…except not funny.
And the “Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer” knew he didn’t understand. That’s miles beyond Kennedy’s ability to reason.
I’ll put this in the Stupid Republicans thread instead of the Donald threads because I’m fairly certain that though Donald was stupid enough to post this, it was manufactured by some other Stupid Republican:
Notice how in the Bad Old Days of “Hussein Obama” the sky was IDENTICAL to the sky in the Paradise of Today…??? And the ducks, too…gee, I wonder how that could have happened???
“it’s a metaphor, I drained the swamp!”
(I imagine that’s the idea behind the original image at least.)
The only way Trump has ever drained the swamp is when someone changes his diaper.
No, it’s about Donny’s new plan to Trumpize the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5848305-reflecting-pool-renovation-trump-burgum/
Obviously, that’s proof that Obama was up to something nefarious.
Mark Lynch is seeking to become the Republican candidate for Senator in South Carolina. (Lindsey Graham holds this seat but Lynch feels Graham isn’t conservative enough.)
Lynch posted this message online today:
Muslim worship in the Hagia Sophia is going to officially end when I get elected to the U.S. Senate.
The fact that Lindsey Graham has allowed this without concern signifies the fact that he is anti-Christ.
Christians in America and throughout the world look forward to the Hagia Sophia being returned to its rightful owner and it will happen when I become South Carolina’s next U.S. Senator.
Dafuq?
You didn’t know that one of South Carolina’s Senators is also the president of Turkey?
But where’s he going to find any Byzantines in 2026?
Of course, Russia claimed they were the successor state to Byzantium when it fell.
So maybe Lynch is saying he’s planning on giving Putin the go ahead to invade Turkey.
(It says a lot of disturbing things about the Republican party that I’m only ninety percent certain that’s a joke.)
We all really need to retire the word “conservative” as applied to anything the New Right says, does, or thinks. IMO what you meant was
(Lindsey Graham holds this seat but Lynch feels Graham isn’t
conservativereactionary enough.)
Christo-Fascist is another word that accurately describes the beliefs Lynch is pandering to in this specific instance.
Originally read that as crypto-fascist.
Once again, the way English works is that a word can and usually does have different definitions based on context. Open a dictionary and check for yourself. Sometimes those different definitions are even contradictory.
For example, an attractive person who is “hot” is not implied to have an elevated temperature, and ironically if they are a “hot mess” it can mean the opposite of attractive.
Just as “conservative” in a political context means just about the opposite of that word in any other context.
It’s okay, that’s just how language is.
My problem is entirely that using the word “conservative” amounts to sanewashing fascism.
And also amounts to minimizing the difference between Eisenhower conservatism, Nixon conservatism, and Lindsey Graham conservatism.
I am well aware of how dictionaries work and how word definitions change over time. But when a definition is undergoing rapid change, the center of what most people think it means lags well behind what the latest trendy use is. And in this case, putting the wolf of raw fascism in the sheep’s clothing of “conservatism” does nothing but aid the slide into fascism as conventional politics.
Sanewashing: Just say no.
Gotta acknowledge though how succesful they have been at keeping “conservative” useful as a positive selling point no matter what you actually are. As opposed to “liberal” being a label you have had to run away from since the late 20th century.
Yep. And ceding the field of political language to one side’s punditocracy is a lot of how we got into this predicament.
Back when I was an undergrad, one of my poli sci professors had a dictum: “As you assume so shall you conclude”. Meaning that your assumptions, both explicit and implicit, do a tremendous amount to shape your inquiry and your results.
A corollary I came up was “He who defines the terms, wins the debate.” I don’t claim the idea is original to me; it’s waay too obvious for that. But IME it’s pretty well true.
And the reactionaries have been allowed to define substantially all the terms of US political discourse for about 50 years now. And now we are reaping the whirlwind they’ve so thoroughly sown.
I prefer “dominionist”, since it doesn’t falsely imply any connection to Christ.
No it doesn’t. The word itself doesn’t matter. People know what “conservative” means in a political context. The “sanewashing” comes from treating conservatism as a legitimate part of democracy, which it isn’t.
Now, if the argument is that modern conservatism is different from the conservatism of folks like Gingrich, Romney, or McCain, and therefore needs a new label, I am a bit more sympathetic to that idea. I do think that it has undergone a massive change in the past decade. We even had a change in the term for the Bush era, “neoconservatism”, and I get it.
I think we already have that though. It’s called MAGA. Biden even called it out explicitly, warning folks about the danger of “MAGA conservatives” while he was still in office.
But the arguing about the term “conservative” is useless. It has meant something different in a political context for a long, long time. There was nothing “conservative” about McCarthy in any context aside from the political one. It has a well-established meaning in politics, and the idea that moving away from it would make any difference is absurd.
Except that there’s something that used to be called “conservatism” that is, in fact, an essential component of democracy. And we’ve been without that essential element for decades. And if we call Trump “conservative”, then what do we call that thing?
Classical liberalism, which is what a lot of conservative pundits like to pretend they are advocating for.
In much of the world (like Europe for example) that’s what “liberalism” means.
Also, just as an FYI, I was a conservative-leaning moderate before Trump was elected, and I had mostly voted Republican before then. Trump did not match what I thought of as conservative, which is a big reason why I did not support him or vote for him. Seeing what he and other Republicans did once he was in office pushed me to being a solid Democrat, and seeing how conservatism was also warped made me move totally to the left. (I’m still somewhat moderate but nowhere near the right anymore.)
So I do get what you mean, I just don’t see a change of label as either useful or accurate.
I often use the term right wing in political discussions. I feel it carries the flavor better than conservative does.
But in that particular post, I was presenting what Lynch was saying. And Lynch doesn’t see himself as a right winger or a Christo-Fascist. Lynch sees himself as a conservative.
As for sanewashing, I then providing a quote from Lynch. I feel that was ample evidence that Lynch is crazy.