Right, Kathy Griffin, my mistake. I should have looked it up before I spoke.
Cathy Griffith posted pictures of a decapitated Donald Trump. To do so she had to have a group of like minded people design everything necessary to take such photos and then post them. In their view of the world, Donald Trump is a monster that should be decapitated, ISIS style. They must have truly believed in their minds and in their hearts that what they were doing is right, and the rest of the US agrees with how they view Donald Trump.
I don't buy that interpretation of events for a second. Griffin is a comedian who has made herself rich and famous by being deliberately inflammatory. She partnered with an artist/photographer who is even more inflammatory. Tyler Shields's previous work has focused on graphic depictions of violence and sex, often involving stand-ins for US presidents and other celebrities. Look him up, the guy's a real piece of shit. His only goal life is to offend.
So no, I don't think that he thought for one minute that this photo shoot was okay. He knew it was obscene, and that was the whole point.
I realize you disagree and of course you would. Yes, Tyler Shields is a piece of shit, but Kathy felt like she knew what she was doing. That's the problem with echo chambers, you and your friends always think you are right. And Tyler was the perfect guy to take advantage of her. You know that she really believes in what she did because she has the audacity to then say that Trump ruined her life. Instead of realizing she made a mistake cognitive dissidence set in.
It turns out their perception was wrong. A very large portion of people believe what Cathy Griffith did was a horrible atrocious act. How is it possible?
His perception was exactly right. He knew people would be outraged, and that's the reaction he was hoping for. That's how he stays "famous". Like I said, he's a piece of shit.
Still doesn't explain Kathy
If Seniors are so likely to vote, do you really believe that there is a single candidate willing to destroy their largest base of voters?
I think you've confused the party's voters with the party's constituency.
The Republican party represents wealthy business interests. They promote lower taxes on rich people, higher taxes on poor people, and less regulation on what businesses can and can't do. They want more law enforcement of poor black communities but less law enforcement of white collar crime. They preach a gospel of individual liberty, unless you are a woman, or gay, or unintentionally pregnant, or brown. They want fewer restrictions on gun ownership, except in inner cities.
In order to further these interests, they need voters. In order to get voters, they need money to buy allegiance. They aren't trying to sway elections by proposing ideas that are important to their voters, they are trying to sway elections by telling their voters which ideas should be important to them. That strategy requires newspapers and tv networks, AM radio talk show hosts, and elected representatives who can be bought off enough to parrot their lies. It needs money. Money comes from wealthy business owners, not voters.
The Republican health care plan is a giant fuck-you to senior citizens. Compared to the ACA, their premiums would skyrocket and their coverage would be skimpier. The GOP health care plan takes healthcare away from millions of poor and elderly Americans in order to pay for a tax cut for the wealthiest Americans. Who do you think is the real constituency here?
They're not worried about losing the votes of senior citizens. Those votes can be bought back with enough Fox News coverage about how our seniors made a noble sacrifice to save the country from ruin. They're only worried about keeping the money flowing, and that means appeasing the Kochs and Adelsons of the world.
Here is the flaw in your statement you think only republicans need money but that is a flat out lie. Democrats need money too and Hillary raised a hell of a lot more cash from wealthy Americans than Trump did. Outside of a select few, the reality is that both democrat and republican politicians are scum who will do anything for money and to get reelected. Democrats say they are for the poor but in reality they take money from the rich and only provide the minimum of services to make the poor tolerate them. They should be looking for ways to get the poor out of the slums instead of just providing them with some cheap housing and government subsidized food. All this does is make those people dependent on those services and vote for more democrats. It is kinda slimy. Don't get me wrong, that is not the outcome in totality. Many people utilize those resources to better themselves, but the reality is that there are more people on social services today than 20 years ago. Is that a good thing? I don't, on the one hand it could be that we are providing for more people that really need it. On the other hand we may have created more dependents that should be able to take care of themselves but don't. Like everything else, I would bet the real answer lies somewhere in the middle.
Also, the ACA did nothing to help senior citizens. And repealing it will do nothing to harm them. Senior Citizens are on Medicare so that topic is kinda moot. It affected reimbursement from Medicare, but does absolutely nothing regarding how senior citizens get medical care.
I also love the comment regarding cutting taxes for the rich.
1) ACA taxed the rich and therefor repealing it would repeal the tax increase.
2) Since the rich pay the most taxes, obviously any tax cut will affect them the most. duhhh.
3) The comment is just as disingenuous as saying "most Americans don't pay taxes." That is also not true most Americans pay Social Security, Medicare tax and sales tax. They don't pay income tax.
4) It is really easy to spin a topic to sound worse than it is using misleading phrasing as I described above.
Maybe you are wrong and maybe the goal of conservatives is not to "fuck over the elderly."
I used to spend more time and effort trying to give them the benefit of the doubt. I thought long and hard about why the GOP could possibly think supply side economics would work this time, when it never has before. Why they thought taking health insurance from tens of millions of Americans would fulfill their campaign promise of coverage for everyone. About why they think the way to improve public education is to gut its funding, why they think the way to deal with climate change is to make it worse, why they think the way to fight terrorism is to start wars. The only unifying theme that I found in all of these ideas is (and maybe you're catching on enough that this won't be a surprise at this point) is that all of these seemingly asinine ideas are good for business. They make even more money for the wealthiest Americans, at the expense of average Americans. They promote the wealth inequality that is the very foundation of the Republican party.
I'm open to hearing other ideas, if you have any genius suggestions for what alternative unifying theme might motivate such a seemingly disparate array of republican policy positions.
You are correct that there are plenty of far right republicans who are racist horrible human beings. Just as there are plenty of far left democrats who are equally repugnant for other reasons. It is disingenuous to judge all republicans and democrats based on the views of the far right and the far left. There is a middle ground in there where most people actually fall into. But to think that all republicans, ~50% of the population voted to destroy the poor and the minorities is preposterous. Just as preposterous for a republican to think that democrats are actually communists.
The reality is that both sides of the isle promote whatever their lobbyists are asking for. I actually believe we need to dismantle the department of education and send all that money back to the states. Our education has gotten worse since its inception and I think all it does is create more bureaucracy in the education system. Also, democrats fight wars also, Obama and Clinton ordered their own bombings. McCain in my opinion is a pawn of the military complex and will do anything that leads to more military spending.
Supply side economics: I think there is a line where too much regulation and too much taxes hinders economic growth, while a the same time not enough regulation allows corporations to run wild putting employees and sometimes consumers at risk.Since I know healthcare the most, I think we have crossed that line towards too much regulation. With regards to other commerce I do not know and would prefer to defer my views to someone who lives and understands it better.
Equally there is a large percentage of poor people who vote conservative. They also don't think their elected officials are trying to fuck them over.
They've been deceived. Many poor people who vote republican have been tricked into that support with seductive advertising about "personal responsibility" and "individual liberty" even though our wealthiest citizens don't really believe in any of that. Trump inherited his fortune and appears to lack a moral compass, how personally responsible is he? Individual liberty sounds great, unless you're black or gay or muslim, in which case it usually rings a little hollow as the republican party systematically deprives you of your individual liberties.
Kinda funny again, you are the wealthiest of citizens. The really wealthy, the so called 0.1% is a tiny tiny fraction of the US, many of which buy political power from both sides of the isle. It is all a big orgy of cash for favors.
I would also like to point out that although there are racist republicans out there, the majority are not and have no issues of civil liberty regardless off race or gender. I'm not quite sure how the republican party deprives you of individual liberties except maybe abortion and gay marriage. Democrats deprive you of liberties like gun control, freedom of speech, and higher taxes. Maybe it is just the liberties you are willing to give up. I will elaborate, there are some liberals, not all who are willing to slander and even riot when conservatives want to congregate together ad practice their freedom of speech.
Islam is an in interesting subject regarding human rights. On the one hand we want to allow people the right of freedom of religion. But on the other hand the religion preaches homophobia and minimizing the rights of women. Makes the subject very confusing and difficult to agree on the right thing. There is a lot of Islamophobia in the world today, and up until recently there was very little denouncing of radical Islam by Muslim communities. Only in the last few years are we seeing it more publicly. I think we need a bit more of that to be seen in the media. Maybe we would have less recruitment of most Muslims were blatant about how wrong that type of thinking is.
Poor rural white Americans sometimes support the republican party platform of enhancing wealth inequality. Not because they actually support a system that keeps them poor while enriching the born Trumps of the world, but because they have been deceived into believing that their systematic economic oppression is a necessary part of their perceived economic opportunity. They want to believe that they too can become rich like Trump, if they just support enough crony capitalist politicians who further enhance wealth inequality, without realizing that their support of those politicians is the very thing preventing them from rising out of poverty. You think the Trumps of the world give a rat's ass about poor people?
Again, it is the political system as a whole not just democrats or republicans that are the problem. Healthcare, the actual topic of this thread is a great example. Not a single political figure is willing to work on cutting the cost of healthcare. They still want the corporations on top to make all that money, we just argue about who will foot the bill.
Some use terms like "class warfare" to describe the liberal movement. Are the conservative voters just stupid?
It absolutely IS class warfare, but they'e got the wrong party. The Democratic party has spent three generations fighting for the rights of blue collar workers, while Republicans further divide America into the haves and the have-nots. It's Republicans like Trump who are conducting class warfare, by using a calculated public performance of success and wealth to inspire our poorest citizens to self-destructively support further social and economic inequality. They're like 1850s plantation slaves pressed into service to hunt down runaway slaves with the argument that runaways make it harder for the slaves left behind.
I used the words "class warfare" to describe another bullshit statement. America has amazing ability for class mobility. All you need is discipline and education. Yes it is harder if your parents don't promote education or hard work. But I see so many people of different gender and ethnicity in every level of wealth. I am a prime example of being a minority starting out in a very poor environment and now living the so called American Dream. Indeed I was lucky that my parents were married and not alcoholics or drug addicts. I am just as lucky I was not born a female in Iran for example. It doesn't mean that government has any ability to change my luck.
Over my short life I see laws passed from both sides of the isle that either help the poor or help the rich but seams to always affect the middle class the most. I honestly do not believe that democrats have done anything of value for the middle class in the last 30 years. I have the same comment about the republicans. Unfortunately all these laws just keep squeezing the middle class the most. ACA is a wonderful example of the middle class being forced to pay more for their own healthcare. Higher taxes affect the middle class the most. The rich can afford a percent or two, The middle class that is scraping by will feel it the most. I think the middle class getting fucked over is the exact reason why we keep switching between democrats and republicans in office. They just keep hoping something will be different.
BTW, comparing class warfare to slavery is just as ridiculous as comparing Trump to Hitler. Statements like that are used when logic fails and we need to continue to argue. It would be no different than calling your neighbor a racist because he voted republican last year. Some people believe that using such terminology is a sign of cognitive dissonance.
What I do know is when we use such blatant comments as "fuck over the poor" or "class warfare" all it shows is that we are stuck in an echo chamber of like minded individuals who may be estranged from reality and the possibility that our perceptions may be flawed.
I don't feel like I'm in an echo chamber, I feel like I'm shouting into the void. All three branches of US government currently parrot the Trump/Ryan philosophy of America, which I find repulsive. Everyone around me says the only way to save America is to destroy everything we have built together, and I feel like the one lone rational voice left in a sea of lies, stupidity, and complicity.
I kinda agree with you here except I think we are all stuck in some form of echo chamber. I think our government is very corrupt from far left all the way to far right. I just don't see many genuine representative any more. I would love to see some term limits in Congress as that may change things up a bit, but I doubt that will ever happen.
I choose to use inflammatory language to describe the destruction of the American ethos because I find it a deeply inflammatory development. I'm always open to having my views changed, if I find an argument that relies on rationality and history and makes a compelling case, but so far that hasn't described anything the GOP has done in the past few cycles.
Unfortunately when you use inflammatory langue that is where you hear your echo the most. the only people who respond are the like minded folks. Unfortunately, those who have differing views tend to stay quite as they were just insulted by said inflammatory language.
Topic: What comes after the ACA? (Read 1997435 times)