Realistically, Carlin's "seven words you can never say on television" has been reduced down over time to only about three or four.
Lindsey Graham flip flops on Trump faster and more frequently than any other Republican in Congress.
Wasn't it just last week that he was trying to reassure our allies and Trump is just an idiot, and America is still with them?
It's long past time for little Lindsey to have picked his Lane. His credibility is gone, and I don't think anybody on either side cares what he has to say anymore.
The democrats ARE going to lose the midterms and then Trump IS going to get a second term (unless he just decides not to run or dies - which he might).
First, because the power position of POTUS and the inertia it creates is almost impossible to reverse.
Second the Red states amounting to a solid 1/3 of this country is irredeemably stupid as shit and stupid people always double down on their mistakes- IE the sunk costs fallacy.
Third, the petulant circular firing squad of the Left will be too busy making hashtags to get out and organize behind what will always be centrist candidates.
Fourth historically low turnout midterms will be exacerbated by the aforementioned apathetic youth non-vote.
I would love to be wrong. But I'm probably not.
I'm being a bit troll-ish, I admit, in pointing this out, but... cough cough
"Come on. The word 'shit' isn't all that profane or vulgar anymore. But protecting your readers—your adult readers—from a word that long since passed from profanity to banality is pretty patronizing." -- Dan Savage, May 2010
Politico spelled his name correctly in their headline but incorrectly in the quote that Dan has used. This is why you don't name your child Lindsey or Lindsay. It's just too damn confusing.
Graham is a feckless cunt.
I wonder what’s gotten into Lindsay Graham? Earlier this week, we learned that Senator Graham got into a verbal altercation with two Republican colleagues at a weekly lunch, now he’s on t.v. cursing? Perhaps carrying water for Donald Trump is hard, thankless work, and Senator Graham is getting cranky.
@4: I wish I had some snarky optimistic retorts to your depressing points, but I don't.
Highly likely trump will be reelected and then a dem pres will bw elected after him. I'd bet a fair amount on that outcome.
Lindsey Graham started off believing all that nonsense about how Trump was more of a peacenik than Clinton. So he was, initially, somewhat anti-Trump. Since then, its become clear that Trump has no scruples about military deployments at all. And that the only thing needed for a war with, say, Iran is an opportune drop in Trump Show the ratings.
So he's all in.
What. The democrats have to win mid term, stop being negative and get out there helping people enrol or whatever hoops you guys have to jump thru to exercise your democratic rights.
Trump for another term? Are you all flamin mad.
@13 LavaGirl: THANK YOU for beating griz to it. We in the Divided Armed Police States cannot afford another Mein Trumpfy term!
Everybody: get off your "meh" asses and vote, register to vote, educate the unenlightened--or if THAT is truly impossible, bar the terminally stupid from further Mein Trumpfy-rallying!!!
For those STILL clueless, here are a couple of hints: 1. If you want change, take away RepubliKKKan guns and illegally gotten money and they're as weak as newborn kittens (we, the 99.9999999999% outnumber them, the .0000000000001%) and 2. The youth of this benighted country have had enough of the current regime, and are lobbying hard to lower the legal voting age to 16. If those in power won't do their job, the next generation will certainly take over. Most likely the insanely rich, fat, usually white, racist, male chauvinist pigs will cry like babies when it happens. Tough shit, Mein Trumpfy, Shithead Graham, ad nauseum! Viva la Resistence! Let the Revolution begin, and for RepubliKKKans and their dupes, may it be bloody as hell. They brought it on.
"stupid people always double down on their mistakes- "
So you're saying the Democrats will nominate Hillary AGAIN?!?
Please tell us that is what you are saying.
You're pinning your hopes on 16 year olds?
(btw it's a little early to be getting smashed.....)
With regard to the gentleman whose Twitter rant you linked to, I couldn't disagree more.
All it is is whataboutism. Someone points out something wrong that someone on Team A did. Team A responds, not by defending that thing, nor by acknowledging that that thing is wrong, but by waving their hands all over the place and pointing out all the wrong things that Team B has done. And then the whole thing escalates into a mindless circular firing squad of caca-throwing chimpanzees that never ends and never accomplishes anything at all.
And so we go spiraling further and further down into madness.
The correct response is one of standards applied to everyone. The way an adult responds to criticism isn't to go off about all the things that are wrong with you, it's to stop, take a moment to cool off, perhaps consider if there is anything to the criticism, and then respond appropriately.
That kind of process happens all the time.
Robert de Niro was wrong to politicize the Tony Awards. It's not a political event. He was also wrong to use that kind of language in a public venue. That's inappropriate behavior. He should own it, apologize for it, and atone for it.
And parents are supposed to teach this sort of thing. Apparently the whole, "If Johnny jumped off the bridge would you do it too?" line disappeared from the standard list of parental lectures sometime after I came of age, because we've got a situation now where because little Donny acts like an idiot, that's a license for everyone else to act like one too.
Standards are standards. Just because someone breaks them and seems to be getting away with it doesn't mean that they don't apply to you, me, and everyone else. Including de Niro.
One good thing about this all... Hopefully, evangelical christians have realized that they've lost everything. They compromised on bits and pieces before, but they fully sold their souls to the devil completely this time.
Evengelical christians are now apostates. They're heretics. They have completely and utterly denounced everything they claimed to have stood for in the past and have instead worshipped the ass of the devil. If there were such thing as a hell, they'd surely be going there.
They're lost. I hope their loss is not lost on the masses.
.....etal oot ton si ti spahreP
.yralliH erohW eht troppus ot ylsuoivbo saw eciohC suoethgiR ehT
.sluos tsol roop ,seY
Eh. Why not.
@21- cool. I remember playing records backwards in high school.
@19 The smarter and more thoughtful ones do realize it. Interesting thing is that on that side of the house, they see themselves as having entirely lost of the culture wars (which they pretty much have). They tend to spend a lot of time grousing about the culture, worrying about facing discrimination and, in a generation or two, martyrdom, and trying to figure out what to do next.
The really funny thing is that they work in exactly the same way as people on this end of the spectrum, endlessly reading the tea leaves about how the other side is really in control and is creating a disaster. So, instead of "OMG Trump did this and it's awful!" you get "OMG isn't it awful the kinds of stuff the liberal media is celebrating!" (Example: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/liberal-media-freaky-fathers-day/ ) This guy, btw, is an anti-Trump conservative; his reaction to the North Korea summit included a favorable embed of a Daily Show clip ( http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/stalin-was-a-winner-too/ )
There's a bit of a generational gap between old guard religious conservatives who want to keep fighting the culture wars through political means and have chosen to interpret Trump as an analog for Cyrus, the Persian king who permitted the Jews to return from the Babylonian Exile and rebuild the Temple. Cyrus, of course, wasn't Jewish, but to them shows that God can work through non-religious secular rulers. Anyways, that's the theory.
There's a bit of a tussle going on between them and a younger crowd that thinks that Christianity needs to stake out some independence from the Republican party. They're far more likely to disagree with Trump's immigration policies, for instance. And the Southern Baptist Convention has been going through its own #metoo moment lately, with some prominent leaders being pretty forthright about some skeletons in the closet in no uncertain terms (e.g. https://albertmohler.com/2018/05/23/wrath-god-poured-humiliation-southern-baptist-convention/ )
As with the left, the right isn't a monolithic entity. The strongest opposition to Trump from the right actually tends to come from some (obviously not all) conservative Christians, who see him for the deeply anti-Christian man that he is. The rest tend to oppose him on ideological grounds; there's an anti-Trump contingent at National Review, for instance.
I agree @18, Corydon. This is not a dick swinging contest. It's patently obvious the Right have gone over to the Dark side, so get out there you lot and make a change happen mid term. Shine the light of compassion not competition.
.live yrev ,yrev oS
There's a woman on another blog I'm on who's somewhere in her late 50s and was in the military. She says she voted for Trump not because she liked him but because she absolutely loathed Clinton. And, specifically, she did not want Clinton to be able to choose anyone for the Supreme Court (presidents depart but Supreme Court justices roll on and on and on.) In her case, it's not because she hopes a more conservative Supreme Court will outlaw abortion, but for other reasons (like making sure American citizens can continue their love affair with lethal weaponry.)
I think a lot of evangelicals support Trump for the same reason: being able to put people on the Supreme Court. However, unlke Ms. Lethal Weaponry, they are hoping a more conservative Supreme Court will end up doing what I believe is their foremost goal/hope: outlaw abortion. I think they're wiling to overlook anything else Trump does in service to that one goal.
4/Dr. Zaius: "The democrats ARE going to lose the midterms and then Trump IS going to get a second term (unless he just decides not to run or dies - which he might)."
I think the two main factors in determining whether Trump wins a second term are: what the state of the economy is, and who his opponent is. And that opponent, of course, has got to be able to connect with working-class people in the in that important belt of states from Wisconsin to Pennsylvania (as I recall, Michael Moore correctly predicted that Clinton was going to lose those states.) .
They could have sat out. Or voted for Pat Robertson or something. But no, they fully endorsed and supported Trump.
I'm an atheist so I don't really give a shit about any of their beliefs... but they profess to actually BELIEVE in god and heaven and satan and hell and all that. They really, truly believe it.
With those beliefs, how on Earth can they possibly live with themselves with what they did? They're all Judas. How can they not see themselves as damned?
They had a choice between Hillary and Trump and Hillary was clearly the much more evil choice.
It really isn't even close.
And Trump will forever, no matter what happen or what he does, not be Hillary so nothing that happens going forward will make his voters regret their choice.
Most Trump voters are not troubled by the choice at all, as you folks seem to wring your hands and imagine.
And, btw; any and everything The Left and Hillary have said and done since the election has only made Trump voters more sure they made the right, and only moral, choice.
Christian Leaders To Jeff Sessions: The Bible Does Not Justify Separating Families
“It goes against pretty much the entire Bible in the ethos of Jesus, and it’s deeply un-Christian.”
Moral choice @29. And whose morals would that be. Why are you using the name of a decent man from a famous book and you are obviously not decent.
The morons who voted for trump agreed with his racism sexism bigotry and sadistic streak etc etc. He mirrors their sad bigoted hearts and minds.
Changing one letter @29, doesn't excuse you attempting to cover your pig mind with the name of a man who stood up to racism.
Dan needs to stop watching cable tv. He's showing his membership in the demographic of old rich dudes by giving even one fuck about stuff like this.
@27 I agree with that. As things are right now, my prediction is that the Dems will pick up a few seats in the midterms but it won't be a landslide and they'll lose the presidency to Trump in 2020. But things change fast these days, and if there's an economic downturn or a good Dem candidate out of left field, I think that could change. While I agree the Dem candidate needs to be able to talk to working people, the reasoning is to motivated disaffected voters, not to sway working class folks that voted Rep- we need to stop with that bullshit theory. The vote was not that hugely divided across class lines, and it favored Clinton at the lower end and Trump at the higher. The problem is who didn't vote at all, not trying to win over Trump voters.
Mizz Liz - Yes, it does rather seem as if the days of being able to convince many people to vote FOR something are long gone, even more so when what one would want someone to vote for would be the equivalent of eating Brussels sprouts for dessert (with all due apologies to Mmes Henin and Clijsters). It often seems as if the only secure path would be to devise a method of voter suppression that would make Simon Barsinister blush with envy.
@31: He does it because it potentially upsets people. He's probably finally run through all the world's national parks and notable mountains in his previously banned accounts, so now he's on to literary characters. Agreed, his behavior and "views" are the absolute antithesis of the character. So just report his comments, and the mods will once again ban him, he'll create a new account that will be instantly recognizable as being the same person, he'll have that account banned, and he'll continue jerking off in his mother's basement to the abuse hurled at him. It's the circle of trolling here on Slog.
@28, @26 is spot on. I've seen many religious conservatives make the argument that Trump was the lesser of the two evils because with Trump you got Justice Gorsuch. Many of these people vote solely on the basis on social issues, especially abortion and, to a lesser extent, marriage rights (most recognize that same-sex marriage isn't going away because public support for it is too high; they're mostly angling for individual and corporate rights to object to it on religious first amendment grounds like in the recent cake decision).
And there were some prominent conservatives who did refuse to support Trump and did vote third party. The most obvious place where that was true was in Utah, where a third party conservative LDS candidate, Evan McMullin, got over 20% of the vote. Between him and Gary Johnson, almost a quarter of the Utah electorate went for third party candidates. Trump won there anyway, because Utah is such an overwhelmingly red state, but 25% is some serious dissent from the right.
Advocating banning speech because it annoys you,
inconvenient truths that disrupt your world view,
seems a poor idea.
those who deny Free Speech to others
deserve it not for themselves;
and in a moral Universe,
will not long retain it.
Atticus Finch was the character I was referring to. I note that there's an extra letter in your current username, just as you've oddly tacked an extra letter onto mine. These are not the first examples of you having poor reading comprehension in usernames, but given your posts (and your lack of understanding of proper capitalization rules), it does explain some things.
I hope your climax at me implying your illiteracy gives you some joy, fleeting though it might be, and that it doesn't instead send you into a sobbing fit at your state in life.
Oh, and happy Father's Day.
Don't get me wrong, I get that Clinton is seen as evil as well. I'm not wondering why evangelicals didn't vote for her. What I don't get is that they voted for Trump, a man who is demonstrably NOT christian and in fact is more like the money changers at the temple that Jesus whipped.
I mean, evangelical voters cannot seriously believe Trump is a christian or even a good person. And that's fine, there's plenty of not good people out there. BUT... they SUPPORTED him!
And again, these are people who profess to really believe in god and heaven and all that. They put their souls at risk by supporting, endorsing, and voting for a man who is extremely non christian. Don't they think god will punish them for that? An earthly election is a drop in the bucket compared to eternal damnation in hell.
So it comes back to why didn't they just sit out? (though Corydon @38 does say that did happen in large numbers)
These are people for whom the lesser of two evils is STILL EVIL! They voted for evil. That's bad for them. That's hell.
Maybe I'm simply saying I'll never again believe their conviction. I don't believe they actually believe in god or heaven or hell... they're atheists just like me. However, they lie about it. Just like their leader.
@43 Your posting at a site where one of the best known contributors has routinely castigated people on the left who decided that, for whatever reason, Jill Stein was a better candidate than Hillary Clinton, and it is somehow those people's fault that Trump won (rather than, say, the people who actually voted for him or, say, the Democratic party that nominated a candidate who had very well-known serious flaws).
Well there's a similar dynamic on the right. So I think there are religious voters out there who voted for Trump as the lesser of two evils.
But that's kinda letting evangelicals off the hook. I mentioned Utah before, but that state was a real outlier in 2016, and the reason was because the Mormons were really squicked out by Trump. So the big question was, why weren't evangelicals? Trump does enjoy 90% approval ratings among Republicans these days, and white evangelicals are overwhelmingly GOP voters of long standing.
I think there are two things happening here. First is that evangelical Protestantism has become identified with the GOP to the point where it really is the Republican Party at prayer. They have basically gotten used to accepting the GOP platform as an article of faith. Now, Trump is causing that to change a bit--witness the recent happenings with the Southern Baptists--but to a large degree it's still true. And there are still a lot of pastors who are basically Republican operatives.
But beyond that, I think we've reached a point in American politics where the overriding urge, more than anything else, is to troll the other side. Our politics has basically been taken over by 4chan. The tribal bases in both parties is driven by constant, deliberate provocation. Let's not forget that the left does this quite a bit too; one of the guilty little pleasures of a Pride parade is watching the right huff and puff in reaction.
So a lot of this is driven by a desire to score points against the other tribe by goring their sacred cows. And what's sacred to the left? Anti-racism, respect for women, respect for immigrants, etc. And every time Trump says or does something that violates those taboos, the left loses its collective mind. So there's an awful lot of schadenfreude driving this, too, I think.
Religion is just not strong enough to overcome these forces. In any case, religion has largely become just another brand you can label yourself with for very many people. This country has been functionally agnostic for quite some time, it's just that most of those agnostics that were still in the pews hadn't really figured it out yet. People have been going to church because they think it's expected of them. Once they figure out that that is no longer the case, the pews empty out pretty quickly, and that's been the story of the last several decades.
Incidentally, I have a theory that one reason Democrats did nominate Clinton was that they knew full well just how hated she was by the right and they wanted her to win the Presidency in part to piss them off. Trump, of course, is the biggest trollbait candidate we've seen yet (I almost said "ultimate," but every time you think politics in this country has gone as low as it can go, someone jackhammers out another sub-basement).
But if you wanted to troll Republicans, Clinton was a great choice.
I would love some examples of how Pres. Trump & Sen. Graham have worked together to make the world a better place. I really can't think of any off-hand.
Yeah I suppose that could be it--that "christians" are really just sleepwalking atheists--I mean, they barely know or understand their own holy book.
Too bad about the entire country being little more than petty trolls. I wonder how far we could have gotten by now if all the energy and resources spent on racism, sexism, bigotry, and hatred had instead been channeled into something productive. Space exploration maybe. What a waste.
The Democrats will lose elections so long as the party is associated with the lunatic left. See this insanity, for example. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-cant-we-hate-men/2018/06/08/f1a3a8e0-6451-11e8-a69c-b944de66d9e7_story.html?utm_term=.0241a90e4ddc
This stuff is why we have Trump. And why he will win again unless "the left" i.e. the mainstream knocks it the fuck off with the trolling and the hashtags and purity contests.
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.