The Real timschochet

You know I never find Babylon Bee to be amusing but this one is actually kind of funny.

You’re right. What Kennedy is talking about is far more intrusive and far more impactful. Which is why I think it’s unlikely to happen. But we’ll see.

Yeah we’ll see here’s the problem: I can see RFK proposing something like this, why not? And then I can see Trump approving it, after all he said he was going to let RFK “run wild with the food!” …And then it goes to Congress. And that’s when the food and chemical companies say to their representatives “umm we donated 2 million to your last campaign so please quash this idea, mmkay?” And then the bill disappears in committee and we never hear about it again. And if asked Trump says “hey we’re working on it! It’s a concept of an idea!” I’ll be pleasantly surprised if I’m wrong about this.

You know you joke around but you’re avoiding answering the serious question: are you willing to regulate and restrict this stuff?

If conservatives are really serious about legislating Kennedy’s proposals to remove and/or restrict food additives, this could be one of the most impactful and positive Presidencies in our history and I will be the first to say so. IF it actually happens. But why do I get the feeling that conservatives aren’t really serious about this or anything; they’re just looking for ways to defend Trump’s wild appointments in order to further troll the libs?

Again, are you willing to legislate this? Because if you’re not no amount of advice to people to eat more organically is going to matter at all.

We are close to finding out.

Yes we have an obesity problem for sure. It seems to me that the only way to really fix it is to start putting restrictions on food. In the past we haven’t been willing to do that. Are we now?

I don’t think RFK (or Trump) can cut spending on anything. That has to be an act of Congress, right?

I need to go to thweep!

I see your point

That was an excellent fight. Honestly one of the best I’ve seen in years.

Looks like Trump is dead serious about recess appointments. He doesn’t want any hearings at all. Again, I fully expect the Senate to roll over.

No. At least not in my understanding. Progressivism involves changes, most of them gradual. On SOME occasions there is a blowtorch effect (one thinks of Brown vs Board of Education, but even that took over 30 years to enforce.) I don’t believe that sudden change is almost ever good.

Regarding Gaetz there’s not going to be any ethics report: https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/15/politics/johnson-ethics-report-gaetz/index.html What investigation? It never happened. Watch him sail right through.

Jon, I’ve never seen anywhere that our government played a hand in the lawsuits against Alex Jones by the Sandy Hook parents. Do you have some evidence of this?

So what happened?

Honestly I find some of the nominations amusing (Tulsi, Gaetz, Kennedy, and Hegseth in particular) but none of them really bother me. This is what people voted for. Trump was very clear that he intended to blow things up. So here we are. Part of the reason I voted for Kamala Harris is because I don’t think it’s wise to blow things up. I believe that for all of its faults, the status quo generally works, and that the chaos created when you set a blowtorch to existing institutions is almost never a good thing. But I was outvoted.

Lady Gaga has destroyed Harley Quinn for me. I didn’t see the movie, the preview was bad enough.

I haven’t complained. Please don’t tell anyone that I objected in any way. I for one fully support our new MAGA overlords.

I fully support this appointment and all other Trump appointments!

It’s probably wise of you to express any discontent you have with something Trump does before January. Later on this sort of dissension may get you into trouble.

It’s about to.

They’re talking recess appointments. Lisa Murkowski may vote publicly against Donald Trump. I’ll be very surprised if any other Republican Senator does during the next four years. That goes doubly for the House. It’s going to be rubber stamp time.

Thanks for the response. Normally the term “classical liberal” is used to define someone who is more libertarian. I think the term you might be thinking of is “traditional liberal” which would more describe somebody who generally believes the government should help the unfortunate among us in various ways. I find it interesting that 100% of your description of far leftists are non- economic. Again the traditional definition of a far leftist is someone like AOC or Bernie Sanders. While neither of them is a Communist both of them want much greater government involvement in economics than we have now. But you are focused on non-economic issues. I don’t think your definition feels right to me. Personally I am very much pro-business, believe in the free marketplace. But I am also sympathetic to many woke issues, including transgender rights. Under your definition I am far leftist and I’m quite positive that’s not accurate.