Kansas Crimson

triggered

I know you are but what am I?

sick burn, bro

Take it to the kids thread.

you sure are bossy this morning

You seem like you could use a little direction today.

And you know me. I'm just here to help.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 12:37 pm And you know me. I'm just here to do my best _____ impression and pick a fight just cuz.

fixed

no wonder he follows you around like a puppy dog

tRiGgErEd

Trad really lacks self awareness.

It's never him. Always someone else.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 817207181a

"A legislature in Alaska caused outrage after questioning whether the death of child abuse victims could be "a cost savings," because it would mean they don't need "government services" later in life.

Republican David Eastman, who sits in the Alaska House of Representatives, made the comment on Monday during a House Judiciary Committee hearing.

Eastman said: "It can be argued, periodically, that it's actually a cost savings because that child is not going to need any of those government services that they might otherwise be entitled to receive and need based on growing up in this type of environment."

No soul whatsoever.

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Feb 22, 2023 10:08 am
"A legislature in Alaska caused outrage after questioning whether the death of child abuse victims could be "a cost savings," because it would mean they don't need "government services" later in life.

Agreed. No soul. Pure, nihilistic evil.

Beyond that, though, does Newsweek not have editors?

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Feb 22, 2023 10:08 am https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 817207181a

"A legislature in Alaska caused outrage after questioning whether the death of child abuse victims could be "a cost savings," because it would mean they don't need "government services" later in life.

Republican David Eastman, who sits in the Alaska House of Representatives, made the comment on Monday during a House Judiciary Committee hearing.

Eastman said: "It can be argued, periodically, that it's actually a cost savings because that child is not going to need any of those government services that they might otherwise be entitled to receive and need based on growing up in this type of environment."

No soul whatsoever.

He's a republican, what do you expect?

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 8:40 am

jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:05 pm My god she got less coherent as the day wore on.

Give them Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Arizona but strip all federal resources from the state. Charge them tolls on every inch of all federal interstates as well and charge them outrageous prices to sell them every federally built port, building or structure. Then install a 20+% tariff on any good sold to their new nation, including on food, parts, everything. You want to be on your own, then go be on your own and fuck off.

Or they could take their own advice and leave if they don't like it here.

And if there was a national divorce, what would red America do for industry, given that many of its economies are dependent on blue state manufacturers who utilize red state nonunion labor to manufacture their goods more cheaply?

If red America was merely a competitor to other low-wage manufacturing countries, they’d have to continually reduce wages in order to compete.

And based on the way individual red state economies like Mississippi, Kentucky and West Virginia operate now, they would be a nation of largely impoverished workers ruled by a small oligarchy of the very rich, with no health care, scant voting rights, and no autonomy for women.

They’d likely be largely dependent on oil and natural gas revenues, which are in diminishing supply. And that would mean they’d also be an ecological disaster, which would mean they’d probably need lots of national aid ... from blue America.

As evidence? Currently, most red states pay less into the federal tax coffers than they take out. So would the new red republic expect the blue states to pay alimony and child support in this “national divorce”?

How 'bout some charts?

Shoutout to Moscow Mitch! He ben donin work!

71% of America's GDP comes from counties that voted for Joe Biden in 2020.

"What the rest of us learned during the Trump era is that a party led by craven men and women — some of them cynical, others true believers, almost all afraid to speak out — will end up normalizing the transgressive, unethical, and moronic," Wehner wrote.

"Greene and McCarthy — one crazed, the other cowardly — embody a large swath of the modern-day GOP," he added. "Any party that makes room for seditionists and secessionists is sick and dangerous."

https://www.businessinsider.com/marjori ... ide-2023-2

KUTradition wrote: ↑Fri Feb 24, 2023 4:53 pm "What the rest of us learned during the Trump era is that a party led by craven men and women — some of them cynical, others true believers, almost all afraid to speak out — will end up normalizing the transgressive, unethical, and moronic," Wehner wrote.

"Greene and McCarthy — one crazed, the other cowardly — embody a large swath of the modern-day GOP," he added. "Any party that makes room for seditionists and secessionists is sick and dangerous."

https://www.businessinsider.com/marjori ... ide-2023-2

it's a party of cowards. Haley announces her campaign and because she has to demonstrate resolve and toughness talks about "standing up to bullies", but she won't even say Trump's name, or take the opportunity when she's asked over and over to simply point out how her policies would differ from his. Pompeo won't say his name, and Pence won't either.

McConnell and Cruz both let Trump trash their wives but are afraid to stand up to him.

I could go on.

DC can correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my impression that Michael Luttig is the closest thing the right has to a legal-intellectual Poobah since Antonin Scalia died. If you accept that premise, then Luttig's opinion piece in the NY Times today is not what you want to see if you're Mike Pence, especially future candidate for president, Mike Pence.

The enormity of Luttig's criticism of Pence's decision to fight Special Counsel Jack Smith’s subpoena for him to appear before a grand jury in Washington as part of the investigation into former President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election and the related Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol makes it impossible to summarize. It's scathing.

By J. Michael Luttig
(Mr. Luttig, a former judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, provided advice to then-Vice President Pence on the run-up to the Electoral College count on Jan. 6, 2021.)

Mike Pence’s Dangerous Ploy

...If Mr. Pence’s lawyers or advisers have told him that it will take the federal courts months and months or longer to decide his claim and that he will never have to testify before the grand jury, they are mistaken. We can expect the federal courts to make short shrift of this “Hail Mary” claim, and Mr. Pence doesn’t have a chance in the world of winning his case in any federal court and avoiding testifying before the grand jury.

Inasmuch as Mr. Pence’s claim is novel and an unsettled question in constitutional law, it is only novel and unsettled because there has never been a time in our country’s history where it was thought imperative for someone in a vice president’s position, or his lawyer, to conjure the argument. In other words, Mr. Pence’s claim is the proverbial invention of the mother of necessity if ever there was one.

[/...]

She's as bright as a blackout.

Sucks to suck Hawaii and Alaska.

Dueces.

No aid for Israel either! Or Michigan UP, for that matter.