Politics

[BrownerandFry]

I would respond by telling him to type shorter messages.

but if he would accept that, he would have to quit dissing people who think in bumper stickers and fortune cookie messages.

and probably would have to quit his current job

 

[Irish#1]

I find comfort in the brief and concise messages conveyed in bumper stickers and fortune cookies.

 

[ab2cmiller]

 

[BrownerandFry]

I find comfort in the brief and concise messages conveyed in bumper stickers and fortune cookies.

as do i.

My fav is PG&E's motto

"Good Enough isn't"

And I once worked for a charismatic Swede
One year his "bumper sticker" (his term not ours) was

"Whiners get punished."

he meant that the market, not management would take care of that.

.

 

[drayer54]

These are the principled norms we've all been craving.

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1441096151902474251?s=20[/TWEET]

 

[Wild Bill]

House votes to hand our money over to Israel 420-9. Amazing how cohesive our system is when Israel's interests are in question.

 

[Irish#1]

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/politico/status/1436085230037778432[/TWEET]

That will go over like lead balloon.

 

[Irish#1]

House votes to hand our money over to Israel 420-9. Amazing how cohesive our system is when Israel's interests are in question.

Let them be the first line of defense against those nut jobs.

 

[Irish#1]

AOC decides not to vote "No" on the bill as she initially said she would. The bold part is probably why.

"Squad" member Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., was accused on Thursday of shedding "crocodile tears" after she reportedly broke down crying on the House floor following a vote to give another $1 billion to Israel in order to restore its Iron Dome missile interception system.

Ocasio-Cortez and her progressive caucus had expressed opposition to the bill, forcing Democrats to pull the provision from a bill a day earlier in order to ensure its passage along party lines. On Thursday, the New York lawmaker voted against the funding, but raised eyebrows when she only later amended her vote to "Present" at the last minute. After the bill was passed by a 420-9 majority, Ocasio-Cortez reportedly became emotional on the floor and was seen being comforted by her colleagues.

9 HOUSE MEMBERS VOTE AGAIN ISRAEL IRON DOME FUNDING, AOC SWITCHES VOTE TO ‘PRESENT’

Online critics, however, did not take well to the lawmaker's flair for the dramatics.

"AOC seems distraught. She is in the middle of the house floor wiping away tears, crying into her colleague's shoulders," journalist Jake Sherman wrote on Twitter.

"Theatre and bad theatre at that," Meghan McCain responded.

Online users speculated that the lawmaker wanted "to vote No but was talked out of it for some strategic reason" as she sets her eyes on the Senate.

"If not voting ‘no’ is that upsetting, then vote ‘no.’ Otherwise these are crocodile tears," The Intercepts'" Eoin Higgins reacted.

"She most likely changed her vote because there is a good chance her new district(due to redistricting) will include Riverdale which has a large pro-Israel/Jewish population," another user speculated.

"But are the Jews really going to say 'well, she didn't vote no. She voted 'present' and cried about it which is totally different," New York Post columnist Karol Markowicz questioned.

 

[Bishop2b5]

AOC decides not to vote "No" on the bill as she initially said she would. The bold part is probably why.

"But are the Jews really going to say 'well, she didn't vote no. She voted 'present' and cried about it which is totally different," New York Post columnist Karol Markowicz questioned.

That's always been my thought on such. Nobody sees a "Present" vote as being less opposed or better or whatever. It's just a "No" without the character or spine to say it out loud.

 

[NorthDakota]

That's always been my thought on such. Nobody see a "Present" vote as being less opposed or better or whatever. It's just a "No" without the character or spine to say it out loud.

It is rather hokey and the only onscreen where it has any value is in Washington.

 

[BrownerandFry]

Let them be the first line of defense against those nut jobs.

And who are these nut jobs to whom you refer?
Thank you for a response.

 

[Irish#1]

And who are these nut jobs to whom you refer?
Thank you for a response.

PLO

 

[IrishLax]

Quick drive by -- poitics aside, I'm kinda impressed that Corey Lewandowski bedded both Hope Hicks and Kristi Noem. Dude must have some serious game.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Quick drive by -- poitics aside, I'm kinda impressed that Corey Lewandowski bedded both Hope Hicks and Kristi Noem. Dude must have some serious game.

Noem flatly denies it, but who knows. She's definitely a looker. I've met her once and she's quite lovely in person. Definitely popular up my way and a serious looker.

 

[NorthDakota]

Noem flatly denies it, but who knows. She's definitely a looker. I've met her once and she's quite lovely in person. Definitely popular up my way and a serious looker.

A family member is well in the know on South Dakota politics...he is not a Noem fan.

whether she banged the guy or not...I dont know and dont care. Considering the state of the media these days, I'm inclined to think it didn't happen.

Still waiting on all of the major left of center media to apologize for RussiaGate and the Hunter Biden stuff.

 

[Irish#1]

A family member is well in the know on South Dakota politics...he is not a Noem fan.

whether she banged the guy or not...I dont know and dont care. Considering the state of the media these days, I'm inclined to think it didn't happen.

Still waiting on all of the major left of center media to apologize for RussiaGate and the Hunter Biden stuff.

Gonna be a long wait.

 

[BrownerandFry]

PLO

Well, this is an intriguing question

I side with the American Revolution against King George and the Colonial Imperialism of the Brits..


but that is just me.


And I know a tad about the Viet Cong and the Rf/PFs

And I side with William Wallace again st that MOFO Longshanks and his "Jus Primae noctis"

The PLO was formed in 1964. Why then, what the Raison d'etre?

Is the PLO similar or dissimilar to the American revolutionaries, the Viet Cong and William Wallace and his merry band of Scots?

Trust me, I will respond further on this once I have your answers.

Oh, further, why did Anwar Sadat have a black mark on his forehead and how did he die?

 

[Irish#1]

Well, this is an intriguing question

I side with the American Revolution against King George and the Colonial Imperialism of the Brits..


but that is just me.


And I know a tad about the Viet Cong and the Rf/PFs

And I side with William Wallace again st that MOFO Longshanks and his "Jus Primae noctis"

The PLO was formed in 1964. Why then, what the Raison d'etre?

Is the PLO similar or dissimilar to the American revolutionaries, the Viet Cong and William Wallace and his merry band of Scots?

Trust me, I will respond further on this once I have your answers.

Oh, further, why did Anwar Sadat have a black mark on his forehead and how did he die?

Pretty sure the soldiers and leaders of the Revolutionary War didn't go around killing citizens where as the PLO has been known to do that without concern when attacking.

 

[Sea Turtle]

Pretty sure the soldiers and leaders of the Revolutionary War didn't go around killing citizens where as the PLO has been known to do that without concern when attacking.

I'm also pretty sure they didn't keep their own citizens locked in refugee camps

 

[BrownerandFry]

Pretty sure the soldiers and leaders of the Revolutionary War didn't go around killing citizens where as the PLO has been known to do that without concern when attacking.

gulp, gulp, gulp sayeth the koolaid drinker.

You been took, you been had, ya been bamboozled

 

[BrownerandFry]

Pretty sure the soldiers and leaders of the Revolutionary War didn't go around killing citizens where as the PLO has been known to do that without concern when attacking.

One followup question:

How many nations have nuclear weapons?

How many nations are regulated by an international body?

 

[drayer54]

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/cbtuck62/status/1445136921328377857?s=20[/TWEET]

Love this. Texas LT Gov candidate and media anti-Trump champion deletes myriad of tweets showing his terrible thoughts and then blames FOX for him being questioned about it. When libs get caught, just blame Fox!

 

[NorthDakota]

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/cbtuck62/status/1445136921328377857?s=20[/TWEET]

Love this. Texas LT Gov candidate and media anti-Trump champion deletes myriad of tweets showing his terrible thoughts and then blames FOX for him being questioned about it. When libs get caught, just blame Fox!

He's an idiot

 

[Irish#1]

Surprised he didn't blame Trump.

 

[drayer54]

2022 cannot come soon enough. [TWEET]https://twitter.com/kkondik/status/1445477837075480585?s=20[/TWEET]

 

[ulukinatme]

Trending this morning, people wishing Hillary a happy birthday.

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/791263939015376902[/TWEET]

5 years today, tripping at the goal line.

 

[irishff1014]

Trending this morning, people wishing Hillary a happy birthday.

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/791263939015376902[/TWEET]

5 years today, tripping at the goal line.

They can under cover every email from Gruden but Hillary's emails are still lost at sea. They find what they want too.

 

[Irish#1]

Dems are starting to turn on their own.

Is Arizona's Kyrsten Sinema bad for bisexual Americans?

It wasn’t that long ago that embattled Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema was hailed as a triumph of bisexual representation. After she was sworn in in January 2019, Out celebrated the first openly bisexual senator as a “rebuke to Trumpism,” positioning the “sassy lawmaker” in opposition to homophobic then-Vice President Mike Pence.

It wasn’t that long ago that embattled Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema was hailed as a triumph of bisexual representation.

But just a few years into her tenure, public opinion has soured on Sinema. Instead of a brash, bisexual icon willing and able to stand up to the far right, she’s now seen as an unreliable centrist, a self-absorbed Democratic turncoat more fixated on getting attention and lining her own pockets than uplifting her community. No longer a bi icon, she’s now held up as a cautionary tale about the limits of representation.

As a bisexual woman — and one who, like Sinema, is white and cisgender — I now cringe every time the senator makes the headlines. Whether it’s fashion columnists dissecting her showy personal style, cartoonists mocking her as a “manic pixie dream senator” or the seemingly endless analyses of her inscrutability, Sinema seems to embody many of the nasty assumptions about bi women I’ve worked my whole life to avoid.
Five Sinema advisers resign, calling her 'one of the principal obstacles to progress'

OCT. 21, 202103:36

Bi women are constantly told we’re untrustworthy, that our attraction to multiple genders means we’re more likely to cheat. We’re called greedy for finding more than one gender attractive, “confusing” for liking more than one gender and self-absorbed because apparently our brains are unable to think about much beyond our own sexual gratification. Within the LGBTQ community, bisexuals can be viewed as fair-weather members at best — likely to bail the second we stop having fun. Media outlets might not be talking about Sinema’s sex life, but her political reputation as greedy, unreliable and attention-seeking echoes many of the stereotypes my community has been dealing with for years.

“Is she bad for the bisexuals?” I find myself wondering on a nearly daily basis. It feels uncharitable to put so much responsibility on one woman’s shoulders. Yet given that she’s arguably the most prominent bisexual woman in the nation, it feels fair to wish she’d put a little more effort into being a bit less of a stereotype.

At the same time, I find myself wondering why Sinema’s sexuality matters so much to me in the first place. What does “bisexual representation” actually mean in this instance?

Bisexuals have a unique perspective that should ideally be helpful when crafting legislation.

One obvious answer is that bisexuals have a unique perspective that should ideally be helpful when crafting legislation. There’s no question that bisexuals face our own particular challenges when it comes to topics like sexual health, mental health and abuse and assault.

According to Gallup poll results published in February, about 3 percent of Americans identify as bisexual — and yet in over 200 years, there have only been two openly bisexual members of Congress: Sinema and Katie Hill, who stepped down less than a year into her first term after her ex-husband allegedly leaked private photos revealing that the couple had been sexually involved with a female campaign staffer. With Hill out of office, Sinema is the only bisexual member of Congress out of the 535 possible voting members. (For comparison, there are currently seven gay men and three lesbians in Congress.)

In theory, electing more bisexuals will lead to better legislation that more thoughtfully addresses bisexual-specific concerns, making sure bisexuals don’t fall through the cracks of public health, anti-violence and anti-poverty initiatives. But in practice, it’s clear that politicians from marginalized backgrounds don’t always act in the best interests of their community. Sinema herself is proof of that. Despite her own history with poverty, she’s worked to gut the social safety net provisions included in the Build Back Better Act.This brings me back to my frustration with Sinema. Watching news outlets eat her alive, it’s hard not to feel like America’s getting a rather poor first impression of what bisexuals bring to the table as legislators. Will voters shy away from other bisexual candidates out of a fear that we’ll turn out to be just as fickle as Sinema? Probably not, but it wouldn’t surprise me if some potential legislators found themselves less eager to publicly identify as bisexual in the wake of Sinema’s first Senate term.


On the other hand, perhaps the opposite will be true. Maybe Sinema will inspire a new wave of openly bisexual politicians, simply out of a desperation to prove that Kyrsten Sinema is not an accurate representation of all bisexuals. If that were to happen, it’d offer an ironic twist on Sinema’s story. She could very well be the best thing to ever happen to bisexuals in politics — if only because she inspires so many of us to stand up and reject the example she’s set for the country.

 

[drayer54]

Dems are starting to turn on their own.

Is Arizona's Kyrsten Sinema bad for bisexual Americans?

It wasn’t that long ago that embattled Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema was hailed as a triumph of bisexual representation. After she was sworn in in January 2019, Out celebrated the first openly bisexual senator as a “rebuke to Trumpism,” positioning the “sassy lawmaker” in opposition to homophobic then-Vice President Mike Pence.

It wasn’t that long ago that embattled Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema was hailed as a triumph of bisexual representation.

But just a few years into her tenure, public opinion has soured on Sinema. Instead of a brash, bisexual icon willing and able to stand up to the far right, she’s now seen as an unreliable centrist, a self-absorbed Democratic turncoat more fixated on getting attention and lining her own pockets than uplifting her community. No longer a bi icon, she’s now held up as a cautionary tale about the limits of representation.

As a bisexual woman — and one who, like Sinema, is white and cisgender — I now cringe every time the senator makes the headlines. Whether it’s fashion columnists dissecting her showy personal style, cartoonists mocking her as a “manic pixie dream senator” or the seemingly endless analyses of her inscrutability, Sinema seems to embody many of the nasty assumptions about bi women I’ve worked my whole life to avoid.
Five Sinema advisers resign, calling her 'one of the principal obstacles to progress'

OCT. 21, 202103:36

Bi women are constantly told we’re untrustworthy, that our attraction to multiple genders means we’re more likely to cheat. We’re called greedy for finding more than one gender attractive, “confusing” for liking more than one gender and self-absorbed because apparently our brains are unable to think about much beyond our own sexual gratification. Within the LGBTQ community, bisexuals can be viewed as fair-weather members at best — likely to bail the second we stop having fun. Media outlets might not be talking about Sinema’s sex life, but her political reputation as greedy, unreliable and attention-seeking echoes many of the stereotypes my community has been dealing with for years.

“Is she bad for the bisexuals?” I find myself wondering on a nearly daily basis. It feels uncharitable to put so much responsibility on one woman’s shoulders. Yet given that she’s arguably the most prominent bisexual woman in the nation, it feels fair to wish she’d put a little more effort into being a bit less of a stereotype.

At the same time, I find myself wondering why Sinema’s sexuality matters so much to me in the first place. What does “bisexual representation” actually mean in this instance?

Bisexuals have a unique perspective that should ideally be helpful when crafting legislation.

One obvious answer is that bisexuals have a unique perspective that should ideally be helpful when crafting legislation. There’s no question that bisexuals face our own particular challenges when it comes to topics like sexual health, mental health and abuse and assault.

According to Gallup poll results published in February, about 3 percent of Americans identify as bisexual — and yet in over 200 years, there have only been two openly bisexual members of Congress: Sinema and Katie Hill, who stepped down less than a year into her first term after her ex-husband allegedly leaked private photos revealing that the couple had been sexually involved with a female campaign staffer. With Hill out of office, Sinema is the only bisexual member of Congress out of the 535 possible voting members. (For comparison, there are currently seven gay men and three lesbians in Congress.)

In theory, electing more bisexuals will lead to better legislation that more thoughtfully addresses bisexual-specific concerns, making sure bisexuals don’t fall through the cracks of public health, anti-violence and anti-poverty initiatives. But in practice, it’s clear that politicians from marginalized backgrounds don’t always act in the best interests of their community. Sinema herself is proof of that. Despite her own history with poverty, she’s worked to gut the social safety net provisions included in the Build Back Better Act.This brings me back to my frustration with Sinema. Watching news outlets eat her alive, it’s hard not to feel like America’s getting a rather poor first impression of what bisexuals bring to the table as legislators. Will voters shy away from other bisexual candidates out of a fear that we’ll turn out to be just as fickle as Sinema? Probably not, but it wouldn’t surprise me if some potential legislators found themselves less eager to publicly identify as bisexual in the wake of Sinema’s first Senate term.


On the other hand, perhaps the opposite will be true. Maybe Sinema will inspire a new wave of openly bisexual politicians, simply out of a desperation to prove that Kyrsten Sinema is not an accurate representation of all bisexuals. If that were to happen, it’d offer an ironic twist on Sinema’s story. She could very well be the best thing to ever happen to bisexuals in politics — if only because she inspires so many of us to stand up and reject the example she’s set for the country.

Republicans who don’t support the party priority are Mavericks and putting country over party.

Democrats who fail to push the agenda are bad and misguided.

Only thing worse in the eyes than a conservative is a moderate Democrat. Only 2 remain.