The Republican Utopia

[knapplc]

4 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

Funny how no one ever answered that question, isn't it? But now their actions are speaking for them.

 

I'm just waiting for the attack on Griswold v. Connecticut, and Obergefell, and by extension Lawrence vs. Texas. And Brown v. Board of Education, because why not?

 

The right-wing herald sounds his trumpet...

 

 

 

[ZRod]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

President murdered

Presidential candidate murdered

Civil Rights Leader murdered

 

Yeah...the 60s were great.

 

[ZRod]

1 hour ago, nic said:

In some ways I feel we are back in the 70s already.   I always took MAGA as more of a statement on rejecting globalist policies and doing what he thought was better for the US. Like the renegotiated trade deals (did those actually ever take affect?) Maybe more isolation, not sure I kwon what they are now. I guess we will never know. He gone.

That's idiotic though. The entire history of civilization is the advancement of technology that creates globalization and closes the distance between continents. Falling back on isolationism is delaying the inevitable. We need to embrace globalization and find ways to work together to over come our issues, like the supply chain ones we gave now, and difference in pay and labor.

[knapplc]

21 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

The right-wing herald sounds his trumpet...

 

 

 

 

 

And another....

 

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

9 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

 

And another....

 

 

 

Does this count?

 

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

It's funny. For a few decades now "globalist" has been the go-to rightwing insult for a Deep State Conspiracy presumed to favor Democrats. 

 

It demonstrates virtually no working knowledge of how the world actually operates. 

 

The not-so-secret powers pulling the levers want the openest possible borders when it makes them money, and government protectionism when it makes them money. They will look the other way if ethics and corruption make things awkward, and screw the American people if it there's a bonus in it for management. The same people will call for America First and plead victimhood as needed. Nobody has seriously advocated for a One World Government. It's not political in nature -- it's just doing business. 

 

Remember, there's a Nationalist movement going on in countries around the globe. There's a long history of Nationalist movements we could learn from, but we won't. Some folks have trouble accepting that Nationalism can be bad for the nation. 

 

[BigRedBuster]

6 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

Remember, there's a Nationalist movement going on in countries around the globe. There's a long history of Nationalist movements we could learn from, but we won't. Some folks have trouble accepting that Nationalism can be bad for the nation. 

 

The problem is that too many people have bought into the idea that Nationalism is patriotism.  Those two things are not the same.

 

It's absolutely idiotic to think we are going to just pull back from the world and live by ourselves.  We NEED the rest of the world just like they need us.  And, that's not because of some international cabal of evil people.  It's just reality.

[Guy Chamberlin]

5 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

Funny how no one ever answered that question, isn't it?

 

Like never. Not once. It's absolutely ingrained in the movement to Make America Great Again. You already have a template for when we were Great, so it should be a matter of revisiting those policies and priorities.

 

But to my knowledge, no MAGA voter or politician will name that time or those policies. 

 

Because it's actually a dog whistle. 

[nic]

2 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

But, others are trying to take his place using the same MAGA motivation.  So, it's still pertinent to the conversation.

True. I think candidate won in Ohio. My reaction was that Republicans better be careful what they ask for. 

[BigRedBuster]

@nic Under the title of "Republicans Better Be Careful What They Wish For".

 

 

 

Since they are such experts in the Constitution, they should know how this works.

[nic]

1 hour ago, ZRod said:

That's idiotic though. The entire history of civilization is the advancement of technology that creates globalization and closes the distance between continents. Falling back on isolationism is delaying the inevitable. We need to embrace globalization and find ways to work together to over come our issues, like the supply chain ones we gave now, and difference in pay and labor.

Tough to do in some cases. See Russia for example. While I do not disagree with you, I think it’s still a Utopian goal. I have to admit that being energy independent would sound very good to me. Or having the most powerful military in the world bar none. I guess that makes me feel more secure when some rogue nation decides to spout off. There is lots of distrust in the world. Plus sometimes I feel like the globalists goal to achieve globalism is to weaken the US. That doesn’t make me feel good. I still want the US to take all the gold medals at the Olympics. I wanna win.  

[nic]

14 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

@nic Under the title of "Republicans Better Be Careful What They Wish For".

 

 

 

Since they are such experts in the Constitution, they should know how this works.

I saw that ruling….it’s gonna be all or none. Maybe go for none.

[Enhance]

On 5/3/2022 at 2:10 PM, ActualCornHusker said:

The bolded is always an interesting point that's made a lot due to conservatives not wanting the government to take care of the child, but the truth of the matter is that conservatives are a fair amount more charitable than liberals

 

LINK

 

After reviewing this link a bit more in-depth, I think it paints a positive picture of conservative financial generosity, but it doesn't draw any strong correlation to the specific issue of supporting the parents and families facing these tough decision surrounding unplanned or unwanted pregnancy. And that's what my bone to pick is with Republicans. If they want to be uncompromisingly pro-life then, in my opinion, they should be the strongest advocates for supporting those people. Historically, Republicans have fought back against a lot of initiatives aimed to do just that.

 

And it would appear that Republicans are at least willing to acknowledge the need to better provide for these people, though actions speak louder than words. If things go the way they appear to be going, I would hope that Republicans would be the loudest voices in the room to make sure these people are provided for. But, I have considerable doubts.

 

Quote

A court decision overturning Roe would lead about half the states to make abortion illegal immediately or soon after the Supreme Court acted. The ruling is the culmination of a decades-long Republican project but could also put a spotlight on the party’s resistance to efforts to aid parents.

“I think that needs to be an important part of the discussion,” Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said in an interview. “It’s not just a matter of saying, ‘We are pro-life.’ It’s a matter, then, of promoting and allowing these people who are making very difficult decisions with their lives to make sure we can help individuals facing these tough decisions.”

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said he has had “preliminary” conversations with other Senate Republicans about coming forward with child programs after the Supreme Court ruling: “I do think if the court does ultimately overturn Roe, it will be a big sea change politically, and I think there will be all kinds of new opportunities to think about what that means for us from a policy perspective, and I hope we’ll come forward with new and interesting policy perspectives.”

“We’re of course waiting for the ruling to be finalized, but yes,” Sen. Todd C. Young (R-Ind.) said. “We as a party and as a country need to be supportive of women who have unplanned pregnancies — through adoptive services, through health-care services and other means.”

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

5 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

His “strawman” isn’t a wrong statement.   There is now a male pregnant emoji developed by the most valuable company in the US.  Not to mention all the news articles/tweets/tik tocs/Instagram posts telling us so.  

 

So what sick agenda did they have for the smiling turd emoji? 

[Dr. Strangelove]

 

When confronted with idiotic stances, simply mention Jesus. 

 

This is the reason the GOP doesn't attempt to run on policy, because it's so disastrous it's difficult to watch.