I don’t understand how you can watch politicians lie about what they’ll do and/or carefully pick battles that don’t change anything day in and day out year after year, and yet seem to believe that an extremely establishment politician would have made any concessions that would be meaningful at all, when any meaningful change would not only threaten his wealth and power, but his freedom and possibly life.
It’s like staring at a giant cement wall and knowing you need to get to the other side, but thinking it’s a victory when the guy who has his entire existence tied into keeping it standing agrees to let you paint some particularly snappy graffiti on it.
I don’t understand how you can watch politicians lie about what they’ll do and/or carefully pick battles that don’t change anything day in and day out year after year, and yet seem to believe that an extremely establishment politician would have made any concessions that would be meaningful at all,
I don't believe McCarthy has any convictions. I do think he is wedded to the establishment, as you say. Which is why this was necessary to force him to establish a new Church Committee.
As Thomas Sowell said: racists may prefer their own race to other races, but they prefer themselves to other people all the same. So they may act in their own interests in a way that is not 'racist'. The same is true for KM. Because as wedded as he is to the establishment, he prefers himself to the rest of the establishment, and will gladly screw over the FBI to make himself speaker.
when any meaningful change would not only threaten his wealth and power, but his freedom and possibly life.
Of this I have to disabuse you. Any change will necessarily require allying with parts of the current elite to overthrow some other part of the elite, and they will need certain assurances.
It's never clean cut like: group A bad, group B good. Group B overthrows group A. Everyone lives happily ever after.
It’s like staring at a giant cement wall and knowing you need to get to the other side, but thinking it’s a victory when the guy who has his entire existence tied into keeping it standing agrees to let you paint some particularly snappy graffiti on it.
How did the radical left accomplish the total domination that it has today? How did propositions that had 0% support become universal?
While I agree with you that we will likely lose, to say that it is impossible to win is defeatist.
No, it's just that you guys don't understand how politics works. If you had control over 20 seats, things would be worse, not better - because you would push things past the point where it is productive and end up with Democrats getting the concessions.
Give it a rest. McCarthy supported Trump, so Trump supported McCarthy. It's how it works.
You’re a complete retard about half the time.
This is one of those times.
Only half of the time?
You're in a very generous mood today/
If I'm right about nothing else, I am right that it's good to vote for McCarthy after extracting concessions.
I don’t understand how you can watch politicians lie about what they’ll do and/or carefully pick battles that don’t change anything day in and day out year after year, and yet seem to believe that an extremely establishment politician would have made any concessions that would be meaningful at all, when any meaningful change would not only threaten his wealth and power, but his freedom and possibly life.
It’s like staring at a giant cement wall and knowing you need to get to the other side, but thinking it’s a victory when the guy who has his entire existence tied into keeping it standing agrees to let you paint some particularly snappy graffiti on it.
I don't believe McCarthy has any convictions. I do think he is wedded to the establishment, as you say. Which is why this was necessary to force him to establish a new Church Committee.
As Thomas Sowell said: racists may prefer their own race to other races, but they prefer themselves to other people all the same. So they may act in their own interests in a way that is not 'racist'. The same is true for KM. Because as wedded as he is to the establishment, he prefers himself to the rest of the establishment, and will gladly screw over the FBI to make himself speaker.
Of this I have to disabuse you. Any change will necessarily require allying with parts of the current elite to overthrow some other part of the elite, and they will need certain assurances.
It's never clean cut like: group A bad, group B good. Group B overthrows group A. Everyone lives happily ever after.
How did the radical left accomplish the total domination that it has today? How did propositions that had 0% support become universal?
While I agree with you that we will likely lose, to say that it is impossible to win is defeatist.
No. The alternative in those 14 was Hakim Jeffries.
LMAO. You have a short memory.
No, it's just that you guys don't understand how politics works. If you had control over 20 seats, things would be worse, not better - because you would push things past the point where it is productive and end up with Democrats getting the concessions.