DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Our future?

The things you and fish say sound very much like the things Q followers say... like almost word for word most of the time. So that might be why this is happening and I assure you that Pit is not the only one thinking it.

I think you are making Q up. and actually, I only hear Pit mention it, yet 10 times a day.

Sorry you think somebody on here would make that crap up. Here is some proof for you from the BBC a more center source.

QAnon: What is it and where did it come from?

https://www.bbc.com/news/53498434

And I haven't been bashing them, Q supporters, because I don't want to spread their rhetoric on here. They are all completely nuts.

I think KGB operatives sounds more fitting.

I basically don't disagree. She is a nut.

While we are at it, there are a lot of idiots in Congress. If we are going to pick on this woman, how about picking on the rest?

If not, she stays.

Be careful what you pray for. There has been a lot of talk about voters being denied the right to vote. What is the difference between that and voter nullification based on not liking the elected officials political stance, no matter how wacked it may seem?

See - by your false equivalence you are suggesting MTG is just like others. But she isn't.

You make excuses for those that do those things, what's a person to think... Sure sounds like you support those actions.

I only post articles printed on Breitbart, PJ Media, and American Thinker...hardly from your boogeyman Qanon, whoever/whatever they are! I've never heard of Qanon until the socialists on this board made their name known!

You, on the other hand, post videos from the Ana Kasparian and Cenk Uygur progressive cult found on The Young Turks channel...I've also seen you post articles from the far-left progressive DailyKos...all far-left outlets!

Any media bias chart I look at has your 3 sources as hard right - JP and American Thinker are "questionable or extreme contect" .... I'd say they sound like the reflection of Young Turks and Daily Kos. Throwing stones at one and saying you rely on their Right skewed equivalent seems to be a compromised or hypocritical position.

Because they have nothing to do with "a political stance". See, this is why you get accused of making excuses for her. Because you do.

Saying there are lasers in space controlled by the Jews to start wildfires in California isn't a political stance.

Thinking the Parkland shootings, 9/11 and other mass shootings were staged is not a political stance.

Believing in QAnon conspiracy theories is not a political stance.

Liking posts saying Democratic lawmakers should be hanged is not a political stance.

Thinking someone's political views are crazy is an opinion. Thinking this woman is a nut job is a fact. Stop trying to compare the two. You're only making cheap excuses why this delusional human being should stay in office.

You obviously haven't watched any footage of the crowds at Trump rallies or the storming of the Capital. There were Q shirts everywhere. You can stop pretending people are making it up. The evidence is everywhere.

You may claim you haven't heard of QAnon, which must be a lie, but you keep promoting the things they believe which are coming from some of the very news sources you use.

Do you make movies, because you appear to fancy yourself a director.

I just pay attention. It isn't that hard. All you have to is actually look at differing news sources with differing opinions that show you differing stories.

It saves you from looking silly by saying, "I've never heard of that" because you simply refuse to look at any place other than your own echo chamber that refuses to report on it.

J/C

Watching C-SPAN at the moment and seeing the GOP use Jesus as a get out of jail free card for MJT makes my blood boil.

I sure wish Christians knew their holy book as much as they profess to say they do.

j/c

So let's see if we can follow the plot line here for just a minute.

First mass school shootings were an outrage to all Americans. Well except the lunatics who claimed they were staged.

Republicans were so outraged in fact they promoted teachers carry guns to protect the students.

Now, only a short time later, they want one of those lunatics who believe the school shootings were staged on an education commission?

The wind blew in a different direction and as such so did their convictions.

I wouldn't apply a blanket statement to Christians in general.

However, as a Christian myself, one thing that often frustrates me about the fundamental Christians that we see on the far right is that, yes, they know scriptural words and passages, inside and out, and then proceed to act almost exactly the same as the scribes and Pharisees. It's one of the biggest paradoxes I see.

Not sure about that...

A large amount of Christians that lean conservative routinely ignore the Social Gospel. The decrying of SJWs and social programs that would help everyone flies in the face of what Christ calls for Christians to do.

Also look at the lack of condemnation on here when Trump used the Bible as a prop outside of a house of worship after forcibly clearing out peaceful protestors.

....I don't think what you're saying is different from what I'm saying....

I was raised Christian by a fundamentalist father. Growing up he taught me to care for other people. Now he calls me a dirty socialist and communist for wanting to care for other people.
My last contact with him, a phone call I made to him on Christmas morning, was a one sided diatribe of such. Him calling me a socialist/communist. It’ll be my last contact with him unless he does the reaching out. His twisted faith, mixed with a steady dose of Limbaugh, Hannity, and Carlson (the 3 horsemen of the apocalypse) has melted his brain into something I sadly don’t recognize, nor want in my life. My father, or not.
It’s sad but it’s more healthy for me in the long run.

There is certainly a fringe element in Christianity. I'm sorry to hear that your dad is a part of it and what it has done to your relationship, but I do understand your feelings.

My dad was also a Christian and he was never anything like that. I'm not a fan of organized religion because overall I think it has been used as a tool to undermine what Christianity actually stands for.

But it's not that way with all religions or all Christians. I just got tired of wading through it all to find one.

I firmly believe in Matthew 18:20

“When two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them.”

TomAto, Tomato perhaps... but I don't think the situation described is a fringe element to Christianity so much as it is a certain political element trying to use Christianity as a tool.

I may be splitting hairs here, as however we choose to label this subset is irrelevant because of their hypocrisy. But from my perspective I see a slight difference.

I don't actually think we're that far apart here. I'm just not sure how when I sit and watch those in the leadership of Christian religions and groups promoting certain politicians and political ideology that it's not Christianity playing the bigger role.

I believe the number is a lot bigger than what you’re suggesting.

Well, if you are applying a blanket statement, then yes, we disagree.

I do have to say that I find hypocrisy in there, though, and this is something I have more of a problem with the left on, not you necessarily.

Basically, the whole notion of "Don't use blanket statements!" followed by...making a blanket statement.

You don't know that his dad is a fringe element. Have you met the man?

It is a sad story.

I'd say it's more 35-40%. Not a majority but quite a large minority.

JC

Just a thought:

1, The most religious people have the strongest faith. I believe this is true.
2, Faith - "firm belief in something for which there is no proof" - Merriam Webster

Putting those 2 things together, it makes sense that the most religious would be the most likely to believe a conspiracy theory that has no evidence to support it.

3, Seemingly, one of the most important issues to the religious is abortion
4, The left tends to be pro-abortion and the right tends to be anti-abortion.

Putting these next 2 together pushes the most religious to the right.

Putting it all together means that the most religious are the most susceptible to right wing conspiracy theories which may explain the correlation between the Evangelicals and far right conspiracies.

Racist white ethnostate fascist endorsing conspiracy theorists have no place in committees, let along congress.



And for the “wHaTaBoUt LabElS!1!1!1!1!” crowd, I can provide receipts for the factual basis she is each of those nouns and adjectives.

You love labels.

I love truth and facts.

You can’t deal with your cognitive dissonance with these words and many GOP members.

Sadly, for you, I don't have cognitive dissonance.

What I DO have is the ability to see that some love to label others, and use all inclusive terminology. It's rampant on here.

"All ya'll christians" "All republicans...." "All conservatives....."

And you come across as the king of labelers.......well, maybe third actually.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cognitive%20dissonance

You seem to have a superiority complex about yourself.

This is at least the millionth time you’ve trotted out the “elitist critique”.

I pose a wager, arch.

I’ll give you a week to find where I’ve said “I am better than anyone on this board”. If you find me saying this, I’ll go away forever. If you can’t, then you stop trotting out your baseless point.

Do we have a deal?

Bro, you can't say you like truth and facts on one hand and then also say 35-40% of Christians act a certain way based on speculation.

Well, you didn't say that. You do, however, insinuate it every time you post.

You always want the "don't label, but I can label" angle, and you always go to the "never post again" thing. It's trite, inane, and humorous.

Now, come label me again. let me give you the ammo: I'm white (actually, french/german white), I'm a male, I'm a conservative, and I voted republican in the last election. I'm a Christian, though I don't belong to a church with any denomination attached to it.

I'm self employed, which means I don't have the taxpayers paying my salary, or retirement.

I don't complain about how much I've sacrificed to do what I do, unlike.......uh.

You claim to hate labeling any group, yet you do it constantly. What gives?

You throw terms like superiority complex out trying to shame him when he is obviously superior. <- this is me making fun of you, and no I don't believe that, but if it ticked you off even slightly, I'm happy.

We live in a society of invisible containers. The OTHER must always be sorted into their appropriate containers so we know who we are dealing with when we encounter them. If your container is labeled "crazy christian", believe me when I say that is much more about you than me. Just saying, nobody has ever accused me of being a crazy christian.

Now that I said that part, I agree with you that not all Christians are cuckoo for cocoa puffs, but a very large group went there under Trump's reign. Certainly you will agree with that.

Nope, didn't bother me in the least.

I'm glad you get a kick out of trying to tick me off. You fail, but it does show a lot about you.

Yes it does. It shows that I know you don't like me and I get a kick out of giving you any crap I can just for the giggle.

House Exiles Marjorie Taylor Greene From Panels, as Republicans Rally Around Her

Democrats pressed past Republicans’ objections to remove the Georgia freshman from her two committee posts in a vote without precedent in the modern Congress.

By Catie Edmondson
Feb. 4, 2021
Updated 7:17 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON — The House on Thursday exiled Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene from congressional committees, blacklisting the first-term Georgian for endorsing the executions of Democrats and spreading dangerous and bigoted misinformation even as fellow Republicans rallied around her.

The House voted 230 to 199 to remove Ms. Greene from the Education and Budget Committees, with only 11 Republicans joining Democrats to support the move. The action came after Ms. Greene’s past statements and espousing of QAnon and other conspiracy theories had pushed her party to a political crossroads.

The vote effectively stripped Ms. Greene of her influence in Congress by banishing her from committees critical to advancing legislation and conducting oversight. Party leaders traditionally control the membership of the panels. While Democrats and Republicans have occasionally moved to punish their own members by stripping them of assignments, the majority has never in modern times moved to do so to a lawmaker in the other party.

In emotional remarks on the House floor, Ms. Greene expressed regret on Thursday for her previous comments and disavowed many of her most outlandish and repugnant statements. She said she believed that the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks “absolutely happened” and that school shootings were “absolutely real” after previously suggesting that aspects of both were staged.

But wearing a mask emblazoned with the phrase “Free Speech,” Ms. Greene did not apologize over the course of her roughly eight-minute speech. Instead, she portrayed her comments as “words of the past” that “do not represent me,” and she warned that if lawmakers wanted to “crucify” her, it would create a “big problem.”

Democrats argued that Ms. Greene’s comments — and Republican leaders’ refusal to take action against her — had required unusual action. In social media posts made before she was elected, Ms. Greene endorsed executing top Democrats, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi; suggested a number of school shootings were secretly perpetrated by government actors; and repeatedly trafficked in anti-Semitic and Islamophobic conspiracy theories.

“You would think that the Republican leadership in the Congress would have some sense of responsibility to this institution,” Ms. Pelosi said. “For some reason, they’ve chosen not to go down that path.”

Republicans themselves moved against Representative Steve King, Republican of Iowa, in 2019 over comments in which he questioned why the term “white supremacist” was considered offensive, stripping him of his committee assignments.

But they refused to take similar action against Ms. Greene. The vote on Thursday presented Republicans with the uncomfortable choice of either appearing to endorse Ms. Greene’s ugly remarks or breaking with their party — and with former President Donald J. Trump, who has effusively praised her. Following the lead of Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the top House Republican, many argued that although they disapproved of her remarks, they objected to the precedent Democrats were setting.

“I truly believe that the majority claiming a new right to be able to exercise a veto over minority committee assignments will ultimately be dangerous for this institution,” said Representative Tom Cole of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the House Rules Committee. “A change in norms away from an institution built on mutual consent and toward an institution where the majority holds a veto power over everything, including committee assignments, is ultimately an institution that cannot function.”

Ms. Greene also told the House that she had broken away from QAnon in 2018. “I was allowed to believe things that weren’t true,” she said, “and I would ask questions about them and talk about them, and that is absolutely what I regret.”

However, that does not square with a series of social media posts she made in 2019, including liking a Facebook comment that endorsed shooting Ms. Pelosi in the head and suggesting in the same year that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had been replaced with a body double, an element of QAnon’s fictional story line.

As more revelations about Ms. Greene’s incendiary comments were made public this week, it became clear that Mr. McCarthy would have to address them. At the same time, loyalists to Mr. Trump were agitating to strip Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, the No. 3 House Republican, of her leadership post as punishment for voting to impeach him.

The debate of the fates of the two women became a proxy battle over the party’s identity and whether it would continue to embrace the former president or reject his brand of politics.

Ms. Cheney ultimately held on to her post after a lopsided vote on Wednesday night at a lengthy closed-door gathering of Republicans. But that vote was taken by secret ballot, while Thursday’s endorsement of Ms. Greene was a very public affair.

Still, the episode laid bare deep divisions among Republicans about how to move forward as a party. In the days leading up to the vote on Ms. Greene, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the most powerful Republican in Washington, had denounced her statements, which he called “loony lies,” saying such conspiracy theories were a “cancer” on the party. Several other top Republican senators had joined him in denouncing Ms. Greene and saying she could not become the face of the party.

In an effort to warn Democrats about the move, House Republicans introduced their own proposal to remove Representative Ilhan Omar, Democrat of Minnesota, from the Foreign Affairs Committee, citing comments she made, including that Israel had “hypnotized the world” from ignoring their “evil doings.” Ms. Omar has publicly apologized for those comments, which drew charges of anti-Semitism.

“If this is the new standard, I look forward to continuing out the standard,” Mr. McCarthy said, adding that Republicans had a “long list” of Democrats they would want to remove from their committees.

On Wednesday, after Democrats had announced they would press forward to rebuke Ms. Greene, Mr. McCarthy issued a lengthy, tortured statement condemning her comments and saying that they had no place among House Republicans, but arguing that she did not deserve to be punished for them. He went further on Wednesday night after Republicans’ contentious, hourslong meeting, telling reporters that Ms. Greene had privately apologized for her previous remarks and suggesting that it was time to move on.

“She said she knew nothing about lasers or all the different things that have been brought up about her,” Mr. McCarthy said, apparently referring to a Facebook post Ms. Greene wrote in 2018 suggesting that devastating wildfires in California had been caused by a space laser controlled by a prominent Jewish banking family with ties to powerful Democrats.

“If we are now going to start judging what other members have said before they are members of Congress, I think it will be a hard time for the Democrats to place anybody on committee,” he added.

Removal from committees is usually reserved for lawmakers who are facing indictments or criminal investigations or who have otherwise broken with their party in a particularly egregious way, according to Eleanor Neff Powell, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Ms. Powell, who studies Congress and the committee assignment process, said the most comparable case to Ms. Greene’s situation was when Mr. McCarthy stripped Mr. King of his committee posts. Mr. King lost a primary battle in 2020 after his opponent made the congressman’s inability to legislate on committees a central theme of his campaign.

House Republicans passed an internal rule in 2018 mandating that lawmakers facing felony indictments could not serve on committees, a measure that barred two of their members at the time from their posts, including Duncan D. Hunter of California, who was ultimately convicted of violating campaign finance laws and who refused to give up his assignments.

But the majority party, at least in modern history, has never before leveraged its power to dictate the minority party’s committee assignments.

“Typically the party has asked the person to step aside, they’ve taken the vote themselves, and then the chamber as a whole takes a vote to confirm that action,” Ms. Powell said.

Mr. McCarthy told reporters on Wednesday evening that he had offered to remove Ms. Greene from her two committees and to put her on a panel overseeing small businesses instead, but Democrats declined the offer, he said, insisting that Ms. Greene should not sit on any committees.

Democrats, who have been particularly incensed by Ms. Greene’s previous calls for violence after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, have insisted that Ms. Greene’s conduct demanded extraordinary measures.

“If anybody starts threatening the lives of members of Congress on the Democratic side, we’d be the first to eliminate them from committees,” Ms. Pelosi said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/04/us/po...xVtOeJu3QDHrv98

So what you are saying is you need to limit your posting to the smack shack.