Reply With Quote
That's cool for her, as it was cool for Palin... but if you're the GOP, I'm not sure that's a really enticing prospect. These are the kind of people the party should really run as far away as possible from, tbh.
No one's laughing at her. We're laughing at the GOP for investing so much in a heinous cunt who never gave two s about the GOP and was only in it for herself, leaving a path of destruction with re ed comments that made people realize the tea party is a loony group of bible thumpers.
That's cool for her, as it was cool for Palin... but if you're the GOP, I'm not sure that's a really enticing prospect. These are the kind of people the party should really run as far away as possible from, tbh.
I'm also laughing at right wingers like DarrinS and WC who agree with virtually everything she says but sanctimoniously call her crazy knowing it makes them seem credible because the rest of the country thinks she's crazy.
Extremists are popular and successful in America. She will find work somewhere and probably be successful. Some group will want to hear the crazy that comes out of her mouth. The GOP is ed and it will probably take them a decade or two to repair the damage that Bush and other neo-cons did to the party. The outlook for Democrats isn't that great either. Both political parties are pathetic and jokes in America but it's how we roll in America. 3rd parties have no chance because Democrats and Republicans say so. When Republicans and Democrats make the rules and basically shut 3rd parties out completely, then you're basically stuck with tweedledee and tweedledum.
Sure, Jacob.. they're both crap. If the Dems would have a Bachman-like presidential candidate, I would also argue he/she needs to GTFO.
Maddow shot MB in back, like a retreating Iraq Army.
The Repug's Hoot-Smawley act fixed the Depression until FDR screwed it up?
MB, if elected President, said she would close the US Embassy in Tehran!
Depends where she goes from here. Lobbyist = good for GOP because she's out of the public eye. Fox News contributor = bad for GOP because her nutjob-ness is still on display to all.
good news, because in a very red district, she almost lost to a newcomer Dem. So now a less insane, ingnorant candidate can take over.
Yeah I agree with boutons on this. The less morons like her and Louie Gohmert they have in congress, the less re ed the GOP looks.
Can't.... unread...
Repug leadership knows this, and are trying to get rid of the extreme assholes like Akin, King/IA, etc, etc who they know put off the independents in the Prez race.
Less extreme morons and assholes in government is a good thing.
Exactly what I was thinking
I know. That made parts of me completely disappear!
I'll miss things like her comparison of taxation to the holocaust.
I like when she implied swine flu outbreaks were related to a democrat being in office.
Cracks me up when Republicans hate on FDR. LOL Republicans' whole campaign in 1940 was about appeasing Hitler and how FDR was going to have us going into Europe to fight a war Europeans should be fighting. How FDR was wrong to be sending weapons and food to England and risking our ships against the Germans' U-boats.Maddow shot MB in back, like a retreating Iraq Army.
The Repug's Hoot-Smawley act fixed the Depression until FDR screwed it up?
MB, if elected President, said she would close the US Embassy in Tehran!
It's kind of an embarrassment the nation was so isolationist that FDR couldn't get into the war until Pearl Harbor despite the Luftwaffe's constant terrorist bombing over England for almost two years and occupation of France. I mean how did we let one of our greatest historic allies go down without doing ?
Last edited by baseline bum; 05-30-2013 at 03:52 PM.
Didn't FDR hold Japanese Americans hostage in camps?
Yes, and that was shady as since a lot of families lost their homes and businesses in addition to their freedom. Tells you what a jerkoff the Bill of Rights really is.
Not to mention the Supreme Court of the United States was totally fine with it at the time.
Has Korematsu v US decision been used as precedent for any other unseemly discrimination since?
Last edited by Th'Pusher; 05-30-2013 at 11:33 PM.
While not specifically reversed, I think Korematsu is regarded as one of the more shameful low points of the Supreme Court, and will never be cited in support of compulsory exclusion. However, the basic idea (that the needs of a country at war outweigh the rights of an individual or group) is still embraced by the Court, e.g., the material support statute.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
