Right wing does not argue in good faith. I’m reminded of that Sartre quote
Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.
Obligatory Brandolini’s law link.
that is the MO for troll comments on many sites.
Heritage deletes the article in 30 minutes lol.
So where’s the article archive?
Here you have the Internet Archive Link
Wait a second, that article still exists. Twitter lied to me!
Yup, non-archive link.
I guess there’s a first time for everything. Lying on the internet, who knew you could do that?
Assigned to Patrick…
…before they
canned him
sorry :)
Restored before Streisand
or
Lies from poopsite
My vote’s on…
number two 😎
Ignorance is Strength.
Drunkenness is sobriety
this economic model is closer to 1684 via Philipp von Hornigg
In case there was anyone left who wasn’t already certain that he was lying when he said that he had nothing to do with the Project 2025 people.
Not sure how that could be possible given the events of the past several weeks… But I’m continuously astounded by people’s ignorance.
Someone shared this, project2025.observer
Would journalists get clicks if they gave weekly progress reports on this? I’m guessing not or those articles aren’t making it to my screens.
Blocked on the wifi where I’m at rn. Lol.
I’d recommend getting Mullvad, IVPN or Proton VPN, or at the very least configuring DNS-over-HTTPS/TLS (second one is free) to circumvent these kind of blocks.
I know. Its trivial to get around it. Its just funny that that website was blocked.
The days left number in this context is really sobering.
I remember he specifically said that he hadn’t read it. Which is something I believe.
I haven’t heard anyone say that after the election tho, but I guess there would still be people like that out there.
Trump is clearly playing 4d chess.
He’s already on project 2029.
Project 2025 is a given, it’s just the details that need to be worked out by minions and rubber stamped by trump.
Musk has already approved project 2025, and is giving it face time. 2029 is obvious to him, so he is working on project 2033 where he gets to ban unions.
Conservatives don’t agree with ideas.
Conservatives agree with people.
Honestly I think tariffs could be a good thing if used in certain ways, but certainly not in the manner that the orange idiot has been applying them. They act to make targeted products more expensive, so if one was to specifically tariff goods made under labor conditions that would be illegally substandard in this country, such as under safety conditions that wouldn’t meet our regulations or with purchasing power adjusted wages that would be below our minimum, and set the tariff amount so as to make those goods just a bit more expensive than if they had been made under conditions that at least met our standards, you could reduce the economic incentive for companies to outsource to places where they can exploit their workforce more, and reduce the incentive for those places to avoid improving their labor laws. Trump would never use them for something like that though.
Agreed, but I would use tariffs as a form of carbon tax on countries w/o sufficient climate policies. Individual companies/products could reduce the tariff by proving how much pollution is actually produced.
I suppose you could extend that to other negative externalities we want to control for as well.
Great use for them. If the reason it’s cheaper is that they aren’t paying the externalities, then adding a tariff is a great way to compensate for that.
Or tariffs on countries with terrible labour policies. It’s always annoyed me that labour is never involved in free trade negotiations and the stuff that makes it in are requirements for standardisation or intellectual property, but never anything about labour standards.
Of course, that’s by design, because all of those things are neoliberal constructs and the whole point of those is to break labour power, but it’s disappointing you never even see anyone pay lip service to anything like that.
Did you not read the first comment in this thread? It talks about just this.
I thought I was adding to the conversation by mentioning free trade agreements, but ok.
Good. It is preferable if that organ of conservativism is dragged down when Trump’s ship sinks.
Why would the heritage foundation support a border wall and capital punishment, two crazy things Trump just happens to have been talking about for decades.
It has a section on restructuring the Fed, removing bailouts for banks, and setting a 3% annual growth in the money supply. Which is amazing, so I’m not even mad.
We need a CleverComebacks and the like communities!
