Totalitarian fascist .....Schumer

Discussion in 'Politics' started by sculptor, Mar 5, 2020.

  1. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    Totalitarian fascist prick Chuck Schumer threatened the supreme court today.
    Well, now he shows his true colors.
    Is this what we should expect from his far too arrogant party?
    Would they destroy the country for their warped egos?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Trump and McConnell actually did, and continue to do, what Schumer merely threatens - with the full support of the overtly fascist and flamboyantly arrogant Republican Party.

    =>I don't recall that kind of unhinged rhetoric from you, in that direction.

    Is your objection the ineffectiveness of Schumer's initiatives, their lack of solid backing within his Party, and their confinement to threats and big talk?
    Is only lame, ineffectual, and mere factionally supported "totalitarian fascist" threats of behavior objectionable to you, so that you find the far worse actual behavior of winners acceptable?
    Schumer's true colors have been obvious and well-recognized for many years. All one had to do was keep track of the reality based (aka "left") news and commentary.

    As have McConnell's - which for eight years of Obama presidency were effective and even dominating, wrecking the US government and damaging the country and paving the road for Trump

    while attracting none of the unhinged rhetoric from supposed opponents of "arrogance" and "warped egos" and so forth we see directed at Schumer, who is a comparatively moderate case of the disease that has consumed the Republican Party entirely.

    -> True colors do show - that is a fact. Yours, in this case.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    When Trump does it the GOP considers him a hero. Standing up to biased activist judges legislating from the bench!

    When Schumer does it he is a "totalitarian fascist prick."

    Good old GOP.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    your projecting your boy trump onto schumer
     
  8. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,364
    sculptor's gone true Trumpist aka brainwashed, hatefilled goon.
     
  9. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,089
    Too late. The Republicans have pretty much dismantled every vestige of civil discourse, civic responsibility, democratic process and factual communication.
    Nobody currently available can rebuild it.
    You'll have to dissolve the union and start over - or hold Civil War II.
     
  10. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    Gee darn.............
    I was so hoping that someone would have posted:
    "Don't sugar coat it, tell us how you really feel"
    (sigh)
    oh well (so much for humor)
    I find myself conflicted
    I have a visceral dislike for both Trump and Schumer
    add that to being a Libertarian Socialist
    and. well
    better I stick to sugaring in anticipation of spring
    <--- bottled 3 quarts if maple syrup yesterday (more on the stove)

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    didn't sugar last year and finally ran out of syrup (gee darn)
     
  11. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,089
    dagnabbit
     
  12. foghorn Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,453
    I understand Clueluss is going to try a Neti pot for that. And remember it's water or salty water, not maple syrup.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    Just last week Trump attacked both Ginsberg and Sotomayor, so it seems rather hypocritical to accuse the Dems of being arrogant and wanting to destroy the country for warped egos. Few in any at the White House have more a warped ego than Trump.
     
  14. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    indeed
    While I was up here on the computer/web access portal
    I left a pot on the stove too long and when I got back down to check
    It had a thick layer of sugar on top of the syrup
    so
    before i could bottle it, I had to skim the sugar off with a spoon
    and, well
    what does one do with a spoonful of sugar?
    sigh
    there goes the diet
    but
    it sure tasted good

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,089
    I remember.
    spring 1998
    had a friend who had maple trees - big ones with scarred hides
    but they and he were getting old, slowing down
    that winter, I had a gig teaching night school two villages over,
    so I'd stop by friend's place on my way to school every Wednesday to pick up the bins of sap,
    boiled it down on the wood stove in the workshop/studio/winery
    put maple syrup in everything that year
    lousy wine, pretty good peanut butter, fantastic mustard
     
    sculptor likes this.
  16. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    You look straight at fascism, lump it with sop venality, slather some bothsiderist excuse spackle over it, and end up posting Republican bs originally composed to further the fascist agenda you claim to harbor a visceral dislike for.
    You are perfectly consistent in your posting here. No visible conflict.
    Taking refuge in the human decency you have chosen to help destroy is only going to work for those without memories.
     
  17. candy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,074
    I must point out that everyone has the legal right to request that a judge recuse themself; so DJT is on sound legal footing.
    Schumer's remarks came very close to a threat and that is a crime.
    I don't know whether to cry or have a couple of glasses of VSOP.
     
    sculptor likes this.
  18. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,089
    Most of us are doing both, daily.
     
  19. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Trump's impunity has established that such threats by an elected official are not even impeachable offenses - let alone crimes.
    No one has a legal right to bear false witness, slander, or lie, in petitioning for a legal action or ruling by a judge.
     
  20. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,089
    Except the Supreme Leader and his designated stooges.
     
  21. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,884
    It's not new. He's just not bothering with any pretenses to the other.

    • • •​

    I don't think our neighbor comprehends the degree to which how many of us outside New York would be just fine with Charles Schumer simply going away.

    And it's true, he didn't check himself, this time.

    To the other, is this really the standard? Okay. Schumer needs to resign, and then it's Trump's turn.

    Oh, what's that? This is a one-way expectation? Well, right. It's Sculptor.

    And the question remains: For all we hear people bawling about "snowflakes", why are so many conservatives so dysfunctionally hypersensitive?

    Like this:

    What, really? That's all it takes?

    And the thing is that when a conservative Supreme Court decides Candy has no human rights, well, we can always blame Democrats, right? Or feminists? And those nasty liberals and leftists?

    It's like a joke I have about incels, that we tried to ignore them as much as we could, and then they started shooting up the place to make the point. The line works best in moments when one is confronted by the sudden cowardly turn, when faced with opposition, from a pretense of confident belligerence to whimpering and mewling and complaining that everyone else is too mean and is violating their rights. It's like the incels who complained when law enforcement finally took shooting threats seriously; of course we could find someone to complain about the snowflakes at FBI and Army being mean to incels.

    We've tried taking various conservative assertions seriously, over the years, and it's kind of like the party complaining that government just doesn't work actually going out of their way to prove it.

    Obscure story: I was looking for an old reference, the other day, and found it, to be certain, but along the way I came across a post from one of our once upon a time prominent conservative voices, and it struck me how much his post looked like both sides of a dispute I'm watching in another discussion. He opened with dismissal, that a columnist and an economist he disagreed with were just silly, shifted to anecdotal equivocation, and then made up a fake complaint that seems, itself, rather silly, given what was occurring in history during that period; but, in that right-wing way, since that part of reality disagreed with him, that part of reality didn't exist, an easy enough solution we find, these years later, openly practiced by the right wing. Here's a fun difference, though: Compared to the players I'm thinking of in that other, ongoing thread, our conservative neighbor was, at least, honest about certain aspects: He considers government evil, and hopes for a Galtian revolution. As with all hopes for authoritarian revolution, he somehow imagines he would be included among winners, which is even funnier than it sounds given how he represented himself as an individual.

    Still, though, it's a weird point that is hard to explain in itself: Some understand a bit about how rightward drift occurs, but I still find it striking that, in that other, current discussion, the ostensibly enlightened argument behaves so much like, and yet falls short of this particular occasion, eight and a half years ago. And I feel, to the one, like I'm describing some sort of shocking decay; to the other, though, not really.

    Because I also think of a random occasion when a friend, kind of caught in the middle of a difficult moment, told me to take something at face value—(which, well, right, doing so was part of how we found ourselves in that circumstance)—because no other alternative seemed palatable.

    And what's really weird about it is that in my life there are several overlapping ranges that do actually have common aesthetics despite an easy and reasonable presupposition that they should have nothing to do with one another, and what stands out is that they are all kind of down to this point in their behavioral arcs: Yeah, y'know, we tried to take this seriously, but all we get in return is unbelievable clownery; taking it at face value still means taking it seriously, but doing so in a different way.

    Of course we don't recall similar unhinged rhetoric; this isn't any matter of principle. This isn't really about politics, either. These are antisocial consciences bereft of any functional pretense to the other. At this point, the purpose is harm. And, in a way, this is how it's always been. But society is apparently in a period so amused so nearly to death as to strip away the euphemisms and pretenses. All those things we weren't supposed to say, because it wasn't polite to presume people so ... oh, I don't know, ¿willfully evil? ... seem to be on the table, in open view.

    It was never really about fears of corruption, or protecting family values. And how many years have they had to come up for air, this time 'round the cycle? They have made this choice; this is what they have done.

    The point was always about the infliction of harm. At some point, taking these decades at face value, we must countenance the functional reality that the infliction of harm appears to be their prime directive.

    And this know-nothing phenomenon too ignorant to call itself know-nothing is simply a reminder that they are human. Even those years ago, in cheering for a Galtian revolution, that other went on to declare society was not of competing classes, and there was no entrenched aristocracy. Like he said, then: Working classes? Fuck that.

    And it's true, we were supposed to somehow take this seriously. An actual Republican telling us his actual view of his fellow human beings, and these years later I still struggle to find whatever merit we might assert to justify the pretense of decency afforded such manners of antisociality.

    But, yeah. We tried taking them seriously. Fuck that.

    And, really, at what point is something obvious? Strangling the consumer in order to increase consumption in a consumer-driven economy is not an actual solution, except, of course, for the billionaires on paper who would never be able to provide that monetary value in the working economy without breaking it.

    They've been telling us, the whole time, and for whatever reason, fuck that, was an inappropriate response.

    With our right-wing neighbors, it's never really been about integrity or societal function.

    Even still, I do think Schumer should resign; the dumbass went and said it. It would be helpful if he used the occasion of this mistake to get the hell out of the way.

    Meanwhile, really, what the rest of us need to do is stop pretending people like Sculptor have any decent intention or purpose. At some point, we're bigger fools than a Bushism for playing along.
     
    Jeeves likes this.
  22. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    And yet you have never started a thread attacking Trump.

    Odd. It's almost as if you want to appear centrist but don't want to actually _be_ a centrist.
     
  23. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,089
    For quite a long time now - off and on since Nixon, with increasing consistency - I've been able to predict exactly what bad/corrupt/illegal thing the right wingers were about to do by what they accused the "left wing" of doing.
    Do you have a theory is to motivation?
    I get Trump's: he's 'getting even'. That's been his central theme for decades. He's finally got his chance to get even. With America for not taking his early presidential bids seriously. With Obama for being a better president. With the free press for portraying him accurately. With the world for disliking him.
    But what's the party various party members' motivation to to stay behind him?
    What was their motivation to get behind Bush Minor?
     

Share This Page