Republicans — fighting for all the wrong things

To be fair to the Uniparty, Democrats- standing up for all the wrong things. Which causes Republicans to fight, causing Democrats to stand up, causing..... See how it works.
 
Red Hard Head said:
To be fair to the Uniparty, Democrats- standing up for all the wrong things. Which causes Republicans to fight, causing Democrats to stand up, causing..... See how it works.
Click to expand...
Trying to understand MAGA supporters a bit better, so help fill in the blanks for me and give me some pointers at what are all the wrong things Democrats are standing up for? If it is easier - what exactly do Republicans stand up for, beyond just opposing whatever Democrats put forward?
 
Aren't the gun charges that Republicans are so determined to have pressed against Hunter Biden all about owning guns while being a cocaine addict and doesn't the NRA/Republican Party oppose anything that restricts gun ownership?

I must be wrong about this as that would make no sense.

Also, Hunter is being charged for tax evasion just like Trump was. Not saying the crimes are equivalent but complaining about Trump's guilty verdict for this crime while demanding Hunter be charged doesn't make sense too.

IMO, if they are guilty of those crimes and the prosecutors can give good reason why they should be charged and prosecuted according to the law, then let them defend themselves in court. The expectation should be that both Hunter and Donald be treated fairly and equally under the law. Does that make sense? Or are Republicans demanding we set a double standard? Seems they are fighting for the wrong thing but none of this makes sense to me.
 
cannabineer said:
It is morbidly fascinating to watch what causes motivate Republicans to do counterproductive and meritlessly performative things as an imitation of governance. I’ll kick things off with an article about the AG of Missouri wasting our time and (some of) our tax dollars.

Click to expand...
More of the same, but different.

missouriindependent.com

Missouri Attorneys General are prolific censors posing as free speech champions • Missouri Independent

Missouri had an embarrassing trip to the U.S. Supreme Court last month, and things have gone downhill from there.
missouriindependent.com missouriindependent.com
 
First, context. The following was published by the same media outlet that said this regarding Trump's conviction:

Political vengeance has a spiraling momentum of its own.

Now the subject of this post. Regarding Scott Ritter being denied the ability to fly to Moscow to they are talking about this incident with horror while clutching pearls as if they are some sort of anchor to reality.

www.theamericanconservative.com

Scott Ritter Claims State Department Seized His Passport

State of the Union: If true, the story indicates an unprecedented attack on a citizen’s freedom of movement.
www.theamericanconservative.com www.theamericanconservative.com

Ritter’s assertion, made during an interview with Andrew Napolitano on the latter’s YouTube show, included the claim that his passport had been seized by Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) officers while he was boarding a plane at New York’s John F. Kennedy airport. Ritter, who has written for The American Conservative in the past, was traveling to Russia for the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF). According to Ritter, the CBP agents never showed him a warrant and never gave him a receipt for the seized passport.

So, I don't know what justification the State Department had but I can say that Russia agrees that former intelligence officers often face travel restrictions. But the story doesn't end with this incident.

In January, this was posted on Xitter:

https://x.com/i/status/1743627014433587410


Again, the State Department isn't talking. They simply say their policy is to never comment on the status of a US citizen's passport. But a former US intelligence official, convicted of multiple sex crimes against a minor who gives pep talks to Chechen troops notorious for the worst of the worst war crimes. They are talking about HIS unexplained denial of travel to Russia as if its a crime against democracy in the US.

Republicans have undergone a very strange transformation.
 
A historian notes that the last time Congress was this violent was in the buildup to the civil war.

The fascinating bit is that the antebellum decades were a time when a disruptive communication technology was being deployed. Theirs was the telegraph. Ours is the internet, specifically social media acting as a primary news feed for millions, but unfiltered for disinformation and provocation. I wonder if we are headed for a cliff as high as the last one.

www.motherjones.com

Dueling, shoving, and threats in Congress. Why are Republicans like this?

A Yale historian on the GOP's culture of violence and what is risked by weaponized incompetence.
www.motherjones.com www.motherjones.com

In any other working environment, you would be fired for this type of behavior. It’s crazy to me that Congress lacks similar rules.

Well, they have the rules. They’re just not enforced.

Exactly.

There’s such a long history of people in government behaving in corrupt and inappropriate ways and having absolutely no accountability for that. What’s happening now is in part because of social media. We see these moments that spread very quickly. There was a similar moment in the late 1840s and early 1850s with the telegraph, when suddenly the entire nation could learn something that happened in Congress within 45 minutes without congressional spin. Suddenly, members of Congress realized that whatever they did, it was going to go out into the world and that they couldn’t control it.

The telegraph meant that whatever happened in Congress became national property very quickly, and that scrambled democratic politics very quickly. We are very much living in a similar moment. Democratic politics relies on communication between the people and those in government, so any form of technology that scrambles that kind of conversation scrambles democracy.

All of this—especially with anti-abortion extremists in government and a new speaker who believes in covenant marriage—feels plagued by masculinity and machismo.

It’s all about manhood and power. The brute force, chest-beating, and threat-tossing. That’s part of what we’re seeing.

The other part of what we’re seeing is that we are in a moment when the people who have power want to keep power and do not respect the rights of people who are not like them. When other people gain power—whether it’s demographically or democratically—they see it as an attack. It doesn’t represent more people having rights. It represents them losing what they feel that they deserve. They feel so absolutely entitled to power and they behave in a way that is manly, that allows them to pose as strong.

But it’s fundamentally a posture of fear and weakness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top