DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus What Republicans have become part 2

Let's keep it real - calling an extremist militant Marxist group "Lefties" as if it i0/was Democrats and represents everyone on the "Left" would be the same as branding the Capital Bldg rioters "
Pro Republicans" and branding anyone and everyone on the "Right" as insurrectionists. . . Yes it's a factual event - but the way it's being thrown into this discussion and tagged "lefties' - the implication is 100% false.

They don't care if it's false. They don't care if they have to reach back 50 years in an attempt to find an example to try and rationalize what happened on Jan. 6th.

The only time Republican politicians were honest about Jan.6th was on Jan. 6th. After that they all started to echo what Trump was saying. Their orange God "trumps" patriotism and America.

They undermined a bipartisan investigation. They're suing to keep records hidden. They are acting more like the mob than a political party. They'll go to any length to hide the facts about January 6th.

Just my opinion - but everything is about optics. To admit how horrendous Jan 6th actually was, what a black eye to the country and it's institutions and uninterrupted peaceful transition of power .... well it's too big a pill to swallow for the GOP. They Republican party has been shown (by Trump) that facts don't matter ... just get your narrative out there and stick to it no matter how many facts fly in the face of your claims and the sheep will eventually forget or accept. It's tragic.

I wanted to say that calling the Weather Underground - Democrats is just wrong.

I would say that the GOP has far stronger ties to the militant right that did show up on Jan 6th.

Proud Boys and Oath keepers were following the Grand Cheetos orders.

“It’s going to be wild”, and it sadly was.

OSU hands out rape whistle type alarms to people in an attempt to improve the deteriorating safety of their campus. The problem is there is a criminal element. (probably more criminals than law abiding people.)

There is no reaching out to a criminal element, that is increasingly arrogant that criminal behavior must be excused accepted and advocated.
Because the authorities refuse to punish rapists, burgurlars, thieves, shooters, and people who threaten to shoot anyone minding their own business and attempting to live life.

Ohio State is also trying by putting up 24-7 search lights, track lights, big honking lights, which they recently put up 24-4. 24-4, or 24-7, as if the criminal element will even give a #$% !

Yet, that is exactly what the left does. Disagree with the liberal hive mind and you get grouped in with the insurrectionists.

You get grouped in with them when you start making excuses for their actions. You get grouped in as a Trumpian when you get sucked into the big lie. Keep up.

You get grouped in with them for much less than that. Anybody who posts a rational thought or explanation about the nuance and motivation of anything that has gone on gets lumped in with them..

The only way to not get lumped in with them is to stick to the narrative... *beat drum* TRUMPIANS BAD *beat drum* CHEETOH MAN EVIL *beat drum* then you have to pretend that all was right with the world before Donald Trump and harken back to the good ol' days of George Bush when things were good, who the left would have hanged if given the chance....

I would say that if someone can't see the difference in Trump and all other presidents before him then maybe they should be lumped into a group.

Sure, you can try and minimize it by saying things were bad before trump and to a point that's true. Can't really argue that point. The two party system just sucks.

But no president, ever has so outwardly done everything he could to purposefully villainize, label and use hateful, vile rhetoric to divide this nation to such a degree ever before. EVER! Refusing to step up to the plate and own that does put you in the category of denial to the point of accepting such behavior as normal and worthy of your vote.

I mean how complicated is it to say that the least Republicans can do is run a decent human being as the minimum standard? Both parties have run some fairly shady characters but this is a whole new level. And it's not even close.

I do see the difference but I can at least respect what the Republicans were trying to do, even as I don't like the outcome. They were fed up with politicians and supported a loud mouthed outsider.. While democrats have proven their absolute love and loyalty to political lifers for as long as I can remember, then they wonder why nothing ever changes.

Though I disagreed with many of the ideas, the democrats had the most diverse primary this country has ever seen, young and old, black and white, gay and straight, and they had some pretty bold ideas getting tossed out. Who did they go with? The 77 year old, senile, milquetoast, straight, white guy, who has been in Washington for 50 years, whose whole career started and was built on a foundation of lies, and who hasn't had an original thought since the Carter administration.

My biggest fear in the whole Donald Trump experiment is that it will sour both sides from trying it again and going outside the establishment to find candidates and that we will be stuck, for another 50 years, with a bunch of Ivy League Law grads and career politicians running our country hoping to get it "back to normal" when "normal" actually sucked for a long time.

Biden certainly wasn't one of my top choices in the primaries. I too am disappointed by his selection. IMO the party could have done so much better.

As far as an outsider goes I'm not against that. But let's not pretend that all outsiders are the same. While I'm not surprised, we do see this somewhat differently. Sure, there's the aspect of Trump being an outsider.

But to me the overwhelming factor was his nastiness. He communicated exactly what many Republicans wanted to hear. He represented that everyone who wasn't a Republican was a communist, unAmerican and evil. We now even have what used to be sane posters on this very board echoing those same sentiments. He even openly attacked and labeled everyone within his own party that didn't walk lock step with his own ideas. The bottom line was you either become a Trumpian or you are no longer welcome in this party. He said the things they wanted to hear their leader say out loud. And as of this moment he is the most popular Republican that is considered possibly running for presidential nomination in 2024.

There are plenty of outsiders that are decent human beings. They wanted an outsider who wasn't. And they still do.

I definitely think we need a breath of fresh air and need to go to outsiders vs the career politicians who have bogged down the system for decades.

The problem is that you need an outsider who isn't a demagogic, self-interested, narcissistic, petulant, xenophobic grifter. I know that's being rather specific toward the last outsider who came in, but the bottom line is that you're going to need a well-funded outsider who is actually altruistic in their rationale for running, and that seems like a real rarity.

I'm still not convinced that Biden was the choice of the democrat people at large but was selected by the democratic party... Hillary proved in 2015 that the democratic primary can be rather easily manipulated by somebody with enough power and influence.


All outsiders are not the same but Trump was the only one in the race at the moment. Just kind of being in the right place at the right time...


Every politician runs on a campaign of anger and fear to some extent. Even Obama, who ran on "hope and change" had an underlying message of anger and fear of the other side. Trump took it to the extreme and was very overt about it. Call it what you will but we have been conditioned to respond to that anger and fear and I think a lot of people got very wrapped up in his willingness to just come out and say it, rather than imply it and beat around the bush about it, and let his pundits say it for him..

I'm an advocate of exactly what you're speaking of. There is only one caveat that concerns me in regards to this. And that is that Washington sadly doesn't run and work like anything else I can think of. Learning the ropes as I would call it has a huge learning curve. I don't believe that having an outsider as president alone would actually fix much if anything since he or she would be working against a huge group of insiders no matter the party. But you have to start somewhere. An actual total overhaul of the political system in this country will be needed before we can even come close to fixing it all.

I didn't feel I had any choice but vote democrat in 2020. It was either that or Trump. I'm certainly not of the progressive variety so my choices weren't people like Bernie or Liz. Not that I have anything against them per say.

My top two choices in order were Mayor Pete and Amy Klobuchar. Mayor Pete is certainly an outsider and while Amy is more of a career politician, after Mayor Pete I didn't really see a moderate outsider in the crowd.

Hope and Change evokes hope, not fear. There is nothing in that message that evokes anything but the hope that you can change things for the better. I think that's a reach of epic proportion on your part.

Trying to imply the only real difference between Obama's message and Trump's message was that, "Trump took it to the extreme and was very overt about it", is totally from left field.

I certainly agree with you about the Democratic party heavily influencing who their candidate will be. They have the "next in line" mentality that I despise.

The reason why Biden won the primary is that dems wanted someone who would beat trump. To do that you had to be able to get the moderate republicans to either vote for you or to at least feel okay not voting.

No republican would vote Warren and Bernie who are way to progressive. I don't know if I could have voted for them either.

Moderate republicans wouldn't vote Chang because of his universal income ideas.

And as much as I hate to say it out loud, I don't believe this country is to the point that a woman or a gay guy could win. So Harris, Klobacher, Pete as are all out. (For the record, I thought Pete would have made the best president out of everyone running).

Bloomberg was too republican to get the liberal vote.

So that left Biden.
Did I miss anyone?

I don't actually disagree with your premise. As for myself in the primary I simply voted for the candidate I thought would make the best president. It seems we agree that would have been Mayor Pete.

Not only do I agree with you that sadly this country is not ready for a gay president, I don't think they're actually ready for a smart one either. That left Mayor Pete out on both counts.

How soon we forget.

The last election was about selecting a candidate that would beat Trump. Trump knew it too, just ask Hunter.

The dems had an open free for all, and there was going to be no clear winner, and they did not want it to go to the convention and have a floor fight.

Clyburn spoke up, made some sense, and poof, we had Biden.

I would have rather seen someone else, but grandpa Joe was the choice.

I am glad they did not rally around Bernie or Liz. They would have been skewered.

And it was still close.

100%

Where did I make excuses or say I supported the big lie? You're the one always claiming facts matter. Funny how you throw that out the window when it doesn't fit your agenda.

I'm liking Sasse more and more these days

Sen. Ben Sasse said Reps. Matt Gaetz, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Marjorie Taylor Greene aren't 'serious adults'
Bryan Metzger 5 hours ago


Sen. Ben Sasse said he's tired of getting asked about statements by other members of Congress.
"I don't give a [censored]," Sasse said. "In a republic, nobody should care about that."
Sasse said Reps. Matt Gaetz, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Marjorie Taylor Greene aren't "serious adults."

Republican Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska offered some choice words for both the Capitol hill press corps and controversial House members, including two from his own party, in a conversation with The Atlantic's editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg on Wednesday.

Sasse spoke broadly about the harms of being too obsessed with politics and how the digital age affects political engagement, and also recounted an interaction with a reporter at the US Capitol that he believes illustrates the problem.

"I had a reporter shove her iPhone into my ribcage in early August on Capitol Hill saying, 'You've been ducking us all, Ben!'" he began, before claiming that his congressional office is quick to respond to media requests.

"Tell me more, what am I ducking you on?" Sasse said he asked the reporter.

"We want to know: what do you think about what Matt Gaetz said, about what AOC said, about what Marjorie Taylor Greene did," Sasse said the reporter asked, referring to Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York as well as the two far-right House Republicans.

"And I don't give a [censored]. Like the – in a republic, nobody should care about that. You just named three people who aren't serious adults," Sasse said.

"They don't actually have an agenda for 2030 America, and the reason I ran for re-election is because I'm worried about the future of work, the future of war, the first amendment culture in a world that moves to primarily digital rather than in-person public squares," he added.

This is not the first time the Nebraska Republican has called out members of his own party. In an interview with POLITICO in February, Sasse said that Gaetz was "not an adult," and that he wanted to help recruit "candidates that want to do something more than Marjorie Taylor Greene."

Sasse also wrote an op-ed for The Atlantic in January where he said Greene was "cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs" and said that House GOP Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy "failed the leadership test" by welcoming her into the caucus.

https://www.businessinsider.com/ben-sass...s-adults-2021-9

"Wha-wha..."

When did I call you a Trumpian? I didn't. I simply explained what it takes to fall into that group.

Jones deserves every bad thing that comes his way.

Occupy Democrats is used more and more as a source...


Welcome Gateway Pundit...

Wouldn't call it a source so much as a popular dem twitter account that is usually factually correct. So, better than a GOPer source.

So was he not found liable?

Fish is checking Brietbart, NewsMaxx, OANN, and InfoWars to see if he can verify it as factual.

So, are you saying that Jones didn't lose the lawsuits? Are you saying that the thing posted is UNtrue?

I mean, if you aren't saying that, they I have no frickin idea what's up in your brain

A simple google search confirms the statement.

Reuters -Alex Jones

I DO NOT follow InfoWars or Alex Jones. I do follow Occupy Democrats though, and the propaganda they put out that so many on this board use as talking points.

I used OCD's post to showcase the use of 'OCCUPY DEMOCRATS' as a source.

So what was said is true you just don't like who said it?

He’ll get back to this conversation after Tucker or Hannity makes a statement.

(Glad to not have to include Rush in these types of statements anymore. Ding dong that witch is dead!!)

Washington Examiner
Lin Wood claims 'no plane fragments found' at 9/11 target sites
Kaelan Deese
Sun, October 3, 2021, 4:29 PM·2 min read


Lin Wood, one of the lawyers who filed several lawsuits alleging massive election fraud following the 2020 election, claimed Friday there were "no plane fragments found" at the target sites of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

"Let's talk about CGI — computer graphics generated images. You know what CGI is? You know what deep fake videos are? I know you know what Photoshopping is," Wood told a crowd gathered in Glynn County, Georgia, on Friday.

Wood shared the clip of his remarks to his Telegram channel from the event in Georgia, where he also called former President George W. Bush "a criminal," adding he should "go to jail."

"Many people in the country want to hear it. We ALL need to hear it and face it. We must face the TRUTH, the good, the bad, and the ugly," Wood wrote in the Telegram post. "The TRUTH about 9/11 is ugly."

Wood went on to discuss the World Trade Center towers that were struck by planes, saying, "What appeared to be a plane hit one building, what appeared to be a plane hit another building, then later that night another building fell down. It wasn't hit by a dadgum thing."

Wood also claimed that the fall of the WTC 7 building, which came hours after the fall of the towers due to flames inside the tower, was where "the papers were about the missing money," the attorney added, referring to alleged "stolen" and "missing" money from the U.S. Defense budget.

Wood alleged the Pentagon "got hit by a missile" and said, "There were no plane fragments found at any of the sites — New York, Pennsylvania, the Pentagon." Wood suggests that the footage from the incident is fabricated, despite evidence of plane wreckage from the WTC attacks existing in the New York State Museum and evidence of wreckage from the Flight 93 crash in Pennsylvania.

Wood, the attorney known for successfully aiding Richard Jewell after Jewell was named a prime suspect in the aftermath of the 1996 Atlanta bombing, was recently penalized alongside eight other lawyers for backing a Michigan lawsuit last fall in support of former President Donald Trump's election fraud claims.

U.S. District Judge Linda Parker said the lawsuit last fall was a sham intended to deceive the court and the public just a few days after Biden's 154,000-vote victory in the state was certified.


When contacted by the Washington Examiner for comment, Wood said that his statements were solely his "opinions" and refused to answer any questions regarding evidence for his claims.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/lin-wood-claims-no-plane-202900650.html

That is beyond despicable.

Apparently the judge should STFU about a topic so obvious - and clearly the judge is part of the problem because they won't let the topic die.