America's Retarded Return to McCarthyism

Submitted by: lalapancakes 6 months ago in News & Politics

newt-gingrich

When I hear the name Newt, I mostly prefer to think of the little girl from Aliens. Mostly. Not the milky flaccid bag of bones who told the Christian Broadcasting Network that he cheated on his last two wives because he "loves America more." Not the chalky exoskeleton who’s been fixated on Nazi’s and Mussolini for his whole political career. Not the chelated red lipped creep who laments the trouble with child labor laws getting in the way of the poor, actually poor children. I try to not think of Newt Gingrich at all because the idea of a human like that serving the United States reminds me of how batshit everything can be. I am absolutely baffled how Donald Trump is taking this man into consideration for a place in his presidential cabinet not only because his career has been a mess of flip flopping and nut jobbery but especially after Gingrich just came out this year for the reissue of a new House Committee on Un-American Activities.

CNN: “(CNN)Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is calling for the creation of a new House Committee on Un-American Activities, invoking the infamous ‘Red Scare’-era congressional body as a blueprint for weeding out American ISIS adherents and sympathizers.

‘We originally created the House Un-American Activities Committee to go after Nazis,’ he said during an appearance on ‘Fox and Friends’ this week. ‘We passed several laws in 1938 and 1939 to go after Nazis and we made it illegal to help the Nazis. We're going to presently have to go take the similar steps here.’ Gingrich, a vocal supporter of Donald Trump, has been touted as a potential running mate for the presumptive Republican nominee.”

It’s hard to not read this and think, “Fuck. Is this country actually going to do this again?”

There are 18 comments:
Male 37,774
IT'S A RUMOUR! You people, @LaLaPancakes especially, cannot differentiate between 'rumour' and reality any longer? Fucking FEARMONGERS. Guess what? He's NOT joining Trump's Cabinet in any capacity. You all PISSED yourselves for NOTHING. Just like all the other bullshit, lies, rumours, hate-mongering and fear-mongering LaLa has posted since the election: it's all lies, all rumours. >>>What else should we expect from those who worship Hillary even after she LOST fair and square? Not the truth, not the facts, nothing like fairness or reason is allowed by her or her followers. This post and many like it are proof of how far they have sunk into their own fantasy world...
0
Reply
Male 2,375
@5Cats wrote: "Just let them come over, hidden among the 'refugees,' they'll only kill a tiny % of Americans, they pose zero real threat! (says several IAB Liberals...)." 5Cats, please tell me which IAB liberals have said this or anything even suggesting they consider the deaths of "a tiny % of Americans" by terrorists "zero real threat." You say several have, so providing just a few names should be easy.
0
Reply
Male 37,774
Squrlz4: Unlike the typical liberal? I don't keep a 'hate list' of all the dumb things people have said over the years here. Several of them have claimed, over the years, that fighting Al Qaeda was 'useless' because 'only' 3000 people died on 9/11 (and thus Bush was wrong to invade Afghanistan). That 'only' a hundred or so have died from terror attacks since then, in the USA, therefor we (the whole world) should not worry at all about terrorists infiltrating our borders because the odds of being killed are 'insignificant'. And etc. NF2 for sure has said stupid shit like this (perhaps not those exact topics, but every bit as stupid) multiple times. Like all the lies and bullshit he tells, he will deny it or ignore the facts. >>> Even when I put up screenshots of their own words? IAB Liberals deny what their own eyes see. I simply don't care, and am only answering you because you were polite in asking.
0
Reply
Male 1,798
something tells me you do keep a list of whatever enemy you have in your head
0
Reply
Male 1,798
the mere fact that this quote was taken from 5cats brain to this post renders it true and without fault DUH<<<
0
Reply
Male 37,774
Because SJWs (all Democrats) in no way resemble McCarthyism... or the Salem Witch Panics... >>>And who needs to fight ISIL anyhow? Just let them come over, hidden among the 'refugees', they'll only kill a tiny % of Americans, they pose zero real threat! (says several IAB Liberals and some Democrats)
0
Reply
Male 2,405
5Cats, you yourself are a SJW - Your interpretation of what is socially "just" or "right" usually differs from those you refer to, but you seem every bit as persistant and vocal about your beliefs.
0
Reply
Male 1,255
Exactly.
0
Reply
Male 37,774
Thanks Lala for the compliment! :-)
0
Reply
Male 5,816
SJWs are annoying, I agree. They do have some appropriate complaints but then go WAY overboard and are, in the end, inappropriate. And so is Newt Gingrich. Remember that old saying, "Two wrongs don't make a right"? Well it's correct, they don't. So the fact that we have SJWs doesn't justify having an asshole like Gingrich around. I don't, by the way, have any problem with the idea of being more careful about checking out people coming into this country from places with known issues of creating and supporting terrorism, but we do have do be careful to not be, ourselves, terrorizing good people in the process. I'm also very wary of anything that even smacks of McCarthyism since it became a way, for McCarthy himself in fact, to punish innocent people who somehow pissed someone off. Kind of like what's happening now in the Phillipines where people are getting killed without due process because they're "suspected" drug dealers or users. Makes it, potentially, rather too easy to get rid of that neighbor who annoys you by mowing the lawn too early in the morning.
0
Reply
Male 37,774
Broizfam: if you know a better way to vet those trying to come to your country? Lets hear it. >>> The very act of 'checking' is called 'overboard' by some, a violation of their human rights! Asking why a 'Syrian refugee' cannot name a town or place in Syria he lived in is no reason to keep him out (they tell us). And that his 'passport' looks like it came of a Xerox is no worry either (so we are told). The very act of checking IS terrorism! So let them all in, a world without borders is Utopia! (or so Hillary said many times over the years).
0
Reply
Male 5,816
Nope. No idea how to do it better. Again, I have no problem with being more careful but I would also hate for it to be done such that good people get sent back only to face persecution. This sound familiar: "Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free."? You're really hyped up on people being allowed to freely carry guns around in their daily lives. I think that there are founding principles for this country that are rather more important. This is a nation that was built, and fought for, by immigrants. Let's not marginalize the message of Miss Liberty.
0
Reply
Male 5,816
My concern, and I'm pretty sure that I was quite clear about it, isn't over the propriety of refusing entry to those who fail the vetting process. It's about what constitutes that process. I'm sure it can be done properly and effectively without being unduly harsh although, of course, I wouldn't know how. And stop making shit up, please. I've made no pretense at all about how other countries have been populated. Just reminded you how the US came to be what it is today. If that's really a problem for you, too bad.
0
Reply
Male 37,774
Well then Broizfam, you accept vetting, correct? And if you vette them, and they fail, do you let them come in anyhow? What does that accomplish? ANY VETTING requires that those who fail are sent back, or deported to a welcoming nation. Period, or it isn't vetting is it? It is Open Borders. >>>Don't give me that 'we're all immigrants ' cock-and-bull. EVERY NATION on Earth is made up of 'immigrants'. American Aboriginals, for example, all came from elsewhere. We ALL came from somewhere else at some point in the past! And every square inch of fertile land has had blood spilled to acquire and possess it. So don't pretend America does something EVERY other nation on Earth does not do: that is a lie, pure and plain as day.
0
Reply
Male 375
I think these are both quotes you would agree with? "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." "First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me." Add them up and you get why I am opposed to this.
1
Reply
Male 37,774
Hi Muert! "This" in your comment is ambiguous, eh? This being Newt? Or this being SJWs? Because Newt wants to keep terrorists OUT of America. If anyone has a better way to do so than vetting them? Let's hear it. Meanwhile the SJWs are out rioting and Obama is encouraging them (I just saw it on the ABC news). What bigger form of denying the rights of others than to attack, burn and destroy ANYONE who dares speak things you disagree with? >>>So either way, those words quoted apply to the SJWs and not Newt: he has not done it, is only ACCUSED of 'wanting to do it".
0
Reply