Jump to content
Radio Shack Killa

God save us....

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Duquesne Frog said:

 

I'm not forgetting that.  It is irrelevant to the discussion.  Ted Nugent has been saying vile, crazy-ass shit about "libruls" for three decades.  And he's getting invited to the White House with a group of "conservative" celebrities for a photo-op with the president.  Which runs counter to your argument that only "liberals" have a double-standard. 

 

And lest you forget that I also am not a Democrat and do not self-assign myself a "liberal" tag, I have not expressed any misapprehension that the left doesn't have a double standard.  I have argued that I do believe there is a different standard for certain cultural slurs.  If that makes me a "liberal" in your eyes, so be it, but that doesn't make me any more inclined to have a rooting interest for that particular team.

Again, I don’t think getting invited to a Trump White House is proof of anything good.

 

The NBA and NFL champs agree, btw. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

FWIW, Ted Nugent's Spirit Of The Wild is on Tuesday, 8:30/7:30 Central.  Outdoor Channel, Ch 606.  Touring, too.  He'll be in Pittsburgh next month - Luke and Duq can go see him together.  😂

  • Thanks (+1) 1
  • Haha  (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Luke Chisolm said:

Again...is this really an indication that his career hasn’t been de-railed?

 

I think you’d be the first to admit that a Trump endorsement isn’t exactly a good thing. 

 

What you forget is that I’m not a Trump supporter. I think he has shamed the office of the president. 

 

Right now a Trump endorsement is not only a good thing for a rep candidate/serving pol, it is pretty much a necessary thing. That may change, but to pretend that the party isn't controlled by Trump forces at the moment is to deny reality, in my opinion. I'd be curious to see your list of rep candidates running on a platform that they do not wish a Trump endorsement and/or are actively not seeking such. There may be a couple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, NewfoundlandFreeFrog said:

 

Right now a Trump endorsement is not only a good thing for a rep candidate/serving pol, it is pretty much a necessary thing. That may change, but to pretend that the party isn't controlled by Trump forces at the moment is to deny reality, in my opinion. I'd be curious to see your list of rep candidates running on a platform that they do not wish a Trump endorsement and/or are actively not seeking such. There may be a couple.

Getting his endorsement while running for office right now is a temporary, necessary evil. 

 

Surely you you are smart enough to know this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Luke Chisolm said:

Getting his endorsement while running for office right now is a temporary, necessary evil. 

 

Surely you you are smart enough to know this. 

 

Oh I agree.

 

I'd also say it's pretty much exactly like dems wimping out and voting for invading Saddam or being branded unpatriotic in the midterms of that day. That said, I've never seen you agree to that point when the parties were reversed. It's one of the negative aspects of the federal system that such wimpery is needed (one only very rarely gets re-elected after losing an election) and one aspect on which the parliamentary system probably does better (it is common that a party or individual gets thrown out of office and then sits out in the wilderness for a few years waiting for the people to come back to them and re-elect them).

 

Lastly, I'd point out that the fact it is a temporary (?...not so sure about that actually, but hopefully you're correct), necessary evil really is a problem for people with actual conservative leanings as opposed to populist/authoritarian leanings. The reps are at a crossroads w.r.t. these two particular paths it appears at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

McConnell on the state of the party:  “In my view, the last 16 months have been the single best period for conservative values since I came to Washington [in 1985]. ... And this is not hyperbole.”

 

I see no notion of "necessary evil" here at all. I see happiness with the situation.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DirtyThirdFrog said:

So no comment on the summit? Okay then. 

 

Was just about to post something but then deleted it out of fear of beating a dead horse ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DirtyThirdFrog said:

So no comment on the summit? Okay then. 

 

China and NK got pretty much everything they ever could have desired.  No more "provocative" (China's/NK's historical words, but now our own too) military exercises near their borders. Recognition of NK as a world player not just a mere Chinese protectorate. NK concentration camps completely ignored. Less US belligerence. Probably about everything they ever could have hoped to get without giving anything at all up themselves. Maybe more, even. Like a "special bond" between the US and a murderous dictator who executes enemies at public events with AA.

 

As China has just announced: “We highly appreciate the political decisions made by the leaders of the DPRK and the United States.”

  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, NewfoundlandFreeFrog said:

McConnell on the state of the party:  “In my view, the last 16 months have been the single best period for conservative values since I came to Washington [in 1985]. ... And this is not hyperbole.”

 

I see no notion of "necessary evil" here at all. I see happiness with the situation.

 

 

I was more than willing to take my beating and move on, but the professor just couldn’t let it go. 

 

What, exactly, did you hope to accomplish with this? To prove me wrong? Is that really so important to you?

 

Okay then...you win. This one example is incontrovertible proof that you are right. I’m sure the Republicans in the house and senate just love Trump unconditionally and want his endorsement more than anything. I’m sure it has nothing to do with the fact that they don’t have a choice...he is the highest ranking member of the party, after all. And far be it for a politician to put self preservation first...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Luke Chisolm said:

I was more than willing to take my beating and move on, but the professor just couldn’t let it go. 

 

What, exactly, did you hope to accomplish with this? To prove me wrong? Is that really so important to you?

 

Okay then...you win. This one example is incontrovertible proof that you are right. I’m sure the Republicans in the house and senate just love Trump unconditionally and want his endorsement more than anything. I’m sure it has nothing to do with the fact that they don’t have a choice...he is the highest ranking member of the party, after all. And far be it for a politician to put self preservation first...

 

Huh?

 

Oh well. That's what I get for agreeing pretty much completely with you and showing equivalent behavior by the other "side", I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NewfoundlandFreeFrog said:

 

Huh?

 

Oh well. That's what I get for agreeing pretty much completely with you and showing equivalent behavior by the other "side", I guess.

Are you out of your mind?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Luke Chisolm said:

Are you out of your mind?

 

No. 

 

"Oh I agree" means, er, well, I agree with what you said that need for a Trump endorsement is indeed a necessary evil right now. Then I went on to an example of dems performing the same sort of wimp out for the very same reasons of "self preservation" that you cite. 

 

The only point we may disagree on is whether it is sure that the problems in the rep caucus on this issue are temporary or permanent.

 

Anyway, I say again, oh I agree.

 

What is your great need to be outraged to the point of namecalling about? I'm curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, NewfoundlandFreeFrog said:

 

No. 

 

"Oh I agree" means, er, well, I agree with what you said. Then I went on to an example of dems performing the same sort of wimp out for the very same reasons of "self preservation" that you cite. 

 

The only point we may disagree on is whether it is sure that the problems in the rep caucus on this issue are temporary or permanent. What is your great need to be outraged to the point of namecalling about? I'm curious.

Did I call you a name?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Luke Chisolm said:

Did I call you a name?

 

Depends on whether you view "the professor" as a mark of respect or derision, I guess. Which feeling was behind your words?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted that getting Trumps endorsement was a necessary evil. You then posted that you agree, but added some dig about me not acknowledging this “necessary evil” when it was Dems. 

 

You then post that you see “no necessary evil” at all with the McConnell example, and added that it appears he is happy with the situation. Which certainly appears to be yet another dig at my “necessary evil” position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Luke Chisolm said:

I posted that getting Trumps endorsement was a necessary evil. You then posted that you agree, but added some dig about me not acknowledging this “necessary evil” when it was Dems. 

 

You then post that you see “no necessary evil” at all with the McConnell example, and added that it appears he is happy with the situation. Which certainly appears to be yet another dig at my “necessary evil” position.

 

Wow...you really need to be outraged for some reason today! 

 

1. I agree with your original point. Completely. And for the reasons you cite.

2. You not only did not acknowledge the prior necessary evil around the Iraq invasion, it is my memory that you didn't agree with it at the time when I brought it up then. If that is an outrageous "dig", well I apologize. It was meant to show both ways-ism, not my outrage at you. And to my memory it is what you posted at the time. I stand to be corrected if your memory is different.

3. McConnell of all rep pols in DC has the leeway to not have to respond to the necessary evil you point out to any great degree. That he is choosing to say something so hyperbolic is not a dig at you. It is an observation that I am not sure the problem is temporary, but maybe is something rather more permanent.

 

Jesus, Mary, and Joseph!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Luke Chisolm said:

Is “professor” above or below the C word now on liberals’ ever-changing scale of insults?

 

Only you can say what was in your mind. But your context here suggests it was not the "respect" option! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, NeFrog in the Kitchen Sink said:

When people call Newf "professor", I usually start thinking about Gilligan's Island. 

 

If Newf had been the professor on that boat, that three-hour tour would have been three hours!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to DTF's question. I love Pompeo's outraged answer about no actual specifics: "We couldn’t reduce them to writing"!!!

 

Imagine if Obama had come back with an "agreement" where specific promises could not be "reduce[d] ... to writing"! Surely Fox and Friends would be trumpeting Obama's successes to the heavens in such a case!!!

 

How many broken ribs back in NK are there from laughing too hard?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...