What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

GOP Censures Cheney and Kinzinger - thoughts? (2 Viewers)

Now starting the 4th page of this thread and I've yet to see any conservatives on this board denounce this censure of their own GOP representatives. I've seen BLM. I've seen whataboutisms. I've seen approval based on false pretenses (or alternate facts, ie; lies.) Not one denouncement from conservatives. I've seen snide remarks like the pot-shot right above this post. It's quite telling.

 
Now starting the 4th page of this thread and I've yet to see any conservatives on this board denounce this censure of their own GOP representatives. I've seen BLM. I've seen whataboutisms. I've seen approval based on false pretenses (or alternate facts, ie; lies.) Not one denouncement from conservatives. I've seen snide remarks like the pot-shot right above this post. It's quite telling.


We've also seen a poster accuse another poster of racism without even bothering to apologize after being corrected. It is quite telling.

 
2Squirrels1Nut said:
How about his praise, love even, for fascist, mass murdering, dictators? 
I was watching a Hitler documentary this weekend.  I’ve heard that Trump read Mein Kempf and had a bit of a fascination with Hitler. I followed Trump very closely and one of the things I remember him describing over and over was “the day I came down that elevator.” (The day he announced he was running for President).  I always thought it was hokey that he chose such an important moment to begin with him coming down an escalator.  Seemed odd.  But every time he mentioned him running he talked about “coming down that escalator.”

Fast forward to last night while I’m watching the Hitler show.  They describe a moment when Hitler flew into the Sudetenland right after he took it over.  He was to give a speech.  Flying was uncommon back then, especially for heads of state.  But Hitler insisted on doing it for the imagery it presented - like he was descending from the heavens as a Messiah.  It was one of those 😳 moments for me. 

 
Now starting the 4th page of this thread and I've yet to see any conservatives on this board denounce this censure of their own GOP representatives. I've seen BLM. I've seen whataboutisms. I've seen approval based on false pretenses (or alternate facts, ie; lies.) Not one denouncement from conservatives. I've seen snide remarks like the pot-shot right above this post. It's quite telling.


I did on page one.  

 
We've also seen a poster accuse another poster of racism without even bothering to apologize after being corrected. It is quite telling.
I wasn't corrected. Two different definitions/meanings of the phrase you used were posted. One which backed up my post, one which didn't. Each of those meanings can be and are correct.

 
2Squirrels1Nut said:
How about his praise, love even, for fascist, mass murdering, dictators? 
I bet you're wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt, aren't you?
You have been taking personal shots at me and other posters here for a long time.  As I once replied to you many months ago, I don't know what's going on in your life to make you do this but I will continue to pray that love enters your heart, mind and life. 

 
I wasn't corrected. Two different definitions/meanings of the phrase you used were posted. One which backed up my post, one which didn't. Each of those meanings can be and are correct.


You were incorrect. There no competing meanings. Stop trying to justify your terrible behavior.

I would suggest to start thinking for yourself instead of going for the standard liberal response when someone disagrees with you.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You have been taking personal shots at me and other posters here for a long time.  As I once replied to you many months ago, I don't know what's going on in your life to make you do this but I will continue to pray that love enters your heart, mind and life. 


Fair enough.  

I appreciate the prayers.  One can never have too many of them. 👍

 
Now starting the 4th page of this thread and I've yet to see any conservatives on this board denounce this censure of their own GOP representatives. I've seen BLM. I've seen whataboutisms. I've seen approval based on false pretenses (or alternate facts, ie; lies.) Not one denouncement from conservatives. I've seen snide remarks like the pot-shot right above this post. It's quite telling.
I doubt my post is going to start a movement.  The entire thing is embarrassing.    It still isn’t making me run out to vote for Team Blue as its constructed.

 
I was watching a Hitler documentary this weekend.  I’ve heard that Trump read Mein Kempf and had a bit of a fascination with Hitler. I followed Trump very closely and one of the things I remember him describing over and over was “the day I came down that elevator.” (The day he announced he was running for President).  I always thought it was hokey that he chose such an important moment to begin with him coming down an escalator.  Seemed odd.  But every time he mentioned him running he talked about “coming down that escalator.”

Fast forward to last night while I’m watching the Hitler show.  They describe a moment when Hitler flew into the Sudetenland right after he took it over.  He was to give a speech.  Flying was uncommon back then, especially for heads of state.  But Hitler insisted on doing it for the imagery it presented - like he was descending from the heavens as a Messiah.  It was one of those 😳 moments for me. 
Oh yeah he’d be full on Generalissimo  Suits with the little brushes on the shoulders if he hadn’t dodged the draft.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Exposing the craziness of the RNC’s attempt to walk back the resolution to censure Kinzinger said the 1/6 committee would not have been formed if it wasn’t for the violence that occurred January 6 and only a peaceful protest would have occurred. Is it possible that there might have been hearings in regards the the fraudulent Trump electors in several states, or the attempts to seize voting machines that we only recently found out about?  Yes that’s possible although I am not sure we would have found out about what was going on regarding these issues if it wasn’t for the committee’s investigation to start with. 

 
Exposing the craziness of the RNC’s attempt to walk back the resolution to censure Kinzinger said the 1/6 committee would not have been formed if it wasn’t for the violence that occurred January 6 and only a peaceful protest would have occurred. Is it possible that there might have been hearings in regards the the fraudulent Trump electors in several states, or the attempts to seize voting machines that we only recently found out about?  Yes that’s possible although I am not sure we would have found out about what was going on regarding these issues if it wasn’t for the committee’s investigation to start with. 


The problem is that if they would have included it you would have pooh-poohed it anyways.

I mean, they even clarified their position and you still don't accept it.  You wouldn't have accepted it either way because you need to push the narrative.

Yeah, we get it. "Sidez!" - we all do it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The problem is that if they would have included it you would have pooh-poohed it anyways.

I mean, they even clarified their position and you still don't accept it.  You wouldn't have accepted it either way because you need to push the narrative.

Yeah, we get it. "Sidez!" - we all do it.
But as has been pointed out...their position "clarified" doesnt make any sense.  WHo is the committee persecuting?

Also...why did something that had to have been gone over time and time again...why did it need clarifying...the actual resolution is still there...no amount of backtracking changes the language in it.

 
I think the Censure is an interesting tactic.  And, I think it comes at a pivotal time in the Party.

I get why, from a political point of view - the House members want to align with Trump.  We have seen, over the last 4-5 years that GOP members who break from Trump have a difficult time staying in their elected positions.  And, so, if you are an elected official, who plans to run for re-election, history says: "Oppose Trump at your peril."

But at the same time the Censure was going down, I am seeing more non-elected Republicans sharply breaking with Trump - specifically on the "stolen election" issue.  Pence was a big voice; Christie also came out and condemned the movement.  You have a few moderate Senators, who are not up for re-election, also going against Trump here.

From a practical matter, I don't know that the censure really means much.  Kinzinger is already not running for re-election, and I think it will be interesting to see how this plays in Wyoming.  Cheney family seems to have deep political ties to Wyoming, even if Liz does not.  Wyoming also strikes me a bit like Alaska or Maine, a bit of an independent streak.  So, her speaking her mind, against the national party, might not be a huge negative.  I don't know.  But, if she wins her primary - what will have been accomplished?

I think the GOP has to have a reckoning over the "stolen election", but I do sense there is a movement afoot for moderate GOPers to take back the reins of the party and will won't to move past 2020 - before the 2022 mid-terms.

 
This boils down to a rather simple question right?  It will likely garner crickets, but here it goes:

Do we have a list of those who were at the pep rally who are being prosecuted and what it is they are being charged with?  Those are the only people this resolution can be talking about if we are taking their clarification at face value and it was a genuine attempt to honestly clarify.  This isn't complicated.

:mellow:  

 
I think the Censure is an interesting tactic.  And, I think it comes at a pivotal time in the Party.

I get why, from a political point of view - the House members want to align with Trump.  We have seen, over the last 4-5 years that GOP members who break from Trump have a difficult time staying in their elected positions.  And, so, if you are an elected official, who plans to run for re-election, history says: "Oppose Trump at your peril."

But at the same time the Censure was going down, I am seeing more non-elected Republicans sharply breaking with Trump - specifically on the "stolen election" issue.  Pence was a big voice; Christie also came out and condemned the movement.  You have a few moderate Senators, who are not up for re-election, also going against Trump here.

From a practical matter, I don't know that the censure really means much.  Kinzinger is already not running for re-election, and I think it will be interesting to see how this plays in Wyoming.  Cheney family seems to have deep political ties to Wyoming, even if Liz does not.  Wyoming also strikes me a bit like Alaska or Maine, a bit of an independent streak.  So, her speaking her mind, against the national party, might not be a huge negative.  I don't know.  But, if she wins her primary - what will have been accomplished?

I think the GOP has to have a reckoning over the "stolen election", but I do sense there is a movement afoot for moderate GOPers to take back the reins of the party and will won't to move past 2020 - before the 2022 mid-terms.
Actually Murkowski is up for reelection this year and she has condemned the censure.

 
The problem is that if they would have included it you would have pooh-poohed it anyways.

I mean, they even clarified their position and you still don't accept it.  You wouldn't have accepted it either way because you need to push the narrative.

Yeah, we get it. "Sidez!" - we all do it.
Not sure what you are talking about? Who is the they and if they had included what?

The thing the RNC should have done is talk about issues the Biden Administration is failing at and nothing else

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the Censure is an interesting tactic.  And, I think it comes at a pivotal time in the Party.

I get why, from a political point of view - the House members want to align with Trump.  We have seen, over the last 4-5 years that GOP members who break from Trump have a difficult time staying in their elected positions.  And, so, if you are an elected official, who plans to run for re-election, history says: "Oppose Trump at your peril."

But at the same time the Censure was going down, I am seeing more non-elected Republicans sharply breaking with Trump - specifically on the "stolen election" issue.  Pence was a big voice; Christie also came out and condemned the movement.  You have a few moderate Senators, who are not up for re-election, also going against Trump here.

From a practical matter, I don't know that the censure really means much.  Kinzinger is already not running for re-election, and I think it will be interesting to see how this plays in Wyoming.  Cheney family seems to have deep political ties to Wyoming, even if Liz does not.  Wyoming also strikes me a bit like Alaska or Maine, a bit of an independent streak.  So, her speaking her mind, against the national party, might not be a huge negative.  I don't know.  But, if she wins her primary - what will have been accomplished?

I think the GOP has to have a reckoning over the "stolen election", but I do sense there is a movement afoot for moderate GOPers to take back the reins of the party and will won't to move past 2020 - before the 2022 mid-terms.
Good points about the practical side of the censure.  Kinzinger knew he was getting gerrymandered out of Congress and there isn’t a feasible path to victory for him in an Illinois statewide office, so he was probably on his way out whether he participated in the 1/6 Committee or not.  If he was seeking a spot in the Fox News pundit rotation that’s probably gone, but I don’t know if that was something he was aspiring to.

Not sure how Liz Cheney’s future in Wyoming plays out.  It’s rare for a national brand to represent such a small state, and in states 1MM or fewer it doesn’t take a lot of votes to swing a statewide election.  Murkowski won her Senate race in 2016 as a write-in candidate.  Maybe Cheney wins that way.   

The normal pattern on a GOP member criticizing Trump or Trumpism usually takes about 7-10 days to play out.  It did take some courage for Pence to say what he did on Friday in front of the Federalist Society. Trump doesn’t need Pence to achieve any goals going forward, so Pence is disposable.

The content of GOP fundraising emails and texts this week should be a good indicator, too.  Do they stand behind the exact wording of the censure, reframe it to align with the clarification issued later, or will they just try to have it both ways and blame the media to gin up more outrage?

 
T J said:
You said party over country.  

I’m still ok with my take there. I think it’s that they are the same because I believe the Republican Party represents what’s best for this country.

On the voting, I happen to agree with the Republican Party. You should have the right to vote, but it shouldn’t have to come to you. You wanna vote, prove you are who you say you are, and go vote. The left’s take on this I find offensive. 

January 6th - j personally do not think the election was stolen, and I also personally think January 6th was terrible. 

But here’s my take - while I do not personally believe the election was stolen, let’s say you were one of those who actually believed that it was - you would consider the stealing of a presidential election to be an extremely serious act. If enough people felt that way, and they do/did, they might act on it. And they did. Not defending, but I understand. 

And keep in mind this was on the heels of the summer of riots in which the right, myself included in this one, felt rioters were basically given a free pass to loot, burn, etc.. by the left. 
January 6th was a direct result of what the right witnessed across America. Again, I don’t condone it, but I definitely understand it. 
"Stand on principle" rings hollow when the riots were met with a collective shrug. This is really clear from a ton of folks that are on the right that I respect the hell out of.  I don't agree with your conclusions but hey, whatever. 

I appreciate your post and willingness to engage and share your truth. 

 
Now starting the 4th page of this thread and I've yet to see any conservatives on this board denounce this censure of their own GOP representatives. I've seen BLM. I've seen whataboutisms. I've seen approval based on false pretenses (or alternate facts, ie; lies.) Not one denouncement from conservatives. I've seen snide remarks like the pot-shot right above this post. It's quite telling.
This should put a sock in these types of ridiculous and premature accusations. @Sabertooth@dozer @sho nuff @HomerSimpson

A number of GOP senators, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, have rebuked the national party over the resolution

It was a violent insurrection for the purpose of trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after a legitimately certified election from one administration to the next. That's what it was," McConnell said Tuesday of the January 6 attack.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mcconnell-gop-senators-criticize-rnc-for-censuring-cheney-kinzinger/ar-AATCMkY?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBnb7Kz

 
Stoneworker said:
This should put a sock in these types of ridiculous and premature accusations. @Sabertooth@dozer @sho nuff @HomerSimpson

A number of GOP senators, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, have rebuked the national party over the resolution

It was a violent insurrection for the purpose of trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after a legitimately certified election from one administration to the next. That's what it was," McConnell said Tuesday of the January 6 attack.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mcconnell-gop-senators-criticize-rnc-for-censuring-cheney-kinzinger/ar-AATCMkY?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBnb7Kz
he was talking about the conservatives on this board, and he's right.  the tribalism continues here, even when the most conservative of Senators are distancing themselves from the RNC.

Nothing ridiculous about his statement.  It's true.

 
Insert "The worst person you know just made a great point" meme here.

(Mitch, to clarify)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stoneworker said:
This should put a sock in these types of ridiculous and premature accusations. @Sabertooth@dozer @sho nuff @HomerSimpson
Put a sock in what?

Do you have some kind of question for me, or is there a post somewhere you disagree with? Or are you just tagging posters you disagree with in general.

Kind of weird, man.

Stoneworker said:
A number of GOP senators, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, have rebuked the national party over the resolution
A number of GOP Senators?  Do you know what the number is?

McConnel and Romney expressed their opinions about J6…. On J7.

We’ve known that they stand against Trump since the day it happened.

McConnel is probably the most secure Senator in congress (just my assumption.) He’s not worried about bending to the will of Trump, and you can bet when McConnel does bend to Trump, no one will know it’s happening. That’s how good McConnel is at being a politician.

I really like this quote from your article:

"Anything that my party does that comes across as being stupid is not going to help us."

--Mitt Romney

I agree with Thom Tillis:

"The minute you entered the Capitol building, it was no longer discourse, it was riot," Tillis said Tuesday.

And this quote from Grassely”

"I like to think of the Republican Party as being a big-tent party, everybody is welcome.”

To me, Grassly sounds to me like he is leveraging the potential backlash of the RNC’s OVERWHELMING vote in favor of censure.

So that article mentions McConnell, Romney, and Tillis. While Grassley is wishy-washy as usual. That’s’ four. It’s a start.

I hope more Republicans in congress, and the real world take the same brave stand against Trump.

They do quote Elise Stefanik.

"The RNC has every right to take any action," said Congresswoman Elise Stefanik of New York, who replaced Cheney as GOP conference chair.

And then, STOP THE PRESSES!!!11!

Stefanik said Republicans….. "Condemn the violence on January 6."

Then the signal kind of cuts out…

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stoneworker said:
This should put a sock in these types of ridiculous and premature accusations. @Sabertooth@dozer @sho nuff @HomerSimpson

A number of GOP senators, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, have rebuked the national party over the resolution

It was a violent insurrection for the purpose of trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after a legitimately certified election from one administration to the next. That's what it was," McConnell said Tuesday of the January 6 attack.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mcconnell-gop-senators-criticize-rnc-for-censuring-cheney-kinzinger/ar-AATCMkY?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBnb7Kz
I thought the NY Times was misleading with their headline?  This suggests that a number of GOP senators agree they got it right.  Weird!

 
Put a sock in what?

Do you have some kind of question for me, or is there a post somewhere you disagree with? Or are you just tagging posters you disagree with in general.

Kind of weird, man.

A number of GOP Senators?  Do you know what the number is?

McConnel and Romney expressed their opinions about J6…. On J7.

We’ve known that they stand against Trump since the day it happened.

McConnel is probably the most secure Senator in congress (just my assumption.) He’s not worried about bending to the will of Trump, and you can bet when McConnel does bend to Trump, no one will know it’s happening. That’s how good McConnel is at being a politician.

I really like this quote from your article:

"Anything that my party does that comes across as being stupid is not going to help us."

--Mitt Romney

I agree with Thom Tillis:

"The minute you entered the Capitol building, it was no longer discourse, it was riot," Tillis said Tuesday.

And this quote from Grassely”

"I like to think of the Republican Party as being a big-tent party, everybody is welcome.”

To me, Grassly sounds to me like he is leveraging the potential backlash of the RNC’s OVERWHELMING vote in favor of censure.

So that article mentions McConnell, Romney, and Tillis. While Grassley is wishy-washy as usual. That’s’ four. It’s a start.

I hope more Republicans in congress, and the real world take the same brave stand against Trump.

They do quote Elise Stefanik.

"The RNC has every right to take any action," said Congresswoman Elise Stefanik of New York, who replaced Cheney as GOP conference chair.

And then, STOP THE PRESSES!!!11!

Stefanik said Republicans….. "Condemn the violence on January 6."

Then the signal kind of cuts out…
Also, H/T to Mike Pence.

Five.

 
bigbottom said:
Fair. I guess maybe a better way to ask the question is what are the ideological views of the “extreme right” on key political issues, and in what way does Trump emulate or represent those views?  Immigration is a good example. 
One of my biggest issues with Trump wasn’t his ideological views but rather that he had none - he would and will take any position that benefits him.  He and Biden are both horrible Presidents but I truly believe Trump is a horrible person.  

 
One of my biggest issues with Trump wasn’t his ideological views but rather that he had none - he would and will take any position that benefits him.  He and Biden are both horrible Presidents but I truly believe Trump is a horrible person.  
Why would you think he's a horrible person?  Was it the open admission to serial sexual assault...oh wait, they "let" you do it, the Harvey Weinstein defense.  Was it the 3 marriages with public cheating on all of them?  Was it the fake university that he was forced to pay $25M in damages?  Was it the fact that he's barred from running a charity in New York?

Other than those, he seems like a really great guy!

 
Why would you think he's a horrible person?  Was it the open admission to serial sexual assault...oh wait, they "let" you do it, the Harvey Weinstein defense.  Was it the 3 marriages with public cheating on all of them?  Was it the fake university that he was forced to pay $25M in damages?  Was it the fact that he's barred from running a charity in New York?

Other than those, he seems like a really great guy!


I think it was his associating and praising Klan members and crafting policies that targeted black men.  Yeah, that was it for me.  :)

 
I'd agree if you'd said that hyperbole is one of the ten biggest problems with political discourse, but the very biggest? That seems a little extreme.
I know it might seem funny that I could have been hyperbolic about complaining about hyperbole. However, I absolutely believe it is #1. What ranks above it, in your opinion? And before you answer, imagine a FBG Political Forum devoid of hyperbole.

 
I thought the NY Times was misleading with their headline?  This suggests that a number of GOP senators agree they got it right.  Weird!
Yeah this occurred to me too. 
 

@Stoneworker only the other day you really went after the New York Times for their reporting- I think you used words like “disgusting” and “shameful”. So did they get it right after all? And if they didn’t, then why are McConnell and the other GOP senators rebuking them? 

 
Stoneworker said:
This should put a sock in these types of ridiculous and premature accusations. @Sabertooth@dozer @sho nuff @HomerSimpson

A number of GOP senators, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, have rebuked the national party over the resolution

It was a violent insurrection for the purpose of trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after a legitimately certified election from one administration to the next. That's what it was," McConnell said Tuesday of the January 6 attack.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mcconnell-gop-senators-criticize-rnc-for-censuring-cheney-kinzinger/ar-AATCMkY?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBnb7Kz
Its nice a few have.   It doesn’t seem to address the post you quoted and have zero clue why you are tagging others.

 
@Stoneworker only the other day you really went after the New York Times for their reporting- I think you used words like “disgusting” and “shameful”. So did they get it right after all? And if they didn’t, then why are McConnell and the other GOP senators rebuking them? 
I did. And would hold my ground on that since I believe the NYT should be infinitely more precise on such an inflammatory matter. Instead they engaged in tabloid reporting.

The exact headline was: The Republican Party officially declared the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol “legitimate political discourse”. 

There is and never was an official document declaring such a thing. Nor in the voice vote itself.

McConnell et. al. are rebuking the GOP for the censure itself, but also "for suggesting that the Jan. 6 insurrection was "legitimate political discourse."

Even after the GOP cleaned up the language, I don't think the bolded is a stretch. But it is not an official declaration. That is not being anal, that is a fact, and the NYT editors know it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top