# Stupid Republican idea of the day **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 26, 2009, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897 "2009-03-26T18:48:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1650
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2017, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32982 "2017-03-14T20:32:37Z")
> [@Chisquirrel](#): > > More like belly to belly. People tended to be leaner in the days of traveling music teachers. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2017, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32983 "2017-03-14T21:20:14Z")
> [@Chisquirrel](#): > > Or be elected to the House of Representatives. > > Why can I call an asshole an asshole, but I can’t call a racist a racist? Do they need safe spaces? Note I had no objection with calling King racist. My argument was just that racism needs to be understood as a social ill, not a moral evil, which makes the fight against racism more religious crusade than an actual attempt at problem solving. We don’t approach addiction, mental illness, or crime that way. To be sure, a lot of good has been done recently to approach racism in a more scientific manner. By understanding how racism becomes a problem and how best to fight it: > **[Research says there are ways to reduce racial bias. Calling people racist...](https://www.vox.com/identities/2016/11/15/13595508/racism-research-study-trump)** > > The challenge for anti-racists looking for solutions in Trump’s America. > [@](#): > > Research says there are ways to reduce racial bias. Calling people racist isn’t one of them. But it does satisfy the left’s version of Bible Thumpers. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2017, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32984 "2017-03-14T21:27:43Z")
Basically, understand the root causes of racism. There are three functional types of racism: 1. Pure hate brought on by upbringing or active recruitment into racist terror groups. This tends to be a matter for the criminal justice system. Not much you can do with these people, although there are some cases of rehabilitation. 2. Hate brought on by fear of the unknown. As Vox observes, just TALKING to people like this in a reasonable way can often change views. They hate what they don’t know. When they know, they don’t hate anymore. 3. Hate, or more accurately resentment, based on real and legitimate policy differences. Black people resenting whites for Jim Crow was perfectly rational. And every white person who feels they got passed over for a promotion due to affirmative action has a grievance. That one may or may not be legitimate, depending on the circumstances. But on immigration, that’s the main issue that’s led to a resurgence of xenophobia in recent years. The government has been acting against the will of the people, and further the illegal immigrants they are protecting have been quite bold and assertive in claiming they have a right to be here. It is shocking(not) that many people, and yes not all of them white, but also some blacks, Hispanics, and Asians(who do not benefit as much from benign non enforcement since there’s no shared border with their homelands), don’t take it well. Trump didn’t just win white voters, he did historically better among nearly all groups than Romney or McCain did. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2017, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32985 "2017-03-14T21:41:07Z")
Meanwhile, Europe is going much further than Steve King ever would: > **[Europe's right hails EU court's workplace headscarf ban ruling](https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/mar/14/employers-can-ban-staff-from-wearing-headscarves-european-court-rules)** > > European court of justice says garments can be banned as part of general policy covering religious and political symbols I don’t know of any right-wing Americans who have called for a headscarf ban. That’s actually law in some places now. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2017, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32986 "2017-03-14T22:20:14Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > But on immigration, that’s the main issue that’s led to a resurgence of xenophobia in recent years. Nonsense. US xenophobia is largely Muslim-directed (why’s it called a “Muslim ban”, again?), and that’s got much less to do with immigration _per se_ than with neocon whipping-up of Islamophobic sentiments in order to enable military adventurism and resource exploitation. There is also longstanding American xenophobia against Latinos, but that’s not what the recent “resurgence of xenophobia” has mostly been about. It’s primarily the “Clash of Civilizations” shit. > [@adaher](#): > > My argument was just that racism needs to be understood as a social ill, not a moral evil Why not both? > [@adaher](#): > > To be sure, a lot of good has been done recently to approach racism in a more scientific manner. By understanding how racism becomes a problem and how best to fight it Oh, I completely agree that effective anti-racism strategies when actually **engaging** with racists require paying attention to how the racists are feeling. As your linked article describes it: > [@](#): > > Robin DiAngelo, who studies race at Westfield State University, described this phenomenon as “white fragility” in a groundbreaking 2011 paper: > > > [@](#): > > > > White people in North America live in a social environment that protects and insulates them from race-based stress. This insulated environment of racial protection builds white expectations for racial comfort while at the same time lowering the ability to tolerate racial stress, leading to what I refer to as White Fragility. White Fragility is a state in which even a minimum amount of racial stress becomes intolerable, triggering a range of defensive moves. These moves include the outward display of emotions such as anger, fear, and guilt, and behaviors such as argumentation, silence, and leaving the stress-inducing situation. These behaviors, in turn, function to reinstate white racial equilibrium. > > […] “Most of us live in racial segregation,” DiAngelo told me. “Our teachers are white. Our role models are white. Our heroes and heroines are white. That insulation is very rarely challenged.” She added, “So when that reality is questioned, we don’t tend to handle it very well.” > > DiAngelo’s paper explained that white Americans have a range of “triggers” that make them defensive about race, from suggestions that a person’s viewpoint is racialized to the rise of people of color into prominent leadership positions. But there is a difference between being sensitive to that kind of fragility when talking directly to the people who suffer from it, and euphemistically downplaying it when talking **about** it to other non-racists. Here on the Dope, we all presumably have too much respect for facts and rationality to need to be gently coaxed out of racist prejudices. (And here in the Pit particularly, words are even less likely to be minced on such subjects.) So I think racist remarks like King’s are still going to get called out in this thread as Stupid Republican Ideas, no matter how fragile King might feel about having them challenged if he ever happened to encounter this discussion. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2017, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32987 "2017-03-14T22:38:39Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Nonsense. US xenophobia is largely Muslim-directed (why’s it called a “Muslim ban”, again?), and that’s got much less to do with immigration _per se_ than with neocon whipping-up of Islamophobic sentiments in order to enable military adventurism and resource exploitation. Wow, that’s some amazing left-wing rationalization there. Why do you guys go much easier on the hate whipped up overseas against us? We are at war. In historical context, we’re doing better at not being racist towards Muslims than we ever did at not being racist against Japanese, Spanish, Brits, Germans, or even people from a different state. When the war is over, as in the haters over there quit their nonsense, it’ll die down here too. That explains the Islamophobia, but there’s also the small matter of resentment towards Latinos, and that’s immigration-based. > [@](#): > > There is also longstanding American xenophobia against Latinos, but that’s not what the recent “resurgence of xenophobia” has mostly been about. It’s primarily the “Clash of Civilizations” shit. The resentment against Latinos is primarily economics-based. People think they are taking their jobs. And some of them are right! Enough of them to make a critical mass of people who have legitimate reason to be pissy. When you know the factory in your area is employing illegal labor, you report it, and nothing gets done, are you supposed to be happy about that? > [@](#): > > Why not both? It can be both, but not both EQUALLY. Liberals have long regarded crime as a scientific problem to be solved through proven, empirical means, with moral judgment of the actual criminals generally withheld unless we know the specifics of their cases. Some even argued that society failed these people. Sometimes it was true. Sometimes people are just plain evil and society failed their victims. Racism today is less motivated by evil intentions than by ignorance or seeking someone to blame for the problems in their personal life. There aren’t too many rich racists, at least not in the “I hate Mexicans!” sense. Of course implicit bias and institutional racism are still very much a thing, but that’s an intractable problem, whereas hate based on resentment can be cured. > [@](#): > > Oh, I completely agree that effective anti-racism strategies when actually **engaging** with racists require paying attention to how the racists are feeling. As your linked article describes it: > > But there is a difference between being sensitive to that kind of fragility when talking directly to the people who suffer from it, and euphemistically downplaying it when talking **about** it to other non-racists. Here on the Dope, we all presumably have too much respect for facts and rationality to need to be gently coaxed out of racist prejudices. (And here in the Pit particularly, words are even less likely to be minced on such subjects.) > > So I think racist remarks like King’s are still going to get called out in this thread as Stupid Republican Ideas, no matter how fragile King might feel about having them challenged if he ever happened to encounter this discussion. They should be. King has no excuse. But I think he also doesn’t mean a word of it. He’s pandering to people, just like Trump is. Resolve the problem at its roots and these politicians either flip back to being normal, decent people because they have to, or they get replaced by better people. And five years ago I would have just said, “Fuck that guy”. But now we live in a country governed by these people. ---
**Author:** ![Guest-starring\_Id](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guest-starring_id/32/21736_2.png) [@Guest-starring\_Id](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guest-starring_Id)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2017, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32988 "2017-03-14T22:41:32Z")
Hopefully this’ll remain _just_ a S.R.I.o.t.D… (coulda put this in the “How has Trump pissed you off today?” thread, I spose)… [http://pilotonline.com/news/military/local/it-s-nonsensical-to-cut-the-coast-guard-to-pay/article\_a3a4bdcb-551f-55cb-8045-6a210d4c2a3c.html](http://pilotonline.com/news/military/local/it-s-nonsensical-to-cut-the-coast-guard-to-pay/article_a3a4bdcb-551f-55cb-8045-6a210d4c2a3c.html) (other articles claim it’s a $1.3 billion cut proposal to the Coast Guard)… > [@](#): > > “It’s nonsensical to pursue a policy of rebuilding the Armed Forces while proposing large reductions to the U.S. Coast Guard budget,” [bi-partisan lawmakers’ letter] added. “Without question, OMB’s proposed budget cut targeting the Coast Guard directly contradicts the President’s stated goals.” Shitty enough that shit’s going on on my side of the border too (as oil tanker traffic is starting to go through the fucking roof now). ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2017, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32989 "2017-03-14T22:47:25Z")
I don’t really like to get into the business of criticizing budget cuts. Budgeting is all about priorities and if Trump thinks the Coast Guard is less important than the other services that’s his opinion. It may be mistaken, but it’s not stupid, because you’d then have to make an argument about why the Coast Guard should get more and the other services a little less. Or call for some other tradeoff. The Coast Guard cut proposal caused me to raise an eyebrow, but ANY cut to the military would result in some protest. Is it wrong to cut the Marines, Air Force, Army, or Navy? If not, then why is it wrong to cut the Coast Guard? Is it because the Coast Guard has been singled out? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2017, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32990 "2017-03-14T22:50:01Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > They should be. King has no excuse. **But I think he also doesn’t mean a word of it. He’s pandering to people, just like Trump is.** Resolve the problem at its roots and these **politicians either flip back to being normal, decent people** because they have to, or they get replaced by better people. And five years ago I would have just said, “Fuck that guy”. But now we live in a country governed by these people. Which is just as evil if not more. He’s enabling evil for his own personal gain. If they have to flip back to a moral position, then they are not normal, decent people. And you just engaged in right wing rationalization. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2017, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32991 "2017-03-14T22:50:14Z")
When people complain about immigrants stealing their jobs, and then in the same breath go on to accuse immigrants of just being lazy moochers on the welfare system, that’s a pretty clear sign that the problem isn’t actually economic. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2017, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32992 "2017-03-14T23:02:57Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > Which is just as evil if not more. He’s enabling evil for his own personal gain. > If they have to flip back to a moral position, then they are not normal, decent people. > And you just engaged in right wing rationalization. Careful. What you’re describing is the Clintons. They didn’t hesitate for a moment to throw any group under the bus they had to to be politically successful. From super predators to rushing back home to execute a mentally disabled person for the sake of a primary, to bragging about signing a gay marriage ban(but only in the South, lest coastal progressives hear about it). History has actually been very kind to people who have used hate to win elections. If they DIDN’T mean it, they actually got treated more kindly than principled racists. Liberal apologists tend to blame the people for having to be pandered to, rather than the politicians that legitimized their hate. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2017, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32993 "2017-03-14T23:05:11Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > When people complain about immigrants stealing their jobs, and then in the same breath go on to accuse immigrants of just being lazy moochers on the welfare system, that’s a pretty clear sign that the problem isn’t actually economic. What you describe is a funny paradox, but it’s also true to the extent that some states have gone out of their way to accomodate illegal immigrants by both letting them work, displacing American workers in some cases, and letting them take advantage of taxpayer benefits. Where such things go on as part of the normal democratic process, fine, it is what it is. Where it’s done on the downlow in defiance of the process, then you run into problems with your bosses(the people). ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2017, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32994 "2017-03-14T23:34:03Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Careful. What you’re describing is the Clintons. They didn’t hesitate for a moment to throw any group under the bus they had to to be politically successful. From super predators to **rushing back home to execute a mentally disabled person for the sake of a primary,** to bragging about signing a gay marriage ban(but only in the South, lest coastal progressives hear about it). > > History has actually been very kind to people who have used hate to win elections. If they DIDN’T mean it, they actually got treated more kindly than principled racists. Liberal apologists tend to blame the people for having to be pandered to, rather than the politicians that legitimized their hate. Who was (maybe ) mentally disabled because he tried to commit suicide after shooting a cop in the head. DOMA was nationwide. Is there something wrong with changing your mind in later years? I was addressing your claim that King doesn’t mean it. At least if he means it, he doesn’t have a conflict regardless of being an asshole. And I do believe he means it. His words are not those of someone keeping quiet about his true beliefs. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2017, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32995 "2017-03-14T23:37:48Z")
Changing your mind doesn’t mean much when you do it long after it doesn’t matter anymore, when you’re merely catching up with public opinion. And sometimes they make no secret of the fact that they said what they had to say. Obama was pretty direct in saying that he personally believed gays should be allowed to marry, but his public position was that they should not. > **[Obama: Axelrod ‘mixing up’ gay marriage stance | CNN Politics](https://www.cnn.com/2015/02/10/politics/obama-gay-marriage-axelrod/index.html)** > > President Barack Obama insisted Tuesday that his former top political aide David Axelrod’s got it wrong when it comes to Obama’s position on same-sex marriage and whether it changed over time. Obama tries to explain it in a way that sounds better, but it doesn’t really work. > [@](#): > > “I think David is mixing up my personal feelings with my position on the issue,” Obama said in an interview with BuzzFeed News. “I always felt that same-sex couples should be able to enjoy the same rights, legally, as anybody else, and so it was frustrating to me not to, I think, be able to square that with what were a whole bunch of religious sensitivities out there.” Clinton has never made such an admission on any issue, but a lot of his support from disadvantaged groups was based on the idea that he was on their side, but might have to say certain things to win elections. Oh, and Obama is trying to make you forget that in 2008 he invoked his Christian faith to justify his oppositon to gay marriage. Is Christianity also his strictly public position, different from his private views on faith? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32996 "2017-03-15T00:01:11Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Changing your mind doesn’t mean much when you do it long after it doesn’t matter anymore, when you’re merely catching up with public opinion. And sometimes they make no secret of the fact that they said what they had to say. Obama was pretty direct in saying that he personally believed gays should be allowed to marry, but his public position was that they should not. > > [http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/10/politics/obama-gay-marriage-axelrod/index.html](http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/10/politics/obama-gay-marriage-axelrod/index.html) > > Obama tries to explain it in a way that sounds better, but it doesn’t really work. > > Clinton has never made such an admission on any issue, but a lot of his support from disadvantaged groups was based on the idea that he was on their side, but might have to say certain things to win elections. > > Oh, and Obama is trying to make you forget that in 2008 he invoked his Christian faith to justify his oppositon to gay marriage. Is Christianity also his strictly public position, different from his private views on faith? So you don’t like his explanation. What a surprise. Putting off changing a situation due to the political atmosphere is different than promising with no intent to follow through. i haven’t really paid attention to his faith as it’s immaterial. ---
**Author:** ![Guest-starring\_Id](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guest-starring_id/32/21736_2.png) [@Guest-starring\_Id](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guest-starring_Id)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32997 "2017-03-15T00:12:48Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I don’t really like to get into the business of criticizing budget cuts. Budgeting is all about priorities and if Trump thinks the Coast Guard is less important than the other services that’s his opinion. It may be mistaken, but it’s not stupid, because you’d then have to make an argument about why the Coast Guard should get more and the other services a little less. Or call for some other tradeoff. Trump’s opinion is mistaken and stupid because if the Coast Guard has had major budget restrictions over the past few years then it’s no longer a question about why should the CG get more and the other services a little less (as you posit) but about why should the CG get further hobbled when there has been no citable proof to justify such a misguided proposal in the first place. From _Virginian-Pilot_ article: > [@](#): > > Hunter’s office led the effort to solicit signatures and send the letter, said Joe Kasper, a spokesman for the congressman. There are nearly 60 other signatories, including Republicans and Democrats who served in the military, such as Reps. Martha McSally, R-Ariz., Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., Seth Moulton, D-Mass., and Peter DeFazio, D-Ore. Huh - kinda funny in a thread like this that I’m actually cutting a (an least _temporarily_ lucid;)) Rep. or two, there, a little slack. > [@adaher](#): > > The Coast Guard cut proposal caused me to raise an eyebrow, but ANY cut to the military would result in some protest. Is it wrong to cut the Marines, Air Force, Army, or Navy? If not, then why is it wrong to cut the Coast Guard? Is it because the Coast Guard has been singled out? Considering I’ve never seen any citable data credibly bolstering the need to maintain current military spending, then making cuts will be much less catastrophic to implement in the Marines, Air Force, Army, and Navy, while the following article (the entire thing is quotable) asserts why it’s wrong to propose Coast Guard cuts: > **[Coast Guard will be 'devastated' by cost-cutting to pay for Donald Trump's...](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-proposed-budget-cuts-hit-coast-guard-hardest-a7621791.html)** > > The maritime security agency's budget faces a 14 percent cut ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32998 "2017-03-15T00:14:30Z")
Okay, so if we were cutting defense spending, including the Coast Guard, it would still be bad to cut the Coast guard? Is the Coast Guard underfunded while the other services are overfunded? ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/32999 "2017-03-15T00:19:37Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > It can be both, but not both EQUALLY. Liberals have long regarded crime as a scientific problem to be solved through proven, empirical means, with moral judgment of the actual criminals generally withheld unless we know the specifics of their cases. Some even argued that society failed these people. Sometimes it was true. Sometimes people are just plain evil and society failed their victims. > > Racism today is less motivated by evil intentions than by ignorance or seeking someone to blame for the problems in their personal life. There aren’t too many rich racists, at least not in the “I hate Mexicans!” sense. Of course implicit bias and institutional racism are still very much a thing, but that’s an intractable problem, whereas hate based on resentment can be cured. But we are willing to call those people who commit crimes through the failure of society criminals, and to condemn them for it. Similarly we don’t have Democratic lawmakers telling their constituents that the correct solution to their economic woes is to go out and commit crimes. I am fully willing to agree with Obama’s assertion [QUOTE=Obama] You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations. [/QUOTE] I am also willing to do whatever possible to ease their burden, but that doesn’t mean that their xenophobia, shouldn’t be condemned or that we shouldn’t call out politicians who actively promote it for political reasons. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/33000 "2017-03-15T00:19:46Z")
> [@Eddie The Horrible](#): > > Trump’s opinion is mistaken and stupid because if the Coast Guard has had major budget restrictions over the past few years then it’s no longer a question about why should the CG get more and the other services a little less (as you posit) but about why should the CG get further hobbled when there has been no citable proof to justify such a misguided proposal in the first place. > > From _Virginian-Pilot_ article: > Huh - kinda funny in a thread like this that I’m actually cutting a (an least _temporarily_ lucid;)) Rep. or two, there, a little slack. > > Considering I’ve never seen any citable data credibly bolstering the need to maintain current military spending, then making cuts will be much less catastrophic to implement in the Marines, Air Force, Army, and Navy, while the following article (the entire thing is quotable) asserts why it’s wrong to propose Coast Guard cuts: > [Coast Guard will be 'devastated' by cost-cutting to pay for Donald Trump's Mexico wall | The Independent | The Independent](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-proposed-budget-cuts-hit-coast-guard-hardest-a7621791.html) Remember Trump’s claim about who’s bringing in drugs? [Coast Guard and drug interdiction.](https://www.gocoastguard.com/about-the-coast-guard/discover-our-roles-missions/drug-interdiction) > [@](#): > > he Coast Guard is the nation’s first line of defense against drug smugglers seeking to bring illegal substances into the United States. The Coast Guard coordinates closely with other federal agencies and countries within a vast six million square-mile region to disrupt and deter the flow of illegal drugs. > > Coast Guard drug interdiction accounts for more than half of all U.S. government seizures of cocaine each year. I’ll bet Cheeto doesn’t know that. ---
**Author:** ![Guest-starring\_Id](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guest-starring_id/32/21736_2.png) [@Guest-starring\_Id](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guest-starring_Id)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/33001 "2017-03-15T01:02:37Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Okay, so if we were cutting defense spending, including the Coast Guard, it would still be bad to cut the Coast guard? Yes, which was elucidated in my previous post that explained why cuts to the CG will be worse than cuts to the A/N/M/AF. And further, from the _Virginian Pilot_ article: > [@](#): > > The Coast Guard has operated “under the realities of severe budget limitations” for years, the [Congressional] letter said. as well as: > **['Hull Envy': The Looming Crisis of the US Coast Guard](https://www.vice.com/en/article/vb84ky/hull-envy-the-looming-crisis-of-the-us-coast-guard)** > > America needs and relies on the seas, but not every problem is a nail to be hit by the Navy's hammer. That's where the US Coast Guard comes in — and it's just about out of ships, money, and time. > [@](#): > > The problem is that the Coast Guard, simply doesn’t have the capacity to do what it needs to do in the South China Sea. And according to Coast Guard’s financial projections, they won’t anytime soon. As Ronald O’Rourke, a naval affairs specialist with the Congressional Research Service said last year, “The Coast Guard barely has enough ships to even do its domestic missions.” > [@adaher](#): > > Is the Coast Guard underfunded while the other services are overfunded? Yes to the first half, as already answered, above, and a yes to the second half: there are countless cites reporting excessive military expenditures, thus, a much more pertinent question would be - would Trump show any signs of curbing such spending, or, more realistically, how exponentially off the rails will the Trump admin. go with its eventual military spending? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897.md?page=1649) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897.md?page=1651)