Arguments of Free Will and Determinism seem lost to this generation. It is odd that some of those who are champions of civil right are often at the same time so deterministic, as if rights are contingent on an inability to control oneself, “Leopards cannot change their spots.” Identity is fixed, and so too thought, forever. And yet, the most fluid expression of authenticity is to change one’s mind, but the Determinists out there simply won’t have it. A criminal is forever thus, so too a political adversary, no chance ever of rehabilitation, or parole.
Taunting me, or anyone else here, is not going to move your point forward one centimeter. The vote in the House was on strict party lines. You might well ask why no Democrats voted against it, but you will not. The vote in the Senate also missed the mark, but you rush to single out one person as responsible for all failure. Others here pointed out the size and scope of the legislation, which is something to consider. It may or may not have been overreach, but there were things in it that bill, such as the creation of a federal holiday, redistricting and campaign finance which may have been best treated in other legislation. All of this, recall, when the matter of closing a loophole in the 1871 legislation, which Trump and his minions were exploiting, went untended. The loophole still has not been fixed, and now the Supreme Court in its next session may end up rendering this moot. In the meantime, Liz Cheyney is quite seriously trying to defeat a cult of personality which is infecting the Republican Party. She has my support for that.
I asked a question, which you refuse to answer. Cheney is doing no such thing. She is just offended by Trump's manner. She has spent her life trying to advance white supremacy and Christian nationalism. Pretending she hasn't is why we are where we are
You surely know the old "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". As long as the enemy is those who would end our democracy, on that issue, Liz is my friend.
But, so what? She's not pretending to be a Democrat. I think since she has ruined her career, lost her standing in her party and faces violence against her and her family shows amazing amount of courage. If she were a witness against a mob boss who she had once worked for, she would be considered brave and honest. And that's exactly what Trump is, a crime boss. He hurts anyone who goes against him and licks the boots of anyone (Putin) who is more disreputable than him. And Fox News aids and abets him. There is no organization more anti democracy than Fox News.
Actually, that's not the definition of "patriot," Mr. Mccrary--in fact it has nothing to do with the term, which can applied to nationalistic monarchists and fascists. I'm sure you know that.
Cheney's vote against the John Lewis act does not by any stretch make her stance on voting rights the same as Thurmond's. The toxic threat to voting right comes from the MAGA forces she is fighting.
Those in Congress are generally wealthy, and people who are very wealthy are less likely to be motivated by the prospects of a salary. Her daddy can't get her the jobs that seem to motivate her, which involve elected office. She gave up something she values--a party leadership position--and accepted waves of opprobrium from those whose support she had depended on.
You can lob easy smoke bombs all you like, but attitudes like the ones your expressing are bad tactics for achieving the goals your statements suggest.
She courageously takes the same stand on voting rights as Strom Thurmmond and courageously voted for Trump in 2016?
Arguments of Free Will and Determinism seem lost to this generation. It is odd that some of those who are champions of civil right are often at the same time so deterministic, as if rights are contingent on an inability to control oneself, “Leopards cannot change their spots.” Identity is fixed, and so too thought, forever. And yet, the most fluid expression of authenticity is to change one’s mind, but the Determinists out there simply won’t have it. A criminal is forever thus, so too a political adversary, no chance ever of rehabilitation, or parole.
So, she flipped on voting rights protections? Got proof of that?
Taunting me, or anyone else here, is not going to move your point forward one centimeter. The vote in the House was on strict party lines. You might well ask why no Democrats voted against it, but you will not. The vote in the Senate also missed the mark, but you rush to single out one person as responsible for all failure. Others here pointed out the size and scope of the legislation, which is something to consider. It may or may not have been overreach, but there were things in it that bill, such as the creation of a federal holiday, redistricting and campaign finance which may have been best treated in other legislation. All of this, recall, when the matter of closing a loophole in the 1871 legislation, which Trump and his minions were exploiting, went untended. The loophole still has not been fixed, and now the Supreme Court in its next session may end up rendering this moot. In the meantime, Liz Cheyney is quite seriously trying to defeat a cult of personality which is infecting the Republican Party. She has my support for that.
I asked a question, which you refuse to answer. Cheney is doing no such thing. She is just offended by Trump's manner. She has spent her life trying to advance white supremacy and Christian nationalism. Pretending she hasn't is why we are where we are
You surely know the old "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". As long as the enemy is those who would end our democracy, on that issue, Liz is my friend.
She supports democracy for some, but not for all.
She supports our Democracy and the peaceful transfer of power. That's good enough for me.
She does? That's why she opposes guaranteed voting rights for Black Americans?
Jeezis H. Keerist! Do you not understand the threat that we face at this moment and the value of what Liz is doing in the face of it?
Nursing grievances over other political differences is irrelevant now. Focus, for God's sake.
Voting rights restrictions based on race is fat more than a political grievance
Voting rights won't matter if they don't bother to count the votes or throw them out if they don't like the results.
I would like to strip the rights of those who phoned into Kinzinger's office. Wouldn't you?
I would like to strip the hide off of their backsides. Their parents taught them better than this.
But, so what? She's not pretending to be a Democrat. I think since she has ruined her career, lost her standing in her party and faces violence against her and her family shows amazing amount of courage. If she were a witness against a mob boss who she had once worked for, she would be considered brave and honest. And that's exactly what Trump is, a crime boss. He hurts anyone who goes against him and licks the boots of anyone (Putin) who is more disreputable than him. And Fox News aids and abets him. There is no organization more anti democracy than Fox News.
A patriot supports voting rights for everyone.
She's rich and her daddy can get her any job she wants What did she lose?
Actually, that's not the definition of "patriot," Mr. Mccrary--in fact it has nothing to do with the term, which can applied to nationalistic monarchists and fascists. I'm sure you know that.
Cheney's vote against the John Lewis act does not by any stretch make her stance on voting rights the same as Thurmond's. The toxic threat to voting right comes from the MAGA forces she is fighting.
Those in Congress are generally wealthy, and people who are very wealthy are less likely to be motivated by the prospects of a salary. Her daddy can't get her the jobs that seem to motivate her, which involve elected office. She gave up something she values--a party leadership position--and accepted waves of opprobrium from those whose support she had depended on.
You can lob easy smoke bombs all you like, but attitudes like the ones your expressing are bad tactics for achieving the goals your statements suggest.
I would belive he pretended to support her views when it was convenient.