The old adage, “The dinner table is no place for politics” doesn’t always hold true when the whole family gets together for Thanksgiving dinner. In fact, the Young Democrats started a Twitter hashtag #YourRepublicanUncle to guide young liberals on sharing their ultra-progressive views with disagreeing elders, such as Hillary Clinton.
As a public service, we are offering some tips for more rational citizens. For those times when a low-information liberal says something you just can’t quite let go, we’ve got you covered with some talking points.
1. When your wild-eyed college-aged nephew insists it’s Democrats who stand up for students.
Washington State Republicans won the college tuition battle during the 2015 legislative session. Thanks to Republican efforts, the state Legislature passed a balanced, no-new-taxes budget that—among other GOP victories—included the College Affordability Program which cut tuition at the University of Washington and Washington State University by 15 percent over two years. Other state universities will see a 20% tuition cut over the same time frame. And, community college tuition will decrease by 5% starting July 2016.
On the other hand, Democrats have not appeared concerned with reversing the mess they created over the past few decades by using college tuition hikes, essentially a tax on the middle class, as a cash cow to help transfer taxpayer money to their special interest allies and key campaign donors. They initially rejected Republican efforts to lighten the college tuition burden, choosing only to trumpet support for higher education after they lost the fight. In an example of political posturing at its worst, Democrats appeared more than willing to withhold tuition cuts if it meant ensuring Republicans wouldn’t get something they cared about.
2. When your hippie-esque aunt begins checking off Jay Inslee’s talking points of why our state must implement an extreme “green” agenda.
Jay Inslee and his supporters have been peddling his extreme “green” agenda using false claims for quite some time. Inslee’s rabid environmentalist followers, seemingly without fail, point to air quality and reducing cases of asthma as a benefit.
The claim that new carbon regulatory rules will reduce asthma rates doesn’t even stand up to Inslee’s own science. The American Lung Association points to particulate matter (PM) as the primary pollutant of concern impacting asthma. A “green” plan like Inslee’s low carbon fuel standard (LCFS) extreme would only reduce PM by up to 0.5 percent by 2026. Just to be clear, that is one-half of one percent, ten years from now.
The reality is Washington State emits approximately 1/10 of 1% of the world’s carbon emissions. Inslee’s extreme “green” schemes would have virtually no impact on reducing carbon emissions. But, it would raise the price of gas on working families and threaten jobs.
3. When your lefty brother-in-law pulls a Harry Reid and starts bashing Republicans as Koch brother-funded politicians.
When it comes to “dark money” funding, Democrats are as guilty—and hypocritical—as it gets. As Shift recently pointed out, according to the liberal Center for Public Integrity, a Democrat-aligned dark money group known as Patriot Majority USA “collected half of the $30 million it raised last year from five anonymous donors.” The largest single donation (from an unknown source) was in the amount of $8.25 million. And that’s a PAC run by Harry Reid’s closest political allies.
In Washington State specifically, California billionaire Tom Steyer was caught illegally funneling millions of dollars into a Washington State PAC back in 2013, and had the case dismissed on a technicality by the Democrat-controlled Public Disclosure Commission. Perhaps because he got away with it, Steyer continues to play a “dark money” role in promoting Democrats’ extreme “green” agenda in our state, even lunching in the Governor’s mansion to exchange targeting lists with Jay Inslee.
Steyer and his NextGen Climate Action Committee have coordinated with our state’s most liberal activists, including the Progress Alliance of Washington, to funnel millions of dollars into Democrat campaigns. The secretive group does this through a variety of front groups like Fuse Washington, the Win/Win Network, and Sightline.
It’s unclear just how much money Steyer has managed to funnel to Democrats in our state thus far, thanks to his desire to hide his dark money. However, it is clear that Steyer plans to have a negative impact on our state’s future one way or another.
Don Charles Steinke says
We’ll have no chance of avoiding catastrophic climate change unless every community does its part. The people in Washington State represent 1/10 of 1% of the world’s population. We need to do our part.
The establishment killed Jesus because he was a threat to their power. The Christian’s jailed Gallileo because he threatened their power. The fossil fuel industry attacks Governor Inslee because he threatens their power.
The fossil fuel industry is the most powerful industry in history. They are the only barrier to a green energy economy.
Mr. Steinke, Have you ever heard of the “11-Year Sunspot Cycle” ? Have you ever heard of the “Maunder Minimum” phase of the Sunspot Cycle and what effect it had on Earth’s climate ? (or perhaps the later “Dalton” Cycle) If not may I suggest that you go to the NASA/ MSFC web site and read all about it. (or any other reputable scientific web site on Solar Physics. You would then understand that solar emissions are hugely more powerful than any of mankind’s puny efforts to warm things up.
4. When your granddaughter and her permanent roommate — you do not use the word “wife”! — offer to return your hospitality by treating you to a fancy meal all the way down there in Seattle, respond by telling her, “Restaurants are closing in Seattle because of you liberals’ $15 minimum wage!” If she says they live in Seattle and know it’s not true, smile and say, “I read it on Townhall, heard it from Rush Limbaugh, and I saw it on FOX News, so there!”
(As always, remember: when young people roll their eyes, shake their heads, and sigh softly, they’re agreeing with you.)
There is very little chance of my granddaughter being warped by society enough to have a “permanent roommate” — She’s too smart not to know deviancy is a mental illness! — even so, she’s also smart enough to know it’s only an $11 minimum wage! and we’d be better off dining in Bellevue.
(As always, remember: when young people roll their eyes at you, shake their heads, and sigh softly, they think you’re a liberal idiot.)
…it’s only an $11 minimum wage!
The link I posted leads to a headline about Seattle’s $15 minimum wage, so please feel free to take it up with whomever published that. However, you can still lecture me on how I should cite only reliable sources of information. Do your worst. 🙂
She’s too smart
not to know deviancy is a mental illness!to talk about such things in front of me.
There, fixed it for you. You’re welcome.
“He and I disagree on whether the minimum wage in Seattle should be $9.47/hour or $11/hour”
“The link I posted leads to a headline about Seattle’s $15 minimum wage”
Which is it, comrade? Why do you ideologically bankrupt leftists have to rely on dishonesty? Because the cowardly phase-in is meant to hide the real effects of maximum idiocy while you score cheap political points?
Too bad real life doesn’t match your silly fantasy-land caricature. My granddaughter has gained her knowledge from truth, facts, science and biology so she rightly knows deviancy is a mental illness, whether talking to me, her parents, her siblings or her friends. You liberals on the other hand, allow yourselves and your children to be perverted by a warped culture until you all believe biological impossibilities are normal, natural and healthy. You’re only fooling yourself.
Which is it, comrade? Why do you ideologically bankrupt leftists have to rely on dishonesty? Because the cowardly phase-in is meant to hide the real effects of maximum idiocy while you score cheap political points?
Cool your jets there, red-baiting ace. In no way did I say (or even imply) that I believed Seattle has a $15/hour minimum wage, any more than I would say (or even imply) that I believe any business in Seattle has closed in anticipation of it. I was merely mocking the risible foolishness required to swallow and regurgitate such obviously contrary-to-fact nonsense.
She’s too smart not to know deviancy is a mental illness!
Hope I don’t shock you into soiling your rad polyester bell-bottoms, but the mod view of mental illness has excluded homosexuality for over forty years now.
“In no way did I say (or even imply) that I believed Seattle currently has a $15/hour minimum wage”
Of course you didn’t, nor have you pointed that fact out in any of your many harangues on the subject. And do you call out your Tsarina for campaigning on having a $15/hour minimum wage when Seattle obviously has an $11/hr minimum wage? Again, of course not. She’s a fellow traveler. Oh yeah, a little fib for cover: “I never saw any of her signs”. Not like that has zero credibility or anything. All you and your leftist ilk’s positions, be it on minimum wage, I-594, glo-bull warming, etc., are purely based on half truths, deceptions, distortions, semantics and outright lies.
“the mod view of mental illness has excluded homosexuality for over forty years now”
Hope I don’t shock you into soiling your studded leather thong and rainbow yoga pants but the “mod view” , thoughts, ideas and feelings, have nothing at all to do with biology, genetics and science, you know, facts and stuff. The “mod view” is only a perverse opinion foisted on you by a warped culture to which you’ve bought into, lock, stock and barrel. Congratulations on being so gullible.
Oh yeah, a little fib for cover: “I never saw any of her signs”.
You see, your using quotation marks doesn’t actually make those my words; it merely makes you a spectacularly incompetent liar.
Weeks after an election in which I was not even eligible to vote for her, I professed ignorance of her campaign slogan. (My actual quote: “Was that her slogan?”) Most adults might understand how a busy man would not bother to remember obsolete information, especially if it was irrelevant to him in the first place. Did I see her campaign signs? Probably. If so, did I pay them any attention? No. (Hint is another real quote: “…Capitol Hill has many, many posters for everyone to ignore.”)
Not like that has zero credibility or anything.
Keep on using those big words like you know what they mean; perhaps you’ll even fool someone here. Not likely, though, seeing how you just called a man a liar based on an obviously fake quote you’d fabricated for that purpose.
… biology, genetics and science, you know, facts and stuff.
Please, do go into great detail about all of the “biology, genetics and science,” which show that homosexuality is a “mental illness.” Entertain us with the transparently ludicrous quackery which you’ve gullibly swallowed wholesale.
So just the use of quotation marks makes me a spectacularly incompetent liar? Then there is not enough superlatives in the English language to describe what a liar you are.
“Most adults might understand how a busy man would not bother to
remember obsolete information, especially if it was irrelevant to him in
the first place”
Most adults understand that trying to backpedal from a lie with another lie never works. I was on Capitol Hill twice in the last 6 month. I had to take my wife to two doctor appointments, One in July, One in October. It was physically impossible for a human with more than motor function to not see her signs. They were everywhere. If you really want to claim you didn’t notice any, for the sake of others around you, you have no business operating a motor vehicle. You conveniently forget and remember information as it suits your bankrupt ideology.
“Please, do go into great detail about all of the “biology, genetics and
science,” which show that homosexuality is a “mental illness.””
OK. Biology: The only biological purpose for sex is to propagate the species. That’s it. There might be a lot of other reasons for sex, but NONE of them are biological. Since it does nothing to propagate the species, there is no biological basis for Adam doing Steve.
Genetics: After years of trying, there has been no “homosexual gene” isolated. It doesn’t exist. No genetic basis, either.
Science: In humans, ALL sexuality is choice, be it conscious or unconscious. If it weren’t, no one could be celibate. It might be a choice deeply buried in your subconscious, but it’s still a choice. Sexual attraction has no physical component any more than your favorite color does, so it’s all thoughts, ideas and feelings. Thoughts, ideas and feelings are all mental in nature and thoughts ideas and feelings that only occur in 3% of the population are abnormal, hence a mental illness.
What this article was about in the first place? Lying Barry urged all his acolytes to talk about gun control over Thanksgiving dinner. Did it work? It was a smashing success! The day after American’s bought more guns in one day than on any other day in history. There were enough guns purchased on Black Friday alone to equip the entire Marine Corps plus an extra 2-4 Army divisions. That’s successful gun control strategy right there. HAHAHAHAHA!!!
If you really want to claim you didn’t notice any, for the sake of others around you, you have no business operating a motor vehicle.
When I drive, I pay careful attention to the road, crosswalks, and sidewalks ahead of me. I *don’t* pay attention to irrelevancies, like Capitol Hill’s multitude of brightly-colored posters. Keep your own eyes on the road before you lecture anyone else. (That counts for even more in the state’s most densely populated areas.)
No matter how careful a driver you are, it’s still a lie and your incessant backpedaling to try and get out of it fools no one. While waiting at stoplights, I suppose you keep your hands on the wheel at ten and two and your gaze fixed rigidly forward lest you see some brightly colored posters you don’t know are there. This is the real world, fool. Your Tsarina’s campaign smut is designed to be eye-catching and real people see stuff that’s designed to be seen so go ahead and keep claiming you didn’t see any. It will continue to be only slightly less believable than “I didn’t see one single I-594 ad”.
While waiting at stoplights, I suppose you keep your hands on the wheel at ten and two and your gaze fixed rigidly forward lest you see some brightly colored posters you don’t know are there.
Uh, no, I’m usually moving my eyes, looking both ways at the cross-traffic coming from either side. But since you’re not paying me for your driving lessons, I’ll stop providing them — even though you desperately need them. (Sorry, but that’s just how a hard-headed capitalist like me rolls, comrade.)
You’ve called a man a liar because he didn’t watch as much television as you did. You’ve called a man a liar because he’s a better driver than you are, and because he has more discipline than to gawk and gape helplessly at everything around him on Capitol Hill. You’ve called a man a liar based on an obviously fake quote you fabricated as your “evidence”. Yet, after all of that, you still honestly seem to believe your calling a man a liar will actually accomplish something — well, something other than eliciting derisive laughter. Priceless!
I would no more take driving lessons from you than I would truth telling lessons. I called you a liar because all the media was saturated with I-594 ads and you can come up with all this research on different topics and then foolishly claim you didn’t see one single I-594 ad or know your Tsarina’s campaign slogan. You can protest all you want, but you’re still a liar, and an incompetent one at that.
I called you a liar because all the media was saturated with I-594 ads…
None of which did I see. Once you get used to the ideas that (a) you can’t actually read another person’s mind, no matter how many times you implicitly claim you can, and (b) not everyone sits around watching TV all of the time, you might stop wasting your time believing that anyone could possibly care less about your chronic abuse of the word “liar.”
… you can come up with all this research on different topics…
That’s because my worldview depends upon facts, so I need to acquire relevant facts to shape my opinions. Your opinions owe nothing to facts, and so you don’t need to bother.
You can protest…
Is that what you believe I’m doing here? Really?
I don’t have to read anyone’s mind to know it takes a special degree of implausible belief suspension for you to claim you’re immune to advertising, not only that but you’re telling me you’re just immune to advertising you don’t like. There is way more to the media than TV, Einstein. Where do you come up with the facts to base your leftist worldview on? There’s no advertising on the internet? So you drive and surf the web with blinders on? I’ll stick with you’re a liar on all counts.
“You can protest… Is that what you believe I’m doing here? Really?”
Protest n. ‘to make objection to; speak strongly against’
Yes, that’s what you’re doing here. Do you speak English, Comrade Context? Would you prefer “being a whiny liberal bitch”?
What, are you not entertained yet, comrade? I know you’re “a busy man” that can’t be bothered to be aware of political posters right in front of your face 24/7, but c’mon, entertainment ain’t cheap. Refute anything I’ve said.
Since it does nothing to propagate the species, there is no biological basis for Adam doing Steve.
So, if a man and his wife make love on the night of their 50th wedding anniversary, that’s evidence of their “deviancy” or “mental illness”? Or do you really believe she might get pregnant? (If you do actually so believe, you can tell us. I won’t call you a liar for stating what you do, to the very best of your knowledge of biology, actually believe.) Most of us have respect for how two adults who love each other choose to show their love for each other in the privacy of their long-established home, but you’re free to call them filthy names if you like.
Put another way, if a healthy young woman times her heterosexual activity with the intent of getting pregnant, her chances of success are, at best, slightly less than one in three. So, according to your “… biology, genetics and science, you know, facts and stuff”, more than two-thirds of all heterosexual acts are evidence of “deviancy” or “mental illness”.
Also, note that “[i]f a woman has sex six or more days before she ovulates, the chance she will get pregnant is virtually zero.” During those days, her having sex with Eve is about as likely to produce a child as if she has sex with Steve, so she’s one of your examples of “deviancy” or “mental illness” either way. (If you want to define a desire for non-reproductive sex with a healthy young woman as evidence of “mental illness,” then according to you, most of the adult male population consists of nut cases — or liars!)
I apologize for having referred to your “… biology, genetics and science, you know, facts and stuff”, as “transparently ludicrous quackery.” By so doing, I inadvertently insulted palm-readers, dowsers, psychics, and supply-siders everywhere.
You seem to think I’ve stated every heterosexual act must be able to produce children. Please cite where I said that. What you’re referring to is my assertion that the only biological reason for sex is to propagate the species. You failed again by bringing a physiological argument to a biology debate. Of course every heterosexual act may not be intended to and doesn’t produce a child. What kind of an idiot are you? Strictly biologically speaking here, what percentage of homosexual acts result in offspring? 00.000%? And strictly biologically speaking again, where does “desire” fit in? You’ll have to excuse me, I wasn’t aware you could “desire” biology. “Desire” sounds a lot like a thought, idea, feeling or emotion. Can you “desire” science?
“America’s Jewish population might not agree with you on that”
Congratulations comrade! You’ve just equated homosexuality with Judaism! Go for the trifecta and insult Christianity, too.
What you’re referring to is my assertion that the only biological reason for sex is to propagate the species.
Then why would a man feel the desire to make love with his post-menopausal wife? There is exactly as much “biological reason for sex” between them as there is for “Adam doing Steve”, and since couples who have been married fifty years or more are a tiny minority of the population, their desire for completely non-procreative sex makes them “deviant,” as you’ve (rather poorly) defined it.
there is no such thing as a “biological desire” to have sex or do anything else. “Desire” for anything is nothing more than a thought. There is nothing biological about thoughts. A medical condition rendered my wife infertile many years ago after we did our part to propagate the species and there is nothing “deviant” at all about non-procreative heterosexual sex. Adam doing Steve never had and never will have a shot at propagating the species and being 3% outliers makes them deviants. You’ve stupidly fallen into the trap of bringing a physiology argument to a biology debate. Your problem lies not in my definition of deviant but your (rather poor) interpretation of my definition
there is no such thing as a “biological desire” to have sex or do anything else.
No, we have no “biological desires” like hunger, fatigue, or thirst, because eating, sleeping, and hydrating just aren’t natural for humans. The activities we orchestrate and perform to feed, find shelter, and obtain water are not in any way directed by thoughts originating in biology.
Adam doing Steve never had and never will have a shot at propagating the species and being 3% outliers makes them deviants.
And they could certainly never raise children orphaned or abandoned by others, because then they would be helping to propagate our species.
There is nothing biological about thoughts.
Just because your own “thoughts” on display here owe nothing whatsoever to any actual brain activity doesn’t make the human brain any less of a biological entity.
Apparently when you were riding the short bus to school, they replaced biology with “how to feel good about yourself” in your curriculum, otherwise you would laugh at yourself for equating sexual activity with motor functions. Hunger, thirst and breathing are INVOLUNTARY. Do you know what “involuntary” means? Now you’re telling that sex in humans is involuntary? I’m glad I went to a different school then you did, after you just claimed adoption is biological. Adoption happens after the propagation is done, Sherlock. You’re immune to not only advertising but to knowledge, logic and the English language as well.
“… equating sexual activity with motor functions.”
Sexual activity doesn’t involve motor functions? Priceless.
Your great self-proclaimed knowledge of biology continues to impress:
“Hunger, thirst, and breathing are INVOLUNTARY.”
Hunger and thirst are not “motor functions,” Darwin. Breathing is, but something “INVOLUNTARY” cannot be stopped by mental effort. (Someday I may explain what you got wrong there, but in the meantime, don’t hold your breath.)
Adoption can be part of propagating the species, just as procreating can be. Having a child but leaving it to die does nothing to propagate our species. That’s why, when our state takes a child from her unworthy biological parents and gives it to a married gay couple to raise, she grows up to call the latter pair her parents.
This grand treatise of irrationality only took you a month to work up? Sorry I used a big word like “equating” that you took to mean “involve”. If you weren’t stoned and sleeping during remedial English, you might know “equating” means “to make equal” or as they might say in your first reader, “to make the same”. It has nothing to do with being involved or not. When your mom brings you a bowl of mac and cheese down to the basement it might “involve” a fork to eat it but that doesn’t mean you’re the same as the fork. Apparently you also missed the meaning of “propagate”. The biological definition is “to reproduce”. Adoption is a societal convention that has absolutely nothing to do with reproduction regardless of what the little crumb-crunchers have been brainwashed to call the the deviants they live with. Then again, you’re the comrade that thinks human sexual activity is involuntary. You must have an involuntary degree from the Jay Inslee Institute of “Higher” Learning. That sure can’t be stopped by mental effort.