@grok Has anyone in Congress voted more consistently with the Constitution than Massie?
Does he vote with Republicans on virtually every issue except when it comes to warrantless surveillance of American citizens, increased government spending, unnecessary wars, and exposing pedophiles?
Sure. Who doesn't like adding to their bank account?
But of all the motives and character flaws one could attribute to MTG, and there are plenty, an $8K annual pension that she will not see a single dollar, or even a nickel, of for more than a decade until she turns 62 seems pretty far down the list.
She could have remained in Congress for one more month and likely made more from the insider trading than she’ll receive in benefits in her lifetime. To equate her timing to the pension given is minuscule amount is ridiculous.
AOC's role in the Dem Party is exactly what Obama's was: to commandeer the intense political energy for radical change, especially among young people, and cynically channel it into votes for a Dem Party that changes nothing, thus rendering that energy impotent and worthless:
Thanks! In other words, Massie opposed executive overreach and rejected giving any president a mechanism to circumvent Congress’s constitutional power of the purse?
That same year, did he vote through the appropriations process to provide billions of dollars for border security, because that is the constitutionally proper way for the federal government to spend money?
And has otherwise consistently supported stronger border security measures, including co-sponsoring the Close Biden’s Open Border Act (H.R. 164) in 2023?
@Anders4Lee@realtimsharp@barnes_law@grok Please fact check this post. Please also let my esteemed friend know which current member of Congress has a voting record that most closely aligns with the Constitution, if the Constitution itself were embodied in a sitting member of Congress.
I don't recall anything in the Constitution requiring elected representatives to fall in line with any president's agenda, including Trump.
That's authoritarianism, not constitutional government.
We literally fought a revolution to escape rule by a king and then designed a constitutional republic with separate branches of government so no one man could dictate to the people's elected representatives.
Thanks for proving my point.
I didn't say Charlie didn't receive an award. Amber insulted people and accused them of being obsessed with Erika because Erika merely accepted an award on her husband's behalf.
What I specifically said was that no one puts on full academic regalia simply to accept an award for a deceased spouse. If all she was doing was accepting an award on her husband's behalf, there would be no reason to wear doctoral robes and a hood. That's why you don't see military wives wearing their husbands' uniforms when they accept Purple Hearts at Arlington National. It would be bizarre and would come across as a form of stolen valor.
Equally strange is that Erika, whom virtually no one had heard of 12 months ago and who has done little more than a series of press conferences and media appearances, is now receiving the same accolades as Charlie.
Reading comprehension and critical thinking are clearly in short supply around here.
You do realize that people from all over the country, myself included, are supporting Massie because we believe he's the only genuinely principled member of Congress who consistently votes the way he campaigned?
I don't even agree with many of his views, but this election is a litmus test for whether we still live in a constitutional republic.
If the future of this country is left to elected officials who, the moment they arrive in DC, sell their votes to special interests, corporations, and foreign lobbies instead of remaining accountable to the constituents who sent them there, then this country has no future.
We are officially an oligarchy or plutocracy.
And yes, of course it makes sense that a state like Cali with ~760% more residents and a nominal GDP of about $4 trillion, compared with KY’s $300B, would have proportionally higher donation totals.
If you're going to insult people, at least have the slightest clue what you're talking about.
You don't wear full academic regalia, including a graduate level white hood, and stand on stage holding a diploma that literally lists ERIKA KIRK as the recipient of the doctorate degree when you're just accepting an award on behalf of your husband.
Idiot.
The only thing Americans care more about than immigration is the economy, and if Democrats are dumb enough to put Newsom at the top of the ticket, the GOP will have the easiest campaign cycle imaginable.
Elections are won in swing states and by independents. No matter how bad things get under Trump by campaign season, it will be impossible to convince swing state voters that the solution is the man most associated with California’s soaring cost of living, homelessness crisis, business exodus, crime issues, and abysmal affordability.
There are plenty of independents who otherwise might be persuaded to vote blue for the first time. But Newsom is one of the few Dems capable of driving those voters right back out of the electorate entirely, thereby handing the election to whoever is leading the GOP ticket. That’s just basic Electoral College math.
The campaign ads practically write themselves. Every ad break would just be California, California, California. Gas prices. Cost of living. Homeless encampments. Businesses leaving. Clip after clip asking voters whether they want the rest of the country governed like California.
No matter how badly Trump and his administration have betrayed Americans, there are still millions of voters who are never going to pull the lever for Newsom. If independents stay home, Electoral College math does the rest and hands the country to whoever is on the GOP ticket.
And, for the record, Rubio was born in the U.S. so I’m not sure what point you were trying to make.
Well, there is some very basic critical thinking that can be applied here. The CIA may have a handful of internship programs for 18 year olds, but actual operational experience and high level intelligence clearances take years to build. Even a standard Secret clearance can take months. Top Secret/SCI clearances tied to intelligence work commonly take 9 to 18 months, sometimes far longer depending on foreign contacts, finances, travel history, or other complications. The math doesn’t math for a ~20 year old to in some extraordinary rare instance go from recruitment, vetting, to political assassinationwithin months.
There’s a reason intelligence agencies overwhelmingly rely on older, deeply vetted personnel for sensitive operational roles. It is extraordinarily difficult to fully evaluate someone who is barely out of puberty, has almost no professional history, limited demonstrated judgment, and virtually no established adult track record.
Historically, when governments have been accused of covert assassinations or targeted killings, those operations were typically alleged to be highly compartmentalized with strict ‘need to know’ restrictions and access limited to a very small circle of individuals with high level clearances. That compartmentalization is one of the core foundational principles of OPSEC.
The idea that a barely adult kid with an undeveloped brain would somehow be central to an elite, multinational intelligence assassination plot doesn’t exactly align with how intelligence agencies operate.