Red Mosquito

Citizen Dick wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

wease wrote:

bune wrote:

Jesus. Fucking. Christ.

That's fucking stupid. We had to tolerate the Republicans blocking Obama's nominee.

I wonder what the average democrat's current stand on blocking Supreme Court nominees is and how it differs from 6 months ago.

6 months ago when Garland had already been sitting as a nominee for 3 months?

The idea that a President shouldn't legitimately perform one of his fundamental functions because he was too close to the end of his term - whilst he still had a full 20 % of that term to go - is fucking indefensible. They may as well have suggested it would be a reasonable ploy 18 months or 2 years out.

BurtReynolds wrote:

Citizen Dick wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

wease wrote:

bune wrote:

Jesus. Fucking. Christ.

That's fucking stupid. We had to tolerate the Republicans blocking Obama's nominee.

I wonder what the average democrat's current stand on blocking Supreme Court nominees is and how it differs from 6 months ago.

6 months ago when Garland had already been sitting as a nominee for 3 months?

The idea that a President shouldn't legitimately perform one of his fundamental functions because he was too close to the end of his term - whilst he still had a full 20 % of that term to go - is fucking indefensible. They may as well have suggested it would be a reasonable ploy 18 months or 2 years out.

And how do you feel about that position now that the parties have reversed sides?

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Democrats are pussies. They will cave.

tragabigzanda wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:The hilarious part of the whole thing, is that when Bernie announced his candidacy and people never gave him a chance to even make it close, the consensus argument seemed to be "well, if he pushes HRC and the DNC further left, it'll be worth it for him to run". Then he got so close that that no longer became good enough, and was worth throwing away just to punish the Democrats.

I'm unclear on what you mean by the bold part. You mean the DNC is worth throwing away?

Look, I am going through a deep ideological change here. I'm sure my smarmy posts are somewhat short-sighted. But after having my sis and bro-in-law here from MA last week, I am reminded of how simultaneously exacerbating and draining it is to be surrounded by millions of scared, like-minded people at all times. They couldn't go more than a few hours without talking about Trump, Hillary, Bernie, etc...

What I'm honestly feeling is a deep need to pull back from national politics. Not because I don't care about the issues, but because this election -- and the media's treatment of the election, in particular -- defied all rational expectations I held. I'm becoming increasingly concerned with my immediate sphere of influence, and effecting change on a local and state level, and increasingly disillusioned by any news outlet that purports to predict the future of our country and make me feel like I'm in a position of power by virtue of being informed. I am electing a sort of willful ignorance in favor of embracing the issues closer to my home and daily life, rather than exhausting my energies trying to keep up with the politicos of the world.

I just came across a great quote by Frederick Buechner: "At what points do my talents and deep gladness meet the world's deep need?" This is ringing very true for me.

The sky is not falling, chud. I imagine that a lot of people in MA are feeling that way. But here in MT I'm feeling relatively safe and secure, yet keenly aware of those issues that do impact me directly (the environment, immigration, and gun control are big ones here). We can all still be forces of positive change; we don't have to read every headline and tackle every issue. That shit is exhausting.

So yea, fuck the DNC. I don't literally hope they burn, or collapse, or anything like that. But I'm done supporting them because of the party line mentality. And their combination of piousness/alarmist/handwringing reactions is every bit as manipulative as Trump saying that Mexicans are rapists. It's all bullshit, because none of it is within my control. I feel I can have way more of a positive impact by sharing a beer with my wife's co-workers here who are gun owners, and trying to understand their rational for desiring to own fully automatic weapons.

I'm still fighting the good fight; I've just come to a place where I see the mainstream media as overwhelmingly enslaved by the liberal agenda; they stink of hypocrisy and manipulation every bit as much as the GOP, even if their stances on most issues are more in line with my own.

BurtReynolds wrote:

digster wrote:I've never really understood the perspective of being entirely uncompromising when it comes to choosing a president. I feel like most of his life is choosing between the best of heavily flawed options; I see no reason to expect that picking a person to be president would be any different. When people advise against choosing "the lesser of two evils," that's just hard to understand. Out of the hundreds of millions of people in the country, I'm to choose from two, or maybe three, to be president. How does someone not go into a choice like that expecting to have to pick the lesser evil?

I think if this election has taught me anything, it's that we may be overrating pragmatism or compromise. To be honest, I only dimly understand why, but I'm slowly getting it. The uncompromising nature of the Tea Party and other movements has led to some spectacular victories for their cause. The Left should be taking notes.

Maybe it just depends on the time and place.

If the democratic party provided a level playing field in their primaries, which they certainly didn't, they would have performed better. Even if Hillary would have come out on top, she wouldn't have been burdened by the Donna Braziles, emails, superdelegates, billionaire donors, etc. You can't blame Bernie for that. Trump in the White House has everything to do with the democratic establishment, not Bernie.

The tragedy to me is that this country is in desperate need of revolution. Real, massive change. Unfortunately, that movement was co-opted by a fucking cartoon character. So unless he surprises me, this revolution will be hobbled before it can start.

So the Right blew it, but maybe it can lead to the Left having their own revolt and throwing out it's half of the establishment. We desperately need it.

wease wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:I feel like Burt and I should get matching trapper hats and go bird hunting together. Or maybe just play Duckhunt on an NES powered by the sun.

Let's buy some motorcycles and then wreck them and let Obama pay for our medical bills.

Is that why he kicked Worf to DS9?

Fuck no. Worf kicks ass.

bune wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

digster wrote:I've never really understood the perspective of being entirely uncompromising when it comes to choosing a president. I feel like most of his life is choosing between the best of heavily flawed options; I see no reason to expect that picking a person to be president would be any different. When people advise against choosing "the lesser of two evils," that's just hard to understand. Out of the hundreds of millions of people in the country, I'm to choose from two, or maybe three, to be president. How does someone not go into a choice like that expecting to have to pick the lesser evil?

I think if this election has taught me anything, it's that we may be overrating pragmatism or compromise. To be honest, I only dimly understand why, but I'm slowly getting it. The uncompromising nature of the Tea Party and other movements has led to some spectacular victories for their cause. The Left should be taking notes.

Maybe it just depends on the time and place.

If the democratic party provided a level playing field in their primaries, which they certainly didn't, they would have performed better. Even if Hillary would have come out on top, she wouldn't have been burdened by the Donna Braziles, emails, superdelegates, billionaire donors, etc. You can't blame Bernie for that. Trump in the White House has everything to do with the democratic establishment, not Bernie.

The tragedy to me is that this country is in desperate need of revolution. Real, massive change. Unfortunately, that movement was co-opted by a fucking cartoon character. So unless he surprises me, this revolution will be hobbled before it can start.

So the Right blew it, but maybe it can lead to the Left having their own revolt and throwing out it's half of the establishment. We desperately need it.

You're not wrong. Barry needed to stop straddling the aisle and tell the Republicans (and Democrats) to shut the fuck up more often.

wease wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:I feel like Burt and I should get matching trapper hats and go bird hunting together. Or maybe just play Duckhunt on an NES powered by the sun.

Let's buy some motorcycles and then wreck them and let Obama pay for our medical bills.

Is that why he kicked Worf to DS9?

Fuck no. Worf kicks ass.

Until you realize that he played the Sandman in the Santa Clause movies. Then, not so much.

bune wrote:It's disgusting. and that's just talking about the people who think something like that is an appropriate response.

MissYouAllDay wrote:I trust the people in the intelligence industry less than I trust politicians and I don't trust politicians at all.