Project 2025 Review - Forward

[metis]

To my knowledge we don't treat Iran the same as Canada. I can't even comprehend where this comes from. Are we only friendly with Canada because we get something from them? Or is it because we share goals and mutual respect?

Both, imo. Here in the Detroit area, there's literally a constant flow or trucks back and forth into and from Canada.

 

[Kathryn]

I have no idea what that's supposed to have to do with anything.

You said something about retirement and that's what I was responding to.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

I'm not going to extremes -- I am trying to point out that parties making motherhood statements about which they can actually do little or nothing are fooling their supporters.

When you say the state should force families to have fathers is an extreme statement and has nothing to do with my comment or put people in jail for wanting a divorce etc. No one is proposing these things.

And you forgot about me -- I was so screwed up by my own near death twice before I was 7 at the hands of the people who were supposed to love and protect me that I could never fit in any family. Nobody would adopt me, nobody could even foster me for very long, so I wound up as a child in institutions. No family at all, so I guess I don't count.

Again extremes, no one said you don't count. How does your situation negate the Principle of having a father and mother in the home is the best thing for the child. No doubt there is abuse and that should be stopped but so we then force fathers to abandon their families because some are a**holes?

Fred Trump, Donald's nephew, was in the Oval Office 12 times when Trump was president, advocating for people with complex disabilities (this is from testimony from Fred himself online which you can find if you wish). In May, 2020, after meeting with some of them in the Oval Office, Trump called his nephew back and said to him, "these people, all the expenses -- they should just die."

I doubt that happened. I know you believe it because you have a view of Trump from the media that Trump is entirely evil. I can quote people saying things that Biden supposedly said that are horrendous as well, so what, they are uncorroborated. I know of no one that thinks like that.

This was not the only time for Fred. Fred also has a son who is severely disabled, supported by a fund which Donald helped set up and contributed to (so, there's an admission, he can do the right thing sometimes). But when the fund started running low, and Fred called him, Donald said, "your son doesn't know you. Let him die and move down to Florida."

Again I doubt this happened.

Not only that, but I guess we could say Trump -- leader of the "Party of Family Values" was certainly not an absentee father. Just away from his wife and infant son long enough for a shag with porn star. But I forget myself -- deep hypocrisy isn't a concern, is it?

I never claimed Trump was a good father or not.

But if hypocrisy isn't a concern, I really do wonder how anyone can tell when they're telling the truth -- or do they just "take it on faith?" In which case, it doesn't even matter whether they have a platform or not, does it?

I can say the same for the dems. And I again never claimed Trump never lied.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

To my knowledge we don't treat Iran the same as Canada. I can't even comprehend where this comes from. Are we only friendly with Canada because we get something from them? Or is it because we share goals and mutual respect?

It is both. The text does not say we only or friendly with countries we can get something beneficial with.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

That's exactly what it said. If you can't read between the lines, it would be best to let others help you with it.

Ok, thanks for the conversation.

No, I haven't. Please stop. This is silly. What we're talking about is an entire agenda. You're trying to break it down and parse it, as if it makes sense to judge each individual thing separately, even though it's "Project 2025", as in it's one big agenda, all bundled together. I don't care who propose it, Project 2025 is terrible. Because Project 2025 is terrible, not because some specific person suggested it.

I don't understand why you insist that even a good idea in a bad document is still not worth talking about and implementing that one idea. Have a great day.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

No, we can't. This is one big agenda that they're trying to get done. It's fine to say "well, this part isn't bad", but we're talking about an agenda as a whole. You either support it or you don't. So, you either think there's enough good stuff to outweigh all that extremely bad stuff, or you don't.

I don't have to think that way and neither do you.

"I agree they shouldn't ban abortion or remake the government to give Trump the opportunity to destroy democracy or get rid of the Department of Education, but hey, they might slightly change how we interact with foreign countries, so..."

Either read it or read explanations of it. You've been talking about this for days, and you've spent a lot of time here making comments. If you're really that ignorant of what it says, you can take 15 minutes to educate yourself.

Sorry, I cannot read 922 pages in 15 minutes.

But that's not your goal. Your goal is to support and defend conservatives and their agenda, so it's "well, some of it's good", and "but where does it say that bad stuff? I haven't seen it, even though I've had more than plenty of opportunity to educate myself". Stop with the theatrics. Either educate yourself on what it says and then respond, or stop responding.

I have said I only have read the forward. I never said I read the entire document. I have said some things I disagree with like making prornapgraphy illegal. I guessed you missed that.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

When you say the state should force families to have fathers is an extreme statement and has nothing to do with my comment or put people in jail for wanting a divorce etc. No one is proposing these things.

Again extremes, no one said you don't count. How does your situation negate the Principle of having a father and mother in the home is the best thing for the child. No doubt there is abuse and that should be stopped but so we then force fathers to abandon their families because some are a**holes?

I doubt that happened. I know you believe it because you have a view of Trump from the media that Trump is entirely evil. I can quote people saying things that Biden supposedly said that are horrendous as well, so what, they are uncorroborated. I know of no one that thinks like that.

Again I doubt this happened.

I never claimed Trump was a good father or not.

I can say the same for the dems. And I again never claimed Trump never lied.

Again, you are ignoring what the point I made in my very first comment: "I am trying to point out that parties making motherhood statements about which they can actually do little or nothing are fooling their supporters."

It's fine to say "families are the best way to be," but what, exactly, is government gong to do to ensure that is the state of things more under Republicans than it is under Democrats? How does government ensure that families stay happily nuclear? And will that effort require removing some freedoms from individuals?

Because if the question is unanswerable, the focus on family is meaningless.

 

[Balthazzar]

Thanks for posting this. I've been wanting to read it over. Sometimes a single reading, if not always, isn't enough so I appreciate the opportunity to discuss it also. The Socratic method might be of use. I'm a Christian, by the way, and I wouldn't simply accept based on favoritism by other Christians. It gets me in trouble sometimes, but that's life.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Again, you are ignoring what the point I made in my very first comment: "I am trying to point out that parties making motherhood statements about which they can actually do little or nothing are fooling their supporters."

It's fine to say "families are the best way to be," but what, exactly, is government gong to do to ensure that is the state of things more under Republicans than it is under Democrats? How does government ensure that families stay happily nuclear? And will that effort require removing some freedoms from individuals?

Because if the question is unanswerable, the focus on family is meaningless.

I did provide answers to this question. I will say it again. Government should support families by providing parent education, financial training, basic skills training, counselling for couples and kids, teaching kids life skills in schools, help find job opportunities along with providing basic necessities if needed and help to get off of government assistance. All of these things can support the family.

 

[Magic Man]

Ok, thanks for the conversation.

You're welcome. If you need further help with figuring out what things actually mean, I'm here.

I don't understand why you insist that even a good idea in a bad document is still not worth talking about and implementing that one idea. Have a great day.

I fully understand why you think this is a worthwhile tactic, even though it's not. This is your attempt to support and defend your conservatives. "Well, it might have some good ideas." Cool, no one cares. I don't care if Hitler's agenda included better schools. I'm going to go ahead and repudiate him and his agenda anyway. I don't care whether Project 2025 has any good ideas. The main ideas are very bad. If someone wants to take the not-so-bad ideas and promote them without the rest of Project 2025, great. But we're talking about Project 2025. That's an agenda.

You're only parsing it to try to find any possibly redeeming ideas because you desperately want there to be and you can't bring yourself to do the right thing and just condemn it.

 

[Magic Man]

I don't have to think that way and neither do you.

That's true. Neither of us has to think that way. I choose to because it's the correct way to think about it. You choose not to because your agenda is to promote the conservative agenda, which means not condemning an agenda that deserves to be condemned and trying to defend it in a way that you think comes off as "neutral" or "fair", even though it's really just a stealthier way of defending the problematic agenda.

Sorry, I cannot read 922 pages in 15 minutes.

You've been commenting on this for days. That's about 4,000 minutes. You also don't have to read all 922 pages. You can read summaries to give you a good idea.

I have said I only have read the forward. I never said I read the entire document. I have said some things I disagree with like making prornapgraphy illegal. I guessed you missed that.

I haven't missed anything. You're desperate to not dismiss the whole agenda because it's your side, and you feel the need to defend it. Whether or not you disagree with some proposals like making pornography illegal doesn't change that. The point is that Project 2025 is a radical, far-right agenda. There's not much use in looking for small pearls from it. It's a bad agenda that should be soundly rejected.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

You're welcome. If you need further help with figuring out what things actually mean, I'm here.

I fully understand why you think this is a worthwhile tactic, even though it's not. This is your attempt to support and defend your conservatives. "Well, it might have some good ideas." Cool, no one cares. I don't care if Hitler's agenda included better schools. I'm going to go ahead and repudiate him and his agenda anyway. I don't care whether Project 2025 has any good ideas. The main ideas are very bad. If someone wants to take the not-so-bad ideas and promote them without the rest of Project 2025, great. But we're talking about Project 2025. That's an agenda.

You're only parsing it to try to find any possibly redeeming ideas because you desperately want there to be and you can't bring yourself to do the right thing and just condemn it.

Sigh. I never supported the document nor did I reject it. I said that from the beginning. It seems all you want to do is argue and make a dig at me on every post instead of talk about the ideas.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

That's true. Neither of us has to think that way. I choose to because it's the correct way to think about it. You choose not to because your agenda is to promote the conservative agenda, which means not condemning an agenda that deserves to be condemned and trying to defend it in a way that you think comes off as "neutral" or "fair", even though it's really just a stealthier way of defending the problematic agenda.

You've been commenting on this for days. That's about 4,000 minutes. You also don't have to read all 922 pages. You can read summaries to give you a good idea.

I haven't missed anything. You're desperate to not dismiss the whole agenda because it's your side, and you feel the need to defend it. Whether or not you disagree with some proposals like making pornography illegal doesn't change that. The point is that Project 2025 is a radical, far-right agenda. There's not much use in looking for small pearls from it. It's a bad agenda that should be soundly rejected.

Sigh, your accusations are unfounded. Have a good night.

 

[Spice]

Project 2025 is beginning to fall apart....

Project 2025 director leaves Heritage Foundation

The news came after former President Donald Trump increasingly disavowed and criticized Project 2025, prompting speculation that his campaign forced the exit.

www.pbs.org

 

[Pogo]

Project 2025 is beginning to fall apart....

Project 2025 director leaves Heritage Foundation

The news came after former President Donald Trump increasingly disavowed and criticized Project 2025, prompting speculation that his campaign forced the exit.

www.pbs.org

I think going underground might be a better term, the characters are still Trumps brain trust, but he has to be the mouthpiece at his convenience.

 

[Magic Man]

Sigh. I never supported the document nor did I reject it. I said that from the beginning. It seems all you want to do is argue and make a dig at me on every post instead of talk about the ideas.

Sigh. You're supporting it by trying desperately to find redeeming ideas in it. You should reject it because of its far-right agenda.

 

[Magic Man]

Sigh, your accusations are unfounded. Have a good night.

Sigh. They are not, but I guess this is easier than taking them to heart or actually addressing them. Have a good day.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Sigh. You're supporting it by trying desperately to find redeeming ideas in it. You should reject it because of its far-right agenda.

I have explained my stance. I am not supporting anything.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Sigh. They are not, but I guess this is easier than taking them to heart or actually addressing them. Have a good day.

I addressed them, you just ignored them. Ideas are good or bad independant of who comes up with them. That is my stance. You seem to disagree with it.

 

[Magic Man]

I have explained my stance. I am not supporting anything.

Yes, you have explained your support for conservatives, including Project 2025.