GOP Failure Watch Part IV (the Majority in Congress edition)

I can't quote from the closed thread, but since when did George Will -- or anybody else in the GOP -- dislike a high incarceration rate. The GOP has run on law-and-order since I was a wee lad. Lock up the baddies, the Dems are soft on crime. Now George Will says that's a bad thing? Can you do than and still be a Republican?

 

Perhaps you should ask George Will instead of assuming he's in lock-step with the entire GOP? Methinks you've projected some stuff onto him that may, in fact, be inappropriate.

Pretty sure at least Rand Paul, and probably Justin Amash, Thomas Massie and I would be shocked if there weren't others in the GOP who were rather critical of high incarceration and "law and order" as an end in itself.

 

Doubt he'll answer my email.

Well anyway, I did a bit of homework. Sure enough, in 2008 George wrote "More Prisoners, Less Crime," which was an argument for higher incarceration rates.

 

And he appears to have at least partially changed his tune, so where does that put us?

 

Moar Gunz?

 

Where that puts us, I think, is that on the subject of prisons, the mainstream GOP is moving from Rudy G to Rand Paul. Which is progress.

 

I actually wish I could be as optimistic, TBH. I listed a few, but I don't think the number's a lot bigger than that. I think the pundits and the non-politician rank-and-file is a lot further along, though, which is good. As always, it's the politicians who are the problem.

 

George Will is as mainstream as any Republican gets. Sometimes he leads the party by a few years, as with disliking Sarah Palin, thinking (quietly) that W effed up in Iraq, or criticizing Nixon on Watergate, but pretty much the party always gets to where George is.

So that is my reading of the matter; Will is laying the groundwork, and yes the politicians will follow.

 

Not to mention Private Correction Companies...

http://www.dunwalke.com/9_Cornell_Corrections.htm

 

Republicans are already looking for a new government shutdown. Or at least the DHS.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/immigration-reform-republicans-house-114251.html?hp=l2_4

1st page!

 

Shutting down DHS sounds delightful. Is there a problem with that?

Mind you, that seems surprising coming from many Republicans. DHS is their fap material.

 

Remember the 2 rules of partisan hackery

1. It's judicial activism when the justices rule in favor of something you are opposed to (or vice versa), but if they rule in a way you agree with they are doing gods work and need to be lauded at every step.

2. The Unitary executive is OK as long as your guy is the executive...when it is the other guy...demonize!

 

A symbolic vote from the GOP. How surprising.

 

the GOP is so basic

 

Not funding DHS would drastically cut border security and deportations which is what GOPs think about when they see the angels while fapping.

 

Ah, good point.

They fap to weird shit.

 

Yeah, it doesn't make sense that this is one of the first things the House passes in 2015.

 

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/st...oni-ernst-state-union-rebuttal-sotu/21816953/

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Jesus H Christ on a motorbike... if it was thought possible it'd have been petitioned for...

This time the response might get better ratings than the speech...

 

If I wasn't from the midwest, I'd have to google to make sure The Des Moines Register wasn't an Onionesque satire paper.

That said, she can't do as poorly as Jindal or Rubio.

And THAT said, she wouldn't be a thing if the Democrats didn't ******** up in Iowa in a big way, from Brayley making comments about farmers (i.e., quite a bit of the constituency) to Michele Obama showing up at a rally so ill-prepared the crowd had to tell her the candidate's last name wasn't Bailey.

 

LOL. My son confessed to me this past weekend that he has not fully grasped the modern meaning of basic. I told him that was fine, I did not know that it even had a modern meaning until then.

So yeah, it's basic, whatever that means.

Oh and another symbolic vote for the House, this time on a provision weakening Wall Street regulations that the Senate will not pass, and which Obama would veto anyway. The GOP is so basic.

 

Wait, so their pH is really high?