The Watering Hole; Friday June 27 2014; Can STUPID be Summarized?

The 2014 primary elections in Colorado were this last Tuesday. The Democrat ballot had a dozen or so “contests” on it, but each ‘contest’ had only one contestant. Interesting, I thought, that there were no real choices to make other than whether or not to take the time to read the names and either leave them blank or mark them with an ‘X’. That was NOT the case on the Republican side of the swamp, however. There, there were numerous choices for each contest — not all that surprising in this era where the ‘baggers are working their fingers to the bone to rid the world of anyone who might be considered “mainstream.” Problem is, though, that more often than not (and in GOP primaries across the country, not just here in Colorado), the closest the favorite/winner ever gets to ‘mainstream’ is that he’s not quite as nuts or demented as the ones beneath him in the final count.

Anyway, the GOP “winners” (my way of spelling ‘losers’) here, i.e. the dudes who will be on the ticket in November running against Democrats who are generally bright, progressive, and competent, are reviewed and duly summarized in just the title of a Think Progress article: Climate Change Deniers Prevail In Colorado GOP PrimariesI could probably rant for several pages on the surreal and unbelievable stupidity and shallowness of the GOP’s candidate slate here, in Colorado. But I won’t, because I’m pretty sure that there’s probably no more collective GOP stupidity here than in any other state, so there’d be nothing new in any rant I might come up with. I do admit, however, that I was surprised that Climate Change Denial was so prominent a GOP feature this year. And frankly, I’ve seen virtually zero evidence that the issue has much variance from state to state amongst Republican candidates. In fact, I have to wonder: just how uniform — across the country — is Republican stupidity? Can anyone point to a GOP candidate anywhere that is NOT a climate change denier? And on so many other issues, is the candidate philosophy uniform across the board, or at least nearly so? Are they, each and all, uniformly against, to name but the few that quickly come to mind:

Climate Science
Renewable Energy
Public Education
Workers’ Rights/Labor Unions
Social Security
Medicare
ACA/Medicaid
Abortion
Contraception
Closing Corporate Tax Loopholes
Immigration Reform
Gun Control (any or all issues therein)
Environmental Protection (EPA)
Raising Minimum Wage
Food Stamps
Tax Reform

If they’re generally against all of that (and more, I’m sure), what are they uniformly FOR? I can only come up with three:

Impeaching Obama
War (most anywhere)
Enriching their Corporate and Wall Street Benefactors

I know I’m missing a whole bunch of issues on the ‘against’ side, maybe even one or two on the ‘for’ side. What’s missing? Contributions welcome!

OPEN THREAD

 

 

35 thoughts on “The Watering Hole; Friday June 27 2014; Can STUPID be Summarized?

  1. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/06/26/supreme-court-limits-president-recess-appointment-power/

    Justice Stephen Breyer said in his majority opinion that a congressional break has to last at least 10 days to be considered a recess under the Constitution.

    “Three days is too short a time to bring a recess within the scope of the Clause. Thus we conclude that the President lacked the power to make the recess appointments here at issue,” Breyer wrote.

    Where the hell did allathat come from? An article in the NY Times notes:

    The Constitution’s recess-appointments clause says, “The president shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate.”

    Analyzing that language, a three-judge panel of the appeals court said that presidents may bypass the Senate only during the recesses between formal sessions of Congress. Two of the judges went further, saying that presidents may fill only vacancies that came up during that same recess.

    So, do I read that right, that the interpretation of the Constitution must rely on traditions and processes that were in play back when the document was first ratified?

    OK, so: Suppose I agree with that premise. Does that then mean that “the right to bear arms” allows solely and for all time that the only “arms” that are Constitutional are flintlocks? That anything other or more modern is automatically disqualified as being defined as “arms”??

    If that were only so, I might find the means to support the SCOTUS decision on recess appointments.

    Who can I call to get a quick opinion on that in order for unconstitutional/illegal gun confiscation to immediately proceed?

    • Gotta wonder if or when that will become the equivalent of climate change denierism to the entire Republican party. Actually, I can’t wait!!

    • Voter fraud and the need for IDs has to take a back seat to finding a way to verify that political candidates are actually residents of reality.

    • To Cavuto’s credit, he did indeed tack her to the cross. My guess is that today, Batshit has holes in her hands, is dressed in a loincloth and laid out on a slab in a cave, all-the-while waiting to see if on Sunday morning the groundhog sees his shadow. Something like that.

  2. I have had a relatively bug-free spring and summer. I hate that it will cease when Gisela becomes bored with catching them. Of course, I do find things knocked over and scattered sometimes.

  3. So….. if you are a fundy Christian…. you believe in the following:

    1. The righteous are resurrected bodily into heaven upon death. And maybe, you get to be resurrected in your prime – after all, who would wish to look like they do at 92 years old when you die in heaven? But what if you are 2 (like the little girl who was shot by her brother yesterday exercising his 2nd Amendment rights to open carry in the playroom) – do you get to resurrect all grown up? How did you get your life experiences? Hmm.

    2. Human life beings at conception…. so those blastocysts…. they’s people sports fans.

    3. The ones that never attach to the womb or miscarry in the first tri….. well in #1 above, they are resurrected bodily into heaven right?

    4. 1, 2 and 3…… ew…. icky.

    I have thought on this enough… it seems silly to me… and if you believe all this…. well guess what?

  4. They’re for Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.

    They’re against His teachings.

  5. “Women’s safety,” my ass.

    In my time working with abortion providers and abortion rights advocates over the last few years, I’ve seen first hand what is considered “counseling” by abortion opponents at unprotected clinics. In Louisville, Kentucky, one of only two clinics left in the Bluegrass state, I witnessed over 100 abortion opponents lining the sidewalk leading up to the clinic, stopping just at the property line in front of the door, chanting rosaries, calling to patients, preaching sin and eternal damnation through a microphone just a few feet from the waiting room window. I watched a woman shout through the window that the patients inside would die on the exam room table, that they would bleed to death inside, and no one would help them because the money was already paid up front. I saw protesters with bloody, graphic signs swarm patients just trying to get out of the car door and cross the mere 10 feet from curb to clinic property.

    That’s what it is like at a clinic with no buffer zone.

    http://www.salon.com/2014/06/27/the_rights_cynical_wordplay_womens_safety_means_absolutely_nothing_anymore/

    • This SCOTUS is wrapped around corporations and effen fundamentalists.
      (Free Speech Zones – corrals – should be banned – given this recent ruling)

      What will happen:

      The justices will meet one last time on Monday to hand down decisions in cases involving the Obama health law requirement that employers cover women’s contraception in their employee health plans and the ability of unions representing government employees to collect fees from workers who don’t wish to join the union..

  6. Alabama city council cancels prayer from Wiccan because of community ‘collywobbles

    Citing “community fears,” the Huntsville, Alabama City Council refused to allow a practicing Wiccan to give the opening invocation at its meeting this week.

    • I missed hearing about that. I seldom keep up with local news anymore.

Comments are closed.