We pit malicious GOP behavior!

[foolsguinea]

Well, they are (largely) Christians. I think it goes something like this: “To he who has much even more shall be given, and from he who has little even that shall be taken away.” It’s in all the Synoptic Gospels, and twice in Matthew.

I think I understand now why some Marxists really didn’t like the Christian Church.

[elucidator]

I have heard it said by people who’s Biblical knowledge I respect is that the passage is referring to spiritual will, faith or grace. He who has it will have more of it, and he who has little faith will have even that evaporate. Whether that is its original meaning is a question, but it does not necessarily refer to class struggle. Not necessarily, at any rate.

[eschereal]

from SRIotD:

@Rick_Kitchen

Not a stupid idea, but an evil idea.

Jeb! wants to do away with food stamps, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and federal housing subsidies, and replace them with block grants to whatever states want to bother to go through the process of applying for the money, and then the states can decide how to use the money.

[YogSothoth]

Jeb! is getting desperate with Iowa 2 weeks away. I’m looking forward to never hearing from him again. However, no matter how bad he does, he’ll probably try to pull a Rick Perry and run again next time.

[BigAppleBucky]

@foolsguinea

LBJ needed a stronger revenue stream & a much better foreign policy, but he had his good points.

As to the gerrymandering issue, we could solve that by doing what the Greeks do regarding voting rights: Even prisoners have the right to vote, except for those convicted of treason or mutiny. Even a resident of a psychiatric hospital has the right to vote unless specifically declared incompetent by a judge.

I think not only ex-convicts but prisoners should have the right to vote in general. Heck, ex-cons should even be able to run for office. (DeLay and Hastert might be delighted to hear that!) Otherwise, one can trump up new “felonies” to exclude political enemies from participation in high office, as the USA has done.

I agree about ex-convicts if they’ve gone through some sort of civic orientation program. It should be easy and straight forward.

But part of the punishment for committing crimes should be loss of civil rights. I have no objection to that.

Democratic politicians in urban areas would do well to work (HARD!!) toward having prisons built in their bailiwicks. That would increase their area’s population, would avoid giving otherwise “rotten” rural districts excess representation and would make life a little easier for the prisoners and their relatives.

[Superdude]

@Clothahump

Sigh. No. I simply said start there.

Posts like yours are why people say that liberalism is a mental disorder. You deliberately chose to overlook the point that I am making. The OP said let’s malicious GOP behavior. I asked why not pit malicious Democrat behavior as well, but OMG that’s just crazy talk because the Democrats have no malicious behavior at all, not one little bit, nosiree bob.How about just little things, like Democrats vandalizing Jeb Bush campaign signs?

There’s a shitload of stuff that the Dems have done. Neither side is innocent.

Yeah, but considering that you started the other thread, and couldn’t even name a valid example in your OP, I don’t think that very many of us are overly concerned with your idiotic viewpoints.

[eschereal]

Hard to tell evil from stupid.

@Toxgoddess

Missouri Republicans pass constitutional amendment to legalize discrimination against gays.

[Evil_Captor]

I have been of the opinion that the US is in the end game of unfettered capitalism, which is an oligarchy that is nominally a democracy, but in which the elected leaders are the paid stooges of the wealthy and the voters have little or no say in what the government does. But if the Republicans attain complete power, we may go beyond that, right in to bozocracy … government by clowns.

[MacCat]

@Evil_Captor

I have been of the opinion that the US is in the end game of unfettered capitalism, which is an oligarchy that is nominally a democracy, but in which the elected leaders are the paid stooges of the wealthy and the voters have little or no say in what the government does. But if the Republicans attain complete power, we may go beyond that, right in to bozocracy … government by clowns.

Very well said…

[Trinopus]

Many in the U.S. want unfettered capitalism, but too many of us remember the “Robber Baron” era – not to mention the collapse of 2007 – and won’t let them have what they want.

[eschereal]

@Evil_Captor

But if the Republicans attain complete power, we may go beyond that, right in to bozocracy … government by clowns.

Siriusly, I think there are a hundred-some thousand folks you owe an apology.

[hotflungwok]

@eschereal

Siriusly, I think there are a hundred-some thousand folks you owe an apology.

Not to mention all the actual hardworking clowns.

[eschereal]

I expect this here thread will probably start getting a bit more action.

@Mr.Miskatonic

… since the GOP didn’t win all they wanted in North Carlona they are doing all they can to strip power from the new legislation.

[GIGObuster]

This needs a bit of a setup:

Exxon Knew about Climate Change Almost 40 Years Ago

Exxon was aware of climate change, as early as 1977, 11 years before it became a public issue, according to a recent investigation from InsideClimate News. This knowledge did not prevent the company (now ExxonMobil and the world’s largest oil and gas company) from spending decades refusing to publicly acknowledge climate change and even promoting climate misinformation—an approach many have likened to the lies spread by the tobacco industry regarding the health risks of smoking. Both industries were conscious that their products wouldn’t stay profitable once the world understood the risks, so much so that they used the same consultants to develop strategies on how to communicate with the public.

Experts, however, aren’t terribly surprised. “It’s never been remotely plausible that they did not understand the science,” says Naomi Oreskes, a history of science professor at Harvard University. But as it turns out, Exxon didn’t just understand the science, the company actively engaged with it. In the 1970s and 1980s it employed top scientists to look into the issue and launched its own ambitious research program that empirically sampled carbon dioxide and built rigorous climate models. Exxon even spent more than $1 million on a tanker project that would tackle how much CO2 is absorbed by the oceans. It was one of the biggest scientific questions of the time, meaning that Exxon was truly conducting unprecedented research.

As some right wing dopers claim that they learned elsewhere about the harms that we will likely get if we continue treating the Atmosphere as a sewer, I still wonder if they are sincere about learning because they look at things like this and they still do not see anything bad:

Trump Taps Climate Change Denier for Secretary of Interior

Trump Taps Climate Change Denier for Secretary of Interior

U.S. Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a sixth-term Republican from Washington State who is a climate change denier and an ardent opponent of regulations for greenhouse gas emissions, has been nominated by President-elect Donald Trump for Secretary of Interior.

If McMorris Rodgers is confirmed by the U.S. Senate, she would govern the management of more than 500 million acres of federal public lands, including more than 400 national parks.

“Scientific reports are inconclusive at best on human culpability of global warming,” McMorris Rodgers falsely toldthe Spokane, Wash., Spokesman-Review newspaper in 2012. “Regardless of which theory proves correct, the goal is the same – to reduce carbon emissions, we need innovation in the private sector; not excessive government regulation to stifle some industries while rewarding others. I oppose ‘cap and trade’ and other big government schemes because they will destroy jobs while likely having minimal impact on the climate.”

McMorris Rodgers signed a 2012 pledge sponsored by Americans for Prosperity, a conservative political advocacy group funded by billionaire David Koch, promising that she would oppose any federal climate-related legislation that would raise revenue for the federal government, including a carbon tax.

Trump's Secretary of State Pick Is Wrong About Climate Change—But Not in the...

Trump’s Secretary of State Pick Is Wrong About Climate Change—But Not in the Way You Think

He’s since continued to acknowledge that climate change is real, and under Tillerson’s (fairly recent) tutelage, ExxonMobil switched tracks on its approach to climate change. It now proclaims that “the risk of climate change is clear and the risk warrants action.”

However, both the company’s and Tillerson’s attitudes have been murky in the past. According to a Guardian report on his 2012 comments, Tillerson expressed skepticism toward the accuracy of climate models and accused environmental advocacy groups of “manufactur[ing] fear.” He also blamed “lazy” journalists for reproducing these supposed scare tactics.

ExxonMobil’s relationship is even cloudier. Two 2015 investigations—one by InsideClimate News, for which the publication was a finalist for the Pulitzer prize, and one by the Los Angeles Times—shone a bright light on the company’s dodgy history with climate change science. Both reports found that the company knew more about climate change than it let on. For example, in 1977, an Exxon senior scientist said that “the most likely manner in which mankind is influencing the global climate is through carbon dioxide release from the burning of fossil fuels.” Yet later on, the company became a staunch denier of climate change. Indeed, Tillerson’s predecessor, Lee Raymond, argued in 2001 that natural sources were partially responsible for the greenhouse effect driving climate change. Under Tillerson, ExxonMobil has staunchly denied the findings of both of the 2015 investigations. The company has also heavily criticized New York Attorney General Eric Scheiderman, who in November 2015 launched a probe into whether the company deliberately deceived the public.

But while he may acknowledge the indisputable conclusion that our appetite for fossil fuel is slowing killing our home planet, Tillerson’s views on how to solve the problem diverge from those of some climate scientists

This underscores how Tillerson could usher in a “technology will solve everything” attitude toward rising temperatures. “This could be seen a distinctly Republican brand of climate effort, representing a kind of brave new world in climate policy, but one certain to be highly controversial,” Paul Bledsoe, an energy and climate consultant and a former Clinton White House climate adviser, told The Washington Post.

That controversy isn’t coming out of nowhere, because at this point, a “tech fix” is a largely hypothetical solution. It’s also one the CEO of a large energy company would advocate for, because it allows him and his fellow suits to continue to make oodles and oodles of money without actually sacrificing much. And crucially, while Tillerson might be talking about an engineering answer, ExxonMobil’s record doesn’t suggest it’s actually working toward one. It simply assumes other people—scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs, inventors—will come up with a magical solution to the problem.

TLDR: Even the less of the deniers in Trump’s cabinet is someone that already knows how harmful the emissions from fossil fuels are and will be. They will make moves to make it worse for all in the future anyhow. And let others try to solve the problem and not pay a thing for the disruption.

A very nasty form of evil.

When a reporter once told Trump that he was like a cartoon villain, he was; Trump and buddies are like the villains from Captain Planet.

[BigAppleBucky]

@eschereal

I expect this here thread will probably start getting a bit more action.

The North Carolina GOP-evil is worthy of a pitting of its own. They are amazingly brazen.

[SteveG1]

@CalMeacham

We could, and should.

But reaching all the way back to 1948 for an equivalence when the GOP version is listing contemporary cases seems like a bit of a reach.

Yeah, it’s pretty weak. Maybe we can go further back to the Whigs or the Know Nothings too.

[SteveG1]

@eschereal

Hard to tell evil from stupid.

What’s the gun law like there? Would Bubba and Billy Bob and Cooter want to pick on some gay dude who is armed to the teeth?
Doubt it.

[Superdude]

@GIGObuster

When a reporter once told Trump that he was like a cartoon villain, he was; Trump and buddies are like the villains from Captain Planet.

But, as we can see in this bit of footage, the real Captain Planet is feeling the stress of this debate.

[Clothahump]

iginally Posted by septimus
We really need a thread for Republican malice. Much of what the GOP does isn’t “stupid” in a clinical sense; it’s evil and malicious but stupid only in the sense that voters are stupid to want malicious leaders.

Cite?

[MacCat]

@Clothahump

Cite?

Cite for what? A simple, clear and accurate statement?