CWRE - User contributions [en]

Myths

2026-04-03T12:43:14Z

Woozle:

[[category:top]]
==Related==
* [[fake scandals]]
* [[irrelevancies]]: statements that are true but don't support the point they seem to be supporting
==Index==
* {{l/sub|America is a Christian nation}}
* {{l/sub|anchor babies}} [http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2015/08/23/there-is-no-anchor-baby-problem/ nope] and [https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/report/2015/11/09/125182/turning-our-backs-on-the-14th-amendment/ nope] ([https://plus.google.com/u/0/+CindyBrown/posts/4J2RsPjcW8g via])
* {{l/sub|Cis is a slur}}.
* {{l/sub|communism is evil}}
* {{l/sub|electric cars pollute more than standard cars}}
* {{l/sub|gun ownership makes you safer}}
* {{l/sub|hybrid cars pollute more than standard cars}}
* {{l/sub|life is fair}}
* {{l/sub|Nazis were socialists}}
* {{l/sub|Nazis defunded police}}
* [[racism]]:
** {{l/sub|racism is over}}
** {{l/sub|reverse racism}}
** {{l/sub|police abuse is not racially biased}}
* {{l/sub|the Democrats are more racist than the Republicans}}
* {{l/sub|Wikipedia is not a reliable source}}: see [https://scholar.social/@eleanorkonik/102549679336560706] for rebuttal
* '''history''':
** {{l/sub|Nazis were socialists}} [http://www.politicususa.com/2012/09/12/hitler-explains-gop-wrong-national-socialism.html nope], [http://historyandpolitics77.blogspot.com/2011/03/we-are-socialists-debunked.html nope], and [http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/germanyandprussia/fl/Was-Adolf-Hitler-a-Socialist-Debunking-a-Historical-Myth.htm nope] ([https://plus.google.com/+SteveSIsBack/posts/KW6TUENLTBj via])
* '''government''':
** {{l/sub|government cannot create jobs}}
** {{l/sub|government has a monopoly on force}}
** {{l/sub|government is the problem}}
** {{l/sub|government is the source of all political power}}
** {{l/sub|government is the source of all oppression}}
** {{l/sub|government is violence}}
** {{l/sub|government regulation stifles free markets}}
** {{l/sub|government should be eliminated}}
** {{l/sub|mail-in voting}} (multiple)
** {{l/sub|monopolies would not exist without government}}
** {{l/sub|the Post Office has fallen into disuse}}
** {{l/sub|the Post Office is unprofitable}}
** {{l/sub|there has never been a successful socialist state}}
** {{l/sub|there are no sustainable energy sources}}
** '''US government'''
*** {{l/sub|Social Security is bankrupt}} [https://plus.google.com/102282887764745350285/posts/XjbYSbJVDNz]
*** '''Trump''' administration (2017-)
**** {{l/sub|Trump did not open concentration camps}}
**** {{l/sub|Concentration camp prisoners are treated very well}}
**** Need data: "The difference is these people can agree to be deported. They don’t have to stay there, they aren’t being beaten nor murdered. They aren’t being starved or persecuted based on their race or religion." [https://twitter.com/JaneBurgessAZ/status/1141212387766202368 Jane Burgess, Tweet, 2019-06-19]
*** '''{{l/sub|Obama}} administration''' (2009-2016)
**** {{l/sub|Democrats had a supermajority for two years}}
**** {{l/sub|Obama is a socialist}}
**** '''{{l/sub|Obamacare}}'''
**** {{l/sub|the IRS targeted conservatives}}
**** {{l/sub|voter fraud is a serious problem}}
**** {{l/sub|Republicans didn't protest when Obama won the election}}
*** '''{{l/sub|Clinton}} administration''' (1993-2000)
* '''health'''
** {{l/sub|transgendrity}} (aka "transgenderism")
* '''public policy'''
** {{l/sub|attempts to fight poverty have never worked}}
** {{l/sub|complaints about economic disparity are just greed}}
** {{l/sub|global warming predictions have failed}}
** '''government aid''':
*** {{l/sub|giving people money makes them work less}}
*** {{l/sub|helping people makes them dependent}}
*** {{l/sub|people need incentives to work}}
** {{l/sub|gun control doesn't work}}
** {{l/sub|hammers are more dangerous than guns}} (see [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2013/01/03/fbi-more-people-killed-with-hammers-and-clubs-each-year-than-with-rifles/ Breitbart] and Danny Killo's comment "Hammers kill more people than guns each year! Should we outlaw hammers?" [https://plus.google.com/102282887764745350285/posts/WxPfaz7zHAA here]. [http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-deaths-and-injuries-statistics/ gun stats])
** {{l/sub|homelessness is a choice}}
** {{l/sub|liberal policies are bad for the economy}}
*** {{l/sub|liberal policies put us more in debt}}
*** {{l/sub|liberal policies destroyed Detroit}}
*** {{l/sub|liberal policies ruined California}}
*** {{l/sub|liberal policies will ruin California}}
** {{l/sub|markets regulate themselves}}
** {{l/sub|net neutrality means government control of information on the internet}}
** {{l/sub|raising the minimum wage hurts jobs}}
** {{l/sub|raising the minimum wage would raise prices}}
** {{l/sub|reducing access to abortion services reduces abortions}}
** {{l/sub|Republicans are better at creating jobs than Democrats}}
** {{l/sub|Social Security is a Ponzi scheme}}: see {{l/ip|US/Social Security/myths}}
** {{l/sub|socialism leads to poverty}}
** Taxation:
*** {{l/sub|taxation is theft}}
*** {{l/sub|taxing the rich kills jobs}}
*** {{l/sub|moving into a higher tax bracket can mean you take home less}}
** {{l/sub|the federal budget should be balanced}}
** {{l/sub|unemployment is due to laziness}}

==Too Far Out==
CWRE considers the following myths to be sufficiently whacked that they are low on the priority list for refuting:
* Evolution is a lie. / The Earth is 6,000 years old. / Humans have no genetic relationship to monkeys. -- see {{issuepedia|Young Earth creationism}}
* Public assistance is like slavery. [http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/2014/12/21/clueless-actress-public-assistance-is-just-like-slavery/]
* Homosexuality is bad.
** [https://plus.google.com/117466634587465429409/about Glen Cauthon]: "Media making it appear so "Natural" and bombarding us with homosexuality every day..in sports, in politics, in movies. They want a generation of homosexual children who will not breed. And it's even more than that. The "population explosion problem" is just a hoax. It's not even believed by those who started it. Only by the dip-sticks in Congress and people like Ted Turner, Bill Gates, Oprah "Bells In Her Fry" Winfrey and so on....and take a good look at those rich men and women."
* Global warming is about increasing government control.
** See comment [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102227800261183349957/posts/ckWdpicPAbT here] -- "Global warming is now relabeled as climate change but it's always been about more government control. Bernie's policies of coercive energy restrictions will further drive this country into depression. Energy is what allows us to be more productive and debate over the internet instead of digging for grubs for sustenance."
* There are no morals without God.
** Example: Frank Black's comments [https://plus.google.com/u/0/+AdmiralTaptap/posts/Fenjq52Pric here] (slightly edited): "moral absolutes? Under God yes, without God no. You atheists believe you have the ability to distinguish good from evil right from wrong! But you can not. God gave you the innate ability to know right from wrong. With out God's Commandments and Law's there is no difference. So all thing all permissible and no consequences for the atheist actions! So if your an Atheist then you cannot obey God's laws and Commandments! If you do then you Acknowledge that there is a God and you accept and follow his Commandments! Your comments are contradictory itself!"
* Obama is on the side of the terrorists.
** Example: http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/2015/04/19/terrorists-dont-attack-us-to-not-embarrass-obama/

==Links==
For future mining:
* '''2016-12-18''' [https://plus.google.com/u/0/+LeratoMajikfaerie/posts/NFfVgnJq6qw concern troll repeats anti-trans myths]
* '''2016-12-13''' [http://www.theestablishment.co/2016/12/13/no-female-trans-athletes-do-not-have-unfair-advantages/ No, Female Trans Athletes Do Not Have Unfair Advantages]
* '''2016-11-17''' [https://www.buzzfeed.com/krishrach/this-woman-was-told-muslims-dont-condemn-violence-so-she-mad This Woman Was Told Muslims Don’t Condemn Violence, So She Made A List To Show They Do] - myth: Muslims don't condemn Muslim violence
* '''2016-11-10''' [http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/paul-ryan-says-medicare-privatization-is-on.html Paul Ryan Says Medicare Privatization Is On] ([https://plus.google.com/u/0/+CindyBrown/posts/B163rpH4r1K via])
* [http://blacklivesmatter.com/11-major-misconceptions-about-the-black-lives-matter-movement/ 11 Major Misconceptions About the Black Lives Matter Movement]
* '''2016-08-03''' [http://boingboing.net/2016/08/03/mexico-us-illegal-migration-ha.html Mexico-US illegal migration has been at zero for 8 years, and other eye-opening facts]
* '''2016-07-08''' [http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-defilippis-hughes-gun-myths-debunked-20160708-snap-story.html 5 arguments against gun control — and why they are all wrong]
* '''2016-06-22''' [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-tax-rate_us_576ade9ae4b0c0252e781158 Donald Trump Keeps Calling The U.S. The ‘Highest Taxed Nation.’ It’s Not Even Close.] ([https://plus.google.com/u/0/+CindyBrown/posts/MaiMNHtF4aj via])
* '''2016-05-24''' [http://cyclingfallacies.com/en/ Cycling Fallacies]
* '''2015-10-26''' [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/GjMGuRQqWJ2 The post reshared here] has a gold-mine of myths and misconceptions about gender and transsexuality; more [https://plus.google.com/102282887764745350285/posts/Zc5TU3nbZE1 here]
* '''2015-04-03''' [http://werehistory.org/ten-myths/ Ten Myths in American History]
*# Myth: The Battle of Bunker Hill, and the Revolution in general, was won by untested but brave militiamen.
*# Myth: The Founding Fathers based their political beliefs in Christian doctrine.
*# Myth: With the Louisiana Purchase, the United States acquired a vast tract of land for almost no cost.
*# Myth: Christian doctrine in America always stood in opposition to moral crimes like slavery.
*# Myth: The heroes of American history have typically been "Average Joes."
*# Myth: Immediately after the Civil War, most white Americans were appalled by the rise of the Ku Klux Klan
*# Myth: Cowboys were brave individualists, freed from the confines of government intervention and big business.
*# Myth: The Medal of Honor has always been nearly impossible to come by, awarded to only the most heroic soldiers.
*# Myth: African American service in WWI paved the way for equality in America.
*# Myth: Those who call for change in America do not share its core values.
* '''2015-02-26''' [http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/feb/26/fact-checks-behind-daily-shows-50-fox-news-lies/ The fact-checks behind 'The Daily Show's' 50 Fox news 'lies']
* '''2015-02-23''' [https://www.newstatesman.com/future-proof/2015/02/sex-isn-t-chromosomes-story-century-misconceptions-about-x-y Sex isn’t chromosomes: the story of a century of misconceptions about X & Y] ([https://mastodon.social/users/plsburydoughboy/statuses/99082098228566754 via])
* '''2014-12-06''' [http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/12/myths-non-binary-people/ 10 Myths About Non-Binary People It's Time to Unlearn]
* '''2014-11-18''' [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brynn-tannehill/myths-about-transition-regrets_b_6160626.html Myths About Transition Regrets]
* '''2014-08-04''' [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brynn-tannehill/fighting-back-against-ant_b_5633450.html Fighting Back Against Anti-Transgender Talking Points]
* '''2014-03-06''' [http://neutrois.me/2014/03/06/5-myths-about-genderqueer-transition/ 5 Myths About Non-Binary Transition]
* '''2012-12-11''' [http://thedailybanter.com/2012/12/how-to-quickly-prove-a-libertarian-wrong/ How to Quickly Prove a Libertarian Wrong]: 5 [[marketist]] myths about capitalism (although many marketists use #5 as an argument ''for'' capitalism)
* '''2012-05-15''' [http://www.cracked.com/article_19864_6-ridiculous-lies-you-believe-about-founding-america_p2.html 6 Ridiculous Lies You Believe About the Founding of America]
* '''2002-03''' [http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2002/03/1491/302445/ 1491]: myths about pre-Columbian America
* [https://www.scarymommy.com/why-is-there-this-sudden-trans-kids-trend/ Why Is There A Sudden Trans-Kids Trend?]: because "They are less terrified of all of you than I was."
* [https://www.scarymommy.com/its-okay-dont-understand-transgender-identity/ Someone Else’s Gender Identity Isn’t About You] ([https://pluspora.com/posts/fa9c6ac0f10401377d7a005056264835 h/t])
** Gender dysphoria is a real condition, and it is not a mental illness.
** There are currently over a million (known) trans individuals in America.
** Few to no transgender people "change their mind" after coming out.
** Affirming a trans child’s identity is necessary to avoid psychological decompensation, depression, suicidal ideation with attempts, and more.
** Myth: “Kids are too young to make this decision!”

Myths/mail-in voting

2026-04-03T12:42:59Z

Woozle: Created page with "{{fmt/title|myths about mail-in voting}} <poem> 🚫 MYTH: Mail-in voting is riddled with fraud and cannot be trusted. ✅ FACT: Out of every 10 million mail-in ballots, fewe..."

{{fmt/title|myths about mail-in voting}}
<poem>
🚫 MYTH: Mail-in voting is riddled with fraud and cannot be trusted.
✅ FACT: Out of every 10 million mail-in ballots, fewer than 4 are fraudulent.
🚫 MYTH: The United States is the only country that uses mail-in voting.
✅ FACT: Over 50 democracies worldwide use mail-in voting, including Germany, the UK, Australia, Canada, and Switzerland.
🚫 MYTH: Anyone can send in a mail-in ballot. There's no way to verify who it's really from.
✅ FACT: Mail-in ballots go through multiple layers of verification: signature matching, unique barcodes, ballot tracking, and in many states, witness or notary requirements.
🚫 MYTH: Mail-in voting is just a convenience for people who don't want to bother showing up.
✅ FACT: Mail-in voting is a lifeline for the elderly, people with disabilities, active-duty military families, and rural voters depend on it to make their voices heard.
🚫 MYTH: Mail-in voting is a new, untested idea.
✅ FACT: Mail-in voting in America dates back to the Civil War. Union soldiers cast mail ballots in the 1864 presidential election, making it a 160+ year tradition in American democracy.
🚫 MYTH: Mail-in voting is designed to benefit one political party.
✅ FACT: Research consistently shows mail-in voting does not significantly advantage either party. What it does do is increase overall voter turnout.
</poem>

Socialism

2026-02-26T20:16:20Z

Woozle:

[[File:OfBisxBGLdPD8cZSxz4sAJVNwEgKAZVWtprYboITue-K=w1600-h900.jpeg|thumb|The US was built on socialism.]]
==Pages about [[socialism]]==
* [[/myths/]]
* [[Meaningless insults/socialism]]
==Links==
===Reference===
* {{issuepedia}}
* {{wikipedia}}
===Posts===
* '''2015-05-12''' [http://mic.com/articles/117944/7-charts-show-the-socialist-hellscape-america-would-be-under-bernie-sanders 7 Charts Show the Socialist Hellscape America Would Be Under Bernie Sanders]

Socialism/myths

2026-02-26T20:15:49Z

Woozle:

[[category:myths]]
{{fmt/title|Myths about [[socialism]]}}
* {{l/pfx|Myths/|socialism leads to poverty}}
* {{l/pfx|Myths/|there are no successful socialist states}}
==Memes==
<gallery mode=packed heights=300>
File:Socialism vs. Capitalism.png
File:870f663ad6c82acc.png
</gallery>
==Links==
* '''2020-07-29 04:13''' [https://twitter.com/BrianSMcCormack/status/1288568254324191234 This thread] looks to be an excellent source of myths about socialism and [[communism]].

Socialism/myths

2026-02-26T20:10:50Z

Woozle: Created page with "category:myths {{fmt/title|Myths about socialism}} * {{l/pfx|Myths/|socialism leads to poverty}} * {{l/pfx|Myths/|there are no successful socialist states}} ==Memes==..."

Template:L/pfx

2026-02-26T20:09:13Z

Woozle: Created page with "}}}"

[[{{{1}}}{{{2}}}|{{{2}}}{{{3|}}}]]

File:870f663ad6c82acc.png

2026-02-26T20:07:00Z

Woozle: * '''what''': meme illustrating a popular myth about socialism * '''source''': [https://pool.jortage.com/tootcat/cache/media_attachments/files/116/136/986/200/025/398/original/870f663ad6c82acc.png image], [https://mastodonapp.uk/@MarkHoltom/116136986136997133 post] * '''retrieved''' 2026/02/26

== Summary ==
* '''what''': meme illustrating a popular [[socialism/myths|myth about socialism]]
* '''source''': [https://pool.jortage.com/tootcat/cache/media_attachments/files/116/136/986/200/025/398/original/870f663ad6c82acc.png image], [https://mastodonapp.uk/@MarkHoltom/116136986136997133 post]
* '''retrieved''' 2026/02/26

Myths/Nazis were socialists

2026-02-23T14:20:01Z

Woozle:

[[category:Nazi]]
[[category:socialism]]
{{hdr/myth|Nazis were socialists.}}
==Claim / Argument==
''"Nazi" is short for "national socialism" – therefore the Nazis and the Nazi Party were socialists.''
==Reality==
Calling oneself something does not make it so. The Nazis were no more "socialist" than the USSR was a "republic" or East Germany was "democratic"; adding "socialism" to the Party name was basically a marketing ploy. ''(See also: [[misnomers]])''

Attacking socialism by attempting to link it with Nazism is a popular talking-point on the Right; this at least is an admission that Nazi ideology is ''bad'', despite their own embracing of many of its tenets (racism / white superiority, nationalism, xenophobia).

{{l/ip|Socialism}} is about ensuring that everyone receives adequate basic care (at a minimum) regardless of ability, "superiority", "fitness", or "value to society". Nazis past and present, by contrast, are very keen on extinguishing those they see as "lesser"/"inferior", and outright mass-killed members of numerous groups whom they considered to be somehow "inferior".

The term "National Socialist" was only added to the name of the far-right {{l/wp|German Workers' Party}} in 1920 in hopes that workers would find the party more appealing, but there's no evidence that the party ever followed socialist ideals to any substantial extent.
===Caveat===
The {{l/wp|National Socialist Program}} of 1941, sometimes called the "Nazi manifesto" or the "25-point program", did include a number of points rooted in socialism, designed to appeal to the workers they sought to recruit:
* the "abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes", by which they apparently meant rents rather than welfare
* the general elimination of wealth-based privilege
* elimination of war profiteering
* elimination of land taxes
* nationalization of all business
* laws to allow seizing property for the common good
** Hitler later added that this was "directed primarily against the Jewish land-speculation companies", however.
* expansion of old-age welfare
* "creation of a healthy middle class"
...and other stances in line with socialism, except for the anti-Jewish sentiments underlying many of them.

However, Hitler never had any real intention of following through on these promises. Historian Karl Dietrich Bracher writes that to Hitler the program was
<blockquote>...little more than an effective, persuasive propaganda weapon for mobilizing and manipulating the masses. Once it had brought him to power, it became pure decoration: 'unalterable,' yet unrealized in its demands for nationalization and expropriation, for land reform and 'breaking the shackles of finance capital.'</blockquote>
===Links===
* '''2019-09-25''' [https://fullfact.org/online/nazis-socialists/ The Nazis were not socialists]
* '''2017-10-05''' [http://tuckered.co.uk/2017/10/05/the-nazis-were-not-lefty-socialists-you-thick-fucking-cunts/ The Nazis were not lefty socialists you thick fucking cunts] ([https://plus.google.com/+AlisonMarlowe/posts/QTX3j9HeDGS via])
* '''2017-08-18''' [https://www.indy100.com/article/nazi-socialist-right-wing-white-supremacists-history-twitter-mikestuchbery-7900001 Man says Nazis were socialist, gets schooled by history writer]
==Further Reading==
* [https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/background-and-overview-of-the-nazi-party-nsdap The Nazi Party: Background & Overview]

Republicans Suck/policies

2025-02-07T01:45:19Z

Woozle:

{{fmt/title|Republican Policy Hall of Shame}}
* [[Toilets of Terror]]
* [[/anti-feminism]], aka the War on Women
* [[/anti-voting]]: voter ID laws etc.
* [[/theocracy]] aka "religious freedom"
* working to weaken labor, strengthen owners, when the opposite is needed:
** "[[right to work]]" laws (dishonest)
** opposition to minimum wage raises
** opposition to workplace safety regulation
* anti-gay laws
* anti-abortion laws
* "aid creates dependency"
* tax cuts for the rich
* anti-contraception
* "abstinence-based education"
* creationism
* opposition to Obamacare
** voted 50 times to repeal it
* repeatedly investigated Benghazi, even after their own committee found no wrongdoing
* wrote a letter to our enemies weakening our hand in negotiations
* the whole "birth certificate" nonsense
* deliberate obstructionism
* holding the government hostage (fiscal cliff)
* states' refusal to expand Medicaid under Obamacare
* requiring welfare recipients to be drug-free
* obsession with profit and "free" markets, by which they mean more power for the powerful
* state laws restraining local government:
** from protecting the rights of gays, trans people, etc.
** from creating municipal internet
** from making laws (e.g. zoning) that take accelerated sea-level rise into account
** from having any autonomy at all (see Michigan, Wisconsin)
* anti-ecology laws
* gun control prevention
* hypocrisy: using "the sanctity of marriage" as an anti-gay argument, while themselves being philanderers
** http://gawker.com/national-enquirer-ted-cruz-has-had-at-least-5-extramar-1767002606
** Newt Gingrich
==Pointless Opposition to Sustainable Energy==
* http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-22/buffett-s-utility-scores-win-against-musk-s-solarcity-on-credits

Right to work

2025-02-07T01:44:30Z

Woozle: Redirected page to Misnomers/right to work

#redirect [[Misnomers/right to work]]

Toilets of Terror

2025-02-07T01:42:18Z

Woozle:

{{fmt/title|Toilets of Terror|the "bathroom safety" moral panic}}
[[category:moral panic]]
[[Republicans Suck|Republicans]], in an apparent backlash against municipal laws intended to protect trans people from abuse (a real problem, but one they write off as "[[political correctness]]"), have been sponsoring a wave of bathroom laws designed to... well, we don't really know what they're intended to accomplish ''[[Republicans Suck/policies|as policy]]''; their primary purpose seems to be posturing for their base, for whom transpeople have been offered up as an {{l/ip|demonization|imaginary Terrible Threat}} against which only Republicans are willing to defend us all.

It should be noted that there have been more US Senators arrested for misconduct in bathrooms than there have been trans people arrested for same. (Why don't the Republicans warn us of the Terrible Threat posed by US Senators, and ''do'' something about it? Won't somebody [[think of the children]]??)

{{box/info|
'''The GOP on Safety''':
''a brief history''

Part 1:
: '''Me''': We need reasonable gun laws.
: '''GOP''': It's already illegal to shoot people.
: '''GOP''': ''[fights all attempts at gun regulation of any kind]''

Part 2:
: '''GOP''': We need to protect people in bathrooms against those wicked transies!
: '''Me''': It's already illegal to harass in the loo.
: '''GOP''': [makes law anyway]

— adapted from a [https://twitter.com/JosieBrendaA/status/717316731480440832 Tweet by Josephine Altzman]
}}
==NC==
North Carolina's recent HB2<ref name=hb2 /> is perhaps the gold standard of awful legislation, regardless of topic. It not only ignores multiple facts and contradicts both itself and stated Republican positions, but it's also written so ambiguously that local governments have been left scratching their heads as to what their obligations under the law actually ''are'' now -- which, of course, is consistent with the general tendency of Republicans to destroy effective government wherever and however they can.

The vote for HB2 was unanimous in the NC Senate because all of the Democrats walked out in disgust -- '''every single Republican supported it'''. It was signed by Governor Pat McCrory (R). State Representative Paul Stam (R) spoke in support<ref name=stam1 /> of the bill, calling it "common sense". State Representative Dan Bishop (R), co-sponsor of the bill, used the same phrase<ref name=dbishop>"What we did was restore common sense, and we did it on a statewide basis." http://www.towleroad.com/2016/03/dan-bishop/</ref>.

These idiots not only don't understand what "sense" means, they apparently don't ''realize'' that they don't understand it -- and it doesn't matter, because people keep voting for them anyway.

NC Lieutenant Governor Dan Forest (R) called the Charlotte ordinance (overturned by HB2) "amazingly discriminatory"<ref name=dforest>http://www.indyweek.com/news/archives/2016/04/04/dan-forest-the-charlotte-ordinance-was-amazingly-discriminatory</ref> -- an amazingly stupid thing to say, and definitely against "common sense". He finished the sentence by digging himself in even further, claiming that the victims of this supposed discrimination was "women and girls who no longer basically had the freedom to walk into a restroom and know that they were gonna be safe and secure in that restroom, without a man walking in or a pedophile or a predator walking into that bathroom."

Apparently he wasn't aware of the fact that HB2, the law he supports, ''requires'' certain men to use the women's room -- a fact which has been widely pointed out, so his unawareness is either feigned or a sign of incompetence. Further, this is sheer hypocrisy coming from any Republican, as their party (and probably they as individuals) have actively supported many measures that harm women and girls (see the {{hilite|War on Women}} chapter).

Looking primarily at the "bathroom safety" part of the bill, we see the following problems:

* '''Fact-blindness''': Allowing people to use the bathroom of their identified gender, and defending their right to do so, ''does not'' in any way pose a public hazard. On the other hand, people ''not'' being allowed to do so ''does'' pose a public hazard. The lawmakers are well aware of this, from extensive testimony.
* '''Fact-blindness''': They don't even make an exception for those who have had corrective surgery. While such a law would still be abusive, it would at least be a bit more consistent with the idea that physical differences need to be accommodated via separate bathrooms. As it is, the implication is: however you are identified at birth (correctly or otherwise) is what you will always be, with no room for error or change.
* '''Fact-blindness''': Claiming that the protective law enacted by Charlotte "defies common sense and basic community norms by allowing, for example, a man to use a woman’s bathroom, shower or locker room." (This is absolutely factually untrue -- and the law he signed now ''requires transmen to use the women's room.'')
* '''Hypocrisy''': quashing local ordinances using the "big government" of state authority -- while claiming to oppose "big government" (a principle they also use to cut social safety programs).
** It should be noted that the "big government" aspects of HB2 go far beyond trans protections: "The law also prevents cities from regulating in areas like living wage laws, benefits and hour regulations for workers in the city, city contracting, and even child labor regulations."<ref name=ref3 /> This was basically a "big-government" power-grab by the GOP, propelled by the hatred and ignorance of their supporters.
* '''Hypocrisy''': Citing "basic privacy and etiquette" while denying those things to a particular group that actually needs them, and not actually making any improvements on those things for anyone.
* '''Hypocrisy''': Claiming that "The basic expectation of privacy in the most personal of settings ''[...]'' was violated by government overreach and intrusion by the mayor and city council of Charlotte" while promoting that exact same violation himself.
* '''Lack of compassion''' for the many trans people who will now be forced to use the wrong bathroom or else risk legal consequences. Laws like this also serve to reinforce the popular (but wrong) idea that trans people are somehow a threat, which leads to increased violence and discrimination against them.
* '''Terrible for business''': Companies and organizations too numerous to count, large and small, have announced plans to scale down their North Carolina operations or withdraw their involvement with state initiatives.
** PayPal cancelled their plans to open a new center in Charlotte which would have employed over 400 people, after it had been announced as a done deal two weeks earlier.<ref name=paypal>https://www.paypal.com/stories/us/paypal-withdraws-plan-for-charlotte-expansion</ref>
** NC's FullSteam Brewery has completely withdrawn its involvement in state promotional efforts until HB2 is repealed.<ref name=fullsteam>http://www.indyweek.com/food/archives/2016/03/31/fullsteam-brewery-to-withdraw-from-state-promotional-programs-over-hb-2</ref>
** Durham restaurant Watts Grocery posted a sign on their door opposing HB2.<ref name=watts>https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10208359556327705&set=a.2038492923143.124509.1268872909&type=3&theater It seems worth noting that the owner of Watts is a woman with two daughters.</ref>
** Durham's Carolina Friends School posted and emailed a statement opposing HB2.<ref name=cfs>http://www.cfsnc.org/page.cfm?p=1475</ref>
** Bruce Springsteen cancelled a performance scheduled for April 10 in Greensboro, in solidarity with those fighting HB2.<ref name=bruce>'''2016-04-08''' [http://myfox8.com/2016/04/08/bruce-springsteen-cancels-greensboro-concert-on-sunday-because-of-house-bill-2/ Bruce Springsteen cancels Greensboro concert on Sunday because of House Bill 2]</ref>
* '''North Carolinians don't support it''':
** It overrides the wishes of most Charlotte citizens.
** The Durham City Council unanimously adopted a resolution calling for the repeal of HB2.<ref name=pa>https://www.facebook.com/PeoplesAlliance/posts/1084593711582082</ref>
* '''Poorly written''':
** There is significant ambiguity regarding who has to enforce the new law, what parts are mandatory and what parts optional, etc.
** Although this may not have been intentional, language in the new law prevents public school teachers from using the same bathrooms the students use -- even in schools where there are no staff-only bathrooms.

(It should be noted that all the evidence I'm aware of suggests that gendered bathrooms aren't even necessary in the first place, and that the Republicans are therefore going in exactly the wrong direction with this, but that's another discussion.)

==MN==
* http://thecolu.mn/22648/44-mn-house-republicans-back-ban-on-transgender-employees-using-the-bathroom
** http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2016/03/23/the-war-on-bathrooms/
==Further Reading==
* Articles:
** [http://www.buzzfeed.com/dominicholden/north-carolina-lgbt-discrimintion BuzzFeed] ([https://plus.google.com/u/0/+MarlaCaldwell/posts/ZD45ZpMq7pW via])
** [http://www.hrc.org/blog/five-things-to-know-about-north-carolinas-newest-radical-anti-lgbt-law HRC]
** [http://www.aol.com/article/2016/03/24/nc-governor-signs-bill-repealing-charlotte-transgender-bathroom/21332911/ AOL] (warning: autoplay video)
** '''2016-03-24'''
*** [http://usuncut.com/resistance/north-carolina-anti-lgbt-bathroom-law/ Trans Man Destroys North Carolina’s Anti-LGBT Law in One Brilliant Tweet] ([https://plus.google.com/u/0/+PaulaRizzuto/posts/PLccdTomE8s via])
*** [http://www.wral.com/nc-discrimination-law-creates-business-backlash/15598305/ NC discrimination law creates business backlash] ([https://plus.google.com/u/0/110399510880870866116/posts/9SjeBFuwUJo via])
*** [http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article68167342.html Protesters of bill restricting LGBT protections arrested outside Governor’s Mansion]
*** [http://www.indyweek.com/news/archives/2016/03/25/the-morning-roundup-welcome-to-the-fallout-day-2-weve-really-screwed-the-pooch-here-havent-we Welcome to the Fallout, Day 2. We’ve Really Screwed the Pooch Here, Haven’t We?]
*** [http://www.indyweek.com/news/archives/2016/03/25/department-of-public-relations-this-is-what-the-rest-of-the-country-thinks-of-us-right-now Department of Public Relations: This Is What the Rest of the Country Thinks of Us Right Now] (humorous video)
* The NC section of this chapter is heavily based on my [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/Hy7N4bp6yGA Google+ post] about HB2.
==Footnotes==
<references>
<ref name=stam1>“"This is a common sense bill that protects the privacy expectations of our citizens while clarifying local authority," said Republican Representative Paul Stam.” -- this bill does the exact opposite of what "common sense" would suggest, and local authorities are now left with major ambiguities to deal with. In short, what Stam said is ''exactly wrong''.</ref>
<ref name=hb2>Wikipedia: {{l/wp|Public Facilities Privacy & Security Act}}; see also:
* http://www.buzzfeed.com/dominicholden/north-carolina-lgbt-discrimintion
* Another link -- '''warning: auto-play video''': http://www.aol.com/article/2016/03/24/nc-governor-signs-bill-repealing-charlotte-transgender-bathroom/21332911/</ref>
<ref name=ref3>http://www.hrc.org/blog/five-things-to-know-about-north-carolinas-newest-radical-anti-lgbt-law</ref>
</references>

Toilets of Terror

2025-02-07T01:38:50Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page Republicans Suck/policies/bathroom to Toilets of Terror without leaving a redirect: more of a CWRE-style title ^.^

{{fmt/title|Toilets of Terror|the "bathroom safety" moral panic}}
[[category:moral panic]]
Republicans, in an apparent backlash against municipal laws intended to protect trans people from abuse (a real problem, but one they write off as "political correctness"), Republicans have been sponsoring a wave of bathroom laws designed to... well, we don't really know what they're intended to accomplish ''as policy''; their primary purpose seems to be posturing for their base, for whom transpeople have been offered up as an {{l/ip|demonization|imaginary Terrible Threat}} against which only Republicans are willing to defend us all.

It should be noted that there have been more US Senators arrested for misconduct in bathrooms than there have been trans people arrested for same. (Why don't the Republicans warn us of the Terrible Threat posed by US Senators, and ''do'' something about it?)

{{box/info|
'''The GOP on Safety''':
''a brief history''

Part 1:
: '''Me''': We need reasonable gun laws.
: '''GOP''': It's already illegal to shoot people.
: '''GOP''': ''[fights all attempts at gun regulation of any kind]''

Part 2:
: '''GOP''': We need to protect people in bathrooms against those wicked transies!
: '''Me''': It's already illegal to harass in the loo.
: '''GOP''': [makes law anyway]

— adapted from a [https://twitter.com/JosieBrendaA/status/717316731480440832 Tweet by Josephine Altzman]
}}
==NC==
North Carolina's recent HB2<ref name=hb2 /> is perhaps the gold standard of awful legislation, regardless of topic. It not only ignores multiple facts and contradicts both itself and stated Republican positions, but it's also written so ambiguously that local governments have been left scratching their heads as to what their obligations under the law actually ''are'' now -- which, of course, is consistent with the general tendency of Republicans to destroy effective government wherever and however they can.

The vote for HB2 was unanimous in the NC Senate because all of the Democrats walked out in disgust -- '''every single Republican supported it'''. It was signed by Governor Pat McCrory (R). State Representative Paul Stam (R) spoke in support<ref name=stam1 /> of the bill, calling it "common sense". State Representative Dan Bishop (R), co-sponsor of the bill, used the same phrase<ref name=dbishop>"What we did was restore common sense, and we did it on a statewide basis." http://www.towleroad.com/2016/03/dan-bishop/</ref>.

These idiots not only don't understand what "sense" means, they apparently don't ''realize'' that they don't understand it -- and it doesn't matter, because people keep voting for them anyway.

NC Lieutenant Governor Dan Forest (R) called the Charlotte ordinance (overturned by HB2) "amazingly discriminatory"<ref name=dforest>http://www.indyweek.com/news/archives/2016/04/04/dan-forest-the-charlotte-ordinance-was-amazingly-discriminatory</ref> -- an amazingly stupid thing to say, and definitely against "common sense". He finished the sentence by digging himself in even further, claiming that the victims of this supposed discrimination was "women and girls who no longer basically had the freedom to walk into a restroom and know that they were gonna be safe and secure in that restroom, without a man walking in or a pedophile or a predator walking into that bathroom."

Apparently he wasn't aware of the fact that HB2, the law he supports, ''requires'' certain men to use the women's room -- a fact which has been widely pointed out, so his unawareness is either feigned or a sign of incompetence. Further, this is sheer hypocrisy coming from any Republican, as their party (and probably they as individuals) have actively supported many measures that harm women and girls (see the {{hilite|War on Women}} chapter).

Looking primarily at the "bathroom safety" part of the bill, we see the following problems:

* '''Fact-blindness''': Allowing people to use the bathroom of their identified gender, and defending their right to do so, ''does not'' in any way pose a public hazard. On the other hand, people ''not'' being allowed to do so ''does'' pose a public hazard. The lawmakers are well aware of this, from extensive testimony.
* '''Fact-blindness''': They don't even make an exception for those who have had corrective surgery. While such a law would still be abusive, it would at least be a bit more consistent with the idea that physical differences need to be accommodated via separate bathrooms. As it is, the implication is: however you are identified at birth (correctly or otherwise) is what you will always be, with no room for error or change.
* '''Fact-blindness''': Claiming that the protective law enacted by Charlotte "defies common sense and basic community norms by allowing, for example, a man to use a woman’s bathroom, shower or locker room." (This is absolutely factually untrue -- and the law he signed now ''requires transmen to use the women's room.'')
* '''Hypocrisy''': quashing local ordinances using the "big government" of state authority -- while claiming to oppose "big government" (a principle they also use to cut social safety programs).
** It should be noted that the "big government" aspects of HB2 go far beyond trans protections: "The law also prevents cities from regulating in areas like living wage laws, benefits and hour regulations for workers in the city, city contracting, and even child labor regulations."<ref name=ref3 /> This was basically a "big-government" power-grab by the GOP, propelled by the hatred and ignorance of their supporters.
* '''Hypocrisy''': Citing "basic privacy and etiquette" while denying those things to a particular group that actually needs them, and not actually making any improvements on those things for anyone.
* '''Hypocrisy''': Claiming that "The basic expectation of privacy in the most personal of settings ''[...]'' was violated by government overreach and intrusion by the mayor and city council of Charlotte" while promoting that exact same violation himself.
* '''Lack of compassion''' for the many trans people who will now be forced to use the wrong bathroom or else risk legal consequences. Laws like this also serve to reinforce the popular (but wrong) idea that trans people are somehow a threat, which leads to increased violence and discrimination against them.
* '''Terrible for business''': Companies and organizations too numerous to count, large and small, have announced plans to scale down their North Carolina operations or withdraw their involvement with state initiatives.
** PayPal cancelled their plans to open a new center in Charlotte which would have employed over 400 people, after it had been announced as a done deal two weeks earlier.<ref name=paypal>https://www.paypal.com/stories/us/paypal-withdraws-plan-for-charlotte-expansion</ref>
** NC's FullSteam Brewery has completely withdrawn its involvement in state promotional efforts until HB2 is repealed.<ref name=fullsteam>http://www.indyweek.com/food/archives/2016/03/31/fullsteam-brewery-to-withdraw-from-state-promotional-programs-over-hb-2</ref>
** Durham restaurant Watts Grocery posted a sign on their door opposing HB2.<ref name=watts>https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10208359556327705&set=a.2038492923143.124509.1268872909&type=3&theater It seems worth noting that the owner of Watts is a woman with two daughters.</ref>
** Durham's Carolina Friends School posted and emailed a statement opposing HB2.<ref name=cfs>http://www.cfsnc.org/page.cfm?p=1475</ref>
** Bruce Springsteen cancelled a performance scheduled for April 10 in Greensboro, in solidarity with those fighting HB2.<ref name=bruce>'''2016-04-08''' [http://myfox8.com/2016/04/08/bruce-springsteen-cancels-greensboro-concert-on-sunday-because-of-house-bill-2/ Bruce Springsteen cancels Greensboro concert on Sunday because of House Bill 2]</ref>
* '''North Carolinians don't support it''':
** It overrides the wishes of most Charlotte citizens.
** The Durham City Council unanimously adopted a resolution calling for the repeal of HB2.<ref name=pa>https://www.facebook.com/PeoplesAlliance/posts/1084593711582082</ref>
* '''Poorly written''':
** There is significant ambiguity regarding who has to enforce the new law, what parts are mandatory and what parts optional, etc.
** Although this may not have been intentional, language in the new law prevents public school teachers from using the same bathrooms the students use -- even in schools where there are no staff-only bathrooms.

(It should be noted that all the evidence I'm aware of suggests that gendered bathrooms aren't even necessary in the first place, and that the Republicans are therefore going in exactly the wrong direction with this, but that's another discussion.)

==MN==
* http://thecolu.mn/22648/44-mn-house-republicans-back-ban-on-transgender-employees-using-the-bathroom
** http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2016/03/23/the-war-on-bathrooms/
==Further Reading==
* Articles:
** [http://www.buzzfeed.com/dominicholden/north-carolina-lgbt-discrimintion BuzzFeed] ([https://plus.google.com/u/0/+MarlaCaldwell/posts/ZD45ZpMq7pW via])
** [http://www.hrc.org/blog/five-things-to-know-about-north-carolinas-newest-radical-anti-lgbt-law HRC]
** [http://www.aol.com/article/2016/03/24/nc-governor-signs-bill-repealing-charlotte-transgender-bathroom/21332911/ AOL] (warning: autoplay video)
** '''2016-03-24'''
*** [http://usuncut.com/resistance/north-carolina-anti-lgbt-bathroom-law/ Trans Man Destroys North Carolina’s Anti-LGBT Law in One Brilliant Tweet] ([https://plus.google.com/u/0/+PaulaRizzuto/posts/PLccdTomE8s via])
*** [http://www.wral.com/nc-discrimination-law-creates-business-backlash/15598305/ NC discrimination law creates business backlash] ([https://plus.google.com/u/0/110399510880870866116/posts/9SjeBFuwUJo via])
*** [http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article68167342.html Protesters of bill restricting LGBT protections arrested outside Governor’s Mansion]
*** [http://www.indyweek.com/news/archives/2016/03/25/the-morning-roundup-welcome-to-the-fallout-day-2-weve-really-screwed-the-pooch-here-havent-we Welcome to the Fallout, Day 2. We’ve Really Screwed the Pooch Here, Haven’t We?]
*** [http://www.indyweek.com/news/archives/2016/03/25/department-of-public-relations-this-is-what-the-rest-of-the-country-thinks-of-us-right-now Department of Public Relations: This Is What the Rest of the Country Thinks of Us Right Now] (humorous video)
* The NC section of this chapter is heavily based on my [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/Hy7N4bp6yGA Google+ post] about HB2.
==Footnotes==
<references>
<ref name=stam1>“"This is a common sense bill that protects the privacy expectations of our citizens while clarifying local authority," said Republican Representative Paul Stam.” -- this bill does the exact opposite of what "common sense" would suggest, and local authorities are now left with major ambiguities to deal with. In short, what Stam said is ''exactly wrong''.</ref>
<ref name=hb2>Wikipedia: {{l/wp|Public Facilities Privacy & Security Act}}; see also:
* http://www.buzzfeed.com/dominicholden/north-carolina-lgbt-discrimintion
* Another link -- '''warning: auto-play video''': http://www.aol.com/article/2016/03/24/nc-governor-signs-bill-repealing-charlotte-transgender-bathroom/21332911/</ref>
<ref name=ref3>http://www.hrc.org/blog/five-things-to-know-about-north-carolinas-newest-radical-anti-lgbt-law</ref>
</references>

Republicans Suck/imaginary threats

2025-02-07T01:37:16Z

Woozle:

{{fmt/title|The War on Imaginary Threats}}
This is one of the core methodologies of how the Republican Party makes its living:
# Create a threat.
# Promote the idea that the threatening threat is very, very threatening. Increase power on the propogandamizer until people feel suitably threatened by the really threatening threat.
# Campaign on promises to defend against it.
# If elected, go out and attack something<ref name=related>The target doesn't have to be related to the threat -- e.g. we were attacked on 9/11 by mostly Saudi Arabians, so of course we had to attack Iraq because Muslims. The threat may also be imaginary or it may have been one we created, such as Al Qaeda.</ref> to show the threatening threat who's boss.
# Act all shocked (shocked!) when the target retaliates or protests -- a new Threat to America! <s>We're saved</s> I mean how terrible, and we must bomb, torture, imprison, or harass more people to show them we ''really'' mean business!
# Where possible, attempt to capitalize on whatever fear has been created by selling people things: Glenn Beck's gold coins, Jim Bakker's barely-survival food...

You may think I'm exaggerating -- but a number of right-wing pundits were actually ''recorded on camera'' saying, apparently without irony, that "we need a new 9/11" so that people will take the threatening threat seriously, and elect more threat-defending Republicans to office. None of them were laughed off the set, nor even seem to have lost any credibility in dysconservative circles.

Among the fake threats Republicans have ginned up are the following:
* '''non-heterosexuals''' and '''non-cisgendered people''': they're different from the majority in certain ways that trigger deep-seated instinctive emotions in many people, and therefore trigger unconscious emotional reactions. Most people want to help prevent violence against such people, who have a hard enough time as it is; Republicans smell an easy kill.
* '''black people''', especially the ones who complain about being demonized ("playing the race card"): Republicans like to pretend that racism is over because we have a black president (who himself has been the target of endless obscenely racial abuse), but we are increasingly seeing evidence from smartphone recordings which show that black people have been telling the truth all along about how they are treated by the police in many places (just for example). It ain't over, and sometimes it seems like it's getting worse.
* '''hispanics''': they're apparently lazy layabouts who lie around a lot sucking up public welfare while somehow also taking our jobs. Nice trick, that.
* '''Muslims''': Republicans would have us believe that Islam is far more violent than Christianity, but both history and recent events show Christian extremists to be no less bloodthirsty than their Islamic counterparts
* '''abortion''': aborting a pregnancy at any stage is apparently exactly the same as killing a baby; the fact that abortion is a medical procedure which results in bloody masses of tissue that may or may not vaguely resemble human infants proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt, and justifies killing doctors, harassing their colleagues, and vandalizing their workplaces. Ayup.
* '''liberals''': apparently there is a growing contingent on the far-right which fervently believes that liberals have destroyed, or are destroying, or want to destroy, America -- while liberals are in fact pretty much the only people who give enough fucks<ref name=fucks>If the use of swear-words offends you, then you are being "politically correct". Just so you know.</ref> to actually try to fix things, rather than just using a pose of fixing things as a pretext for gaining power.
* '''terrorists''': yes, they actually kill people -- but far less than many other phenomena that Republicans seem to have no trouble ignoring or even playing down. Deaths from terrorism have been on a decline for the past few decades, as well; this is not a new problem, and it's getting better on its own. Terrorists have been one of the primary excuses for dysconservative hypocrisy on the subject of small government: they brought us the dysfunctional TSA (which replaced a private, for-profit system which was ''working just fine,'' thanks), a now-even-more-biggerer-than-ever-before Military Industrial Complex, increased government surveillance and reduced rights of privacy against same: ''1984'' in a bottle (just add media).
* '''communism''' or even '''socialism''': It needs to be understood that the concept of an ideological system struggle between "Free Market Capitalism" and "Communism" is largely a myth told to children.<ref name=morbius>Credit is due to Edward Morbius (see comments [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/5m69LfmHzeq here]) for this formulation.</ref> {{hilite|[further explanation needed]}}

Oddly enough, they seem to go out of their way to downplay any ''genuine'' threats to society, such as increasing economic inequality or global warming. One almost suspects there might be some kind of monetary connection involved...
==Notes==
===LGBT People===
* Republian lawmakers everywhere seem to think that LGBT people deserve all the discrimination and abuse they can get:
** The entire Republican contingent of the NC State Senate, when they unanimously voted for HB2.(see {{hilite|NC Bathroom Bill}})
** Texas State Representative Matt Krause (R)<ref>'''2016-04-07''' [http://www.liberalamerica.org/2016/04/07/meet-man-writing-hate-texas-religious-freedom-bill-act/ Meet The Man Writing More Hate Into The Texas Constitution]</ref>
===Islam===
* Clare Lopez, one of Ted Cruz's primary foreign policy advisers, has expanded the popular right-wing claim of fictional "Muslim No-Go Zones" in certain areas by suggesting that there is one such zone in Minneapolis.<ref name=patheos1>'''2016-04-07''' [http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2016/04/07/cruz-adviser-claims-minneapolis-has-muslim-no-go-zones/ Cruz Adviser Claims Minneapolis Has Muslim 'No-Go' Zones]</ref>
==Footnotes==
<references/>

Republicans Suck/Trump

2025-02-07T01:35:57Z

Woozle:

{{fmt/title|Yes, Donald Trump is Your Monster}}
==Notes==
Donald Trump has openly expressed approval of violence against trans people, gays, and basically anyone who isn't a straight white conformist with a good job, which is exactly the message sent by many GOP policies such as "[[Toilets of Terror|bathroom safety]]" bills (see {{hilite|Republican Policy Hall of Shame}}).

Trump has been endorsed by:
* NC State Governor Pat McCrory (R)

Other links for mining:
* http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2016/03/28/who-is-to-blame-for-the-current-chaos-in-the-republican-party/
* http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2016/04/01/trump-ban-all-muslims-except-my-rich-friends/
* http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2016/04/01/trump-reveals-convenient-incoherence-of-anti-choice-position/
* http://www.politicususa.com/2016/03/31/misogynistas-trump-cruz-race-hate-women.html

Republicans Suck/right-wing assholery

2025-02-07T01:34:25Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/right-wing assholery to Republicans Suck/right-wing assholery without leaving a redirect: take 2...

==Notes==
* http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2016/04/03/nugent-posts-deletes-racist-image/
* http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2016/04/02/erik-rush-gets-facts-wrong-reaches-ridiculous-conclusion/
* Tony Perkins, Family Research Council
** http://equalitymatters.org/blog/201112010011

Republicans Suck/real threats dismissed

2025-02-07T01:34:25Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/real threats dismissed to Republicans Suck/real threats dismissed without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|The War on Responsibility}}
==Notes==
* global warming
* abuse & murder of LGBT people
* economic disparity
* financial instability of Wall Street due to regulatory failures
* gun injuries & deaths

Republicans Suck/political philosophy

2025-02-07T01:34:25Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/political philosophy to Republicans Suck/political philosophy without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|Republican Political Philosophy}}
=Republican Political Philosophy=
Plenty has been written about the correlation between Republicanism and authoritarianism; I'm going to take a different (though compatible) tack, and put it in less technical terms based on my own observations:

In short, Republicans don't see politics the way rational people do.

Rational people living in a free society see politics as the process of arriving at policies that work as well as possible for the most people. We may have disagreements about the best policies, but they're based on honest beliefs about what the known evidence suggests. Any discussion should be about sharing evidence to minimize disagreement, and working out compromises until we arrive at a position that most participants agree is at least acceptable.

Yes, we recognize that in reality things often don't work this way -- but it ''bothers'' us when they don't. We see mudslinging as a ''failure'' in our representatives, and we'll tend to vote ''against'' someone who uses personal attacks to overcome an opponent's position.

Republicans, however, see politics as being more like an Olympic gladiatorial mud-slinging contest where the key criterion for a good leader is that they ''defeat the other candidates'', by any means necessary -- not that they ''have the first clue about running a government''.

Republicans will ''cheer'' when one of their representatives manages to change a civilized discussion of relevant issues into a brawl, if that's what it takes to get people to overlook the fact that their position has no merit. The guy won, didn't he? So what's the problem?

In Republican politics there's absolutely nothing wrong with lying to the public, even if it causes harm to your constituents (present or future). All that matters is whether it will help advance your (and by extension the Party's) position and whether you can get away with it. Having won, the winner will naturally be the candidate best qualified for the job -- never mind that the contest filters for qualities almost completely unrelated to job performance.<ref name=fallacy>This is an example of another common Republican belief: the "just world" fallacy, where virtue is dependably rewarded and lack of reward is a reliable signal of non-virtue. I'll discuss this more later.</ref>

Likewise, the only bad thing about accepting a bribe is the risk of your enemies finding out and using it against you; there's not actually anything ''wrong'' with it, in the Republican worldview. It helps fund the Party -- and the Party's ideology thus becomes, over time, the ideology of those with extra money and a shortage of scruples.

To a Republican, positions of power are rewards to be given out for loyalty -- not important work to be done by those best capable of using it, and certainly not implying any kind of responsibility or duty to those underneath or to those supposedly being served.

It is by this irresponsible and underhanded ethos -- victory at any cost, we're always right {{hilite|(see Moral Absolutism)}}, suppress any information that shows we might be wrong, destroy public understanding of government and democracy -- that Republicanism has not only thrived but remade much of American culture in its own image: violent, hateful, narrow-minded, dishonest, ignorant, superstitious, paranoid, blindly loyal to the undeserving and trusting of the untrustworthy.

Put more simply: Republican ideology has made us gullible and stupid.

Or, rather, it has made ''you'' stupid. Yes, you out there -- railing about how terrible Donald Trump is while preparing to vote for Ted Cruz. Cruz's policies are, on the whole, no better than those proposed by Trump; the only difference is that Cruz is constrained by the needs of the Party establishment, and will backtrack when he accidentally carries Party beliefs to their logical conclusions in public. Trump ''is'' that logical conclusion; he is everything the Party wants to say but is afraid to; he is everything that right-wing voters have come to believe because Republicans have led them to believe it. (Listen to Cruz's dad sometime if you want to understand better where Cruz is really coming from.)

What this really comes down to, though, is that the Republican base represents people who ''don't care enough about the facts to bother checking them,'' and probably don't have a clue about how to do so. They'll blindly go along with whatever false beliefs their trusted leaders present to them -- and savagely defend those beliefs against any evidence they encounter, no matter how compelling.

{{box/info|
* '''Scientific method''': collect evidence, make guesses, and test those guesses against reality to see if they hold up
* '''Republican method''': believe what you're told, look for evidence to prop it up
}}

This is not a noble thing, but they seem to think it is. The Republican idea of "how we decide which things are true and which things are false" is basically 100% inverted from the scientific method: instead of collecting evidence, making guesses, and testing those guesses against reality to see if they hold up, Republicans take the truth they are handed and look for evidence to prop it up -- and the only reason they bother looking for evidence is with the hope of convincing us heathens that there is something to their beliefs; they'd be just as happy closing their eyes and ears and just Believing.

This is an absolutely terrible way to attempt to understand the universe, much less run a government. It's the opposite of what works.

If you can't be bothered to check the facts your leaders are giving you -- to research the issues you're voting on, whether or not they affect you personally -- to understand what the other side is arguing, and why -- then ask an informed Democrat or independent<ref name=marketism>I can't recommend asking a Libertarian, unfortunately. They make sense on some issues, but on too many others their beliefs are similarly based on bad logic and sophistry.</ref> to explain them to you, or to offer suggestions on how to vote. If you're the sort of person who prefers to let others make the big decisions, then try trusting your informed neighbor instead of the megacorporate news or "conservative" web sites and blogs.

==Footnotes==
<references />

Republicans Suck/policies/theocracy

2025-02-07T01:34:25Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/policies/theocracy to Republicans Suck/policies/theocracy without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|Taking Religious Liberties}}
Many other Republican positions are justified in the name of "religious freedom", including:
* inserting religious doctrine into public education:
** teaching the Bible as fact
** teaching creationism as fact, or as a theory of equal validity to evolution
** abstinence-based education (like walking-based driver education)
* anti-gay sentiment and laws
* anti-trans sentiment and laws
* laws subjugating women (see {{hilite|War on Women}})
==Notes==
* http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/politics/2016/04/05/gov-bryant-signs-religious-objections-bill/82654578
** http://www.breakingnews.com/topic/mississippi-lgbt-bill/
** http://m.sfgate.com/news/us/article/Mississippi-gov-signs-law-allowing-service-7229306.php

Toilets of Terror

2025-02-07T01:34:25Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/policies/bathroom to Republicans Suck/policies/bathroom without leaving a redirect: take 2...

Republicans Suck/policies/anti-voting

2025-02-07T01:34:24Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/policies/anti-voting to Republicans Suck/policies/anti-voting without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|The War on Voting}}
=The War on Voting=
* http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/04/04/3766032/wisconsin-voter-id-students/

Republicans Suck/policies/anti-feminism

2025-02-07T01:34:24Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/policies/anti-feminism to Republicans Suck/policies/anti-feminism without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|The War on Women}}
=The War on Women=
==Notes==
* anti-abortion bills
* anti-sex-education actions
* pro-patriarchal statements and bills
* pro-discrimination actions
* http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jen-caltrider/hello-america-its-me-colorado_b_5870476.html - Colorado "personhood" bill

Republicans Suck/policies

2025-02-07T01:34:24Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/policies to Republicans Suck/policies without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|Policy Hall of Shame}}
=Republican Policy Hall of Shame=
* [[/bathroom]]
* [[/anti-feminism]], aka the War on Women
* [[/anti-voting]]: voter ID laws etc.
* [[/theocracy]] aka "religious freedom"
* working to weaken labor, strengthen owners, when the opposite is needed:
** "right to work" laws (dishonest)
** opposition to minimum wage raises
** opposition to workplace safety regulation
* anti-gay laws
* anti-abortion laws
* "aid creates dependency"
* tax cuts for the rich
* anti-contraception
* "abstinence-based education"
* creationism
* opposition to Obamacare
** voted 50 times to repeal it
* repeatedly investigated Benghazi, even after their own committee found no wrongdoing
* wrote a letter to our enemies weakening our hand in negotiations
* the whole "birth certificate" nonsense
* deliberate obstructionism
* holding the government hostage (fiscal cliff)
* states' refusal to expand Medicaid under Obamacare
* requiring welfare recipients to be drug-free
* obsession with profit and "free" markets, by which they mean more power for the powerful
* state laws restraining local government:
** from protecting the rights of gays, trans people, etc.
** from creating municipal internet
** from making laws (e.g. zoning) that take accelerated sea-level rise into account
** from having any autonomy at all (see Michigan, Wisconsin)
* anti-ecology laws
* gun control prevention
* hypocrisy: using "the sanctity of marriage" as an anti-gay argument, while themselves being philanderers
** http://gawker.com/national-enquirer-ted-cruz-has-had-at-least-5-extramar-1767002606
** Newt Gingrich
==Pointless Opposition to Sustainable Energy==
* http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-22/buffett-s-utility-scores-win-against-musk-s-solarcity-on-credits

Republicans Suck/moral absolutism

2025-02-07T01:34:24Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/moral absolutism to Republicans Suck/moral absolutism without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|Moral Absolutism}}
=Republicans and Moral Absolutism=
Republicans think they're in the right, regardless of any criticism or evidence. Anyone who criticizes you is therefore the enemy, and not to be trusted. As the second President Bush famously said: "you're either with us, or you're against us; either you're with those who love freedom, or you're with the enemy."<ref name=Bush>Never mind that his idea of "loving freedom" seemed to involve hoarding it. (I'll touch only lightly on Bush's awfulness; I'd have to write another book to explore the subject even a little bit thoroughly.</ref>

That kind of sentiment is what we non-Republicans often refer to as "facepalm-worthy": it's the kind of thing we just can't believe anyone would be so stupid as to say out loud.

I really shouldn't have to explain this, but apparently Republicans don't get it: this is not what America was ever about. This is not what ''civilization'' is about. This is what ''destroys'' civilizations from within. It is exactly what "the terrorists" want: a black and white world where everyone believes that our in-group is Right and everyone else is Wrong and evil and we'd be doing the world a favor if we just nuked 'em.<ref name=ISIS1>It says as much in the ISIS training manual: they're trying to create a black-and-white world where everyone not actively fighting against their cause is aligned with it... and this isn't the only point on which Republican hardliners and their best frienemies seem to agree.</ref>

In other words: Republicanism is what the terrorists want.<ref name=ISIS2>Not that I think we should care all that much about what the terrorists think; they're just part of the dark pantheon of overrated, created, or {{l/same|imaginary threats|invented bogeyman threats}} that Republicans need to have around in order to be seen defending us from something -- but y'all seem to be scared of them, so....</ref> When Donald Trump says we should kill the families of known terrorists, he's following their playbook to the letter. When Republican leaders talk about nuking countries whose policies or actions we dislike, they're doing the same way: using the threat to advance their own agenda, then using their agenda to advance the threat.

...which is how the Republican Party makes its living, in a nutshell: inventing {{l/same|imaginary threats}} from which they will defend us with their last breath.
==Footnotes==
<references />

Republicans Suck/leadership

2025-02-07T01:34:24Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/leadership to Republicans Suck/leadership without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|Leadership Hall of Shame}}
=Republican Leadership Hall of Shame=
==Notes==
* officials in high office with patently false beliefs
** '''Ted Cruz''' - believes US was founded as a Christian nation; hired serial liar David Barton, who also promotes this myth, to run his super PAC<ref name=patheos1>'''2016-04-06''' [http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2016/04/06/john-fea-on-the-theology-of-ted-cruz/ John Fea on the Theology of Ted Cruz]</ref>
* horrible mismanagement of states and cities
** '''Bobby Jindal'''
** '''Scott Walker'''
*** wasted taxpayer money by requiring TANF recipients to be tested for drugs
*** Refused Medicaid expansion, despite changing his mind briefly [http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/florida-governors-conscience-takes-costly-turn?cid=sm_tw_msnbc]
*** Ignores scientific consensus on global warming, despite admitting he's not a scientist and despite direct evidence in his state
*** officially withdrew a citizen-approved referendum banning Gerrymandering, thus preventing them from being implemented
** '''Rick Scott'''
* idiotic candidates taken seriously:
** ''see also above: '''Ted Cruz'''''
** The 2016 Republican candidates for US Senate have some bizarre ideas:
*** '''Peg Littleton (R)''' not only supports eliminating the EPA and opening up public lands for unlimited drilling, she also believes that fracking can't cause earthquakes because "You know God is kind of in control of those" -- and she wasn't laughed off the stage when she said this. She also wants the EPA eliminated. Completely. No environmental regulation, period.<ref name=patheos2>'''2016-04-05''' [http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2016/04/05/fracking-cant-cause-earthquakes-because-god-does-that/ Fracking Can’t Cause Earthquakes Because God Does That]</ref>
*** '''Robert Blaha (R)''': the EPA needs to have its "reach" reduced<ref name=patheos2 /> (as if it hadn't already been, repeatedly)
*** '''Tim Neville (R)''': it should be "de-funded"<ref name=patheos2 /> (...because what better way to efficiently close a vital government agency, and prudently conserve its resources for future use, than to just abruptly cut off its funding?)
*** '''Jerry Natividad (R)''': it's "killing hundreds of jobs" (and employs how many?)<ref name=patheos2 />
* Reprehensible organizations:
** {{l/wp|Conservatives for Patients' Rights}}
** {{l/wp|Swift Boat Veterans for Truth}}
** {{l/wp|Family Research Council}}
==Footnotes==
<references />

Republicans Suck/intro

2025-02-07T01:34:24Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/intro to Republicans Suck/intro without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|Introduction}}
=Introduction=
==A Brief Word to Republicans==
If you consider yourself at least reasonably well-educated and reasonably intelligent, and yet you still somehow inexplicably find yourself voting Republican, or running for political office as a Republican, then this book is for you.

That is, it's written with you in mind. If you ''are'' a Republican, then you may not actually care what I think, since I'm not a Republican -- indeed, I oppose most or all of what the GOP has come to stand for -- and therefore am not to be trusted or taken seriously (a bit of authoritarian logic which is discussed further in {{hilite|the "Moral Abolutism" chapter}}). If that's true, you can stop reading here, because I'm not going to be saying much of anything nice about your party as it now stands – though I do have a few harsh things to say about Democrats as well, if that's any consolation.

If, however, you're curious as to why so many people find your party and the people who vote for it to be despicable human beings, read on. I can promise you that it won't be "politically correct" or coddle your sensitive feelings in any way. (That's good, right?)
==Not to Put Too Fine a Point On It==
In short: your party is a blight upon civilization, a virus that infiltrates all the right and proper functions of society and uses their hard-earned legitimacy to support nothing but its own cancerous growth. It is everything it habitually accuses everyone else of being: a useless parasite, a menace to society, a threat to the values we hold most dear.

That which appears principled, it uses only to excuse its most heinous excesses -- and ignores when inconvenient. That which is based in rigorous scientific research, it either distorts for its own ends, claims that the opposite is true (see {{hilite|Counterfactualism}}), simply ignores, or even suppresses.

That which is grounded only in ancient ambiguity and can be interpreted one way today and another one tomorrow, however, is exalted and held aloft as moral guidance for all to follow -- often under penalty of law (see {{hilite|Christian Extremism}}).

''[a summary of the following chapters should go here]''

Republicans Suck/imaginary threats

2025-02-07T01:34:24Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/imaginary threats to Republicans Suck/imaginary threats without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|The War on Imaginary Threats}}
This is one of the core methodologies of how the Republican Party makes its living:
# Create a threat.
# Promote the idea that the threatening threat is very, very threatening. Increase power on the propogandamizer until people feel suitably threatened by the really threatening threat.
# Campaign on promises to defend against it.
# If elected, go out and attack something<ref name=related>The target doesn't have to be related to the threat -- e.g. we were attacked on 9/11 by mostly Saudi Arabians, so of course we had to attack Iraq because Muslims. The threat may also be imaginary or it may have been one we created, such as Al Qaeda.</ref> to show the threatening threat who's boss.
# Act all shocked (shocked!) when the target retaliates or protests -- a new Threat to America! <s>We're saved</s> I mean how terrible, and we must bomb, torture, imprison, or harass more people to show them we ''really'' mean business!
# Where possible, attempt to capitalize on whatever fear has been created by selling people things: Glenn Beck's gold coins, Jim Bakker's barely-survival food...

You may think I'm exaggerating -- but a number of right-wing pundits were actually ''recorded on camera'' saying, apparently without irony, that "we need a new 9/11" so that people will take the threatening threat seriously, and elect more threat-defending Republicans to office. None of them were laughed off the set, nor even seem to have lost any credibility in dysconservative circles.

Among the fake threats Republicans have ginned up are the following:
* '''non-heterosexuals''' and '''non-cisgendered people''': they're different from the majority in certain ways that trigger deep-seated instinctive emotions in many people, and therefore trigger unconscious emotional reactions. Most people want to help prevent violence against such people, who have a hard enough time as it is; Republicans smell an easy kill.
* '''black people''', especially the ones who complain about being demonized ("playing the race card"): Republicans like to pretend that racism is over because we have a black president (who himself has been the target of endless obscenely racial abuse), but we are increasingly seeing evidence from smartphone recordings which show that black people have been telling the truth all along about how they are treated by the police in many places (just for example). It ain't over, and sometimes it seems like it's getting worse.
* '''hispanics''': they're apparently lazy layabouts who lie around a lot sucking up public welfare while somehow also taking our jobs. Nice trick, that.
* '''Muslims''': Republicans would have us believe that Islam is far more violent than Christianity, but both history and recent events show Christian extremists to be no less bloodthirsty than their Islamic counterparts
* '''abortion''': aborting a pregnancy at any stage is apparently exactly the same as killing a baby; the fact that abortion is a medical procedure which results in bloody masses of tissue that may or may not vaguely resemble human infants proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt, and justifies killing doctors, harassing their colleagues, and vandalizing their workplaces. Ayup.
* '''liberals''': apparently there is a growing contingent on the far-right which fervently believes that liberals have destroyed, or are destroying, or want to destroy, America -- while liberals are in fact pretty much the only people who give enough fucks<ref name=fucks>If the use of swear-words offends you, then you are being "politically correct". Just so you know.</ref> to actually try to fix things, rather than just using a pose of fixing things as a pretext for gaining power.
* '''terrorists''': yes, they actually kill people -- but far less than many other phenomena that Republicans seem to have no trouble ignoring or even playing down. Deaths from terrorism have been on a decline for the past few decades, as well; this is not a new problem, and it's getting better on its own. Terrorists have been one of the primary excuses for dysconservative hypocrisy on the subject of small government: they brought us the dysfunctional TSA (which replaced a private, for-profit system which was ''working just fine,'' thanks), a now-even-more-biggerer-than-ever-before Military Industrial Complex, increased government surveillance and reduced rights of privacy against same: ''1984'' in a bottle (just add media).
* '''communism''' or even '''socialism''': It needs to be understood that the concept of an ideological system struggle between "Free Market Capitalism" and "Communism" is largely a myth told to children.<ref name=morbius>Credit is due to Edward Morbius (see comments [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/5m69LfmHzeq here]) for this formulation.</ref> {{hilite|[further explanation needed]}}

Oddly enough, they seem to go out of their way to downplay any ''genuine'' threats to society, such as increasing economic inequality or global warming. One almost suspects there might be some kind of monetary connection involved...
==Notes==
===LGBT People===
* Republian lawmakers everywhere seem to think that LGBT people deserve all the discrimination and abuse they can get:
** The entire Republican contingent of the NC State Senate, when they unanimously voted for HB2.(see {{hilite|NC Bathroom Bill}})
** Texas State Representative Matt Krause (R)<ref>'''2016-04-07''' [http://www.liberalamerica.org/2016/04/07/meet-man-writing-hate-texas-religious-freedom-bill-act/ Meet The Man Writing More Hate Into The Texas Constitution]</ref>
===Islam===
* Clare Lopez, one of Ted Cruz's primary foreign policy advisers, has expanded the popular right-wing claim of fictional "Muslim No-Go Zones" in certain areas by suggesting that there is one such zone in Minneapolis.<ref name=patheos1>'''2016-04-07''' [http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2016/04/07/cruz-adviser-claims-minneapolis-has-muslim-no-go-zones/ Cruz Adviser Claims Minneapolis Has Muslim 'No-Go' Zones]</ref>
==Footnotes==
<references/>

Republicans Suck/government dependence

2025-02-07T01:34:24Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/government dependence to Republicans Suck/government dependence without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|Government Dependence}}
=The Almost-Myth of Hurting by Helping=
''(Maybe this belongs in the "just world fallacy" section, but for now...)''

If I hadn't seen it over and over again, I'd have assumed it was a parody of Republican beliefs -- but apparently Republicans ''actually claim'' that forcing people off welfare makes them more independent, because welfare creates dependency on government handouts, while ''not'' being on welfare gives them an incentive to get a job which of course means that they can get one if they really want to.

(The one grain of truth to this is that many welfare programs make unemployment and/or extreme poverty a precondition of receiving benefits, where benefits are cut off ''immediately'' once the thresholds are exceeded. This does indeed provide a disincentive to be employed or to do at all well financially. Such provisions, however, are invariably demanded by Republicans; most reasonable people would prefer rules that allow a more graceful transition back into mainstream society.)

One can point out the obvious -- just because you have a really strong incentive to do something doesn't mean you can do it -- and that people on welfare typically either ''do'' want a job (regardless of being on welfare) or have circumstances which prevent them from having one -- but of course one then runs into the ever-present Republican obliviousness to facts. They ''believe'' that welfare creates dependence, and that if you take people off welfare they'll <s>learn how to fly by flapping their arms</s> just go out and get a job, and what they believe must be right, because it's what they believe and because, of course, the world is a fair place where merit is always rewarded and poverty proves that you aren't <s>flapping your arms</s> trying hard enough

==Sidepage==
But seriously, folks... the idea that giving someone something creates dependency, and therefore we should never give help to people who need it is an interesting idea which I think is worthy of further exploration. I'd like to propose the following ventures:

* '''Free-Fall-Market Skydiving School''': Students will be thrown out of airplanes without unfairly providing the convenient hand-out of a backpack containing a parachute. This will give them a great deal of incentive to learn how to fly or at least land softly, as well as being less coercive than other skydiving clubs which surrender to the politically correct notion of enforcing safety "for your own good". On the way down, students will learn to collaborate under pressure in order to arrive at unique and innovative solutions to the problems posed by falling out of an airplane at extreme height without a parachute. Anyone who is killed or otherwise fatally injured is a loser who deserves to fail, and will be graded accordingly. (Note: course is conducted by the Self-Determination Flight School, which also offers planeless flying lessons.)
* '''Independent Teaching Hospital''': At most hospitals, you have patients lying around in beds resting, "convalescing", attended hand and foot by "doctors" and "nurses" who thereby create dependence on a liberal medical elite. At Independent Hospital, patients must learn to heal themselves, through intensive study of medical texts which they buy at market rates in exchange for their labor in various other Independent Industries enterprises. The regular course is capped by an intensive eight-hour "emergency room" boot camp where each student is given a fatal injury and must then adapt to their circumstances in time to prevent failing the course.<ref name=python>Credit must be given to M. Python's pioneering work in this field, of which there is a brief documentary available on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp9iQaK0eiA</ref>
* '''Ignite Your Ambition Aeronautics Academy''': students will be placed on the surface of the moon without any solution-space constraints (such as space-suits, a working return capsule, etc.) that might stifle their creativity and result in failure to innovate. This will allow them the full, unconstrained freedom to explore their own unique inventive ability in designing and building a vehicle for return to the Earth before they lose consciousness approximately nine seconds later -- unlike those big-government tyrants at NASA who enslave their astronauts by making them dependent on the billion-dollar free handout known as the US space program.
* '''Invisible Hand Electric Company''': Order service from our company and our technicians will be at your back door in minutes, ready to free you from dependence on the electric grid by disconnecting you from the shackles of your old electric company and giving you all the incentive you've always needed to figure out how to improve your life and generate your own damn electricity, you lazy good-for-nothing layabout. (Warning: bills over 60 days past due will result in immediate reconnection.)
* '''Tough Love Employment Agency''': We believe that the greatest disservice other agencies do for their clients is to take care of all the legwork of finding job openings for them -- making them lazy and more dependent on job-finding services in order to find jobs. Here at Tough Love, we don't fall into that trap! We let our clients know that all they really need to do is ''try'', and they will find a job -- and if they don't, it's clearly their fault for not trying hard enough.

==Footnotes==
<references />
==Notes==
* http://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/more-than-500000-adults-will-lose-snap-benefits-in-2016-as-waivers-expire
** {{l/wp|Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act}}

Republicans Suck/dysconservatism

2025-02-07T01:34:24Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/dysconservatism to Republicans Suck/dysconservatism without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|Dysconservatism}}
=Dysconservatism=
The rot goes deeper than mere naked self-interest. Modern Republicanism has betrayed nearly everything that is implied by the label "conservative".

Let's look at that word for a minute. When it's not referring specifically to a political party or religious entity<ref name=capitalc>I'll refer to these as the "capital-C definitions". Where they come up, the views of the parties or sects in question are not described, so those definitions are of little use in this discussion.</ref>, "conservative" is understood to mean:

* The first three definitions from dictionary.com:
*# disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.
*# cautiously moderate or purposefully low: ''a conservative estimate.''
*# traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: ''a conservative suit''
* The two lowercase brief definitions from Merriam-Webster (m-w.com):
*# believing in the value of established and traditional practices in politics and society : relating to or supporting political conservatism
*# not liking or accepting changes or new ideas

Merriam-Webster's "full definition" punts a bit and defines it as "of or relating to a philosophy of conservatism". It defines "conservatism" first as "not liking or accepting changes or new ideas" and "a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change", but then specifies this as:

<blockquote>''specifically'' : such a philosophy calling for lower taxes, limited government regulation of business and investing, a strong national defense, and individual financial responsibility for personal needs (as retirement income or health-care coverage)</blockquote>

This is more or less in line with the modern political philosophy which calls itself "conservatism".

Definitions from the 1969 ''American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language'' (hardback edition, edited by William Morris), however, say nothing about taxes, government regulation, business, defense, or financial responsibility. Omitting only the capital-C definitions, the full text is:

<blockquote>
* '''con-ser-va-tism''' ''n.'' '''1.''' The disposition in politics or culture to maintain the existing order and to resist or oppose change or innovation. '''2.''' The principles and practices of persons or groups so disposed. ''[...]''
* '''con-ser-va-tive''' ''adj.'' '''1.''' Tending to favor the preservation of the existing order and to regard proposals for change with distrust. ''[...]'' '''4.''' Moderate or prudent; cautious; ''a conservative estimate''. '''5.''' Traditional in manner or style; not showy; ''a conservative suit''. ''[...]''
</blockquote>

So, in summary:
# preservation of the existing order
# opposing change or innovation
# moderate or prudent; cautious
# traditional

On none of these points does the modern political philosophy calling itself "conservatism" succeed.

It has worked to erode long-existing establishments essential to the preservation of the existing order. It has supported change -- especially destructive change -- in the name of "progress" and "profit". It has been profligate in its pursuit of war and in its disregard for prudent measures necessary to maintain a functional economy. It has violated the American traditions of democracy, fairness, tolerance, diversity, justice, and the rule of law.

In short, it is absolutely the opposite of everything a naive reader might assume "conservatism" to mean; at best, it has become completely dysfunctional at serving the interests of those who prefer a conservative approach to government; at worst, it does them a complete disservice.

For those reasons, I will be referring to the political philosophy of today's Republican Party -- a philosophy which brands itself as everything from libertarian to puritannical, but maintains no principles except that of self-promotion -- as "dysconservatism".

==Footnotes==
<references />

Republicans Suck/counterfactualism

2025-02-07T01:34:24Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/counterfactualism to Republicans Suck/counterfactualism without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|Counterfactualism}}
=Counterfactualism=
[[File:40bf3e68-796b-41b0-b0d1-0c19ffbecdd3.jpg|thumb|Republican leaders encourage ignorance and misunderstanding in their supporters. If they didn't, they wouldn't have any. ([[:File:Dont-steal-from-medicare-2.jpg|Here's another one]].)]]
==Disregard for Evidence==
==Disregard for Consistency==
* http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2016/04/01/historian-answers-every-gop-argument-on-garland/
* http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2016/03/31/bryan-fischer-award-winner-ted-cruz-3/
==Wrong Beliefs==
* Just-world fallacy
* Christianity should rule
* Anyone different is a threat
** gay people, trans people, people of color, atheists & people of different religions
* Sex education causes more sex; contraception causes more sex; ABE works
* We need to reproduce faster.
* Socialism is bad.
* (check [[Myths]])

Republicans Suck/badness

2025-02-07T01:34:24Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/badness to Republicans Suck/badness without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|Stupid All the Way Down}}
=A Litany of Badness=
Whatever it once was, the US Republican Party has become truly awful -- that is, far more so than the average political party<ref name=average>...by which of course I mean the Democrats, who have raised mediocrity to a fine art form</ref>. This is a fact that is now pretty much obvious to anyone who isn't a Republican; there has been extensive debate, and the debate is now over. Today's Republicans are, as a group and as individuals, absolutely terrible at running a government of any size.

If you take any arbitrary piece of terrible legislation that has come out in the past ten to twenty years, it was probably sponsored by a Republican and backed by Republicans. If a Republican and a Democrat disagree over something important, it's almost always the Republican who is not just wrong, but absolutely and utterly ''dead'' wrong.

''[needs to be more here]''

Republicans have:
* decimated public education:
** slashed budgets for public education at all levels
** engaged in a nationwide campaign to insert superstition and anti-scientific dogma into school curricula
** required stickers on textbooks stating that essential cornerstones of modern understanding are "just a theory"
** removed any elements of critical thinking from school curricula.
* ruined municipal governments by reducing taxes on the wealthiest
** ...thus creating another pseudo threat to "save" us from by cutting vital services, which in turn destroys the local economy, further reducing government revenues until the budget is in absolute crisis -- providing an excuse for even more draconian "austerity" measures
** Wisconsin, Louisiana, Michigan...
* promoted false claims about their opponents, merely for the sake of winning (see {{hilite|Political Philosophy}})
** (maybe a quick list of [[myths]] here?)

===Ghastly Governance===

==Footnotes==
<references />
==Notes==
* http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/poverty-across-wisconsin-reaches-highest-level-in-30-years-b99676529z1-370157381.html

Republicans Suck/bad Democrats

2025-02-07T01:34:24Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/bad Democrats to Republicans Suck/bad Democrats without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|Nobody's Perfect}}
=Well, Nobody's Perfect=
* California Senator Dianne Feinstein (D) sucks when she joins with North Carolina Senator Richard Burr (R) in supporting a bill that would require technology companies to be able to break their own encryption, making it easier for government (and big business) to spy on personal data.
** ...but Oregon Senator Ron Wyden (D) makes up for Dianne by firmly opposing the bill.<ref name=guardian1>'''2016-03-30''' ''The Guardian'': [http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/30/oregon-senator-ron-wyden-filibuster-encryption-rightscon Oregon senator threatens to filibuster any attempt to weaken encryption]</ref>
==Notes==
* http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2016/04/01/louisiana-where-even-the-democrats-are-science-denialists/ - Louisiana State Senator John Milkovich
==Footnotes==
<references />

Republicans Suck/Trump

2025-02-07T01:34:23Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck/Trump to Republicans Suck/Trump without leaving a redirect: take 2...

{{moved/wrs|Donald Trump}}
=Yes, Donald Trump is Your Monster=
==Notes==
Donald Trump has openly expressed approval of violence against trans people, gays, and basically anyone who isn't a straight white conformist with a good job, which is exactly the message sent by many GOP policies such as "bathroom safety" bills (see {{hilite|Republican Policy Hall of Shame}}).

Trump has been endorsed by:
* NC State Governor Pat McCrory (R)

Other links to mine:
* http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2016/03/28/who-is-to-blame-for-the-current-chaos-in-the-republican-party/
* http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2016/04/01/trump-ban-all-muslims-except-my-rich-friends/
* http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2016/04/01/trump-reveals-convenient-incoherence-of-anti-choice-position/
* http://www.politicususa.com/2016/03/31/misogynistas-trump-cruz-race-hate-women.html

Republicans Suck

2025-02-07T01:34:23Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Republicans Suck to Republicans Suck without leaving a redirect: take 2...

==Chapters==
* [[/intro]]
* [[/badness]]
* [[/political philosophy]]
* [[/dysconservatism]]
* [[/counterfactualism]]
** [[/imaginary threats]]
** [[/real threats dismissed]]
** [[/just-world fallacy]]
** [[/government dependence]]
** [[/political correctness]]
* [[/moral absolutism]]
** [[/Christian extremism]]
* [[/Trump]]
* [[/bad Democrats]]
* [[/policies]]
* [[/leadership]]

Not sure if this is on-topic:
* [[/right-wing assholery]]
==Resources==
* [http://republicanssucks.org/ Republicans Suck]: not the site I want to do, but may have some useful information
==Notes==
* http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/25/1316539/-That-FL-CEO-Who-Said-He-d-FIRE-Everyone-if-Obama-Elected-Guess-What-Happened - Republican myths don't just harm poor people. This CEO believed them and tried to compel his workers to ''vote against his and their best interests''.
* https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-rejects-conservative-bid-to-count-only-eligible-voters-for-districts/2016/04/04/67393e52-fa6f-11e5-9140-e61d062438bb_story.html - more inconsistency: the court ''did'' reinstate "one person one vote". The dysconservatives wanted "one qualified voter, one vote".

Republicans Suck/right-wing assholery

2025-02-07T01:33:58Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/right-wing assholery to User:Republicans Suck/right-wing assholery without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Republicans Suck/real threats dismissed

2025-02-07T01:33:58Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/real threats dismissed to User:Republicans Suck/real threats dismissed without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Republicans Suck/political philosophy

2025-02-07T01:33:58Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/political philosophy to User:Republicans Suck/political philosophy without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Republicans Suck/policies/theocracy

2025-02-07T01:33:58Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/policies/theocracy to User:Republicans Suck/policies/theocracy without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Toilets of Terror

2025-02-07T01:33:58Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/policies/bathroom to User:Republicans Suck/policies/bathroom without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Republicans Suck/policies/anti-voting

2025-02-07T01:33:58Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/policies/anti-voting to User:Republicans Suck/policies/anti-voting without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

{{moved/wrs|The War on Voting}}
=The War on Voting=
* http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/04/04/3766032/wisconsin-voter-id-students/

Republicans Suck/policies/anti-feminism

2025-02-07T01:33:57Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/policies/anti-feminism to User:Republicans Suck/policies/anti-feminism without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Republicans Suck/policies

2025-02-07T01:33:57Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/policies to User:Republicans Suck/policies without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Republicans Suck/moral absolutism

2025-02-07T01:33:57Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/moral absolutism to User:Republicans Suck/moral absolutism without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Republicans Suck/leadership

2025-02-07T01:33:57Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/leadership to User:Republicans Suck/leadership without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Republicans Suck/intro

2025-02-07T01:33:57Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/intro to User:Republicans Suck/intro without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Republicans Suck/imaginary threats

2025-02-07T01:33:57Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/imaginary threats to User:Republicans Suck/imaginary threats without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Republicans Suck/government dependence

2025-02-07T01:33:57Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/government dependence to User:Republicans Suck/government dependence without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Republicans Suck/dysconservatism

2025-02-07T01:33:57Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/dysconservatism to User:Republicans Suck/dysconservatism without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Republicans Suck/counterfactualism

2025-02-07T01:33:57Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/counterfactualism to User:Republicans Suck/counterfactualism without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Republicans Suck/badness

2025-02-07T01:33:56Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/badness to User:Republicans Suck/badness without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article

Republicans Suck/bad Democrats

2025-02-07T01:33:56Z

Woozle: Woozle moved page User:Woozle/Why Republicans Suck/bad Democrats to User:Republicans Suck/bad Democrats without leaving a redirect: promoting this to a main article