GOP Will Shit Itself

[nosimpleway]

Parses in a similar context to "blood for the Blood God" or perhaps "skulls for the Skull Throne"

[Bal]

I know I've posted this before in the context of it being a modern political speech, but it's a pretty evergreen meme.

[Mongrel]

[Mongrel]

NBC: Text messages leaked by several of Kavanaugh's friends suggest he was working to refute Ramirez's claim before it became public

[Yoji]

So, has anyone else heard about how an IP address from the House of Representatives was caught editing the Wikipedia entry for "devil's triangle (disambiguation)" to include how it's a supposed drinking game enjoyed by a young Kavanaugh?

He better pull out soon. If he doesn't, I'm going to strangle everyone involved and then myself.

[beatbandito]

So, has anyone else heard about how an IP address from the House of Representatives was caught editing the Wikipedia entry for "devil's triangle (disambiguation)" to include how it's a supposed drinking game enjoyed by a young Kavanaugh?

He better pull out soon. If he doesn't, I'm never going to get a turn in this lively and wholesome drinking game.

[Mongrel]

The Wiki edits were briefly mentioned in the news a few days ago, though they didn't include the fact that the morons were using House IP addresses to do so.

Given the number of times Wiki "editors" have been busted for doing just that, you think they'd have learned to go use the free WiFi at a Panera or something by now.

[pacobird]

Has anybody made any Virgin Kavanaugh vs. Chad Ludington MS Paints yet?

[Mongrel]

[Thad]

Maybe at least two of Flake/Collins/Murkowski vote against him.

We'd need all three of them. Or two of them and Manchin.

I don't expect any Democrat to be the deciding vote. Not even Manchin.

I'm not saying he won't vote to confirm. But I don't think he'll vote to confirm unless every Republican does too.

I was close. Murkowski is a no, Manchin is a yes. They'd still have the votes to confirm without him.

Kavanaugh is getting confirmed. I'm not surprised, but it's still a pretty tough thing to see.

I've got plenty more to say, but...nah. I really don't feel like it right now.

[Mongrel]

Well, someone could still pull a John McCain, but I'm not hopeful.

[Rico]

Well, someone could still pull a John McCain, but I'm not hopeful.

Tweet sternly about how it's a bad idea and vote for it anyway?

[Mongrel]

Well, someone could still pull a John McCain, but I'm not hopeful.

Tweet sternly about how it's a bad idea and vote for it anyway?

lul

Anyway, I saw the post above before I saw the news about Murkowski rolling over, so yeah.

[Mongrel]

Every single day, I just keep wondering "How much longer before some Republican gets shot?"

This is not me approving of such tactics. I'm just amazed that while, sure, shooting up the joint tends to be more a part of the right-wing playbook than than the left-wing playbook, someone hasn't tried to gun down a couple Republican senators yet (unless you count that baseball game a few months back).

Especially given all the half-jokes I've been seeing lately about guillotines.

EDIT: Oh looks like that's definitely on the table: http://freewestmedia.com/2018/10/04/twi ... -platform/

[Yoji]

This is America we're talking about. We kill our best people and elect our worst, so I'll be damned if we even see a bird crap on Trump's head.

[Mongrel]

I mean, there might not be a civil war, but there's going to be way more violence before this is over. If it ends anytime soon.

[Mongrel]

[Thad]

Well, someone could still pull a John McCain, but I'm not hopeful.

Tweet sternly about how it's a bad idea and vote for it anyway?

lul

Anyway, I saw the post above before I saw the news about Murkowski rolling over, so yeah.

Murkowski was the sole "nay" on the Republican side. You're thinking of Collins -- though I'd describe her fucking speech as something a lot less passive than "rolling over". She really is the new McCain, just in case that wasn't obvious already.

Evidently my post wasn't clear (I was typing on my phone); I meant to imply, given the context of the previous post I was quoting, that every Republican except Murkowski was a yea and that Manchin was joining the winning side once it was clear which side that was.

Every single day, I just keep wondering "How much longer before some Republican gets shot?"

This is not me approving of such tactics. I'm just amazed that while, sure, shooting up the joint tends to be more a part of the right-wing playbook than than the left-wing playbook, someone hasn't tried to gun down a couple Republican senators yet (unless you count that baseball game a few months back).

"I wonder when [thing] will happen (unless you count that time it already happened)" is kind of a weird take.

I do think we're in something of a powder keg right now, and the Kennedy quote about making violent revolution inevitable applies. I don't know what happens next, but I do suspect that if we see violent escalation, it's much likelier to be more altercations between police and protesters than more attacks by lone wolves against elected officials.

[Mongrel]

Well, someone could still pull a John McCain, but I'm not hopeful.

Tweet sternly about how it's a bad idea and vote for it anyway?

lul

Anyway, I saw the post above before I saw the news about Murkowski rolling over, so yeah.

Murkowski was the sole "nay" on the Republican side. You're thinking of Collins -- though I'd describe her fucking speech as something a lot less passive than "rolling over". She really is the new McCain, just in case that wasn't obvious already.

Evidently my post wasn't clear (I was typing on my phone); I meant to imply, given the context of the previous post I was quoting, that every Republican except Murkowski was a yea and that Manchin was joining the winning side once it was clear which side that was.

Every single day, I just keep wondering "How much longer before some Republican gets shot?"

This is not me approving of such tactics. I'm just amazed that while, sure, shooting up the joint tends to be more a part of the right-wing playbook than than the left-wing playbook, someone hasn't tried to gun down a couple Republican senators yet (unless you count that baseball game a few months back).

"I wonder when [thing] will happen (unless you count that time it already happened)" is kind of a weird take.

I do think we're in something of a powder keg right now, and the Kennedy quote about making violent revolution inevitable applies. I don't know what happens next, but I do suspect that if we see violent escalation, it's much likelier to be more altercations between police and protesters than more attacks by lone wolves against elected officials.

Well, we've already got plenty of the former - I'd say we've averaged one news story per day for the last week about violence at a protest/"protest". Today alone, there's something like three or four different stories out of Portland, including a cop joining the "Proud Boys" in stomping a counter-protestor "lib" antifa goddamned pinko commie.

I guess the baseball attack feels a bit different to me in the sense that it was so broadly targeted - nearly any republicans would have done, in the same sense that any mass shooting is fairly indiscriminate. I'm thinking more about specific members of the GOP being targeted, i.e. someone going specifically for Grassley, Kavanaugh, etc.

[Thad]

Well, we've already got plenty of the former - I'd say we've averaged one news story per day for the last week about violence at a protest/"protest". Today alone, there's something like three or four different stories out of Portland, including a cop joining the "Proud Boys" in stomping a counter-protestor "lib" antifa goddamned pinko commie.

I just got back from vacation and haven't kept on the news. Sad to hear that but unsurprised.

I guess the baseball attack feels a bit different to me in the sense that it was so broadly targeted - nearly any republicans would have done, in the same sense that any mass shooting is fairly indiscriminate. I'm thinking more about specific members of the GOP being targeted, i.e. someone going specifically for Grassley, Kavanaugh, etc.

I'm a little uncomfortable engaging in conjecture on why attacks do or don't happen. Partly because it's ghoulish, and partly because it's an attempt to make sense of something that's inherently senseless.

I suppose there are a few factors at play here. One is that most senators are pretty popular in their home states; another is that security around the Mall is pretty good. Another is that, while spree shootings have become depressingly common, they rarely have political motives behind them. (And those that do -- say, the shooting of Gabby Giffords, or even of Reagan -- are less likely to be motivated by any particular ideology than because the target is an elected official in general.)

And then there's demographics. As you said, shooters are likelier to be right-wing -- and I think that's down to the profile. Shooters are likelier to be white and male; white males are likelier to be Republicans.

But again, ultimately all this is just an attempt to impose order onto chaos. Truth is, I don't know why people do things or don't do things.