I firmly believe, for every politician, when they reach a certain level, there is a period of discovery. I’d bet money even the ones who join politics with good intentions get to a point in their political career where there are absolutely no good choices .
I know this because I live it in my own life. For the politician, though, they have to settle into it, reject it and defect, or gamble. A good politician, one people mostly admire, is probably just a gambler that won the jackpot. They were in the right place at the right time and pulled the right lever. A bad politician is someone we see as bad only because we see them constantly making safe bets. Like a drunk who spends all day at the horses they bet the 2:1s and try to beat the house.
Its crazy to me that logic, reason, and decency arent very good political tools. They cant sway the masses. They always need to be propped up by some underlying moral structure that no one ever agrees on.
could we have a bare minimum tho? like, a civics test, because I’m really getting the impression these conservative fucks don’t understand the basics. At all. And when you only have vague knowledge of what’s right and wrong, allowing tyranny to slip by is just a lil’ ooopsie. But if we test incoming pols for the basics, when they violate their oaths to the constitution they can then be held accountable.
Now it’s just open season for any moron to come bumbling through the senate/house at state or federal level and claim they interpreted things differently while grifting the fuck out of what few freedoms remain.
Conservatives are the most morally bankrupt of them all. Don’t let them trick you into believing they dont know civics. They know, and actively subvert it. At the end of the day regressives regress all the way down to authoritarians. Authoritarians derive morality from within themselves. So its basically Calvin ball but they want you to think its liberty.
well, your bitch mcconnels and flimsey grahams do, fo sho… your fetal-alcoholism green and handjob boeberts were more what I was thinking for the basics civics tests…
I firmly believe, for every politician, when they reach a certain level, there is a period of discovery. I’d bet money even the ones who join politics with good intentions get to a point in their political career where there are absolutely no good choices .
I know this because I live it in my own life. For the politician, though, they have to settle into it, reject it and defect, or gamble. A good politician, one people mostly admire, is probably just a gambler that won the jackpot. They were in the right place at the right time and pulled the right lever. A bad politician is someone we see as bad only because we see them constantly making safe bets. Like a drunk who spends all day at the horses they bet the 2:1s and try to beat the house.
Its crazy to me that logic, reason, and decency arent very good political tools. They cant sway the masses. They always need to be propped up by some underlying moral structure that no one ever agrees on.
Anyway…
could we have a bare minimum tho? like, a civics test, because I’m really getting the impression these conservative fucks don’t understand the basics. At all. And when you only have vague knowledge of what’s right and wrong, allowing tyranny to slip by is just a lil’ ooopsie. But if we test incoming pols for the basics, when they violate their oaths to the constitution they can then be held accountable.
Now it’s just open season for any moron to come bumbling through the senate/house at state or federal level and claim they interpreted things differently while grifting the fuck out of what few freedoms remain.
Conservatives are the most morally bankrupt of them all. Don’t let them trick you into believing they dont know civics. They know, and actively subvert it. At the end of the day regressives regress all the way down to authoritarians. Authoritarians derive morality from within themselves. So its basically Calvin ball but they want you to think its liberty.
well, your bitch mcconnels and flimsey grahams do, fo sho… your fetal-alcoholism green and handjob boeberts were more what I was thinking for the basics civics tests…
Alright, thats true.
depressingly, yep.
I think what concept you’re trying to point at is compromise.
At a political level, compromising is never fun. “a good compromise is one where neither party is happy” and all that.
Compromise is fine. Im talking about gridlock.
If you think they are equivalent, thats fine. I dont agree.