Like he said, Democrats have already repeatedly weaponized the government against their political opponents. So the question is whether Republicans just keep waiting for Democrats to set the next new precedent and respond in kind or whether Republicans use the same playbook and start setting new precedents too. The thing is that Republicans are the only adults in the room. Democrats do stuff, like using the nuclear option in Congress to approve judicial appointments with a simple majority vote, and then whine when Republicans then respond in kind. It's like Democrats either have zero foresight or they're delusional enough to think Republicans will never be in power again... several times.
Democrats have zero limiting principles in what they will do to get and keep power, while Republicans generally believe in small government with specifically/strictly enumerated powers. But if Republicans always seek for government to relinquish power and not be weaponized against opponents, while Democrats always do the complete opposite, I fail to see how that is anything but a losing strategy for Republicans. How do you scrupulously fight an enemy that has zero scruples?
But maybe the FCC chairman's statement was just playing chicken, knowing the FCC couldn't legally prevail but casting a shadow of a doubt that such things could happen. Sure, in this case, it would have been better if he hadn't muddied the water of what would have otherwise been clear market forces. But maybe you also take the opportunity when it's such an unforced error.
It's ultimately a choice of if Republicans what to accelerate/escalate the political/cultural division. Do we press our advantage while we have it, likely driving the evil and insane left more so? Looks like we're going to get there anyway. Just a matter of whose terms we get there on... whose the aggressor and whose the defender. God help the left if the right ever goes completely on the offensive.
(Sep 20, 2025 09:02 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Like he said, Democrats have already repeatedly weaponized the government against their political opponents. So the question is whether Republicans just keep waiting for Democrats to set the next new precedent and respond in kind or whether Republicans use the same playbook and start setting new precedents too. The thing is that Republicans are the only adults in the room. Democrats do stuff, like using the nuclear option in Congress to approve judicial appointments with a simple majority vote, and then whine when Republicans then respond in kind. It's like Democrats either have zero foresight or they're delusional enough to think Republicans will never be in power again... several times.
Democrats have zero limiting principles in what they will do to get and keep power, while Republicans generally believe in small government with specifically/strictly enumerated powers. But if Republicans always seek for government to relinquish power and not be weaponized against opponents, while Democrats always do the complete opposite, I fail to see how that is anything but a losing strategy for Republicans. How do you scrupulously fight an enemy that has zero scruples?
But maybe the FCC chairman's statement was just playing chicken, knowing the FCC couldn't legally prevail but casting a shadow of a doubt that such things could happen. Sure, in this case, it would have been better if he hadn't muddied the water of what would have otherwise been clear market forces. But maybe you also take the opportunity when it's such an unforced error.
It's ultimately a choice of if Republicans what to accelerate/escalate the political/cultural division. Do we press our advantage while we have it, likely driving the evil and insane left more so? Looks like we're going to get there anyway. Just a matter of whose terms we get there on... whose the aggressor and whose the defender. God help the left if the right ever goes completely on the offensive.
Democrat... Republican... Left.... Right....
Each of those are LABELS, but the true taxis that should be looked at is the Sociopath to Psychopathic scale.
Sociopaths want to dominate and dictating control over others, they enjoy claiming an "Alpha" spot by keeping those they feel are lesser than themselves down. Thats why they are into being extremely petty when it comes to grudge holding and feel they have to go out of their way to undermine those they feel begrudged by.
Psychopaths on the other hand are likely what happens to Sociopaths when their Alpha spot is disallowed, when they can't be petty, when the control they try to apply to their world just doesn't stick. (in other words they lose their shit)
Sociopaths and Psychopaths can be Left or Right, they can be Democrat or Republican. When the shit hits the fan and someone gets shot at, it's those on that scale responsible for either stirring up the shit or just blatantly losing their shit. So applying one point of datum like; "They were from this party" or "they were sexually that way inclined", actually misses what the true underlining point was... "People can be shit to each other".
Last I checked Fox News is still on the air despite their lies and offensive comments and none of their newscasters have been fired. Trump and his ass-kissing FCC crony are the only ones to have actually censored a national TV network. Not only does it set a dangerous precedent for future censorship but it blatantly violates the constitution. You can't ban speaking bad about somebody, even if you are the president. Trump says far worse and lies almost every day and nobody complains. And you can't censor a comedian for saying something that later didn't turn out to be true. We will see how this plays out, but going by the national uproar it's not goin away anytime soon
Networks fire newscasters all the time. CNN fired Chris Cuomo and Don Lemon. That's within their purview as nobody has a right to a certain job. But it isn't the govt forcing a network to fire someone for something they said. That's a whole different ballgame.
I thought the number of Ex-FOX people employed by Trump actually meant FOX was going strong... just with their people on the inside rather than the outside. Who knows if they are truly Trump/MAGA supporters or are just there to dig deep into that deep state that was supposedly so grand that Trump wouldn't get elected.
What Kimmel ACTUALLY said:
"In his monologue on Monday, Kimmel said the "Maga gang" was "desperately trying to characterise this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them" and of trying to "score political points from it". Mr Carr said Kimmel was "appearing to directly mislead the American public". Kimmel has not yet commented."
Kimmel never called the shooter MAGA. He didn't lie about anything. That's disinformation. He said republicans are desperately trying to paint him as not MAGA, which is exactly what happened. I saw this myself. MAGA posters in this very discussion forum looking for some way to connect TR to transgenders even before we knew anything about him. That's why this whole attempt to shut Kimmel up is really just a spineless suck-up doing the bidding of a thin-skinned manbaby who just can't handle criticism or satirical humour.
Keep telling yourselves that. 9_9
![[Image: 28a3e68c-baac-4651-b353-37fd82a8e3a6.jpeg]](https://media.townhall.com/cdn/hodl/ha/images/2025/262/28a3e68c-baac-4651-b353-37fd82a8e3a6.jpeg)
![[Image: FRbX9jkagAAmi4g?format=png&name=small]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FRbX9jkagAAmi4g?format=png&name=small)
![[Image: GrbKc6EXcAA8zHQ?format=png&name=small]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GrbKc6EXcAA8zHQ?format=png&name=small)
![[Image: G1I4UXcW8AA0gJC?format=jpg&name=small]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G1I4UXcW8AA0gJC?format=jpg&name=small)
![[Image: G1I4UXbXgAAZ4SO?format=jpg&name=small]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G1I4UXbXgAAZ4SO?format=jpg&name=small)