasonable people that there isn't a ton of merit in them. In order to do so, be certain to assert things like wanting to stop the crazy flood of illegals into the country is 'hating immigrants'.

Then criticize all you want to whatever approach enhances the support of those tenets without twisting simple love of freedom into the return of the Third Reich, and I'm all ears. Well, I'm maybe half ears and half that other part, and the rest is brains. So much brains.
I forgot, you're an expert on the project. I wouldn't be surprised if they consulted you for approval.
 
I’ve scanned through it and I would call it a christian nationalist rw fuk nut Christmas list. Most of it is just pie in sky thinking which will never see light of day but just the fact there are people out there that have influence with elected officials that think like this is horrific. And if anyone actually believe trump when he claims he “knows nothing about it” you’re an idiot. I’m not saying he supports it or wants it implemented (I would not in the least be surprised if he does though) but he definitely is familiar with it.
there's a qualitative difference between knowing 'about' something and knowing 'of' something. I'm sure he knows of it, and I'm just as sure he knows something about it...but I can easily believe he doesn't know enough about it to claim familiarity. And simply knowing of it is no condemnation...who doesn't know of it?

In the current climate one has to be careful not to give social and commercial media even the slightest tidbit that can be twisted into damning half-truths, so I don't blame him for any grade of denial he thinks is appropriate to convey a lack of familiarity...
 
Sorry the tic tac thing went over your head, but I agree with you. Hopefully her 'plan'...as if she has one that actually addresses the economy...won't be anything like Trump's. Which is saying that hopefully Trump's isn't anything like her anticipated further plunge into socialism.
It was 2 different packages of breath mints, WTF did that have to do with inflation?
 
@tarheel0910 an interesting read https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/inside-project-2025s-plan-to-reprogram-the-government/ says

"Mandate for Leadership’s final set of tactics for hijacking the administrative state have to do with limiting or evading congressional oversight. Several chapters, for instance, describe how the administration can manipulate the Federal Vacancies Reform Act by installing political appointees in key agency leadership positions—a gambit whose practical effect is to enable politically loyal personnel to carry out official agency business without being subjected to the lengthy, and potentially embarrassing, Senate confirmation process."


Schedule F is "grounded in a provision of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act that exempted from civil service protections any employee “whose position has been determined to be of confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating character.” And it takes and extremely broad intepretation of that. He issued it as an executive order a week before the last election when he finally realized lots of his officials were disobeying his whims. here is the exec order. Biden revoked it.

Regarding congress, a bill, here, was actually proposed to help prevent the schedule F executive order from happening, but has gone nowhere. So it is clearly a big enough deal that people (Dems) are trying to create some protection that Congress can act on.
tl;dr
 
  • Like
Reactions: nctransplant
I forgot, you're an expert on the project. I wouldn't be surprised if they consulted you for approval.
I'm probably about as much an expert on the project as the average citizen who doesn't care much for the twisted machinations of misrepresenting political endeavors for self-serving political purposes. In other words, I know enough about it to dismiss the mischaracterization of it as an evil plan to put Hitler back in power. That doesn't make me an expert and I don't need to be an expert in this regard.

What I am expert on, self-proclaimed or otherwise, is recognizing such bullshit and reacting against it. As is typical, the lefties are taking a molehill and trying to make you see a mountain..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2
I'm probably about as much an expert on the project as the average citizen who doesn't care much for the twisted machinations of misrepresenting political endeavors for self-serving political purposes. In other words, I know enough about it to dismiss the mischaracterization of it as an evil plan to put Hitler back in power. That doesn't make me an expert and I don't need to be an expert in this regard.

What I am expert on, self-proclaimed or otherwise, is recognizing such bullshit and reacting against it. As is typical, the lefties are taking a molehill and trying to make you see a mountain..
as always... left vs. right, for you
 
I think 3 is pretty universal at this point.

4 is totally believable but inconsequential.

7 is worded strangely but I think it’s pretty well known that the black side of her family was not the side she was leveraging to advance her political career until recently.

Regarding 9, if they’re not prisoners, they should be.

As for 10, there's this:
Wow!
 
It was 2 different packages of breath mints, WTF did that have to do with inflation?
if I'm correct, one was larger or more full than the other. The larger one represented what you would have before inflation, and the smaller one represented the effect that inflation has had on what you now get for the money. It's a difficult concept I know. Not hard to see how it got past you. Some think tank is probably delving into it to tease out the ramifications of tic tac inflation.

And I might be wrong, I only know anything about it because I googled it when you first mentioned it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2
if I'm correct, one was larger or more full than the other. The larger one represented what you would have before inflation, and the smaller one represented the effect that inflation has had on what you now get for the money. It's a difficult concept I know. Not hard to see how it got past you. Some think tank is probably delving into it to tease out the ramifications of tic tac inflation.

And I might be wrong, I only know anything about it because I googled it when you first mentioned it.
You can get a can of beer or you can get a sixpack of beer. WTF does that have to do with inflation?
 
When CNN and the washington post hammer your liberal economy plan you really might be in trouble. Do socialist countries have price controls from gubment, asking for a friend?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT