spot on
or interferes with his golf schedule. or if he wanted to develop some battlefield into a golf course
2 Likes
iâve said this before, but imagine being her kids and seeing that face coming towards you every night when she gives them her goodnight kiss
4 Likes
Yeah I can only imagine her kids see it differently.
Otherwise they are scarred for life. Like Ted Cruzâs kids.
4 Likes
this.
Good night dear, remember, mommyâs working to make sure you have polluted air to breathe and will be afraid to speak up about when men put their hands on your private parts. mmwah.
5 Likes
Poor kids. Itâs not their fault that their dad is the Zodiac Killer and looks like the unholy spawn of Joseph McCarthy and Margaret Thatcher.
4 Likes
I know. I feel for those kids, especially the oldest who is so repulsed by him.
3 Likes
That is so fitting!
2 Likes
There is some consolation that this may be the highest income ms sanders ever earns in her lifetime. No reputable outlet will touch her. (And seriously, sheâs as dumb as a bag of hammers). It also helps that her aesthetics are not to fox viewersâ liking.
4 Likes
Dead troops donât vote
/s
6 Likes
Impose consequences
If you want this sort of behavior to stop, impose consequences.
Back up from this particular problem, Sanders lying to justify yanking access from one reporter, to see this as just one example of how you reestablish norms. We and the Rs are always going to be in conflict, at least as long as both parties survive. Itâs why we have parties, to oppose the other party. While much of the task of limiting and defining the rules of engagement in that conflict can and should be law, actual rules enforceable by objective, above the political conflict, people and institutions, we are never going to get all of it, or even close to all of the areas, under the rule of law in this case. What our parties are in perpetual conflict over is partly control of those very legal institutions. Government is the whole enchilada, and the govt both parties strive to control includes the judges and prosecutors and investigative services and military and intelligence services that enforce the law.
The political parties stand in relation to one another in their political struggle much as warring nations used to in confronting one other. There was no higher power that could make them follow rules, and not yet any formal agreements, which actually canât be enforced anyway by any higher power. The rules that limit violence in warfare really are just norms even today, even after being codified in international agreements as they have been in the past century and a half.
Warring parties follow norms only insofar as there are consequences for violating them. The British didnât start treating the soldiers of ours they captured in the Revolutionary war with the dignities that the unwritten laws of warfare required at that time until our armies started having some success capturing their sideâs soldiers. They felt perfectly justified treating our soldiers as criminals, traitors against the crown, and putting them on prison ships like criminals, right up until they faced the prospect of consequences in the form of our side treating their soldiers like the bandits that our sideâs ideology said they were. Then they decided that our soldiers needed to be treated like combatants, not criminals.
The Rs are not going to decide that they have to start following basic norms of reasonable and decent conduct until and unless we start fighting back and imposing consequences. I went the long way around the barn to get to that point, because, boy, is that not our usual take on things. We donât like to acknowledge that the other side is the other side in a conflict, that they are bums who need throwing out of office, not negotiating partners in some imaginary bipartisan dance that govt is supposed to be, where both sides cooperate, and so if we just persist in not fighting back, sooner or later the other side is going to see the error of their ways and start to behave reasonably. Or maybe some objective referee is going to intervene. We donât acknowledge that we are at metaphorical war with the other side, so we donât shoot back. We avoid even talking about imposing consequences, as if such belligerence is only something those fiends on the other side would even consider.
Consider what imposing consequences in this case would look like, and you will see what Iâm talking about in the wider conflict. Sanders is a public servant. She is an official, paid by the taxpayers, to fulfill the function of helping the president explain administration policy to the electorate, and working within a publicly funded office with the same mission. Ds now control one of the chambers of Congress, and thus have not just the authority and power to oversee the operations of every least office in the executive branch for its effectiveness and efficiency in carrying out its duties â but the duty and responsibility for such oversight. After investigating whether or not any office and any officer is doing their legally defined duty, the Congress then has the duty to correct failure to perform in office in ways that serve the mission f that office. After due and reasonable investigation, including public hearings in which Sanders will be given every opportunity to explain how this and her many past similar lies and actions such as this one contribute to the mission the taxpayers fork over good money for her and her office to accomplish, she should be fired by defunding. Of course such investigation will find that she and the whole WH communications office has worked clean contrary to its stated legal aims, and the consequence should be imposed of denying them any funding until and unless that communications office submits to oversight of its daily operations.
If you donât yet find that shocking enough, consider how the D House majority gets that defunding done. The only way the House can get this done is to not let the funding bill that supplies WH operations contain any money for Sanderâs job, or any WH communications effort. This is the point at which I donât advise this project of imposing consequences unless there is consensus in our caucus to stick out the uproar this will raise to its bitter end. The other side will not let the bill pass if it does this, defunds Sanders and her evil crew. There will be a shutdown of at least all the govt functions funded by that bill, with exceptions as provided by law for âcritical personnelâ.(as, for example, Secret Service protection of the president, or the NSC), and their entire propaganda machine will go into overdrive blaming the D House for a shutdown of the govt that will surely get us all murdered in our beds. OMFG!
Iâm not sanguine about the Ds hanging together to tough out even a very limited shutdown that will actually not be our doing, but that of the other side. We are the Ds. Most of us will find it at least a little shocking that weâre fighting back, and will insist on backing down at the first sign of R resistance. Getting the electorate on our side for this really shouldnât be that heavy a lift. Only non-critical WH operations would be shut down, and everything shut down will be their sideâs doing, as all our side insists on is shutting down Sanders. If we canât make a villain out of Sanders in the public mind, we should just go home. But if weâre not up for that, defaming someone who deserves every bit of defamation that doesnât even have to be made up â and we probably are not, as a team â then best to not start what the other side is going to turn into a game of legislative chicken. We wonât win at that sort of hardball without a complete change of our present attitude, and if you wonât see a try at hardball to its conclusion, if youâre not committed to making the other side swerve first, you shouldnât start down that road, because you will lose big.
âSarah Huckabee Sanders Is Our [P]uke Of The Weekâ
1 Like
Such a fragile snowflake
Minor quibble - a scaramuchia as they say - should it not be Duchess - or are you trying to say something more?
2 Likes
Sanders is such a rotten person that DOTW is too kind to her.
She should be in federal prison with her boss.
1 Like
All the Ivies have gone purely odious in this era of hereditary wealth and white entitlement, but Harvard takes the cake: it has become the nastiest little trust fund brat hatchery on the East Coast.
2 Likes
Case in point⌠If SHuck can explain why tRump was right in blaming Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia for the war in Yugoslavia she has to win next week.
4 Likes
Who?
6 Likes
I am quite sure that Young Mrs Hamhock is deeply touched at the bestowing of this major award. I hope so that she adds it to her list of accomplishments on her resume, along with her signature product line:
3 Likes
What is the story with the daughters?
2 Likes
Is that Trump story TRUE? Is it just that I believe that he is that stupid BUT this is literally INCONCEIVABLE as quoting Vizzini in Princess Bride?!?
2 Likes