Dumbass Tweet O’ Day


A major disaster is in progress in the State of Texas. Many are doing what they can to help regardless of their political affiliation. And yet, some liberals in the media can’t help themselves.

[Update: Ken deleted his tweet, but the internet is forever.]


Ken is a writer for the Orlando Weekly.  Ken must’ve forgotten that it was Houston that helped relocate some 30,000 families from New Orleans during Katrina.

Way to be a dumbass, Ken.

Update: Adding one more tweet for irony:


31 thoughts on “Dumbass Tweet O’ Day

  1. There is a liberal epidemic of virtual signaling their moral superiority by saying Texas deserve the lost of life and property damage from Hurricane Harry because they are mostly Trump supporters

    Liked by 3 people

    • Liberals suck at this sort of thing.

      If they wanted to be dicks about this, they could have very fairly pointed out that both Cruz and Cornyn are looking for handouts now after having told the Northeast to go fuck itself after Sandy.

      Liked by 2 people

      • And God help me, I’m looking forward to Ted lobbying for a debt ceiling increase like it’s Christmas morning.

        I’ve always hated that Canuck motherfucker, and he’s spent the last year showing everybody why.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Whoops, I accidentally responded at the bottom of the page.

        I’ll reprint here for continuity.

        “It’s not going to be tax reform. It’s going to be a giant tax cut that Republicans pretend is tax reform.

        Tax reform is hard. It took Reagan almost two years and a bunch of Democrats to get tax reform.

        Tax cuts are easy, which is why the White House thinks it can get this wrapped up by Christmas.”

        Liked by 2 people

        • Answering your question from up thread, Neal.

          Republicans had the House in 2013. Democrats still had the Senate. Republican didn’t retake the Senate until the 2014 mid-terms.

          Liked by 3 people

        • Neal TAX CUTS are TAX REFORM. I do not know about Canada but here in the states if you think you have not paid enough in taxes, there is a handy little line on the 1040 were you can give all you want.

          Liked by 3 people

        • If you close loopholes and get rid of dumb giveaways and social engineering subsidies, you can have considerably lower rates. The problem is that no one wants to give away THEIR loopholes, dumb giveaways and social engineering subsidies. The reason that the code is so long and impenetrable is because absolutely everyone is “entitled” to their shit.

          The more deductions you have, the higher rates have to be. And that’s essentially a subsidy.

          Look, when the government wants to do almost anything, my answer is almost reflexively “no.” The less government does, the less it has to be paid for. But if you want the government doing everything then the people have to pay for it.

          I don’t believe in “good spending” and “bad spending” because math is amoral. If you can’t afford it, don’t do it. Period.

          I’m WELL to the right of all but a very few Republicans on deficits and debt and think that they should be avoided at all costs. I think deficits are acceptable in the case of actual invasion and not much else.

          The problem with tax “cuts” is that both parties are incapable of not spending on things that they can’t afford, so the cuts further drive deficits. And the history more or less is that tax cuts are never anywhere close to matched by spending cuts. Nor do I have any faith that they ever will be.

          But if you want dramatically lower rates – which is possible – you have to get rid of some pretty popular stuff, which no one ever wants to do. And that’s doubly true at the federal level because the federal government should barely exist.

          Why should everybody else subsidize your charitable giving? If they do, is it still charity? No. get rid of that deduction. Why should the government, especially the federal government, give a shit if you own a house or rent? Get rid of the mortgage interest deduction. Carried interest is essentially deferred compensation, so kill that deduction.

          THAT’s tax reform.

          Let’s move onto spending.

          If Washington is going to dictate conditions, then Washington can pay for them. If it doesn’t, it shouldn’t.

          Here’s my answer to Obamacare – complete repeal and let the states deal with it. If they want single payer or to end bans on preexisting conditions, let them. If the states want no coverage at all, cool. Patient’s bill of rights? Why? That’s not a federal function. Jesus, even the federal government in Canada doesn’t micromanage policy that much and we have single payer. But if you believe that everybody should have insurance (the widespread use of which was an unintended consequence of wage and price controls during World War II), it’s gonna get pricey.

          A prison population like yours means one of two things; either Americans are almost genetically criminal or you have too many stupid laws. In fact, the only reason to have a full-time legislature is because you think that you don’t have enough laws.

          Education is not a federal responsibility, including charter schools, Let the states fight it out among themselves.

          If all you want to do is defend yourselves, then your military is about four times too big. But if you want to be the guarantors of good against evil throughout the globe, then it’s probably about twenty times too small.

          You have no idea how crazy I’d go to drive rates down, and I’d pay for it, too. But I would be a very unpopular boy with pretty much everybody.

          I don’t feel bad for countries that go broke, even if it was my own, because they make conscious decisions to spend money they don’t have. Pay for stuff, cut it, or don’t complain about a $20 trillion debt.

          I’m a libertarian. I can out-cut almost everybody.

          Liked by 4 people

        • And not for nothing, tariffs are nothing more than a retail sales tax.

          If Trump follows through will his campaign threat of 35% tariffs, it will probably represent the biggest tax increase in American history and effectively kill outlets such as Wal Mart.

          Because Trump doesn’t seem to like Jeff Bezos all that much, he’s also implied that Internet sales taxes are on the table.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Finally – and I’d love to debate this all day, but I can’t – the tariffs Trump wants are almost certainly illegal under WTO regulations. If they are, he’ll no choice other than to stand down or withdraw from the WTO.

          If the latter happens, the United States will have absolutely no protection from unlimited retaliatory tariffs from the rest of the world. I can almost guarantee you that the dollar will be replaced as the reserve currency, and you’ll lose the financial latitude that goes with it. A resulting default on your debt is a near certainty, which will cause interest rates to skyrocket and you’ll look at North Korea’s economy with envy.

          Brexit provides another horrifying example of what could happen. If there’s a hard Brexit, which seems more likely because the British have decided that their centuries-long reputation for competence is boring, the financial services industry is almost certain to leave. The individual banks are currently deciding whether to move to France or Germany, but they will leave.

          Off the top of my head, I don’t know what percentage of GDP the U.S financial services industry represents, but I’ll bet it’s a lot. Lose that and you lose one of your major drivers of growth

          Oh, and you’ll have no allies in the world. Nearly vaporizing the world economy twice in a decade is probably more than the economic and political traffic can bear.

          As a friend, I urge you not to start a war that you can’t win, and you absolutely cannot win this.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Wow,. You really went through a major set of policy discussions when this was really about hurricane relief. 🙂 Way to hijack a thread, Neal..

          In general I agree with most of what you’re saying. The unknown here is how effective Trump will be in using his NY style bullying tactics to sway people on the other side to either capitulate or come to the negotiating table.

          My only complaint is that while Trump is in no way a libertarian, much less a conservative, he would sign off on a Republican led agenda that was promised: Repeal and replace Obamacare, comprehensive tax reform, reduction of government spending, reducing regulations, foreign trade policy, and education reform. Most of these would provide a much needed boost to the economy and keep Trump’s more wild policy positions at bay. I think Trump was hoping the leadership would just throw legislation almost immediately to show the voters they were serious.

          Instead, the Republican leadership has balked at nearly every stage when they have been given unprecedented power to enact sweeping reforms and remove Obama’s legacy. In some ways, I think the GOP leadership is trying to stall to hurt Trump, without realizing they are hurting the very voters who could decide their job fate.

          Yes, the Senate Democrats have been obstructing, whining, complaining, but the voters do not care. The GOP leadership seem more interested in media posturing than getting the job done. My hope is that they pay in the midterms by losing to more aggressive Republicans the same way Eric Cantor met his fate. Cantor was a Tea Party person until 2012, then paid at home.

          I’m not a Trump supporter by any stretch, but I do believe that the Republicans are trying to out last Trump. What better way to keep Trump in a cage than actually do what you’re supposed to do and watch America recover, keeping the voters happy. Trump may take the credit, but the Republicans could essentially cripple the Democrats when they are the weakest right now.. but, you know..here we are.


        • My apologies, MJ. It’s a gift.

          Trade is the ONLY thing that Trump has been consistent on for thirty years. He can’t make up his mind about, say, abortion, but he’s dead serious about this. As for Trump’s tactics, some history is instructive.

          The US and Canada first entered into a free trade agreement in 1988. I cast my first ever vote in support of it, but the negotiations of were fraught.

          One of the major sticking points at the time was the dispute resolution mechanism, which I believe is Chapter 30 in the subsequent NAFTA agreement. President Reagan resisted it, and Prime Minister Mulroney said “no deal” and walked away from the table until Washington dropped the shit. And Reagan wasn’t an idiot or an asshole. Canada will ABSOLUTELY walk over that. I guarantee it. Trump is insisting on getting rid of it because Trump doesn’t WANT a deal. He wants to be the Napoleon of a moron trade war.

          Personally, I’d walk over government data retention because of your national security state. If you feel any differently, send your personal information to Beijing. But I don’t know that it would be a deal breaker.

          My attitude is really simple and is very likely to be widespread here. If the United States abrogates NAFTA, it should be the end of the ENTIRE relationship. Think it’ll be easy to tell Canadian voters that we should continue things like military and intelligence cooperation when the United States is vaporizing millions of our jobs just because your fourth child president in a row wants to score idiotic points with people who have no idea what they’re talking about? Like it or not, but we have voters too, and we’ve had to worry about this for a quarter century now, first from Democrats, now from Republicans. Personally, I’ve had it.

          Fun fact. Almost everything Trump wanted was in …. TPP.

          Shut down the border and figure out how to pay for another wall, this one three times as long. But know that Canada is the largest trading partner of 37 of your states.

          And if you think I’m pissed, imagine how the Mexicans feel. I suspect that you’ll find out after their election next year. I further suspect that you won’t like the way it plays out.

          Here’s another thing. Your “energy independence” strategy is almost entirely reliant on Canadian and Mexican oil. I also hope that none of you folks are in the market for a new car because if the NAFTA supply chain is disrupted, the entire North American auto industry will be mothballed for two or three years. Explain that to the people of Michigan, Ohio and Indiana On the other hand, don’t. It’s not like Ohio is important to the GOP’s electoral map. :Let’s see what happens to the Republican Party when unemployment hits about 15% overnight and the very real possibility of a depression pops up out of nowhere.

          There is a 100% certainty that you’re going to have bail out entire industries again, and won’t be able to blame Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton for it.

          Canada and Mexico can tilt to the EU and China. You can’t. You’ll be busy warding off lawsuits from every company in America for essentially voiding millions and millions of cross-border contracts.

          Kill NAFTA and you’d have to be crazy to think that any other country will sign a bilateral agreement with you ever again. That’s not how these things work. The rest of the world will isolate your economy until it no longer matters.

          I get how this is driven by your domestic politics. But the thing is that it’s not my job to care,

          And always remember, Canada and Mexico didn’t start this.


        • The Republican Party has the stark choice of going to war with Trump or losing the world’s largest trading partnership and undefended border.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Regarding trade, as I said before – the Republicans domestic agenda would be more than enough to keep Trump caged on his wild policies, especially with trade. The leadership just wants a Republican of their kind in office. The voters said something differently.


        • There was probably more than a bit of “we’d rather have the loon than the crook” in that election.

          On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Sonoran Conservative wrote:

          > Sonoran Conservative commented: “Regarding trade, as I said before – the > Republicans domestic agenda would be more than enough to keep Trump caged > on his wild policies, especially with trade. The leadership just wants a > Republican of their kind in office. The voters said something differ” >

          Liked by 1 person

        • Except, no. My understanding of how your law works is that Trump can withdraw from NAFTA on his own, without Congress. He was within hours of doing it back in April. The official story is that Trudeau stopped him with sweet talk. I’ve read elsewhere that the *real* story is that Mexico City wasn’t going to negotiate dick with a gun to their heads, and good for them.

          There are basically two things the GOP can do; Sign off on Mike Lee’s bill to make withdrawal subject to congressional review, which should tie the whole thing up in the courts for years until the constitutionality of it is resolved, or withdraw his fast-track authority.

          I’m not convinced that either will work because Trump will veto, and there are enough pussy Republicans who fear Trump’s Twitter account to cross him and Bernie Bros to block an override.

          But it’s the last best shot there is.

          Liked by 1 person

    • Houston (Harris County) went for Hillary Clinton 54% to Donald Trump’s 42%. In 2012 Obama barely won it. If liberals keep it up they will turn it into a purple county again. Stupid people.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Is it okay to say that Milwaukee, Chicago, Baltimore, St Louis deserve all the gun-related homicides because they keep electing Democrats? And also that their poverty rates are so high for the reason, as well as their lousy schools?
    Hmmm. Hurricanes are natural phenomena while homicides, poverty, and education are not.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. It’s not going to be tax reform. It’s going to be a giant tax cut that Republicans pretend is tax reform.

    Tax reform is hard. It took Reagan almost two years and a bunch of Democrats to get tax reform.

    Tax cuts are easy, which is why the White House thinks it can get this wrapped up by Christmas.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Pingback: Heh, Karma is a … | Sonoran Conservative

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s