I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
Post Reply
User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Post by Lord Jim »

Then vote for Donald Trump:
Why this Never Trump ex-Republican will vote for almost any 2020 Democratic nominee

I don’t care if Sen. Elizabeth Warren is a mendacious Massachusetts liberal. She could tell me that she’s going to make me wear waffles as underpants and I’ll vote for her. I don’t care if Sen. Kamala Harris is an opportunistic California prosecutor who wants to relitigate busing. She could tell me that I have to drive to work in a go-cart covered with Barbie decals and I’ll vote for her. I don’t care if Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is a muddle-headed socialist from a rural class-warfare state (where I once lived as one of his constituents). He could tell me he’s going to tax used kitty litter and I’ll vote for him.

I don’t care if Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is clearly influenced by a hostile foreign government or that Marianne Williamson is a weird, anti-science guru. They could …

Wait. I do care about that. It’s the reason they won’t get my vote next year, and why the president won’t either.

Trump is getting worse

All of the policy “what about” hypotheticals from my conservative friends are diversions. They’re trying to move the argument to policy to blind us to the reality that President Donald Trump is both unstable and compromised.

As I have argued for well over two years, there is plenty of evidence that the president is compromised by our most dedicated enemy. Even before the Mueller report laid bare the degree to which the Trump campaign welcomed Russian help, it was obvious that Trump feared Russian President Vladimir Putin — not only because Putin knew how much Trump had lied to the American people during the campaign about his dealings with Russia, but also likely because Moscow holds Trump’s closest financial secrets after years of shady dealings with Russian oligarchs.

And obviously, I would care if Warren or Harris wanted me to do something insane, because it would be evidence of their mental or emotional impairment. As much as conservatives hate to admit it, governing by executive order or supporting the financial evisceration of rich people is not a sign of an emotional disorder.

I can live with policies I hate

Compulsive lying, fantastic and easily refuted claims, base insults and bizarre public meltdowns, however, are indeed signs of serious emotional problems. Trump has never been a reasonable man, but for two years, he has gotten worse. He literally cannot tell the truth from a lie, he often seems completely unable to comprehend even basic information, and he flies off the handle in ways that would make most of us take our children to a pediatrician for evaluation.

This is why policy doesn’t matter. I have only two requirements from the Democratic nominee. First, he or she must not be obviously mentally unstable. Second, the nominee must not be in any way sympathetic — or worse, potentially beholden — to a hostile foreign power. This rules out Gabbard, Williamson and maybe New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, although in de Blasio’s case it’s hard to tell whether he is unstable or just a terrible person.

As for the rest of them, I am willing to live with whoever wins the Democratic primary process. I will likely hate the nominee’s policies, but at least I will not be concerned that he or she is incapable of understanding “the nuclear” or “the cyber.” I will feel like I have a shot at trying to convince my elected representatives that they should listen to the policy preferences of normal human beings instead of two old men wearing shirts that say they’d “rather be a Russian than a Democrat,” or a woman in a shirt indicating that she is willing to have the president grab her genitalia.

I can't believe I miss Eric Holder

The Democratic candidate will promise to nominate people into Cabinet posts who will make me tear my hair out. But at least I will be confident that they are in charge of their own inner circle, instead of surrounded by unprincipled cronies who keep their own boss in the dark while taking a hatchet to the Constitution. Is there anyone that Warren or former Vice President Joe Biden could bring to, say, the Justice Department, whom I would fear more than an odious and sinister courtier like William Barr?

I never thought I could miss Eric Holder, yet here we are.

It is a sign of how low we have fallen as a nation that “rational” and “not compromised by an enemy” are now my only two requirements for the office of the president of the United States. [AMEN] Perhaps years of peace and prosperity have made us forget the terrifying responsibilities that attend the presidency, including the stewardship of enough nuclear weapons to blow the Northern Hemisphere to smithereens.

As long as the Democrats can provide someone who can pass these simple tests, their nominee has my vote.

Pass the waffles.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ ... 013614001/

I really feel Mr. Nichols pain... :? :(
Last edited by Lord Jim on Fri Aug 16, 2019 8:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8570
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Post by Sue U »

Welcome back, Jim.

Pretty sure if your underpants were waffles, they'd be sourdough. (Do I need a smiley thingy here?)
GAH!

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Post by Lord Jim »

Thanks Sue...
Pretty sure if your underpants were waffles, they'd be sourdough.
Not that there'd be anything wrong with that...
ImageImageImage

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Post by wesw »

"than"

8-)

unless yu want t0 wear blueberry waffle drawers 0n electi0n day...

n0t that there s anything wrng with that......

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 16563
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Post by Scooter »

It cannot have been that long ago when "not mentally unstable" and "not beholden to a hostile foreign power" would have been assumed as an unstated given of any candidate for the presidency of the U.S. Why does it seem to have been an eternity ago, in a land far, far away?
"If you don't have a seat at the table, you're on the menu."

-- Author unknown

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 18371
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Post by BoSoxGal »

He was on Morning Joe today - very good discussion. MJ is my only political TV these days as I’m on a diet to maintain sanity - occasionally when something happens that requires some good legal analysis I also dial up Ari Melber’s show.

Besides Mr. Nichols, there was a segment on Trump’s polling this morning that was heartening. Hopefully there are many willing to wear waffles out there now!
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Post by Lord Jim »

You know, it would be so refreshing to see some actual currently serving Conservative members of Congress speaking the kind of woke truth that this former Congressman expresses:
Joe Walsh: Trump Needs a Primary Challenge

The case for a contender from the right.

By Joe Walsh

Mr. Walsh is a former Republican member of Congress from Illinois.

There’s a strong case for President Trump to face a Republican primary challenger. I know a thing or two about insurgencies. I entered Congress in 2011 as an insurgent Tea Party Republican. My goals were conservative and clear: restrain executive power and reduce the debt. Barack Obama was president then, and it was easy for us to rail against runaway spending and executive overreach.

Eight years later, Mr. Trump has increased the deficit more than $100 billion year over year — it’s now nearing $1 trillion — and we hear not a word of protest from my former Republican colleagues. He abuses the Constitution for his narcissistic trade war. In private, most congressional Republicans oppose the trade war, but they don’t say anything publicly. But think about this: Mr. Trump’s tariffs are a tax increase on middle-class Americans and are devastating to our farmers. That’s not a smart electoral strategy.

It’s one of the many reasons Mr. Trump is ripe for a primary challenger. In fact, it would buck the historical trend if he didn’t have one. More often than not, unpopular presidents face primary challengers.

Since leaving Congress in 2013, I’ve been the host of my own conservative talk radio show several hours a day, five days a week. The only time a majority of my conservative audience has noticeably broken with the president is when he signed the omnibus spending bill in 2017 that ballooned the deficit. Fiscal responsibility is an issue the American electorate cares about but that our elected officials disregard from the top down — including the Tea Party in the Trump era.

Fiscal matters are only part of it. At the most basic level, Mr. Trump is unfit for office. His lies are so numerous — from his absurd claim that tariffs are “paid for mostly by China, by the way, not by us,” to his prevarication about his crowd sizes, he can’t be trusted.

In Mr. Trump, I see the worst and ugliest iteration of views I expressed for the better part of a decade. To be sure, I’ve had my share of controversy. On more than one occasion, I questioned Mr. Obama’s truthfulness about his religion. At times, I expressed hate for my political opponents. We now see where this can lead. There’s no place in our politics for personal attacks like that, and I regret making them.


I didn’t vote for Mr. Trump in 2016 because I liked him. I voted for him because he wasn’t Hillary Clinton. Once he was elected, I gave him a fair hearing, and tried to give him the benefit of the doubt. But I soon realized that I couldn’t support him because of the danger he poses to the country, especially the division he sows at every chance, culminating a few weeks ago in his ugly, racist attack on four minority congresswomen.

The fact is, Mr. Trump is a racial arsonist who encourages bigotry and xenophobia to rouse his base and advance his electoral prospects. In this, he inspires imitators.


Republicans should view Mr. Trump as the liability that he is: No matter his flag-hugging, or his military parades, he’s no patriot. In front of the world, he sides with Vladimir Putin over our own intelligence community. That’s dangerous. He encouraged Russian interference in the 2016 election, and he refuses to take foreign threats seriously as we enter the 2020 election. That’s reckless. For three years, he has been at war with our federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies, as he embraces tyrants abroad and embarrasses our allies. That’s un-American.

And despite what his enablers claim, Mr. Trump isn’t a conservative. He’s reckless on fiscal issues; he’s incompetent on the border; he’s clueless on trade; he misunderstands executive power; and he subverts the rule of law. It’s his poor record that makes him most worthy of a primary challenge.

Mr. Trump has taken the legitimate differences that Americans have on policy and turned them into personal division. He’s caused me to change my tone and to reflect upon where I went over the line and to focus on policy differences moving forward.

We now have a president who retweets conspiracy theories implicating his political opponents in Jeffrey Epstein’s death. We now have a president who does his level best to avoid condemning white supremacy and white nationalism.

Yes, William Weld, the former Massachusetts governor, is challenging Mr. Trump from the center. [I'm not sure I would agree that Gov. Weld's more Libertarian positions make him strictly speaking a "centrist"]But the president is more vulnerable to a challenge from the right. I’m on the right, and I’m hugely disappointed that challenge hasn’t yet materialized.

Mr. Trump’s most vulnerable against a challenger who’d make the case for strong borders — instead of warning of “invaders,” dragging us down, turning neighbor against neighbor. A majority of Americans want fixes to our most basic problems.

We need someone who could stand up, look the president in the eye and say: “Enough, sir. We’ve had enough of your indecency. We’ve had enough of your lies, your bullying, your cruelty, enough of your insults, your daily drama, your incitement, enough of the danger you place this country in every single day. We don’t want any of this anymore, and the country certainly can’t stand four more years of it.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/14/opin ... imary.html

If Bill Weld gets on to the California GOP primary ballot I will certainly turn out to vote for him. (I'd turn out to vote for former Congressman Walsh or even the somewhat flaky Mark Sanford as well...Any Republican who makes the CA primary ballot against Trump gets my vote; if more than one does, I'll vote for the one I would most like to actually see win)

That having been said, I'm realistic enough to realize that barring something completely unforeseen, a primary challenge (from the right or the center) doesn't have much of a chance of prevailing against Trump. But anything that helps to in any way undermine or diminish his re-election chances (which primary challenges tend to to do to incumbent Presidents) works for me...
ImageImageImage

ex-khobar Andy
Posts: 5442
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018

Re: I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Post by ex-khobar Andy »

I don't recall ever seeing something written by a Tea Partyist with which I agreed so much.

From a strictly partisan pov I don't want to see a challenger to Trump in the primaries. I don't want to see a more reasonable Republican nominee (Romney redux, for example) who might actually win. I want to see Trump go down in disgrace with all his flags flying so that the American people (and those elsewhere who support him) see him for the fraud (that's the least ugly word I could find) that he really is. Nevertheless although it's against my interests - my head tells me no, no, no - I really want to see it: my heart is telling me yes, yes, yes and with an extra scoop of ice cream please.

Big RR
Posts: 14093
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Post by Big RR »

I want to see Trump go down in disgrace with all his flags flying so that the American people (and those elsewhere who support him) see him for the fraud (that's the least ugly word I could find) that he really is.
I'd like to see that as well, but even more I want to be sure we don't get "four more years"; and given the dems so far (and it is early so it may well change--I hope so), I'm not at all confident that he will lose. a more reasonable republican nominee, hell, a more reasonable anything, would be welcome IMHO.

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 18371
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Post by BoSoxGal »

I encourage a vigorous primary challenge from Bill Weld, John Kasich, Mark Sanford or all of the above to lay bare the incompetence in the current administration.

And I’m praying every day for the recession to hit hard and soon. It’s coming anyway, it might as well come RIGHT NOW. If you’re in the market, now is the time to go to cash - nobody here is young enough to be messing around. I’m sorry for the pain that the recession will cause but it’s gonna happen because our economy is mismanaged by a bunch of super wealthy gamblers and craven politicians. Let’s at least put the pain to good use and have it happen in time to shake off this sick parasite.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8570
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Post by Sue U »

Lord Jim wrote:You know, it would be so refreshing to see some actual currently serving Conservative members of Congress speaking the kind of woke truth that this former Congressman expresses:
Joe Walsh: Trump Needs a Primary Challenge

The case for a contender from the right.

By Joe Walsh

Mr. Walsh is a former Republican member of Congress from Illinois.
Joe Walsh? Not The Eagles' Joe Walsh, you mean this Joe Walsh? The racist dickhead deadbeat dad Joe Walsh whose slimy ass was kicked out of Congress by genuine war hero and American patriot Tammy Duckworth? Yeah, fuck that guy.
GAH!

User avatar
Crackpot
Posts: 11282
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 2:59 am
Location: Michigan

Re: I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Post by Crackpot »

It does not prevent him from being largely correct in this instance. As for challengers I’d also be interested in what Justin Amash intends on doing. Tho since he won’t be running as a Republican he probably won’t be announcing his intentions until the end of primary season.
Okay... There's all kinds of things wrong with what you just said.

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 16563
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Post by Scooter »

Do you what I don't see in there? Any admission that the GOP has been courting racists since long before Trump arrived on the scene. Or that the birther narrative, of which Walsh was one of the key proponents, was intended to attract and embolden racists. Or that the ballooning deficit that Walsh bemoans has largely been caused by a tax cut that Walsh obviously supports. And I certainly don't see any acknowledgement that all the things that Walsh bemoans about Trump now are things that he knew before the election, but yet he chose to vote for him anyway.

But most critical of all, what I don't see is any sort of pledge to refuse to support Trump if the calls for a primary challenger fall on deaf ears, and he does end up being the nominee.

Nothing but self-serving claptrap designed to rationalize Walsh's culpability for his own actions and choices.
"If you don't have a seat at the table, you're on the menu."

-- Author unknown

Big RR
Posts: 14093
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: I'd Rather Have To Wear Waffles For Underpants...

Post by Big RR »

You're right Scooter, but I'll take what I can get.

One thing, though; I don't see any democrats or republicans supporting raising taxes. A few support an increase on the highest wage earners, but all of them (well maybe not Bernie) shy away from saying they'll raise taxes for everyone--even those supporting medicare for all sidestep this inevitability. But even if we keep bloating the deficit, we have to get Trump out.

Post Reply