Long Cons: G.O.P.'s Trademark

[g5000]

He did not. He had a Republican majority in the Senate-

The composition of the 109th Congress (2005 - 2007) was as follows: Senate: 44 D, 55 R House: 202 D, 231 R The composition of the 110th Congress (2007 - ) is as follows: Senate: 49 D, 49 R House: 233 D, 198 R Reference:

When we have 61 seats, then get back to me.

Unless there is a fool proof majority, anyone thinking such things will come to pass, you are crazy to think he could.

Bullshit. Total bullshit.

Ryan and Trump can't claim to have a replacement for Obamacare, and not really have one, and then blame their hoax on not having a foolproof majority.

The GOP massively hoaxed you, man. Wake the fuck up.

Did Reagan have a 61 seat majority?

Nope. He had a Democratic Congress and still managed to get what he wanted.

Your excuse is bogus. Totally bogus. It's the excuse of a huckster which you are parroting.

You know how you get shit done? BY HAVING A SUPERIOR PLAN.


Trump and the Republicans have NOTHING. It's all they have had for the past two decades.

Reagan was elected in 2000.

The Reagan tax cuts were passed in 1981.

With a Democratic Congress.

After the 2004 election, he STILL didn't have a 61 seat majority. Not even close.

My point stands.

 

[depotoo]

Reagan was elected in 2000?

He did not. He had a Republican majority in the Senate-

The composition of the 109th Congress (2005 - 2007) was as follows: Senate: 44 D, 55 R House: 202 D, 231 R The composition of the 110th Congress (2007 - ) is as follows: Senate: 49 D, 49 R House: 233 D, 198 R Reference:

When we have 61 seats, then get back to me.

Unless there is a fool proof majority, anyone thinking such things will come to pass, you are crazy to think he could.

Bullshit. Total bullshit.

Ryan and Trump can't claim to have a replacement for Obamacare, and not really have one, and then blame their hoax on not having a foolproof majority.

The GOP massively hoaxed you, man. Wake the fuck up.

Did Reagan have a 61 seat majority?

Nope. He had a Democratic Congress and still managed to get what he wanted.

Your excuse is bogus. Totally bogus. It's the excuse of a huckster which you are parroting.

You know how you get shit done? BY HAVING A SUPERIOR PLAN.


Trump and the Republicans have NOTHING. It's all they have had for the past two decades.

Reagan was elected in 2000.

The Reagan tax cuts were passed in 1981.

With a Democratic Congress.

After the 2004 election, he STILL didn't have a 61 seat majority. Not even close.

My point stands.

 

[Correll]

He did not. He had a Republican majority in the Senate-

The composition of the 109th Congress (2005 - 2007) was as follows: Senate: 44 D, 55 R House: 202 D, 231 R The composition of the 110th Congress (2007 - ) is as follows: Senate: 49 D, 49 R House: 233 D, 198 R Reference:

When we have 61 seats, then get back to me.

Unless there is a fool proof majority, anyone thinking such things will come to pass, you are crazy to think he could.

Bullshit. Total bullshit.

Ryan and Trump can't claim to have a replacement for Obamacare, and not really have one, and then blame their hoax on not having a foolproof majority.

The GOP massively hoaxed you, man. Wake the fuck up.

Did Reagan have a 61 seat majority?

Nope. He had a Democratic Congress and still managed to get what he wanted.

Your excuse is bogus. Totally bogus. It's the excuse of a huckster which you are parroting.

You know how you get shit done? BY HAVING A SUPERIOR PLAN.


Trump and the Republicans have NOTHING. It's all they have had for the past two decades.

Reagan was elected in 2000.
....

If only that were true.


President Reagan, from 19 fucking 80, to 20 fucking 04.


That would have been GLORIOUS.



24 FUCKING YEARS OF REAGAN!!!!

 

[miketx]

We need a whole forum devoted to liberal troll asshats.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Is your concern here, war, and the deaths of tens of thousands, min, or are you just here because it gives you a chance to be partisan?

For more on why the topic, read the full report in the provided link or listen to the show/podcast. If being obviously independent qualifies as "partisan" in your book, then so be it. Kudos for expressing your concerns directly to the White House.

 

[Correll]

Is your concern here, war, and the deaths of tens of thousands, min, or are you just here because it gives you a chance to be partisan?

For more on why the topic, read the full report in the provided link or listen to the show/podcast. If being obviously independent qualifies as "partisan" in your book, then so be it. Kudos for expressing your concerns directly to the White House.

I wish I had taken the time to email my senators, to encourage non involvement.


You know a lot of dems are pushing for this conflict. Have you contacted any of your reps to demand non intervention?

 

[Grumblenuts]

I often do express my concerns to my supposed reps from both the crappy major parties.

 

[g5000]

Reagan was elected in 2000?

He did not. He had a Republican majority in the Senate-

The composition of the 109th Congress (2005 - 2007) was as follows: Senate: 44 D, 55 R House: 202 D, 231 R The composition of the 110th Congress (2007 - ) is as follows: Senate: 49 D, 49 R House: 233 D, 198 R Reference:

When we have 61 seats, then get back to me.

Bullshit. Total bullshit.

Ryan and Trump can't claim to have a replacement for Obamacare, and not really have one, and then blame their hoax on not having a foolproof majority.

The GOP massively hoaxed you, man. Wake the fuck up.

Did Reagan have a 61 seat majority?

Nope. He had a Democratic Congress and still managed to get what he wanted.

Your excuse is bogus. Totally bogus. It's the excuse of a huckster which you are parroting.

You know how you get shit done? BY HAVING A SUPERIOR PLAN.


Trump and the Republicans have NOTHING. It's all they have had for the past two decades.

Reagan was elected in 2000.

The Reagan tax cuts were passed in 1981.

With a Democratic Congress.

After the 2004 election, he STILL didn't have a 61 seat majority. Not even close.

My point stands.

Sorry. 1980.

His tax cuts passed in 1981. With a Democratic Congress.

My point stands.

 

[g5000]

He did not. He had a Republican majority in the Senate-

The composition of the 109th Congress (2005 - 2007) was as follows: Senate: 44 D, 55 R House: 202 D, 231 R The composition of the 110th Congress (2007 - ) is as follows: Senate: 49 D, 49 R House: 233 D, 198 R Reference:

When we have 61 seats, then get back to me.

Bullshit. Total bullshit.

Ryan and Trump can't claim to have a replacement for Obamacare, and not really have one, and then blame their hoax on not having a foolproof majority.

The GOP massively hoaxed you, man. Wake the fuck up.

Did Reagan have a 61 seat majority?

Nope. He had a Democratic Congress and still managed to get what he wanted.

Your excuse is bogus. Totally bogus. It's the excuse of a huckster which you are parroting.

You know how you get shit done? BY HAVING A SUPERIOR PLAN.


Trump and the Republicans have NOTHING. It's all they have had for the past two decades.

Reagan was elected in 2000.
....

If only that were true.


President Reagan, from 19 fucking 80, to 20 fucking 04.


That would have been GLORIOUS.



24 FUCKING YEARS OF REAGAN!!!!

Even though he is dead, Reagan would be ten times better as President than Trump.

 

[Correll]

He did not. He had a Republican majority in the Senate-

The composition of the 109th Congress (2005 - 2007) was as follows: Senate: 44 D, 55 R House: 202 D, 231 R The composition of the 110th Congress (2007 - ) is as follows: Senate: 49 D, 49 R House: 233 D, 198 R Reference:

When we have 61 seats, then get back to me.

Did Reagan have a 61 seat majority?

Nope. He had a Democratic Congress and still managed to get what he wanted.

Your excuse is bogus. Totally bogus. It's the excuse of a huckster which you are parroting.

You know how you get shit done? BY HAVING A SUPERIOR PLAN.


Trump and the Republicans have NOTHING. It's all they have had for the past two decades.

Reagan was elected in 2000.
....

If only that were true.


President Reagan, from 19 fucking 80, to 20 fucking 04.


That would have been GLORIOUS.



24 FUCKING YEARS OF REAGAN!!!!

Even though he is dead, Reagan would be ten times better as President than Trump.

Depends on how he adjusted his policies for the changes in the world.


Reagan's Free Trade Policies have NOT had the results that were expected.


It would be interesting to see how he reacted to that information.

 

[whitehall]

Defend global warming? You almost gotta gasp at the gall of the poster to use Bernie Sanders as an icon when it is less than a year since a Bernie Sanders democrat declared war on conservative republicans and opened fire on a republican baseball team practicing for a charity game.

 

[Grumblenuts]

What about face? Have we gone to war with Syria yet?

I'd say it sounds like you've just been woken from a deep, addled sleep but I hate discovering I've been presumptuous. In any case, yes, Trump was highly critical of B. Obama's and H. Clinton's proxy warmongering in Syria before he supported it. You really didn't know? And yes, in our* crazed lust for never ending military adventure we have been trying to provoke Russia via Syria for many a year now. Add N. Korea, Iran, Yemen... Trump appears quite eager for more involvement in just about any war these days to distract everyone from Mueller's activities. However, I think he's just begun adapting to his core belief structure. Fascist neo-liberalism. Appears yours likely as well. Thus the * on "our". Sure as hell didn't mean "my".

 

[Grumblenuts]

Defend global warming?

Actually we're opposed to it, but thanks for your feeble attempt to play here.

 

[Grumblenuts]

It would be interesting to see how he reacted to that information.

Given his advanced level of brain decay after only 8 horrible years, I doubt anyone could describe his reactions as simply "interesting" after 24.

 

[theHawk]

What about face? Have we gone to war with Syria yet?

I'd say it sounds like you've just been woken from a deep, addled sleep but I hate discovering I've been presumptuous. In any case, yes, Trump was highly critical of B. Obama's and H. Clinton's proxy warmongering in Syria before he supported it. You really didn't know? And yes, in our* crazed lust for never ending military adventure we have been trying to provoke Russia via Syria for many a year now. Add N. Korea, Iran, Yemen... Trump appears quite eager for more involvement in just about any war these days to distract everyone from Mueller's activities. However, I think he's just begun adapting to his core belief structure. Fascist neo-liberalism. Appears yours likely as well. Thus the * on "our". Sure as hell didn't mean "my".

Wrong. President Trump does not support proxy warmongering with Russia. He has been clear about warning Assad about chemical weapons. So the President has decided to make precision strikes against that capability. He has not called for war against Russia or even Iran.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Not that the Dems have anything to crow about, but the Repugs sure do take the cake here:

We unpack alotta long cons on today's BradCast, some of them decades in the making. Among them: Trump's new position on U.S. war in places like Syria, versus his position before he became President; GOP House Speaker Paul Ryan's position on deficit spending before he and Congressional Republicans exploded the deficit and he announced on Wednesday he's retiring from the U.S. House; And, Royal Dutch Shell's position on the dangers of global warming before a new, recently revealed treasure trove of internal company documents going back to the 50's revealed their realposition on the matter.

Any G.O.P. apologists care to try and defend any of this?

can you give a name of someone that kept all his campaign promises?

you can go all the way back to Washington.

pols lie, no one is shocked anymore.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Yes, though clearly about far more than simply keeping promises, pols lie. Thanks for noticing. Yawn..., sorry, pardon moi. Meanwhile, I've noticed this pattern of apology via two-wrongs-making-a-right fallacious argument, though seemingly somewhat inherent to the human condition, appears to mostly afflict those self-identifying toward the political right. Thus the compulsion to respond as a "G.O.P. apologist" in the first place.

 

[Aldo Raine]

Not that the Dems have anything to crow about, but the Repugs sure do take the cake here:

We unpack alotta long cons on today's BradCast, some of them decades in the making. Among them: Trump's new position on U.S. war in places like Syria, versus his position before he became President; GOP House Speaker Paul Ryan's position on deficit spending before he and Congressional Republicans exploded the deficit and he announced on Wednesday he's retiring from the U.S. House; And, Royal Dutch Shell's position on the dangers of global warming before a new, recently revealed treasure trove of internal company documents going back to the 50's revealed their realposition on the matter.

Any G.O.P. apologists care to try and defend any of this?

And of course there is the longest con of all, repealing and replacing ObamaCare.

Day 1: The Signing of ObamaCare

O no he di'int!

Trow da bahstahds out!

We're going to put on some theater for the rubes and repeal ObamaCare, knowing it will be stopped in the Senate and by Obama.

Time travel forward five years...



ObamaCare is repealed for the 60th time!

The rubes never get tired of this shit!

Time travel forward one year...

Trump and the GOP win! Now we can REALLY repeal ObamaCare!!!

I can't REALLY repeal the ACA! That was just a ruse to win the election.

I can't REALLY repeal the ACA. That was just a ruse to win the election!

You've had SEVEN YEARS to come up with a replacement! And you don't have one!?!?

Okay. Plan B. What were all those fixes to the ACA the Democrats wanted that we obstructed?

And there you have it in about 20 seconds, the attention span of the tard herd!

 

[Grumblenuts]

President Trump does not support proxy warmongering with Russia. He has been clear about warning Assad about chemical weapons. So the President has decided to make precision strikes against that capability. He has not called for war against Russia or even Iran.

Dream on. Sorry, actions must be noticed in order to expose the B.S. behind mere words.

From Vox just yesterday:

President Donald Trump decided to strike Syria on Friday night, and he might incur some unintended consequences — like increasing the risk of getting into a shooting war with Russia.

On Tuesday night, Russia’s ambassador to Lebanon said the Russian military could shoot down any missiles launched at Syria, and even retaliate against the planes or ships that fire the weapons. (As of now, there is no indication that any Americans were hurt in the strike.) But Trump responded to the threat the following morning, egging Russia on with his characteristic bravado.

 

[Aldo Raine]

He did not. He had a Republican majority in the Senate-

The composition of the 109th Congress (2005 - 2007) was as follows: Senate: 44 D, 55 R House: 202 D, 231 R The composition of the 110th Congress (2007 - ) is as follows: Senate: 49 D, 49 R House: 233 D, 198 R Reference:

When we have 61 seats, then get back to me.

Bullshit. Total bullshit.

Ryan and Trump can't claim to have a replacement for Obamacare, and not really have one, and then blame their hoax on not having a foolproof majority.

The GOP massively hoaxed you, man. Wake the fuck up.

Did Reagan have a 61 seat majority?

Nope. He had a Democratic Congress and still managed to get what he wanted.

Your excuse is bogus. Totally bogus. It's the excuse of a huckster which you are parroting.

You know how you get shit done? BY HAVING A SUPERIOR PLAN.


Trump and the Republicans have NOTHING. It's all they have had for the past two decades.

Reagan was elected in 2000.
....

If only that were true.


President Reagan, from 19 fucking 80, to 20 fucking 04.


That would have been GLORIOUS.



24 FUCKING YEARS OF REAGAN!!!!

Gloriously broke, you do know Raygun is the only president to ever triple the debt don't you? Also his tax plan was the greatest transfer of wealth from the working class to the Uber wealthy in the history of the world! Yup we need more of that!