Lindsey "It's Ma'am" Graham shows his loyalties again
(nitter.poast.org)
Comments (33)
sorted by:
This motherfucker...
All I'll say is thank god he's focusing on his Israeli paymasters than promoting a federal abortion ban like in 2022. He can do less damage to us that way.
Implying the negro population follows laws. If they live in a state that bans abortions, the local drug dealers will simply start stocking abortion pills and some enterprising chap with a coathanger will open an unlicensed clinic.
I've said it repeatedly.
The exact same thing that's going to happen to them right now anyway. Them, and the mud slimes, pajeets, the various flavors of Mexican, and a fair few others.
Most of the survivors will be deported.
It'll have to happen anyway, and it's probably going to happen anyway, so it's not an excuse to justify the rampant child murder that has directly lead to the demographic collapse of the white population.
And the last excuse, that it's not politically popular. Who cares? It's not like democracy is valid, legitimate or functional. And it's certainly not like women will be allowed to vote in the society of the future either.
Sure it's realistic.
Because there isn't a scenario where we don't have a civil war.
A great many things that are politically unviable now, become not only possible but probable, in such a future.
I would add that you're also discounting the prospect of acceleration. Had child murder not been legalized in the sixties, the American population would have had to address the elephant in the room long ago.
I think you just came up with a better answer than the other guy.
Excellent idea, but I don't think nigloids will go for it. They love fucking just as much as they love doing drugs and stealing. That's WHY they abort so much.
I suppose as long as you don't give them time to think about it and just snip them post haste, it won't hurt.
He doesn't give a shit about abortion. If he did, he'd have to admit that his abortion ban would be made unconstitutional by the same decision that banned Roe v. Wade, which he would respond with a constitutional amendment to overturn that very decision, which welcomes abortion back in.
It also feeds into the normie "the left goes too far one way, then the right goes too far the other" sentiment which has basically killed all of the anti-abortion efforts in every state so far.
Ohio is an abortion on demand state because of that sentiment. 9 Month abortions are legal if any doctor claims a woman may be "harmed" by a pregnancy.
And since it is always brought up as an example (including by Trump himself) let me tell you what happened here in Kansas.
A large amount of the state wanted to move it back from the current 24 week limit to closer to 14-16 weeks. Because despite what a lot of people think we are actually fairly reasonable around here and the Evangelical types dont actually hold as much power statewide as you would think. Legislation doing exactly that move was drawn up, but then the handful of Evangelicals that do have power used it to gradually turn it into an attempt to completely ban the practice in the state.
This then went up to a vote, and in the same election where we kept a fairly conservative State House with a veto-proof majority over the governor, and elected conservatives to every executive position except governor, the law regarding abortion flopped hard with 60-40 split. Driven largely on people like me and my family voting it down despite voting Republican for everything else. If they had just been more reasonable, they probably would have gotten what they wanted.
Which is why even as much as I listen to Ben Shapiro, him dinging Vance for "dodging the issue" at the debate is another example of Ben not seeming to realize the situation has changed (along with his "100% free trade, no tariffs ever" stance). Sorry Ben, you and other hardcore Pro-Lifers can be pissed all you want, but you have lost on the issue, and you need to fix a hell of a lot more about the culture before you can even think about banning it.
Considering most of these establishment Republicans are busy fucking kids, or killing them elsewhere, I'm confident this has nothing to do with getting abortion banned because they're strong moralists, but because they want Trump and Republicans to lose, and enshrine abortion state-wide.
I like 100% Free Trade too! But it ain't Free Trade is the government is heavily involved on one side. Ben Shapiro is trying to win a Culture War he already lost 10 years ago, with a Corporatist alliance that are now diametrically opposed to the people of the US.
Sometimes when it comes to the genuine moral conservatives, they grew up in an echo-chamber and fail to understand how broken and degenerate society actually is. It's like when Michael Knowles was on the Whatever Podcast and was shocked that the OnlyFans thots across from him had slept with (at least) 30 people by the time they were 25.
They think they can impose morality on a population that's already beyond degenerate. 50% of the population is anti-moral. You can't impose morality on that.
How would a constitutional amendment banning abortion welcome abortion back in?
He's built up a complicated hypothetical.
Supposedly a law made to ban abortion would be found unconstitutional because of the same Supreme Court ruling that overturned Roe v Wade.
The proposal then is to amend the constitution to allow the abortion ban.
He's suggesting that the proposed amendment would overturn that ruling that originally overturned Roe v Wade, apparently making abortion legal again.
Which is ridiculous, because if there's enough political support to ratify a law saying the federal government can make laws about abortion, with the clear intent of passing a ban right after, then they could simply ratify an amendment banning it. Or maybe he doesn't understand that the SC ruled that the federal government doesn't have jurisdiction over abortion?
Because it wouldn't be a constitutional ban on abortion. It would be a constitutional amendment to regulate abortion at the federal level.
That's just a ban with more steps and additional stupid risks. If they could do that, they could simply ratify an amendment banning it and avoid the risk.
Those risks are the point.
None of the Republican establishment calling for an abortion ban have any interest in banning abortion. They want to ratify federal abortion regulations to make sure it stays a federal issue to argue about, and probably to also just kill kids because they don't genuinely oppose abortion anyway.
Demand for abortion would organically decrease if slut-shaming became more acceptable and the government stopped paying chicks to get rawdogged and then ditched by Chad.
A total ban would have to go hand-in-hand with eliminating all the gibs. The only reason the destitute keep popping out children is because the government gives them money for doing so.
If you look into the Gosnell abortion mill incident that happened a number of years ago, there was a theory/rumor that the Feds were paying single mothers up to a certain amount of children, and then after that they would get nothing extra. So some of these women were going to abortion mills because not only they couldn't keep their legs closed and were absolute morons, they had just enough sense to know that no additional gibs would be doled out.
The Left are trying to keep a certain population size of them so they continue to be a problem for the rest of America, but they don't want the problem to cause a descent into chaos.
The only way he can redeem himself is by supporting a federal Lindsey Graham ban.
He's recently been attacking Trump for not supporting Israel enough, and not supporting Ukraine enough. he's a definitional war-monger.
He's the definition of a neocon, so yes.
That was what I was expecting to see. And I probably would have caught a ban for rule 2 if it was the case. He is still a traitor, but at least he isn't trying to rig an election for his "opponents" this time.
He gave a speech recently explaining why we need to hurl trillions of more dollars into Ukraine, and it basically sums up to: "I want to be on the board of Burisma, but for minerals".
I think this man is literally drinking the blood of the innocent.
Well adrenochrome doesn't grow on trees you know.
I wonder if that's just how he ends sentences.
"Sir, would you like some fries with that?"
What about what's happening in Israel
"What kind of dog is that"
What about what's happening in Israel
He has to have some measure of self reflection to know this is a horrible time to be graphically fellating Israel. Imagine how much his Israeli handlers must be beating on the old ghey quisling.
So at least we have that to amuse us in these troubled times.
Israel seems largely able to take care of themselves. Some of our aegis shot down missiles, and apparently Jordan did too, but on the offensive side they're fine on their own.
We should be helping the citizens impacted by the hurricane instead of pissing away money we don't need to be spending.
If Graham wants to play in the sandbox, he can fuck right off. Just let Israel do what they want to do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhckuhUxcgA
I'm seeing this "Israel is weak" narrative get pushed a lot this year in dissident spaces. Am I wrong in thinking that if someone really wants to end military support of Israel, a more effective cointel op would be to promote the idea that Israel is independently strong and don't need no man?
Not speaking about you, but I don't think the anti-Israeli Arab contingent that pretends to be Americans on American forums understand that because they are already raised in an anti-Jew bubble. Talking about how Israel's military is a paper tiger that we can bring to its knees if only the US would stop helping it might work in their communities, but it won't convince the American right. Pro-Jewish AIPAC influence aside, American's love an underdog story. Establishment mouthpieces like Graham constantly talk about how precarious Israel's position is, and as "the only democracy in the middle-east", is a tiny island that we need to fund to ensure their survival. It seems like to convince people to end funding you'd want to take the opposite stance. "Look at that, Israel is dominating its neighbors. Iran can't touch them. They can blow up terrorists anywhere. They're going to conquer Lebanon next. They don't need us. Get the US out of the middle east!"
(I do understand laughing at the irony of Israel "taking care of themselves" when they're heavily exploiting US resources. You just reminded me of that apparent contradiction.)
People love underdogs, not parasites.