Stable Genius Elon?

[PaulS]

This is where Trump has taken much of the R party:

When Rep.-Elect George Santos admitted that he “embellished” his “résumé” during his 2022 campaign, the New Yorker’s critics were quick to respond that his fabrications went way beyond embellishment. Santos (whose district includes parts of Queens and Long Island) claimed that his grandparents were Ukrainian Jews and Holocaust survivors, that he had an abundance of real estate assets, and that his mother was killed on 9/11 — none of which was true.

Regardless, some Republicans have been rushing to Santos’ defense, including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia. And Senate Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy has been in no hurry to throw Santos under the bus, as he knows he will need Santos’ vote if he is going to be chosen as House speaker in 2023.

In a scathing column published by The Bulwark on December 28, Never Trump conservative Charlie Sykes emphasizes that the Santos scandal is not only an indictment of the congressman-elect, but underscores the GOP’s overall dysfunction.

“Embellished? I do not think that word means what the Talented Mr. Santos thinks it means,” Sykes explains. “To ‘embellish’ is to adorn, decorate, enhance, gild, beautify, and festoon — and on occasion, it means to ‘exaggerate.’ This Santos did not do. He just made s**t up out of whole cloth. He did not place doodads on his résumé: He lied about his schooling, his degrees, his background, his criminal history, his employment, and about the non-existent properties he claimed to own.”

The conservative columnist continues, “He lied that his employees were killed in the Pulse nightclub shooting. He lied about his Jew-ishness and about his grandparents escaping the Holocaust. He used fake quotes from Winston Churchill. He lied about his money, probably lied on financial disclosure forms — which is actually a crime — and lied about his lying. And then, having constructed this Babel of Fabulism, he turned to the playbook of disingenuous non-apologies.”

Sykes laments that because Santos is a Republican, he is getting a pass from other members of his party.

“Of course, a political party with any sort of intact immune system would move quickly to send this sociopath back to ScamLand, whence he came,” Sykes argues. “But this is the GOP circa 2022, and so, it faces a painful dilemma. With a narrow majority in the House, Republicans — and especially Kevin McCarthy — need his vote, of course. But that’s not the real problem here, is it?”

Sykes continues, “After years of ignoring, enabling and rationalizing Big Lies and small ones, it will now be exceedingly difficult for the GOP to find their misplaced conscience that might morph into outrage and something like a moral standard. As Nick Catoggio writes, ‘Anyone willing to set aside their qualms about Trump for the sake of holding executive power logically should be willing to set aside their qualms about Santos for the sake of holding legislative power.’ So, not surprisingly, GOP leaders are either silent, or in a forgiving mood.”

Greene, Sykes observes, is “all in” for Santos. After former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (an ex-Democrat turned independent) asked Santos some tough questions when filling in for Tucker Carlson on Fox News, Greene attacked her for showing “zero grace.” The far-right Georgia congresswoman tweeted, “I think we Republicans should give George Santos a chance and see how he legislates and votes, not treat him the same as the left is.”

Sykes laments, “The responsibility for this entire goat-rope lies with Santos and the GOP, but it’s worth noting that all of this should have been exposed before the election by the local media and Dem oppo research. Balls were dropped.”

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

This is where Trump has taken much of the R party:

When Rep.-Elect George Santos admitted that he “embellished” his “résumé” during his 2022 campaign, the New Yorker’s critics were quick to respond that his fabrications went way beyond embellishment. Santos (whose district includes parts of Queens and Long Island) claimed that his grandparents were Ukrainian Jews and Holocaust survivors, that he had an abundance of real estate assets, and that his mother was killed on 9/11 — none of which was true.

Regardless, some Republicans have been rushing to Santos’ defense, including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia. And Senate Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy has been in no hurry to throw Santos under the bus, as he knows he will need Santos’ vote if he is going to be chosen as House speaker in 2023.

In a scathing column published by The Bulwark on December 28, Never Trump conservative Charlie Sykes emphasizes that the Santos scandal is not only an indictment of the congressman-elect, but underscores the GOP’s overall dysfunction.

“Embellished? I do not think that word means what the Talented Mr. Santos thinks it means,” Sykes explains. “To ‘embellish’ is to adorn, decorate, enhance, gild, beautify, and festoon — and on occasion, it means to ‘exaggerate.’ This Santos did not do. He just made s**t up out of whole cloth. He did not place doodads on his résumé: He lied about his schooling, his degrees, his background, his criminal history, his employment, and about the non-existent properties he claimed to own.”

The conservative columnist continues, “He lied that his employees were killed in the Pulse nightclub shooting. He lied about his Jew-ishness and about his grandparents escaping the Holocaust. He used fake quotes from Winston Churchill. He lied about his money, probably lied on financial disclosure forms — which is actually a crime — and lied about his lying. And then, having constructed this Babel of Fabulism, he turned to the playbook of disingenuous non-apologies.”

Sykes laments that because Santos is a Republican, he is getting a pass from other members of his party.

“Of course, a political party with any sort of intact immune system would move quickly to send this sociopath back to ScamLand, whence he came,” Sykes argues. “But this is the GOP circa 2022, and so, it faces a painful dilemma. With a narrow majority in the House, Republicans — and especially Kevin McCarthy — need his vote, of course. But that’s not the real problem here, is it?”

Sykes continues, “After years of ignoring, enabling and rationalizing Big Lies and small ones, it will now be exceedingly difficult for the GOP to find their misplaced conscience that might morph into outrage and something like a moral standard. As Nick Catoggio writes, ‘Anyone willing to set aside their qualms about Trump for the sake of holding executive power logically should be willing to set aside their qualms about Santos for the sake of holding legislative power.’ So, not surprisingly, GOP leaders are either silent, or in a forgiving mood.”

Greene, Sykes observes, is “all in” for Santos. After former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (an ex-Democrat turned independent) asked Santos some tough questions when filling in for Tucker Carlson on Fox News, Greene attacked her for showing “zero grace.” The far-right Georgia congresswoman tweeted, “I think we Republicans should give George Santos a chance and see how he legislates and votes, not treat him the same as the left is.”

Sykes laments, “The responsibility for this entire goat-rope lies with Santos and the GOP, but it’s worth noting that all of this should have been exposed before the election by the local media and Dem oppo research. Balls were dropped.”

why does santos deserve more than the punishment you’d give to democrats who lied/embellished, like our esteemed senator blumenthal, Biden, Princess Liz Warren, etc? Hilary lying about coming under sniper fire, that wasn’t a problem for democrats…

look, i’d say kick the guy out and have another election. but your side would never, ever agree that they need to be held to the same standard

Is there a specific reason why republican lies are more problematic than democrat lies?

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

why does santos deserve more than the punishment you’d give to democrats who lied/embellished, like our esteemed senator blumenthal, Biden, Princess Liz Warren, etc? Hilary lying about coming under sniper fire, that wasn’t a problem for democrats…

look, i’d say kick the guy out and have another election. but your side would never, ever agree that they need to be held to the same standard

Is there a specific reason why republican lies are more problematic than democrat lies?

Well you use the same old few D lies and embelishments over and over and over again. The level of those same lies you use to try to tarnish Ds are not even close to the level and # of Trump or Santos. Trump/Santos have told dozens (Trump thousands) while the D lies you use are so few that you have to repeatedly use them. In addition, Trump, Biden, Warren and Blumenthal have all apologized. Trump prob. did but I must have missed it.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Well you use the same old few lies and embelishments over and over and over again. The level of those same lies you use to try to tarnish Ds are not even close to the level of Trump or Santos.

why is the list of lies i cite not valid paul? because i’ve cited them more than once?

so using that logic, if you and wayne cite santos’ lies the same number of times, those lies no longer matter?

Blumenthals lie is far worse worse than anything santos said, which is exactly why today that lie is a crime. unless a democrat tells it, apparently. Gimme a break.

Trump is in a category all by himself. We’re taking about santos.

the reason why i bring those lies up, is because you guys get all twisted in knots in a pathetic, humorous attempt to explain why those lies are so much more benign.

“everything is ok when democrats do it.”

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Well you use the same old few D lies and embelishments over and over and over again. The level of those same lies you use to try to tarnish Ds are not even close to the level and # of Trump or Santos. Trump/Santos have told dozens (Trump thousands) while the D lies you use are so few that you have to repeatedly use them.

so “a few lies”, at least when told by democrats, is acceptable.

What’s the maximum number of lies that are allowed, before we should start caring? do democrats get a larger number?

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

so “a few lies”, at least when told by democrats, is acceptable.

What’s the maximum number of lies that are allowed, before we should start caring? do democrats get a larger number?

Show me a D how "gets a larger number?"

Keep trying to comparing hundreds/thousands of lies with 1 or an embellishment and that is why we (I) can't take you seriously.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Show me a D how "gets a larger number?"

Keep trying to comparing hundreds/thousands of lies with 1 or an embellishment and that is why we (I) can't take you seriously.

Biden.

Santos has told hundreds or thousands of lies? how many fin hem are crimes, as blumenthals lie is?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Biden.

Santos has told hundreds or thousands of lies? how many fin hem are crimes, as blumenthals lie is?

And here it is again Jim’s logic

if they are not crimes what’s the problem

Jim give up . You defend this clown right off the bat. But know since you committed yourself to his cause

You decide to do what you always do try to make some false equivalences. And in double down because you can’t win the argument.

And the only argument I made was if his lies were proven truth would Republicans make him resign?

And it’s looking like they won’t hopefully they’ll come to their senses
But now they are proving that they are not the party of integrity, honesty, truthfulness they’re only interested in keeping his seat at any cost.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Biden.

Santos has told hundreds or thousands of lies? how many fin hem are crimes, as blumenthals lie is?

Santos has told dozens (on the way to hundreds) of lies. Trump thousands.

The D lies or embellishments you post are not crimes and that is why both Santos and Trump are being investigated by federal and local authorities.

Blumenthal was a reservist and said he served in vietnam - which he didn't. How is Blumenthal's a crime?