Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Ninjasaurus
Feb 11, 2014

This is indeed a disturbing universe.
I do literally nothing to help or thank military service members and freely admit that makes me a piece of poo poo.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

MariusLecter
Sep 5, 2009

NI MUERTE NI MIEDO

Ninjasaurus posted:

I do literally nothing to help or thank military service members and freely admit that makes me a piece of poo poo.

No, that makes you an American :patriot:

lol it's all the same poo poo haha

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug

MariusLecter posted:

No, that makes you an American :patriot:

lol it's all the same poo poo haha

Seriously, this. Half the guys praising the veterans are the same ones who vote in the guys who cut veterans benefits and defund programs that help them.

Ninjasaurus
Feb 11, 2014

This is indeed a disturbing universe.

CommieGIR posted:

Seriously, this. Half the guys praising the veterans are the same ones who vote in the guys who cut veterans benefits and defund programs that help them.

I don't vote Republican and try not to vote Democrat unless I actually like the candidate (rare)/it's strategically the best option (common) so I guess that at least makes me dried up poo poo, not fresh steaming poo poo.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug

Ninjasaurus posted:

I don't vote Republican and try not to vote Democrat unless I actually like the candidate (rare)/it's strategically the best option (common) so I guess that at least makes me dried up poo poo, not fresh steaming poo poo.

Fair enough

Intel&Sebastian
Oct 20, 2002

colonel...
i'm trying to sneak around
but i'm dummy thicc
and the clap of my ass cheeks
keeps alerting the guards!
You know what would be a cool way to support the troops? Making sure everyone is paying the proper amount of taxes seeing as the majority of every dollar you send to the government gets thrown into a black hole with a wooden sign next to it that says "MILITARY AND FRIENDS". poo poo I would say the ratio is so heavily skewed that it's your patriotic duty to pay all you can, even if some of it manages to get chislered away into bullshit like "domestic infrastructure" and "making sure the poorest citizens aren't dying in the streets". We can figure out how to squash those later but ISIS is out there RIGHT NOW and you're sitting on your hands bitching about paying for G.I. Joe's backpack full of death!?!?! No no no this just won't do, citizen.

Intel&Sebastian fucked around with this message at 00:12 on Nov 18, 2014

Orange Devil
Oct 1, 2010

Wullie's reign cannae smother the flames o' equality!

Intel&Sebastian posted:

You know what would be a cool way to support the troops? Making sure everyone is paying the proper amount of taxes seeing as the majority of every dollar you send to the government gets thrown into a black hole with a wooden sign next to it that says "MILITARY AND FRIENDS". poo poo I would say the ratio is so heavily skewed that it's your patriotic duty to pay all you can, even if some of it manages to get chislered away into bullshit like "domestic infrastructure" and "making sure the poorest citizens aren't dying in the streets". We can figure out how to squash those later but ISIS is out there RIGHT NOW and you're sitting on your hands bitching about paying for G.I. Joe's backpack full of death!?!?! No no no this just won't do, citizen.

It is vitally important that domestic policy and foreign policy are always presented and seen as two completely separate things.

woke wedding drone
Jun 1, 2003

by exmarx
Fun Shoe
I support our troops not having incredibly lame benefits.

Screaming Idiot
Nov 26, 2007

JUST POSTING WHILE JERKIN' MY GHERKIN SITTIN' IN A PERKINS!

BEATS SELLING MERKINS.
How can we support our troops if we can't even support our citizens? Let's spend less money on things that put holes in people and more on things to keep people alive.

BiggerBoat
Sep 26, 2007

Don't you tell me my business again.

Screaming Idiot posted:

How can we support our troops if we can't even support our citizens? Let's spend less money on things that put holes in people and more on things to keep people alive.

Because if we don't support our citizens they often have no choice but to join the military.

XtraSmiley
Oct 4, 2002

ToxicSlurpee posted:

Casualty rates in the military are rather low, though. Being a lumberjack is more likely to kill you than being a soldier, for example. If we're going to honor people for volunteering to do something risky then there are much nastier things than "join the military." If that's the sole metric we're using then we should replace Veteran's Day with Lumberjack Day.

Well, I don't know many lumberjacks (actually, I just know one) and he joined the military because he was patriotic. He became a lumberjack later b/c of his family (work basically).

I guess that's the difference to me. I've been in over 19 years and I appreciate it when people thank me. I also don't give a poo poo if they don't.

Yes it's true that many times Republican's are known as the "support are troops" group, and even so, many times the politicians end up screwing the troops, but I don't get angry at the Republican voter. I don't think they are intentionally voting against the troops, I think they just vote poorly, very poorly. That's why many times they actually vote for things against their own interests (regardless of it being military related).

All this being said, I've had people I know get killed doing an office job in the military. Are they heroic? Courageous? Who the hell knows man, I'm just saying, if you want to loving thank someone on Veterans Day, just do it. Some of us like it, some don't, some don't give a poo poo. Don't make it a bigger thing than it is.

By the way, I try to make it a point to thank many people, teachers, waiters, basically anyone that does something that may not pay that well, but they are trying to do well at it.

Also, I have a friend who owns a bar here in DC and he was a 12 year vet, boy I sure can't wait to use that "thanks for your service" line next time I get a drink. Yes, I'm sure it won't get old for me either!

FuzzySkinner
May 23, 2012

XtraSmiley posted:

Yes it's true that many times Republican's are known as the "support are troops" group, and even so, many times the politicians end up screwing the troops, but I don't get angry at the Republican voter. I don't think they are intentionally voting against the troops, I think they just vote poorly, very poorly. That's why many times they actually vote for things against their own interests (regardless of it being military related).

I get the vibe that those who are in red states/red counties don't agree with a lot of republican policies, but just do it because it's been ingrained into their head that Republicans some how represent some form of psuedo American mainstream values and that Democrats represent some evil soviet, socialist plot to take over america.

I've had conversations with those that would be considered "Republicans" where I've seen them state things that would be what an average "Democrat" would agree with. (IE, Improving our energy grid along with our roads, etc, Immigration, Gay Rights, Anti-NSA).

I think that's kind of why the two party system is indeed very poisonous.

Thump!
Nov 25, 2007

Look, fat, here's the fact, Kulak!



FuzzySkinner posted:

I get the vibe that those who are in red states/red counties don't agree with a lot of republican policies, but just do it because it's been ingrained into their head that Republicans some how represent some form of psuedo American mainstream values and that Democrats represent some evil soviet, socialist plot to take over america.

I've had conversations with those that would be considered "Republicans" where I've seen them state things that would be what an average "Democrat" would agree with. (IE, Improving our energy grid along with our roads, etc, Immigration, Gay Rights, Anti-NSA).

I think that's kind of why the two party system is indeed very poisonous.

:siren::siren::siren:LOW-INFORMATION VOTERS!!!:siren::siren::siren:

Despite being a Rush catchphrase, there is a morsel of truth.

It's just, like most of the other stuff, not in the way he perceives it.

AsInHowe
Jan 11, 2007

red winged angel

Tender Bender posted:

The "thank you for your service" stuff hurts mostly because it's a symptom of the blind military worship that allows us to throw men's lives away and justify it by saying that is a really great thing for them to do. It also paints modern military service as a necessity, like if they didn't do it, someone else would, or we'd all be killed by dirty foreigners. That isn't the case, you're basically signing your life away to further the interests of politicians and businessmen, who are absolved of any responsibility because they say your sacrifice is heroic. Yeah it's really great that your nephew died heroically on a land mine, you know what would have been better? If he had grandkids and lived till he was 90.

It's so loving perverse that any call to cut back on the military or keep our troops at home is met with "Don't you support the troops?!" bullshit. Yes I support the troops, that's why I want them to stay out of danger or better yet be able to get a job that doesn't involve killing or being killed.

Back when I worked in politics, we had to escort a Tea Partier from a townhall meeting, because she was angry that troops were coming home and not just over in the Middle East until every last one died. Her reasoning was that the troops signed up to give their lives for America, and that they should be fighting something or anything until they all are dead. Some combat vet almost beat the poo poo out of her.

The Rokstar
Aug 19, 2002

by FactsAreUseless

AsInHowe posted:

Back when I worked in politics, we had to escort a Tea Partier from a townhall meeting, because she was angry that troops were coming home and not just over in the Middle East until every last one died. Her reasoning was that the troops signed up to give their lives for America, and that they should be fighting something or anything until they all are dead. Some combat vet almost beat the poo poo out of her.

What the gently caress. That's insane even for a Tea Partier. That's like legit mental illness right there.

AsInHowe
Jan 11, 2007

red winged angel

The Rokstar posted:

What the gently caress. That's insane even for a Tea Partier. That's like legit mental illness right there.

The Tea Partiers are far crazier than they'd ever publicly state. Or that would ever get reported on.

Jerry Manderbilt
May 31, 2012

No matter how much paperwork I process, it never goes away. It only increases.

AsInHowe posted:

The Tea Partiers are far crazier than they'd ever publicly state. Or that would ever get reported on.

In which case I shudder to think about what crazy tinfoil poo poo Tom Cotton and Hogballs believe that they don't tell us all, because it has to be horrifying.

Dapper_Swindler
Feb 14, 2012

Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

AsInHowe posted:

Back when I worked in politics, we had to escort a Tea Partier from a townhall meeting, because she was angry that troops were coming home and not just over in the Middle East until every last one died. Her reasoning was that the troops signed up to give their lives for America, and that they should be fighting something or anything until they all are dead. Some combat vet almost beat the poo poo out of her.

Jesus gently caress, any more details?

shadow puppet of a
Jan 10, 2007

NO TENGO SCORPIO


That sounds more like Sovereign Citizen territory than Tea Party. The insane worship and almighty power of "contracts" overriding everything sane or logical being what would tip it off.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug

shadow puppet of a posted:

That sounds more like Sovereign Citizen territory than Tea Party. The insane worship and almighty power of "contracts" overriding everything sane or logical being what would tip it off.

The Tea Party and them tend to blur lines a lot, there are a lot of the Free Man on the Land and other kooks hiding in there, along with a lot of Libertarians and others.

Periodiko
Jan 30, 2005
Uh.

The Rokstar posted:

What the gently caress. That's insane even for a Tea Partier. That's like legit mental illness right there.

I dunno, it seems like a natural extension of the clash of civilizations rhetoric you hear - if you truly believe that radical islam, headquartered in the Middle East is engaged in an existential war with the Western world with cosmic overtones, with the strong possibility that they will acquire nuclear weapons or some other WMD, then soldiers really should be over there. I mean, I'm assuming that her problem was that the soldiers weren't fighting, not that they hadn't died yet.

If you are somewhat mentally unbalanced, I'm sure the rhetoric you hear coming out of Fox News combined with the realities of IS are extremely terrifying.

Centripetal Horse
Nov 22, 2009

Fuck money, get GBS

This could have bought you a half a tank of gas, lmfao -
Love, gromdul

Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:

She is a mess and I guess does not believe in multiple takes

AsInHowe
Jan 11, 2007

red winged angel

pengun101 posted:

Jesus gently caress, any more details?

It wasn't even the craziest thing from the Tea Partiers that year. Maybe the third-craziest thing, in a long list of insanity. (The craziest was that blacks and gays are teaming up to destroy America and take it from white people, due to their shared love of sodomy.) Essentially, the Tea Partiers would show up at any event, for any candidate, and shout profane/obscene nonsense until the cops showed up and they were forced to leave.

Specifically to this, there was (and is) a perverse element of death worship that came through the Tea Partiers. Any idea that included people dying was applauded, and it only really hit the media with those Republican primary debate moments where the crowd shouted "let them die" and applauded Rick Perry's execution record. If people were going to suffer and die, the Tea Partiers were pleased. If there was any way to get more people to die, the Tea Partiers were pleased. It was disgusting.

Jerry Manderbilt posted:

In which case I shudder to think about what crazy tinfoil poo poo Tom Cotton and Hogballs believe that they don't tell us all, because it has to be horrifying.

It's nothing that hasn't been mentioned before, only to the n-th degree.

This does bring up another thing about this group, their constant fetishizing of farming and rural culture. Hogballs won because she played up the "I'm an idiot farmer, just like you!" angle, and it won. The Tea Partiers love anything relating to their idealized rural culture, and complain endlessly when it isn't constantly praised. Outside of rooting for pain and suffering, there was always a lot of people complaining about how people aren't forced to be country, like them.

Periodiko posted:

I dunno, it seems like a natural extension of the clash of civilizations rhetoric you hear - if you truly believe that radical islam, headquartered in the Middle East is engaged in an existential war with the Western world with cosmic overtones, with the strong possibility that they will acquire nuclear weapons or some other WMD, then soldiers really should be over there. I mean, I'm assuming that her problem was that the soldiers weren't fighting, not that they hadn't died yet.

If you are somewhat mentally unbalanced, I'm sure the rhetoric you hear coming out of Fox News combined with the realities of IS are extremely terrifying.

It has nothing to do with anything bigger than someone wanting someone else to die. It isn't about religion, it's about a basic lack of empathy towards anyone else, and bristling at the fact that everyone else thinks differently than they do.

Sir Tonk
Apr 18, 2006
Young Orc

GAYMIEN SANDOW posted:

A friend of mine is a vet and a bartender so every time he brings me a drink I tell him "thank you for your service" and let me tell you that joke never gets old.

That's pretty drat funny.

Pope Guilty
Nov 6, 2006

The human animal is a beautiful and terrible creature, capable of limitless compassion and unfathomable cruelty.
Don't privates make like 18 grand a year? It seems to me that if supporting the troops is your thing, you should be agitating for a raise.

Sir Tonk
Apr 18, 2006
Young Orc

XtraSmiley posted:

Yes it's true that many times Republican's are known as the "support are troops" group, and even so, many times the politicians end up screwing the troops, but I don't get angry at the Republican voter. I don't think they are intentionally voting against the troops, I think they just vote poorly, very poorly. That's why many times they actually vote for things against their own interests (regardless of it being military related).

Voting for the party that sent hundreds of thousands of soldiers to get killed/injured in two wars based on blatant lies is pretty drat against the troops, if ya ask me, even if they don't understand what they're voting for. Ignorance isn't really an excuse when we're talking about the lives of fellow citizens, as much as they want it to be.

Pope Guilty posted:

Don't privates make like 18 grand a year? It seems to me that if supporting the troops is your thing, you should be agitating for a raise.

http://www.dfas.mil/militarymembers/payentitlements/militarypaytables.html

It was under a grand a month when I joined, but when you add in free housing, food, utilities, etc it's a reasonable enough wage (for a teenager with no college).

AsInHowe posted:

Back when I worked in politics, we had to escort a Tea Partier from a townhall meeting, because she was angry that troops were coming home and not just over in the Middle East until every last one died. Her reasoning was that the troops signed up to give their lives for America, and that they should be fighting something or anything until they all are dead. Some combat vet almost beat the poo poo out of her.

:stare:

burnishedfume
Mar 8, 2011

You really are a louse...

AsInHowe posted:

It wasn't even the craziest thing from the Tea Partiers that year. Maybe the third-craziest thing, in a long list of insanity. (The craziest was that blacks and gays are teaming up to destroy America and take it from white people, due to their shared love of sodomy.) Essentially, the Tea Partiers would show up at any event, for any candidate, and shout profane/obscene nonsense until the cops showed up and they were forced to leave.

Huh, as someone who has never been anywhere near involved in US Politics, the whole "gays and minorities are trying to destroy America" thing has become cliched to the point that I just kinda roll my eyes at it while the thing about "bringing our soldiers home is an outrage, they signed up for eternal war and that's what they must do" is pretty much more :stonk: to me. Is it just seeing so many people earnestly saying "blacks and gays are teaming up to kill America" that makes it crazier to you, or is there a fun story there?

kik2dagroin
Mar 23, 2007

Use the anger. Use it.

quote:

RUSH: The smartest thing to do is distrust anything coming out of this Regime. There's something out there that they're pushing, and it can be really complicated, if you listen to the wrong people about it, and that's called "net neutrality."

It's something that is totally mis-titled. There's nothing "neutral" about net neutrality, what the Regime wants to do. But here's the thing. I'm telling you, you don't even need to know what it's about. All you need to know is who is behind it, and that alone should disqualify your support. It's the same people that had given us Obamacare and the same way they did it: They lied through their teeth, misrepresented it, ran a con game.

They're still running the con. Here's the thing. You remember the movie The Sting? I remember that movie. I liked that movie, and one of the reasons I liked the movie is because I figured it out before it happened. It's one of the few times in a novel or a book or a movie that I actually was ahead of the plot and figured it out. Normally I read a novel, a mystery novel and wait for things to be revealed. I don't try to figure them out.

The Sting, for some reason, it all came to me. So when the final sting happened, I had already suspected that's what was gonna happen. So I wasn't as shocked as the rest of the audience was. There's one thing I remember about that movie. I think it was the Newman character, Henry Gondorff, said the key to the con is that it's never over. You never let the person you conned know he's been conned. Never. The con goes on.

Well, that's what's happening here. They run a giant con game on the population of this country with Obamacare, and they are continuing to run the con. They are not giving it up. They are not gonna admit they've been had. They are not gonna admit they've been exposed. They are gonna continue to operate on the belief that got them here, and that is that you're too stupid to figure this out.

And that you still love and respect the office of the presidency enough that you will believe what your president is telling you about this, that he didn't know about it, that he's angry about it, that what Gruber's saying didn't happen, that Gruber had no power. He was a simple advisor, he had no influence, and their process was wide open and transparent and everybody knew everything about it.

They're running a con game, and they're demanding you deny it. You never admit the con, because that would then -- in the case of a politician -- damage any future cons that you want to run. I'm telling you, net neutrality is the next con game they're running. The question you need to ask yourself is: Do you want the people...? You may not like Comcast and you may not like AT&T and you may not like Time Warner.

You may not like them, but do you want the people who gave you Obamacare running your Internet service? Do you want them in charge of what you can get and when you can get it and how much it's gonna cost you? Are you gonna believe anything they tell you about net neutrality, given what you know? That's how people need to be dealing with this. This is what frustrates me.
Here we have a teachable moment.

This is indisputable and inarguable what happened. As such, Obama should have forever forfeited any credibility or believability. Obama is now fully exposed as nothing more, in common parlance, as a lying con man. He ought not ever get away with it again, not after something this big that is this damaging and this costly to this many people. And they're coming at us again.

I don't care what it is. Global warming or climate change or whatever gonna call it -- immigration, amnesty, or net neutrality -- the fact is they have forfeited any credibility and believability on any of this. Anybody paying attention ought to be suspicious of everything they say about what they intend to do, how they intend to do it, and what its intended benefits are. Because they are lying through their teeth.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Here's Richard in Jackson, Michigan. I'm glad you waited. I'm glad to have you on the program. Hi.

CALLER: Hello, Rush.

RUSH: Hey!

CALLER: Mega dittos. I've been listening since you were on TV.

RUSH: Well, I appreciate that. That was 1992. That's many, many moons ago.

CALLER: It's been a while, yeah. Yeah. You were talking about the government wanting to do the net neutrality and take over the Internet.

RUSH: That's exactly the way to put it. The government wants to take over the Internet just like they want to take over every other utility and monopolize it, and they want to make it fair for everybody, isn't it a beautiful thing? Fair and equal for everyone, like everything is fair and equal for everyone now. Yeah. What are your thoughts on that, Richard?

CALLER: My thought was that their equalization will be the same way that they equalized education, which is the lowest common denominator. So whosever Internet was the slowest, everybody else will slow down to that.

RUSH: No, no. The same objective exists in net neutrality as exists in Obamacare. What's the objective in Obamacare? To wipe out private sector insurance, ultimately. You partner with 'em first, you butter 'em up, and eventually the government becomes single payer. That's where you go. Net neutrality, we know who these people are. Forget the title, forget net neutrality. The objective here is for Obama, the Democrats, the government to run the Internet. Now, if that's what you want, if you think the government should run the Internet, and if you think the government creates and causes innovation to happen, why, then, have at it, folks.


BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Net neutrality is about an accurate a title as the Affordable Care Act is a title for Obamacare. There's nothing neutral about net neutrality. Totally misnamed.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/11/17/net_neutrality_is_the_next_con
I hope this becomes part of his daily repertoire for a while because it will only take a couple of callers to slip through the net and tell him how wrong he is on this. Not that it would matter of course, Limbaugh can never be wrong about anything on his own show but it is funny to hear him flounder from time to time.

quote:

RUSH: Okay, if you believe... If you are an inside-the-Beltway media or elected official elitist or honcho, and, if you don't want to get anywhere near action -- like a series of bills that would deny Obama the funding necessary either to implement amnesty, or elements of Obamacare, because that would be a government shutdown, and the Republicans will get blamed no matter what happens, and they'll never recovered from it, and it's horrible, and it's messy -- aren't you essentially the same as Jonathan Gruber?

Aren't you really saying the American people are too stupid to understand what's really going on?

Aren't you saying, "No, no! We can't have a series of bills that will defund various steps of amnesty. Why, that would shut down the government, and then we'll get blamed for it." So you believe the American people are so stupid that even though they just elected you to stop this, when you take action to stop it they're gonna get so mad at you for shutting down the government, that they're never gonna elect you again, and the media is gonna have a field day with you?

Aren't you kind of just like Jonathan Gruber? Aren't you, in essence saying, "No, we can't do what's right because the American people are too stupid to see what we're doing, and they will blame us, and we don't want to get blamed"? It seems to me that a year ago in December there was a government shutdown, and Ted Cruz got blamed for it left and right.

And the last I saw, the Republicans just won a landslide election a little over a week ago. So where is it written that government shutdowns destroy Republican electoral efforts? Where is it written that defunding this part of Obamacare or that part of amnesty equals a government shutdown anyway? I think it's time for people to realize -- Republicans, especially -- that the people who voted for 'em are not stupid.

...
Look, there was a government shutdown. I do this for a living, and I don't even remember what it was about. That's how big it was. Now Snerdley, who is a wonk, probably remembers. All I know is that Ted Cruz getting blamed for it everywhere. What was it over? (interruption) "Continuing resolution for funding." Okay, so we shut down the government over the mechanism that we were gonna pay for the next series of months of government, the continuing resolution.

The Republicans have been trying to stop the Democrats and get 'em to do a budget as required by law, and they've been doing this continuing resolution stuff, which... (interruption) Well, I know. The typical sleigh ride guy at Jellystone got sidelined for a while, but he got his money back. They all do. The government workers that lost their jobs for a couple days got their Thanksgiving and Christmas turkeys.

It always ends up that way. The point is, there was a government shutdown, and there was no politician that got hurt. The last I looked, the Republicans won a landslide election last week or week half ago -- and they were the guys blamed for the shutdown last January, am I right? (interruption) The Republicans were blamed for the shutdown last December, 2013, right? (interruption) Okay.

Single-handedly! Ted Cruz and the Republicans were tarred and feathered and blamed and everything was laid at their feet and it was a disaster, and what happened? The Republicans win a landslide election less than a year later. So where is it written that government shutdowns... Now, granted, in a government shutdown, the media is going to hate you. The media is gonna say mean things about you.

The media is gonna call you racist and sexist and bigoted and homophobic, and the media is gonna call you mean-spirited, and the media is gonna call you extremist, and the media is gonna say, "You don't like the little guy," and the media is gonna lie about you. But it didn't hurt, did it? If the Republicans shutting down the government last year was political disaster, somebody explain the results of ten days ago for me.


But I know how the inside-the-Beltway thinks, and it is typified here and personified by Brit Hume of Fox News. This is yesterday on Fox News Sunday during the panel discussion. The host Chris Wallace was speaking with senior political analyst Brit Hume about immigration reform and the federal budget, and Chris Wallace said, "If Republicans somehow tie funding of the government to opposition to this executive action, is it a smart political move or is it another mistake?"
...
Now, on this shutdown business, I think, in the first place, this is not technically a government shutdown. Just telling Obama we're not gonna give you the money for, say, a driver's license for these people. We're not gonna give you the money for Social Security cards for these people. We're not gonna give you the money. How the hell is that a government shutdown, for crying out loud?

But even if it is, it seems to me -- and I say this with all due respect. I am not a flamethrower here, and I'm not trying to pick a fight. I am just trying to serve this audience the best I can, and it seems to me that this fear that whenever anything happens, that the media can call a government shutdown and therefore we can't do it 'cause the Republicans are gonna get blamed and don't want that, aren't you kind of being just like Jonathan Gruber in assuming the people are so stupid they won't be able to figure out who's really responsible for this?


Add to this the fact, if you want to talk polling data, whatever poll you want to cite, you've got 55 to 60% of the American people who disapprove of Obamacare and want it repealed. So if you take action to deny Obama funding to implement it and somebody calls that a government shutdown, how in the hell are the people gonna get mad at you for trying to stop the implementation of Obamacare when that's what you were elected to do?

This inordinate fear that the Republicans are, no matter what happens, gonna get blamed for it seems to rely on the fact that the American people are so stupid that they will always believe what the media tells them and that they will never question it. If this is way you look at -- why should the Republicans ever oppose anything? Because we know what the media is going to say about them.

The media is gonna call the Republicans names no matter what the Republicans do or say, and if our policy decisions are going to be rooted in trying to limit what the media says, aren't we conceding defeat? And aren't we at the same time pretty much saying that we are afraid that the American people are too stupid to see our actions for what they are, and that is, trying to save the country from the disasters of Obama's policy implementations. And I would say the same thing about amnesty.

The majority of the American people, no matter where you look, no matter what poll, nobody's in favor of it. Nobody wants executive amnesty. It's not a majority position. Nothing Obama is doing is a majority position to support. So any action the Republicans might take after having won a landslide election, I mean, that has to be a factor here. They were just elected to stop this stuff, and so they take action to stop it, and the media accuses them of shutting down the government, and the American people are so stupid that right then and there they're gonna regret that they voted for the Republicans.

And the Republicans are gonna be paying the price for, what, another year 'til the next election, another two years. How did the Republicans win this election if they got blamed for the shutdown last December? "Well, it took a year to get back." Well, they got back. I don't know. This is unnecessarily tying your own hands behind your back.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Okay. So the establishment, they say they will not shut down the government. What that means is, they're not gonna deny Obama any funding to implement his various schemes, so what are they gonna do? It's a serious question. I mean, they were elected to do something here. They were elected to stop this. Even if you think they were elected to do more than that, fine and dandy. I don't want to get into an argument about that. But you can't deny that part and parcel of the reason for this electoral win was to stop what is happening.

If they're not going to use the power of the purse, and if they're not going to use impeachment, then what are they going to do to stop it? That's gonna get them in more trouble with voters than any so-called government shutdown. The worst thing they could do is ignore the mandate the voters gave 'em. That looks like what they're aiming for.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: This is Sally, Richmond, Virginia. Great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER: Hey, Rush. How are you?

RUSH: I'm not well. Thank you very much.

CALLER: Good! I wanted to comment about your conversation about the Republicans and shutting down the government.

RUSH: Yeah?

CALLER: I actually think Ted Cruz and the Republicans that supported the government shutdown, caused the wake-up call and they were what caused people to pay attention and get engaged, and they drew people's attention to the truth about Obamacare and what the negative impacts were gonna be. Not only on the economy, but the level of care that we were all gonna eventually experience, and the rising costs.

RUSH: That is an interesting take, because Ted Cruz did get the blame, right?

CALLER: He got the blame but he really should be getting the praise.


RUSH: Well, but wait. That's what I'm saying. He did. The point is: Did Ted Cruz lose any popularity?

CALLER: He lost popularity outside of the Republican Party but also within the party.

RUSH: Well, no. I'm talk with the American people.

CALLER: No! No.

RUSH: No, he didn't lose popularity. He might have been enemy number one inside the party, but in terms of the people? The voters didn't take it out on Ted Cruz. That's a good observation, interesting observation. Sally, I appreciate the call. Thank you very much.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/11/17/it_s_time_to_man_up_gop
This really makes him bringing up Colbert calling him out on saying "The Republicans weren't elected to govern!" all the more hilarious. The only thing I really get from his word salad is that shutting down the government won the Republicans the midterms with a mandate to grind everything to a halt, when in fact we had one of the lowest electoral turnouts in history.

agarjogger
May 16, 2011

Halloween Jack posted:

I agree, but you still can't criticize American imperialism unless you introduce it with an "I support the troops, but" in the form of a glowing panegyric to the troops, all of whom are greater than the greatest teacher, doctor, or what-have-you that ever lived. Not to mention that it's still beyond the pale to criticize the troops or their motives.

I think the troops get put on a pedastal for the same reason pretty girls do, so they can be dehumanized and hosed.

McAlister
Nov 3, 2002

by exmarx

Pope Guilty posted:

Don't privates make like 18 grand a year? It seems to me that if supporting the troops is your thing, you should be agitating for a raise.

Basically privates make, "everything you need plus some spending money". This is through a low wage and highly variable, non taxable, allowances.

So this is also tax evasion, but to be fair the government taxing itself is kind of silly.

Health insurance for you, your spouse, and any kids. The bigger your family the bigger the value of the compensation package. Housing allowances that grow if you have a family. Subsistence/food allowance.

This structure is a bigger threat to the sanctity of marriage than the gay agenda because the effective raise you get for having a spouse is substantial and sham marriages do happen to collect it.

R-Type
Oct 10, 2005

by FactsAreUseless

McAlister posted:

Basically privates make, "everything you need plus some spending money". This is through a low wage and highly variable, non taxable, allowances.

So this is also tax evasion, but to be fair the government taxing itself is kind of silly.

Health insurance for you, your spouse, and any kids. The bigger your family the bigger the value of the compensation package. Housing allowances that grow if you have a family. Subsistence/food allowance.

This structure is a bigger threat to the sanctity of marriage than the gay agenda because the effective raise you get for having a spouse is substantial and sham marriages do happen to collect it.

Agreed. And on the point of the other poster about raising wages, all this does is ultimately add to inflation, just like minimum wage bullshit increases and is not sustainable. The better thing to do is work hard get promoted and work toward NCO or OCS, or get out and get your billing rate up.

FuzzySkinner
May 23, 2012

What's weird about Limbaugh was he was pretty vocally against any sort of censorship of internet (in regards to pornography). on the episode of The Drew Carey he was on.

He even tried to pin it on "SOMETHING THE DEMOCRATS ARE TRYING TO DO" :colbert: or something along those lines. Just seems odd he's against it in that regard. But of course, it could be just having to disagree with everything that Obama supports out of principle.

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN
Jun 26, 2009



For what it's worth personally thanking members of the armed forces is an american only thing and even then it only started in the last decade or so I think?

shadow puppet of a
Jan 10, 2007

NO TENGO SCORPIO


I have no doubt that 'Support Are Troops' can be traced directly back to an advertising campaign for the Ford F-150. Chevy replied with the John Cougar Mellencamp 'This is Are Country' campaign for the Silverado and so things have been locked up in spiraling, escalating masturbatoria of all things militaria but entirely divorced from military reality.

Orange Devil
Oct 1, 2010

Wullie's reign cannae smother the flames o' equality!

AsInHowe posted:

Specifically to this, there was (and is) a perverse element of death worship that came through the Tea Partiers. Any idea that included people dying was applauded, and it only really hit the media with those Republican primary debate moments where the crowd shouted "let them die" and applauded Rick Perry's execution record. If people were going to suffer and die, the Tea Partiers were pleased. If there was any way to get more people to die, the Tea Partiers were pleased. It was disgusting.

This does bring up another thing about this group, their constant fetishizing of farming and rural culture. Hogballs won because she played up the "I'm an idiot farmer, just like you!" angle, and it won. The Tea Partiers love anything relating to their idealized rural culture, and complain endlessly when it isn't constantly praised. Outside of rooting for pain and suffering, there was always a lot of people complaining about how people aren't forced to be country, like them.

I know this is cliché, but I'm going to say it anyway. Nazism believes that only through constant conflict against whatever the enemy-du-jour is a society can be strong. The few good people are beset upon by a mass of inferior evil people from all sides pretty much all the time. Furthermore their idealised society was highly rural, believing that these traditional values and living conditions represented and brought out the best in the Aryan race. They went so far as to construct idealised rural villages in which they'd house the training for their concentration camp "doctors", quite macabre places I can tell you. The endgame was razing most of Poland and Western Russia in order to populate it with German colonists to live in newly constructed rural communities accross this vast space.

Blood and soil.

Orange Devil fucked around with this message at 14:35 on Nov 18, 2014

BiggerBoat
Sep 26, 2007

Don't you tell me my business again.
Calling my shot now: One of these assholes is going to do a segment on how this woman who's marrying Charles Manson is a big, loony, liberal Democrat.

shadow puppet of a
Jan 10, 2007

NO TENGO SCORPIO


Democrats need That Soros to fund and most importantly brand a name onto the far fringe of the left. Something like Indigo Voters but you've got to ensure that they themselves use it at their loopy rallies.

It would really help balance the narrative between GOP+Tea Party vs. Democrats.

HackensackBackpack
Aug 20, 2007

Who needs a house out in Hackensack? Is that all you get for your money?

FuzzySkinner posted:

But of course, it could be just having to disagree with everything that Obama supports out of principle.

Pretty much. That's his show now. If Obama cured cancer, Rush Limbaugh's show tomorrow would be about all the cancer clinics closing shop and the doctors out of work because of Obama.

William Bear
Oct 26, 2012

"That's what they all say!"
This article is getting passed around today. I had to double check it wasn't satire.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/the-extraordinary-smallness-of-washington-20141117

quote:

On health care, we needed a market-driven plan that decreases the percentage of uninsured Americans without convoluting the U.S. health care system. Just such a plan sprang out of conservative think tanks and was tested by a GOP governor in Massachusetts, Mitt Romney.

Instead of a bipartisan agreement to bring that plan to scale, we got more partisan warfare. The GOP resisted, Obama surrendered his mantle of bipartisanship, and Democrats muscled through a one-sided law that has never been popular with a majority of the public.


He's defending the idea on Twitter, though.

https://twitter.com/ron_fournier

quote:

.@moiskd @jbarro ACA was not bipart. I back the law and it's roots to Heritage/Romney. Long on record. Ends don't justify means #Gruber

I don't get it.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Jerry Manderbilt
May 31, 2012

No matter how much paperwork I process, it never goes away. It only increases.

William Bear posted:

This article is getting passed around today. I had to double check it wasn't satire.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/the-extraordinary-smallness-of-washington-20141117



He's defending the idea on Twitter, though.

https://twitter.com/ron_fournier


I don't get it.

Krugman posted a takedown of it on his blog.

A Pundit Explains What’s Wrong With Washington posted:

Or, actually, demonstrates by example what’s wrong with Washington.

Matt Yglesias finds Ron Fournier saying this about health reform:

quote:

On health care, we needed a market-driven plan that decreases the percentage of uninsured Americans without convoluting the U.S. health care system. Just such a plan sprang out of conservative think tanks and was tested by a GOP governor in Massachusetts, Mitt Romney.

Instead of a bipartisan agreement to bring that plan to scale, we got more partisan warfare. The GOP resisted, Obama surrendered his mantle of bipartisanship, and Democrats muscled through a one-sided law that has never been popular with a majority of the public.

The mind reels. How is it possible for anyone who has been following politics and, presumably, policy for the past six years not to know that Obamacare is, in all important respects, identical to Romneycare? It has the same three key provisions — nondiscrimination by insurers, a mandate for individuals, and subsidies to make the mandate workable. It was developed by the same people. I and many others have frequently referred to ObamaRomneycare.

Well, I’ve know for years that many political pundits don’t think that understanding policy is part of their job. But this is still extreme. And I’m sorry to go after an individual here — but for God’s sake, don’t you have to know something about the actual content of a policy you critique?

And what’s actually going on here is worse than ignorance. It’s pretty clear that we’re watching a rule of thumb according to which if Republicans are against a proposal, that means it must be leftist and extreme, and the burden on the White House is to find a way to make the GOP happy. Needless to say, this rewards obstructionism — there is literally nothing Obama can do to convince some (many) pundits that he’s making a good faith effort, because they don’t pay any attention to what he does, only to the Republican reaction.

Awesome.

Honestly at this point I get the feeling Krugman thinks—and I'm inclined to share the feeling—that Very Serious Pundits like Fournier are a bigger problem than Rush et al. It's one thing if the RWM network just jerks off to their loyal listeners, it's another if you have people at mainstream outlets helping to legitimize and normalize their viewpoints.

Jerry Manderbilt fucked around with this message at 15:30 on Nov 18, 2014

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply