or Connect
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › The Republican Party Going Forward v 2.0
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Republican Party Going Forward v 2.0 - Page 10

post #451 of 2236
Any time a career politician says they haven't decided to run for a higher office yet, it's part trial balloon and part early investment invitation. It's like Kickstarter for a target audience of oil and real estate barons.
post #452 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reasor View Post

Any time a career politician says they haven't decided to run for a higher office yet, it's part trial balloon and part early investment invitation. It's like Kickstarter for a target audience of oil and real estate barons.

 

 

And fortunately for Jeb he is both of those wrapped in one. Oh wait you mean he needed to get support from other real estate and oil tycoons. Well I think he'll have that wrapped up pretty easy especially with his most challenging rival would be Marco "Poland Springs" Rubio.

post #453 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arturo RJ View Post

 

 

And fortunately for Jeb he is both of those wrapped in one. Oh wait you mean he needed to get support from other real estate and oil tycoons. Well I think he'll have that wrapped up pretty easy especially with his most challenging rival would be Marco "Poland Springs" Rubio.

 

Rubio's one of his creatures; he's unlikely to be competition.

post #454 of 2236

I would welcome a Jeb/Marco face-off, not only because I don't think either would stand a chance, but also because it might give Bush the opportunity to say "You forgot Poland Springs."  (But mostly because I think both would get crushed.)

post #455 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by yt View Post

Oh my GOD!  Keith Ellison raised the curtain on Hannity's Oz the Gweat and Powerful, treating him to the unvarnished truth about himself.  My new hero.  What an amazing appearance. 

 

 

If my embed doesn't work, the youtube link is here

 

Sorry, just catching up on this thread.  I can't get past what a flippant unprofessional little bitch Hannity is in this interview.  

post #456 of 2236
How do you defund something that no longer exists? That would be like the congress declaring war against the Soviet Union , the Holy Roman Empire, Babylonia and the Ottomon Empire.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2013/03/05/acorn-gop-budget-bill_n_2810345.html?1362489640
post #457 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackson View Post

 

Sorry, just catching up on this thread.  I can't get past what a flippant unprofessional little bitch Hannity is in this interview.  

 

...and like clockwork, a few days after being called out-

 

Hannity Unloads On Rep. Keith Ellison, Rips ‘Radical Connections’ To Nation Of Islam

post #458 of 2236
post #459 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackson View Post

 

I can't get past what a flippant unprofessional little bitch Hannity is in this interview.  

 

Fixed that for you.

post #460 of 2236

Now no one will remember this but it is funny. Obviously someone told him that having this new stance will not only make him look like a hypocrite and cost him a lot votes with latinos. Just reaffirms Jeb  is running for President. If he dosen't I'll pull a Werner Herzog and eat my shoe!

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/05/1191578/-Jeb-thinks-America-wants-more-Bush-begins-punching-brown-people

post #461 of 2236
Rubio v. Bush with Christie as the moderate spoiler and Rand Paul as the fringe candidate? Color me very intrigued.
post #462 of 2236

hahahahaha! Wow they are terrified by Ashley Judd. Also they are totally grasping at straws and this is just stupid. I wonder if McConnell is going to come to her defense against these sexist talking points? My guess is not. 

 

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/05/the-more-you-attack-ashley-judd-the-stronger-her-campaign-looks/

post #463 of 2236

I'm very sorry Rep. Steve King you are no longer the craziest elected repersentative in Iowa all thanks to this guy, State Repersentative Tedd Gassman. Man what the hell!? What a terrible person!

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/05/1191808/-Iowa-Republican-wants-to-ban-divorce-so-his-granddaughter-doesn-t-become-a-slut

 

It's been a weird day of Iowan elected officials because United States Senator Grassley was bemoaning for not calling him or texting him back. Dosen't the President know the Republicans will go through his radical socialist agenda if only he will talk to them! Chuck Grassley the Carly Rae Jepsen of Republicans.

 

 

http://www.buzzfeed.com/johnstanton/chuck-grassley-blasts-obama-for-refusing-to-work-with-congre

post #464 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arturo RJ View Post

I'm very sorry Rep. Steve King you are no longer the craziest elected repersentative in Iowa all thanks to this guy, State Repersentative Tedd Gassman. Man what the hell!? What a terrible person!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/05/1191808/-Iowa-Republican-wants-to-ban-divorce-so-his-granddaughter-doesn-t-become-a-slut

Wired's Laura Hudson put together the thought that was on the tip of my tongue, but I was too pissed off to articulate it: "The degree to which this is about men trying to control the choices and sexuality of women without even hiding it is fucking amazeballs."
post #465 of 2236

Jeb would get eaten alive not just because of his flip flopping but because of his relations. Yes, people are that shallow and stupid to not vote for him because of his last name.
 

post #466 of 2236
Jeb literally has more kids who have had felony arrests than Obama has kids. Watch the GOP scramble to put the families of candidates off limits again when Jeb makes it official.
post #467 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arturo RJ View Post

hahahahaha! Wow they are terrified by Ashley Judd. Also they are totally grasping at straws and this is just stupid. I wonder if McConnell is going to come to her defense against these sexist talking points? My guess is not. 

 

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/05/the-more-you-attack-ashley-judd-the-stronger-her-campaign-looks/


I don't live in Kentucky and I will never live in Kentucky, but if she runs I will donate to her campaign.  Hell, I might volunteer to help her campaign.

post #468 of 2236
Wait so canceling White House tours that might kind of bum out tourists is more important than peoples jobs being in jeopardy? Are you serious GOP!?

I laughed this off at first because a loose cannon Tea Partier first said this but now that Boehner is joining I find this rather perplexing. I thought the GOP wanted to create more jobs as that what got them the House in 2010 and that was a major talking point in 2012. Now they are saying he have to fire people? Or according to them government jobs aren't real jobs.

Screw of Speaker Alkie Orange Suntan! Thanks America for forcing these morons in power in 2010 all thanks to impatient  will of stupid backwards Americans. When they crash the economy and gut millions of jobs I don't to hear any crying!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/06/1192084/-Boehner-outraged-White-House-cancelled-tours-instead-of-laying-off-workers-It-s-just-sick
Edited by Arturo RJ - 3/6/13 at 12:23pm
post #469 of 2236

Meanwhile, Rand Paul began an actual filibuster, and a few other douchebags joined in and wont - stop - talkin.

 

http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN2/

post #470 of 2236

I support this because if you want to Filibuster something you should defend it until you are defeated by the 60 vote cloture. So not upset about this at all this is the way the filibuster should be used and not the weaselly way its been used of late. Make people fight and have real discussions on bills and not just say you're filibustering something and than obstructing without a valid point. I like that Paul is doing this to prove the point that civil liberties should be more important in this country, and it's sad how much we've lost. This is probably the only thing I agree with him on. Other than that he is a truly odious piece of crap just like his dad. We really need to have a huge discussion in this country on this issue and whether we should use drones at all. So I give Rand Paul a lot of credit for this and I like that this is a bipartisan filibuster with Ron Wyden being involved.

post #471 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arturo RJ View Post

I support this because if you want to Filibuster something you should defend it until you are defeated by the 60 vote cloture. So not upset about this at all this is the way the filibuster should be used and not the weaselly way its been used of late. Make people fight and have real discussions on bills and not just say you're filibustering something and than obstructing without a valid point. I like that Paul is doing this to prove the point that civil liberties should be more important in this country, and it's sad how much we've lost. This is probably the only thing I agree with him on. Other than that he is a truly odious piece of crap just like his dad. We really need to have a huge discussion in this country on this issue and whether we should use drones at all. So I give Rand Paul a lot of credit for this and I like that this is a bipartisan filibuster with Ron Wyden being involved.

Ya should clarify - I very much appreciate them doing it the proper way.  I just cant stand listening to what theyre saying.  And yes, Im glad Wyden showed up. 

post #472 of 2236

Here's NBC News' write up of the filibuster currently happening in the senate.

 

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/06/17210879-with-bipartisan-aid-paul-filibusters-cia-pick-brennan?lite

post #473 of 2236

hahahahahaha! What a weak loser Harry Reid is! You can tell how pissed he is. Well Reid could of had reform of the filibuster. He has no one to blame but himself, Loved his fail at trying to ripoff his mic. How can this man be the Majority Leader he absolutely sucks! Just embarrassing.

post #474 of 2236

Brennan is the guy trying to create a formalized legal framework for the Drone program. Motherfuck Rand Paul.

post #475 of 2236

speaking of Paul, I read something amusing the other day.

 

A libertarian is just an Anarchist that's too lazy and/or too scared to move to Somalia.

 

 

As far as the filibuster goes, I kinda like the idea of it in a "Mr Smith Goes to Washington" way.

That being said, I really think the main reason Paul and the others are doing this is 'spite'.

They are just doing it to try and 'kill' government....make governing appear so dysfunctional that dismantling it will be the only option. Drown it in a bathtub, if you will.

post #476 of 2236

meme officially dead. I don't know if we should thank McConnell.

 

post #477 of 2236
The nomination of a potential CIA Director who asserts in testimony that the President has the authority to order the deaths of Americans is worth filibustering.

This is me, the guy who was actually angry that calling Ron Paul supporters "Ronulans" never took off, talking: Good for Rand Paul.

_
Edited by Reasor - 3/6/13 at 10:08pm
post #478 of 2236
Yeah totally agree. I disagree with Rand Paul on almost every issue but on his stance on civil liberties and defending constitutional rights.

I hope the senate takes up his bill saying you can't use drones on American soil. It should be unanimous but sadly I highly doubt this because it would be pretty much be rebuking the President. You know you can't talk bad of him since he is on Team Democrats.

It's sickening that no progressive Democrats apart from Ron Wyden joined this debate. You know Romney was elected president they would be utterly against the drone program. Look at what the Dems said of Bush over the wiretap program. Just pathetic. Now that a Democrat is in office they are perfectly fine with both. They are huge hypocrits!
post #479 of 2236

Sorry, strongly disagree. You wave a gun at police and due process is forfeit, but we expect the administration to carve out an exemption for terrorists waving guns at American citizens on American soil? How does that play out if and when something actually does happen here?

There is this repetition, about 'ordering the deaths of American citizens', that solely rests on al-Awaki and his son. Al-Awaki was an operational asset in al-Qaeda, it wasn't any sort of secret, and he had already been served due process in the civilian justice system and ignored it. The slippery slope from there to just murdering Americans willy-nilly on U.S. soil is fucking vertical. Brennan has been point man in creating a workable legal framework for this messy business, with a very real eye on the question of 'what happens when its another administration with this power?' Filibustering the nomination is a fucking joke. Equating the drone program to warrantless wiretaps is incredibly slopping thinking. You're talking about the difference between a program with no legal framework that casts a blanket net over every single American, and a program that is signed off on at multiple levels of the Department of Justice targeting irregular forces in lawless warzones. There is no comparison there. The goal here should be to codify the meaning of 'imminent threat' and who has legal and operational authority over these targets, not throwing political tantrums and pretending like the government doesn't have a right to kill you. Guess what, it does: treason is an executionable offense. Combine treason with an irregular combat force, and it's an ugly mess that needs to be sorted. Should we be torturing suspects? No. Should we be trying them in secret in Cuba? Hell no. Should we be assassinating operational assets in extremist organizations in lawless regions? Well, if its that or COIN/occupation, yes. So these guys grandstanding in the Senate are full of shit when they have continually ignored the first two issues there , in some cases even opposing efforts to get a grip on those issues, while making THIS issue, and in particular the Brennan nomination, their fight. 

The drones are coming home, and that's a losing fight. Either there is a reasonable framework for their use, crafted by somebody with a track record of respect for civil liberties (do some research, and you'll find that Brennan fits that profile to a degree that is unmatched by anyone else ever nominated to be the goddamn Head Spook), or there will be no policy, and it'll be the clusterfuck that is business as usual, until something bad happens, at which point the policy will be immediately created by a reactionary administration at a time of national panic. Take that into consideration when you applaud these assholes filibustering the nomination.

 

ETA: Holder's a stooge. If everyone is so concerned about Brennan's role in this, they need to question Brennan, not Holder's weaksauce ass.

post #480 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhukov View Post

Should we be torturing suspects? No. Should we be trying them in secret in Cuba? Hell no. Should we be assassinating operational assets in extremist organizations in lawless regions? Well, if its that or COIN/occupation, yes. So these guys grandstanding in the Senate are full of shit when they have continually ignored the first two issues there , in some cases even opposing efforts to get a grip on those issues, while making THIS issue, and in particular the Brennan nomination, their fight. 

I don't believe that the GOP have suddenly seen the light and taken up opposition against war crimes any more than you do, and I sure wish last night's display had come from someone with more credibility. The drones are a moral disaster. I earned my Afghanistan Campaign Medal the legit way, and I have a visceral understanding of the appeal of using technology to fight the war without putting boots on the ground in harm's way. What we're doing with these aircraft bears no resemblance to the use of, say, sniper rifles to take targets out in the war theater. The visual on the target isn't very good, the strike is usually conducted on the basis of rumors that the target is in a given building, and the use of explosive missile launches by remote aircraft is killing civilians in droves. Ask Bradley Manning how good the checks and balances on this way of fighting is.

The use of these aircraft surrenders the moral high ground and forfeits the hearts and minds of the civilians in theater. When the empire's answer to asymmetrical warfare is to try to make its sight and reach inescapable, the empire becomes a menace that the civilians take up arms to fight. This is why asymmetrical warfare has been a winning strategy since at least the Roman occupation of Jerusalem that serves as the backdrop for the Gospel story of the life of Jesus. Use of drone aircraft to carry out strikes that can only be indiscriminate in city streets, no matter how much salesmanship the White House tries to put on it, justifies and provides recruits for the Mujahideen in Afghanistan. It will inescapably justify and provide recruits for right wing domestic terrorists here in the States. The drones are criminal and ineffective.
post #481 of 2236

Whatever you might think of Rand Paul and his filibuster, in his ramblings he apparently praised a very questionable SCOTUS decision.

So while he might be worthy of a smidgen of praise for his actions, the truth is, at his core, he's just another 'free-market is awesome' libertarian kook.

 

Rand Paul Praises Horrendous Supreme Court Decision, Would Let Employers Ruthlessly Exploit Workers

 

<excerpt>

Quote:
Lochner fabricated a so-called right to contract in order to strike down a New York law preventing bakery owners from overworking bakers, but its rationale has implications for any law intended to shield workers from exploitation. In essence, Lochner established that any law that limits any contract between an employer and an employee is constitutionally suspect. If desperation forces someone to agree to work 18 hours a day, seven days a week, for a dollar a day in a factory filled with toxic air, then courts must treat that law with heavy skepticism. Not every workplace law was struck down during the so-called Lochner Era — the justices of that era sometimes valued sexism more than they valued exploiting workers, for example — but Lochner placed any law benefiting workers on constitutionally weak footing. Needless to say, the “right to contract” it invented appears nowhere in the Constitution.
post #482 of 2236
No I agree with apart from civil liberties he is terrible. He also used a Hitler comparison on the senate floor, which is utterly cringeworthy.

He's a kook but he was right on this issue. He's a broken clock but he was right on this issue. Where was Bernie Sanders and Angus King their technically not Democrats and feel their voice would of been appreciated. And yet nothing rather disappointing.
post #483 of 2236
Stupid iPhone!
post #484 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reasor View Post

The use of these aircraft surrenders the moral high ground and forfeits the hearts and minds of the civilians in theater. 


I'm not sure how much moral highground there is when we're talking about extremists who kill girls for going to school being blown up by flying killer robots.  The main issue here is the unsettling revulsion generated by this sort of warfare - the potential for very bad things happening in future is almost limitless with this sort of thing. But can you put the genie back in the bottle? No.


The hearts and minds on the ground just isn't a solid argument. In Afghanistan, public sentiment tracked closely with boots on the ground and traditional COIN operations, because the Taliban followed and attacked wherever NATO was. Civilians on the ground come to associate the violence with the foreign troops, because when they show up, the fighting follows. Remote killings circumvent that conundrum, but at great political and ethical peril.

 

I certainly don't mean to lecture someone who experienced all this firsthand. My brother-in-law has served as sniper recon in Helmand, so I hear some of this from a primary source, and any attempts made to elucidate moral highground in this conflict just seem to get buried in mud. He strongly rejects the possibility of leaving the Afghan people to the mercy of the Taliban and other extremists. So what's the alternative? Leave him there indefinitely?

Also influencing my thinking: http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/magazine/111356/the-last-men

All of which is to say, its just an unbelievably difficult issue, from an ethical standpoint (for all the noise made about 'enhanced interrogation' at least we've all agreed that shit shouldn't happen, for the most part; indefinite detention should also be clearer in that regard, sadly it is not); and grand-standing on a CIA nomination because suddenly some guys find political opportunity in making this whole mess a black and white issue is not helpful.

I wish we didn't rely on drones; I wish we didn't rely on nuclear stockpiles or the military-enforced energy shipping lanes either. From a detached perspective, it seems that technology is untethering itself from any human capacity to handle it. I don't think relentless flying surveillance robots make for a particularly optimistic future, but we will have to adapt to it, because its here. And if the question is who in government do I have more faith in to handle that adaptation in a thoughtful manner, President Obama or the Tea Party ... well, it strikes me as a very silly question.

post #485 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhukov View Post

I wish we didn't rely on drones; I wish we didn't rely on nuclear stockpiles or the military-enforced energy shipping lanes either. From a detached perspective, it seems that technology is untethering itself from any human capacity to handle it. I don't think relentless flying surveillance robots make for a particularly optimistic future, but we will have to adapt to it, because its here. And if the question is who in government do I have more faith in to handle that adaptation in a thoughtful manner, President Obama or the Tea Party ... well, it strikes me as a very silly question.

It sounds as though we have a common ground here. I do have a concern about delegitimizing opposition to drones by making Rand Paul the face of that opposition, and I agree that the drones aren't going away any time soon; at the end of the day, I've learned to cope with my feelings about politics by adopting a Stoic outlook similar to yours.
post #486 of 2236

Looks like someone didn't "stay off the lawn".....

 

Quote:

Sens. McCain, Graham lambast 'ridiculous' drone filibuster by Paul

 

Two senior GOP Senate defense hawks say Sen. Rand Paul "cheapened" the debate over drone policy by making "ridiculous" arguments in a talking filibuster. 

Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) sternly criticized the statements that Paul made on Wednesday in his attention-grabbing filibuster of CIA nominee John Brennan, which lasted for more than 12 hours.

 
McCain said Paul's argument that the administration might use a drone to kill an outspoken opponent — someone like Jane Fonda during the Vietnam War — was "ridiculous.”

“To infer that the president is going to kill someone like Jane Fonda or someone who disagrees with him is simply ridiculous,” McCain said on the Senate floor. “If someone is an enemy combatant, that enemy combatant has nowhere to hide, not even in a café.”

“To infer that our government would drop a Hellfire missile on Jane Fonda brings the conversation to a ridiculous tone.”

<cont.>

 

Oh, to be a fly on the wall in Washington DC....

post #487 of 2236

 While I do agree with Rand Paul about the the drone program needs to be discussed, I haven't forgotten that he is a crack pot. Wasn't when he was interviewed by Rachael Maddow, that he said a business has the right to discriminate. Don't say nonsense like that and tell me your all about freedom. He also asked Hilliary Clinton if weapons where being run out of Libya to Turkey to be sent to the rebels in Syria; even though he had no evidence to back that statement up. He is like his old man, right about a couple of things, but wrong about everything else.

 

  I don't trust Ron Paul's decision making skills since he doesn't believe in evolution. I don't trust the judgment of somebody who ignores facts to believe whatever the hell he wants to believe.

post #488 of 2236

Okay, Mr. Holder, I will give you credit for this one.



Rand Paul evidently now considers this to be a good enough response, and is dropping his opposition to the Brennan nomination. So, yeah, he's full of shit and looks like a clown. Good show.

I would also take this chance to say I met Rand Paul once, and had an opportunity to talk to him, and he was full of shit then too. Nice enough guy, though.

post #489 of 2236

The only thing missing is Holder slapping that letter on the window of Rand Paul's office and saying "How do ya like them apples?"

post #490 of 2236

There was an Arthur C. Clarke short-story (might have been Asmiov) about this guy who invents a machine that can look into the past. What ends up happening is people realize the past is actually the present removed by the tiniest moment, and this results in a total breakdown in the notion of privacy and upheaval of the social order. 

Its possible we will see something like that, except instead of time travel the mechanism is omnipresent, low-cost drones everywhere.

post #491 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhukov View Post

There was an Arthur C. Clarke short-story (might have been Asmiov) about this guy who invents a machine that can look into the past. What ends up happening is people realize the past is actually the present removed by the tiniest moment, and this results in a total breakdown in the notion of privacy and upheaval of the social order. 

Its possible we will see something like that, except instead of time travel the mechanism is omnipresent, low-cost drones everywhere.

 

It will be mandatory for everyone to be wearing Go-Pro's in the near future. :)

 

As the Russian comet explosion has shown, everyone there has a camera system in their car. It's kinda like your own personal drone....?

 

I can imagine that the insurance industry in the US would love to have cameras in every car. Many of the newer vehicles have "black boxes" that record data that, in theory could be used against you in an accident situation.... "no you were going 32 mph in a 30mph zone, your not covered!"   ???

post #492 of 2236

Deploying Anti-Drone countermeasures! I just take it all to mean that I've gotten old, and all the dystopian sci-fi tropes from my youth are now happening, live and on the news.

post #493 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhukov View Post

Deploying Anti-Drone countermeasures! I just take it all to mean that I've gotten old, and all the dystopian sci-fi tropes from my youth are now happening, live and on the news.

 

I'll keep saying this until it becomes law: I always thought our horrible dystopian future would have better art direction.  Someone get on that.

post #494 of 2236

Saw this clip on Rachel Maddow tonight and figured I had to watch the whole thing it's rather interesting. I did believe GOP can change, eventually  but after watching this I seriously question that. This reminds me of the stupid GOP/TP debates from last year that was just rather insulting and stupid. Poor Ron Paul he never gets a break. Though I'm not entirely sure he deserves one, he is totally right about the drug war the rest? Meh. 

 

It's funny we generally think of the Tea Party as being a new occurrence but the stupidness existed before, as early as 1964 with Goldwater's Conservative Revolution but honestly it probably goes back further to the Hoover Administration and the economic collapse that created the Great Depression. This gives me less hope than ever before. Overall I find this interesting because the young people of the conservative era were raised on this fire branding moronic garbage and explains them for being rather nutty (Paul, Ryan, Cruz). Before this I only knew Morton Downey Jr. for that terrible Wrestlemania promo didn't realize how much of piece of crap he was. We probably have one or two more generations like this the ones who believe what Hannity, Limbaugh, and O'Reilly say, but that's probably about it. But it is interesting to see the first nationally known conservative media moron in action

 

post #495 of 2236
Boy, does that take me back to my childhood. Fucking Morton Downey was basically the id of every northeasterner who had voted for Reagan in '80 and '84. I used to get his show on WWOR Channel 9 from New York, where it was taped. I had no idea he was nationally known until he was in Predator 2, later on.

Those were good days to worry about war, with Libyans car bombing the front gate to the Naval Base in my hometown and "The Day After" airing on prime time television. You damn kids and your North Korea! Get the fuck off my lawn!
post #496 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reasor View Post

Boy, does that take me back to my childhood. Fucking Morton Downey was basically the id of every northeasterner who had voted for Reagan in '80 and '84. I used to get his show on WWOR Channel 9 from New York, where it was taped. I had no idea he was nationally known until he was in Predator 2, later on.

Those were good days to worry about war, with Libyans car bombing the front gate to the Naval Base in my hometown and "The Day After" airing on prime time television. You damn kids and your North Korea! Get the fuck off my lawn!

 

 

Hahahahaha! I just loved because it showed me their were utter conservative pricks back in the day. I was born in 1985 so i wasn't really aware of him really so watching this was interesting it's like a more charasmatic, sanitized version of Limbaugh. But goes to show these people always existed and were just as stupid as now, even though we assume people are more extreme now than in the past. Maybe politicians, maybe but overall not really. I'd love to find some old audio from the 30's calling FDR a socialist and the most radical president in the history of the United States and vastly Un-American! 

 

 

Okay this sums up what I wanted to see. Wow it's hilarious essentially you can just replace stimulus and Obamacare with the Anti-New Deal Propaganda and just label the "Russian Vodka" more blatent as socialism and this could of basically been a 2012 GOP ad. So by the way obviously this was an easy victory for Langdon and caused FDR to be one and done as president.  


Edited by Arturo RJ - 3/8/13 at 12:14am
post #497 of 2236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhukov View Post

Rand Paul evidently now considers this to be a good enough response, and is dropping his opposition to the Brennan nomination. So, yeah, he's full of shit and looks like a clown. Good show.

 

Paul voted nay.

 

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00032
 

post #498 of 2236
Hmmmmmm..........the future of the GOP sounds very much like the past.

http://m.dailykos.com/stories/1192522
post #499 of 2236

God, that Morton Downey video brought back memories for me as well...mostly about how being an asshole on TV is timeless.

 

MD was like the primordial version of O'Reilly, Limbaugh, and Hannity....it's actual proof that evolution can fuck up sometimes.

post #500 of 2236
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › The Republican Party Going Forward v 2.0