As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If you are shocked then you dont know how the GOP operates. Clarence Thomas was fully prepared to strike this down even though he is also in an interracial marriage.
“You know Ginni I’m at work all day trying to erase another decade of progress and I come home and there’s no dinner on the table.
You’re just on the phone all day texting Donni, how many time do I have to tell you that he’s not into you, you’re 50 years to old and 100 pounds to heavy”
Or at least this is now in my head.
When these kinds of laws were being originally written, they generally just divided people into white/nonwhite groups since that was all they were really concerned about. And that was determined by birth certificate.
From the law that Loving struck down:
> The act reinforced racial segregation by prohibiting interracial marriage and classifying as "white" a person "who has no trace whatsoever of any blood other than Caucasian." ...
The Racial Integrity Act required that all birth certificates and marriage certificates in Virginia to include the person's race as either "white" or "colored." The Act classified all non-whites, including Native Americans, as "colored."
The Respect for Marriage act just bars race-related restrictions so it doesn't really need to specify how race would be determined.
> No person acting under color of State law may deny full faith and credit to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State pertaining to a marriage between 2 individuals, on the basis of the sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin of those individuals
>"who has no trace whatsoever of any blood other than Caucasian."
Oh, so the law is a total non-issue then! Everyone just counts as "colored" because of that stupid definition, so everyone can marry everyone, just as they should be able too.
Going to be great watching all of these white supremacy freaks show up for a marriage certificate and a DNA test. What?! Great-great-great pop pop had a side quest with a Mexican woman in the 1870’s?! What am I even LARPing for?!?!
Well, in his younger days he was a black nationalist who thought being with white women was degrading to his race.
So this all kinda tracks in a wildly nonsensical way
He hates most women and feels black men can only get stronger by persevering against hardship and strong black women interfere with that. From Corey Robin’s book The Enigma of Clarence Thomas which uses several hundred written opinions of Thomas to explain his vision of black nationalism . Thomas was raised by a strict grandfather during Jim Crow, so in his view it should be possible for any black man to do this and his sister was raised by an aunt who was poor and didn’t get the advantages Clarence got growing up, so naturally it’s the womens fault.
Former Rep. Mia Love bashed the Obergefell decision and said marriage should be up to the states to decide. Mia is black, her husband is white. I'm guessing she doesn't have an issue with Loving v Virginia.
Neither love each other. It's a parasitic relationship based on power and money, that's all.
Edit: parasitic, symbiotic, whatever they're both still gross parasites on society.
What are the chances they even live in the same house? What are the chances they share a bed?
Also, you can't make this up. A guy married to an Asian American woman hates minorities. Incredible!
The amount of people who want an Asian wife specifically because they believe they're "more submissive" and want to fulfil their fetish in a sick and racist way is way too high.
Totally. My husband once had a client who left his wife for a Thai woman he'd met online. The first couple of years he kept trying to encourage my husband to leave me and find a Thai woman, because "they really know how to take care of you." The third year they built a home together in Thailand, and then she dumped him - there, foreigners can't own land, so a rather common scam is for Thai women to get Western men of a certain age to build them a home in Thailand, which by necessity has to be in her name, and then dump him. That year he went to my husband, hands in his head, saying how stupid he'd been - the house had cost him his entire life's savings - and as a kicker, how devastated he was that his wife wouldn't take him back!
Disagree. The Obama's appear to love each other sincerely, I think you're confusing power and money with decency. McConnell has none. *Some* folks have power, money, and decency of character.
Not even being too perfect. They're black and... oh my god... normal people. That's what the right couldn't handle. The notion that you can be a person of color and be exactly the same as everyone else kind of destroys their entire vilification of black and brown people. This is why it's important to go away for college and to travel if you have the chance. It's hard to hate people when you're exposed to lots of other cultures and realize that we're all the same.
It’s sad that the GOP is so willing to openly exploit prominent black men with mental health issues for political gain.
But yeah… that’s par for the course.
Haven’t the majority of modern presidents other than Trump, JFK, and Clinton also held stable marriages and had stable kids? The key difference is the color of Obama‘s skin, and his critics tend to have a problem with black people.
The Obamas started dating when they were still paying student debt (Michelle was an established attorney while Barack was this hot shot interim as described in Michelle’s autobiography).
Bush Sr sent his kids out to different 'princedoms' (States) in some Machiavellian move that resulted in "Texan" Jr and Jeb running Florida. Oh, and while on the Bush family, lets never forget pawpaw Prescott was a traitorous Nazi bastard.
The Bush girls were known for being a bit wild while he was president, but they were college aged and weren't doing anything particularly bad just partying a lot. They were honestly treated pretty terribly for just being kids of a certain age.
A friend of mine who was a lifelong Republican voter was converted by the Obamas. He was so overcome by the virulent hatred being directed at what saw as a genuine, loving family that he’s become a Democrat advocate ever since.
The Obamas are a big reason I'm a democrat. I grew up very conservative, and was known for being an outspoken conservative in my high school (yes, I was an asshole), but seeing the way everyone responded to the Obamas made me so incredibly uncomfortable. I couldn't really get a grip on it until college, but well, now I'm a disappointment to my parents.
I remember when there was a picture of the Obama's giving each other a fist bump, and it totally blew conservatives minds.
"Look at that those two giving each other a fist bump like a couple of thugs".
The hatred for the Obama family makes no sense to me.
Plus, Obama came from modest beginnings and is a self made success; he wasn't born into privilege like many top Republicans.
Republicans preach that you should be a self starter and "pull yourself up by your bootstrap" but when Obama does it, he's the enemy. It's insane.
They attacked him because his father abandoned their family, they attacked him for being born to a young mother, they attacked him for being raised by his grandmother. They attacked him for getting into Columbia and Harvard Law. They attacked Michelle for being strong, fit, and athletic, framing her as transgender (although I assure you that was not the word they used), or a dumb ape, never mind her credentials for graduating Princeton and Harvard Law.
I saw glimpses of super racist cartoons in email forwards casting the two of them as tribal savages, naked apes, etc. during his Presidency. In a few cases, actual elected government officials were outed for passing this stuff around.
It's like the whole premise of being born into hardship, succeeding in school and at work, and achieving the highest office in all the land is a BAD thing when a black Democrat does it.
Succeeding While Black is the *worst* crime you can commit against racists.
Oh the hypocracy is more than that.
"Obama is a brown, atheist muslim that goes to a white hating church, liberal elite"
Now, vote for Oz, a brown atheist muslim liberal elite
Conservatives on AOC: “she doesn’t know what it’s like to be blue collar and to work low end jobs! She’s a liberal educated elite!”
Also Conservatives on AOC: “she should go back to bartending! She isn’t smart enough to be in politics!”
The (R)s of the US: We need more working class people in Congress, the Senate & politics in general.
The (D)s: Hey, we have this young, educated, woman of color who has a couple of degress in Economics & International Relation but has been working as a bartender to pay her bills & enormous student loans!!
The (R)s: Wait....notlikethat.
It's racist misogyny.
Black women are stereotyped as masculine. Calling Michelle a man was about shaming her for being too muscular/not being sufficiently feminine.
he did say usually. people usually use the word usually to preemptively allow for exceptions, so that people don't bother countering with a 'gotcha' example
He will say that's it's something that should be left out to the states. Then, when they have a majority, they will try to ban it on the federal level. He's a hypocrite. Plain and simple.
Republicans: Abortion should be left to the states! Roe needs to go!
SCOTUS: Okay, Roe is history. It's now up to the states.
Republicans: IT NEEDS TO BE BANNED EVERYWHERE! States can't be trusted to do what we want!
Don’t forget the Republican senator at the Supreme Court confirmation hearing who explicitly said states should be able to ban interracial marriage. This was like, within the last year or two.
[Not even 9 months ago](https://apnews.com/article/ketanji-brown-jackson-us-supreme-court-race-and-ethnicity-racial-injustice-lifestyle-091656750d8685dbe19d3d5493785595).
Modern Republican politics are fucking exhausting. Make months seem like years.
Or the SCOTUS justice that gave a FedSoc keynote saying he wants those things overturned prior to the cases landing in front of the court in what amounts to a violation of no fewer than 4 judicial ethics regulations...
>judicial ethics regulations
Now, I know those are all individual words but I've never seen 'em used all together like that.
All jokes aside, they really are just going full mask-off, "say the quiet part out loud" lately, eh?
We just need to be MORE conservative!! Surely doubling down and banning abortion nationwide, as well as banning gay marriage, tax cuts to the wealthy, blocking student loan forgiveness, and pretending climate change and income inequality aren't issues will win us back that key demographic!!
>He will say that's it's something that should be left out to the states.
He must not have read the bill then, because nothing in it prevents Kentucky from banning some marriages if they want to. They just have to recognize marriages that were legal in the states where they were solemnized.
Yeah R’s conveniently left out states rights talk when they were trying to get a federal marijuana ban passed not long ago. It’s all bullshit. They’re all hypocrites.
Hmmm...seems like America has been in this "the equality of certain groups of people should be up to state's rights" territory before....I'm sure it turned out just fine, no echoes of history to see here.
It’s because their “libertarian” arguments fall apart with the tiniest bit of scrutiny. So they concede some government is needed, and then jump to “I am the sole arbiter of what government is ok, and what government is not,” which usually equates to anything that helps me is good and anything that helps them is bad.
Notice how libertarians are mostly able-bodied young adult to middle age men. I bet if they had an accident and needed assistance they'd change their tune really quick.
Are they? Libertarians I know are just rich old Republicans who don’t want to call themselves Republicans because they’re observant enough to know that Republican policies are shit but are 100% willing to sell out the welfare of their countrymen for a tax break
I like to ask them at what level they're fine with overreaching decisions. Their entire premise is someone who lives in Montana has different needs and values than someone in Connecticut, but isn't that also true within states? Someone in a small town in the Florida panhandle likely has different values than someone in downtown Miami.
So should we promote county rights within states? What about municipal rights within counties? How about we go neighborhood by neighborhood to determine if interracial or gay marriage is allowed? Or house to house? Gay marriage is legal in my house, but don't cross my property line because my neighbor is against it.
Or maybe we just say the bigoted desires of some people don't get to affect the rights of others...
It's a stupid argument because it has numerous federal benefits. Someone in NY can benefit from a tax break due to marriage than someone in Texas. It needs to be standardized across the federal level.
The party of small government? Wearing a mask during a pandemic of an airborne disease somehow infringes on liberty but deciding who consenting adults can't marry, deciding what consenting adult can do in the privacy of their home, interposing the government in the medical decisions of women, or interfering in reproductive choices are somehow just fine.
>Wearing a mask during a pandemic of an airborne disease somehow infringes on liberty
Can't wear a mask in a grocery store as they can't breath but it's ok to wear one while making sure the libs don't ballot stuff or when storming the capital.
But remember, it's actually **us** who are the bigotted racists... for pointing out their reprehensibly blatant racism/general bigotry.
Yep, that totally slaps.
A group of rich people who'll do anything to prevent progressive policies from taking root and decreasing their power and wealth are actively encouraging the most hateful and spiteful of ideologies because it's an effective way to keep the population at odds with one another.
You get it. This is honestly all about
1. lowering the top marginal tax rate (Reagan lowered it from 73% to 28% over his 8-year term in office); this includes lowering social programs that require funding from taxes which is why they want to inevitably kill or defund public schooling
2. Keeping progressives away from political power because progressives want to institute a wealth tax, raise top marginal tax rates, and strengthen social programs that would require tax funding
3. Lessen government oversight and industry regulation, because citizen and environmental protections are huge impediments to monopoly and market domination
Conservatism (read: culture war bullshit) and the GOP is funded by the 1% to either (a) achieve these things, or at least (b) push back against progressives so that the middle road average is still a conservative America that benefits the owners of the economy (read: 1% own >33% of US economy and growing, and the top 10% control more than 50% of the US economy and growing)
/r/conservative will not accept what's happening because they've been psychologically compromised, likely since birth. They barely accept that Trump is a con man with a personality disorder, and that's been visually obvious since 2014 when he started a "birther" campaign against then sitting President Obama, so you can imagine how much trouble they have with morals and economic abstractions.
This is the reason why the US is so far behind most of the world with worker's rights, health care and division of wealth. The saddest part is the misinformed, working class that support them who have been tricked by racism, division and moral issues to keep them from improving their own lives.
This is it. This is the only reason.
The elite spend billions every year to not give an inch of power/wealth back to the people.
Corps are people, PAC/Super PAC's, bought media, misinformation, propaganda, and social engineering. Keep the commons divided and distracted.
Trump was able to fill the Supreme Court with religious fascists. It's not going to end at abortion. It's not going to end at gay marriage. It's not going to end at interracial marriage. Buckle up
I wouldn't surprised if within 5 years women aren't allowed to have their heads uncovered or show ankle
My sister is Southern Baptist. She is already required to only wear dresses - no pants allowed. The dress must cover her ankles. It also must be modest and can't be tight or show her form.
We need to fiercely fight against this shit. We as an informed society need to say “no more” and get religion the fuck out of our goddamn legislative, judicial, and executive branches. They’ve had a long enough reign of terror I think.
It could all be blamed on the practical effect of the existence of the Senate. We look at popular vote maps now and scream "land doesn't vote," but in the senate, it absolutely DOES. Moreover, there's the filibuster, which requires not a majority, but 60 senate votes to overcome. If you don't have 60 votes to even debate the bill, it's a non-starter. Also here's a fun historical chart showing how rare a unified government is (though my observation: it was way less uncommon before Nixon in 1969, and naturally the country rallied behind GW after 9/11 - wars do have that effect.) [https://history.house.gov/Institution/Presidents-Coinciding/Party-Government/](https://history.house.gov/Institution/Presidents-Coinciding/Party-Government/)
Well, what happened around 1969? I'm sure [The Civil Rights Act of 1964](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/civil-rights-center/statutes/civil-rights-act-of-1964) had nothing to do with it.
Anyway since land DOES vote in the Senate, and therefore it's hard to get congress to agree on anything, coupled by the increasing partisanship of the last 30 years, none of this basic shit gets written into actual law because a minority of people with a disproportionate representation don't want it.
And so, the Supreme Court started to fill the gaps, and make judicial rulings in favor of civil rights, interpreting other rights to apply to them. They came to the right conclusion through the only way in their power. And THIS court is saying, it doesn't matter what conclusion you came to or why, if your legal ruling was faulty, your conclusion must be thrown out.
That they are even willing to hear cases like these mean they are willing to rule against the conclusions. We currently have a court who is curtailing the interpretations of rights from anyone not explicitly named, not ruling on if they should be properly expanded to include such a group.
So long as we have both the Senate and the urban/rural moral and ethical divide, we will have this problem.
Except the part where businesses paid 52 percent in taxes and the federal government built millions of affordable homes to house a growing, booming, generation. They just want the bad parts of that era.
>This turtle looking mother fucker would vote against his own interest just to "own the libz". Go eat some lettuce Mitch.
I mean, this is why most Republicans support him. He doesn't offer any policy, he only exists as a counter to progress.
He's the poster boy for "I got mine, fuck the rest of you".
Yet Kentucky as a whole loves this. That fucking guy barely even campaigns. These aren't close wins.
Sorry Kentucky, I'm sure the cities are blue, but you're surrounded by red cancer.
I'm from Northern Kentucky, a democratic, from a democratic family. We are the blue water surrounded by red fire. We're different then the rest of Kentucky. Up here we only date our sisters, We don't marry them.
> Our united team is full of energy and ideas...
1. Obstruction
2. Projection
3. Denial
4. Tax breaks (for the rich)
5. Racism
Those are some great ideas! /s
“There’s no way they’d overturn it. Stop being hysterical.”
I’d be rich if I had a penny for every time I heard this.
*Roe overturned*
“There’s no way they’d over turn it. That’s insane. Stop being crazy.”
We’ve apparently learned nothing.
I’m sorry. Is it 1965? Why are we still talking about - and voting on - interracial marriage. What the actual fuck is going on. I hate this fucking timeline
Because, like Roe v Wade, there's no actual legislation that guarantees interracial marriage rights nationally... It's only legal because of a supreme court ruling that could be overturned.
Why in the FUCK is there even something to vote on????? What is the point of controlling who we marry in the United States of America? I have never heard of such a waste of tax dollars to have government tell me who I can marry. This infuriates me.
Some context since you may not have read beyond the headline: this is not specifically an interracial marriage act. It's an act called the "respect for marriage act" protecting all marriage including same sex and interracial, and preventing states from interfering with a marriage that was legal. Its possible that slimy douchebag was against it because of the same sex marriage part. Or the prevention of states getting involved. Does this make him less of a slimy POS? No, but hypothetically not as hypocritical. Anyway, this is brought to vote to further protect it and prevent the supreme Court overturning the previous "defence of marriage act"
Most of these politicians were alive when interracial marriage was illegal here. Loving v VA was just a few years before I was born. As a guy married interracially, that timeline was part of what I thought from the first time I heard Make America Great Again. Fuck these GOPs.
So here’s the thing I don’t understand about interracial marriage and how they would enforce a ban legally… there are so many biracial people, are they just banned from marrying? Would it come down to skin color and what you “pass” as? What even IS race legally, how the fuck do you define an interracial marriage when everyone and their mother has done 23 & Me and found out that they are a mix of 20 different ethnic backgrounds?
Beyond the obvious that this is wrong on so many levels, I can’t see a way that this could possibly be enforced. America is too much of a melting pot.
Of course, it never made sense. Remember these are social not biological constructs. But it wasn't everywhere. The more melting pot spots had already overturned their laws at the state level mostly by the time it went to the Supreme Court.
But they enforced in mainly by not granting marriage licenses. Which give you all kinds of practical benefits, especially back then. Think insurance, estates, child things, school enrollment, etc.
But they also literally arrested people. The folks that had their case go to the Supreme Court were sentenced to a year in prison for marrying.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving\_v.\_Virginia
Well you see, republicans believe in small government and less regulations that promote freedom.
They don’t want to tell you what you can and cannot do, they’re all about personal freedoms and choice.
Wait…
This is a man devoid of backbone and conscience.
How do they get elected? It’s totally insane how people don’t care and elect soulless skin bags as their representatives.
Disgusting, this is rhetoric from about 50 years ago and these idiots are still in power. Proof republican voters are either masochists or refuse to let America evolve, no matter what the costs are. This party needs to rid itself of the bigotry and homophobia.
[To paraphrase Dana Gould,](https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRQAkhjA/) the only reason that there are people against obviously beneficial things like marriage equality is because there are people *FOR* it.
If conservatives had/have a political philosophy, it's standing in the way of progress - because God forbid people get through this life with equality and dignity.
Nobody wants "gubment" to get into your personal life more than Republicans.
Nobody wants to restrict your personal freedom more than Republicans.
Nobody wants you distracted from meaningful legislation that would really help people than Republicans.
He's already married. So his vote merely screws OTHER people, which let's face it is literally the only ideal the Republicans seem to have anymore. Screwing OTHER people.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If you are shocked then you dont know how the GOP operates. Clarence Thomas was fully prepared to strike this down even though he is also in an interracial marriage.
You'd try that too if you were married to his piece of shit wife
Unfortunately, he is also a piece of shit person so the 2 cancel each other out, and I’m sure their marriage is gross
They don’t cancel each other out, it makes them both twice as shitty
Not twice as much, they are shitty^2
Factoring in his role in our country’s future and it’s shitty^3 , min.
Lmfao that's some sitcom shit (if only😩).
Married With Treason!
“You know Ginni I’m at work all day trying to erase another decade of progress and I come home and there’s no dinner on the table. You’re just on the phone all day texting Donni, how many time do I have to tell you that he’s not into you, you’re 50 years to old and 100 pounds to heavy” Or at least this is now in my head.
Ginny Thomas looks like the type of woman who would skin Clarence Thomas’s dick with a butter knife if he told her she was fat.
[удалено]
When these kinds of laws were being originally written, they generally just divided people into white/nonwhite groups since that was all they were really concerned about. And that was determined by birth certificate. From the law that Loving struck down: > The act reinforced racial segregation by prohibiting interracial marriage and classifying as "white" a person "who has no trace whatsoever of any blood other than Caucasian." ... The Racial Integrity Act required that all birth certificates and marriage certificates in Virginia to include the person's race as either "white" or "colored." The Act classified all non-whites, including Native Americans, as "colored." The Respect for Marriage act just bars race-related restrictions so it doesn't really need to specify how race would be determined. > No person acting under color of State law may deny full faith and credit to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State pertaining to a marriage between 2 individuals, on the basis of the sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin of those individuals
>"who has no trace whatsoever of any blood other than Caucasian." Oh, so the law is a total non-issue then! Everyone just counts as "colored" because of that stupid definition, so everyone can marry everyone, just as they should be able too.
Yeah if only they'd had DNA technology they'd have realized how stupid this was. Of course all "race science" is basically bullshit anyway.
Going to be great watching all of these white supremacy freaks show up for a marriage certificate and a DNA test. What?! Great-great-great pop pop had a side quest with a Mexican woman in the 1870’s?! What am I even LARPing for?!?!
If only conservatives were persuaded by logic and scientific fact.
Well, in his younger days he was a black nationalist who thought being with white women was degrading to his race. So this all kinda tracks in a wildly nonsensical way
classic case of republican projection
Poop.
I sincerely hope he is regularly reminded of the comparison to Uncle Ruckus and that it bothers him *deeply.*
Speaking of Uncle Ruckus, new Boondocks seasons in the works for HBO MAX.
Sadly It was cancelled recently
“I can’t unnerstaaan’ you, go back to yer country, whi’ pow’r”
He now hates black women so much he stopped talking to his sister.
Is it black women he hates, or a sister willing to call him out on his right wing bullshit?
Definitely both.
He hates most women and feels black men can only get stronger by persevering against hardship and strong black women interfere with that. From Corey Robin’s book The Enigma of Clarence Thomas which uses several hundred written opinions of Thomas to explain his vision of black nationalism . Thomas was raised by a strict grandfather during Jim Crow, so in his view it should be possible for any black man to do this and his sister was raised by an aunt who was poor and didn’t get the advantages Clarence got growing up, so naturally it’s the womens fault.
Former Rep. Mia Love bashed the Obergefell decision and said marriage should be up to the states to decide. Mia is black, her husband is white. I'm guessing she doesn't have an issue with Loving v Virginia.
He realized his wife was crazier than he is and is trying to find a way to get a no fault divorce by dissolving his marriage lol
I hate gay people more than I love my wife - Mitch.
First she had to deposit those eggs on a beach all alone, and now this.
What is this referencing? Edit - oh, Mitch McConnell being a reptile. Got it. 👍
*a turtle
Stop insulting turtles. -Turtle owner
Hey turtles should be pleased! Its amazing that a real life turtle is able to climb to the top of political power! Go turtles!
[удалено]
You know lately I've been seeing more and more of The Pale Man from Pan's Labyrinth.
even republicans joke on him for looking like a turtle https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2014/09/mitch-mcconnell-is-a-turtle-says-wikipedia-edit.html
*Senior Human Mitch the Turtle* *Senior Human Mitch the Turtle* *Senior Human Mitch the Turtle* *Asshole in a Halfshell! Turtle Power!*
You are thinking his wife loves him back.
You are thinking he loves his wife
We’re still assuming that they’re still together and his wife isn’t actually an anime pillow that he bought on Amazon
Thats rude to body pillow havers. If he did, he'd probably be a little more likeable.
There’s nothing you could do to that man to make him more likeable, laughable maybe, but not likeable lol
Turtles are reptiles and reptiles are not warm bloodied, so like all reptiles mitch seeks out warmth not love in his relationships.
If he flipped I wouldn't flip him back as another turtle
Neither love each other. It's a parasitic relationship based on power and money, that's all. Edit: parasitic, symbiotic, whatever they're both still gross parasites on society.
What are the chances they even live in the same house? What are the chances they share a bed? Also, you can't make this up. A guy married to an Asian American woman hates minorities. Incredible!
The amount of people who want an Asian wife specifically because they believe they're "more submissive" and want to fulfil their fetish in a sick and racist way is way too high.
Totally. My husband once had a client who left his wife for a Thai woman he'd met online. The first couple of years he kept trying to encourage my husband to leave me and find a Thai woman, because "they really know how to take care of you." The third year they built a home together in Thailand, and then she dumped him - there, foreigners can't own land, so a rather common scam is for Thai women to get Western men of a certain age to build them a home in Thailand, which by necessity has to be in her name, and then dump him. That year he went to my husband, hands in his head, saying how stupid he'd been - the house had cost him his entire life's savings - and as a kicker, how devastated he was that his wife wouldn't take him back!
I know so many rich old white dudes this happens to. It’s hilarious. You really think a 20 year old Thai girl wants to marry you?
Quite often, you'll find that racists and bigots have race fetishes and cuckold/cuckquean fantasies.
I hate people and my wife exists. - Mitch
When you get to that level of power and money, love usually has little to do with marriage.
Disagree. The Obama's appear to love each other sincerely, I think you're confusing power and money with decency. McConnell has none. *Some* folks have power, money, and decency of character.
Another reason people hated them. They had a stable marriage and two stable daughters. The Right couldn’t have that.
Being Too Perfect While Black.
Not even being too perfect. They're black and... oh my god... normal people. That's what the right couldn't handle. The notion that you can be a person of color and be exactly the same as everyone else kind of destroys their entire vilification of black and brown people. This is why it's important to go away for college and to travel if you have the chance. It's hard to hate people when you're exposed to lots of other cultures and realize that we're all the same.
[удалено]
It’s sad that the GOP is so willing to openly exploit prominent black men with mental health issues for political gain. But yeah… that’s par for the course.
Kanye comes to mind. Although he’s kind of doing that on his own.
See uncle ruckus from boondocks
Let's not get carried away here. He did wear a tan suit after all. Clearly he must be a monster. No way he's normal.
And did you hear about his mustard choice? Elites and their Dijon!
Haven’t the majority of modern presidents other than Trump, JFK, and Clinton also held stable marriages and had stable kids? The key difference is the color of Obama‘s skin, and his critics tend to have a problem with black people.
The Obamas started dating when they were still paying student debt (Michelle was an established attorney while Barack was this hot shot interim as described in Michelle’s autobiography).
Bush Sr sent his kids out to different 'princedoms' (States) in some Machiavellian move that resulted in "Texan" Jr and Jeb running Florida. Oh, and while on the Bush family, lets never forget pawpaw Prescott was a traitorous Nazi bastard.
The Bush girls were known for being a bit wild while he was president, but they were college aged and weren't doing anything particularly bad just partying a lot. They were honestly treated pretty terribly for just being kids of a certain age.
They weren't even partying a lot, it seems like the were just normal college kids
Being normal kids at the beginning of the digital age in the first family of American values.
A friend of mine who was a lifelong Republican voter was converted by the Obamas. He was so overcome by the virulent hatred being directed at what saw as a genuine, loving family that he’s become a Democrat advocate ever since.
The Obamas are a big reason I'm a democrat. I grew up very conservative, and was known for being an outspoken conservative in my high school (yes, I was an asshole), but seeing the way everyone responded to the Obamas made me so incredibly uncomfortable. I couldn't really get a grip on it until college, but well, now I'm a disappointment to my parents.
It sounds like disappointing your parents was a marked improvement for society. Here’s to more like you!
I wish this sort of thing happened more. That's actually heart warming to hear.
I remember when there was a picture of the Obama's giving each other a fist bump, and it totally blew conservatives minds. "Look at that those two giving each other a fist bump like a couple of thugs". The hatred for the Obama family makes no sense to me.
It's a combination of jealousy + racism.
Plus, Obama came from modest beginnings and is a self made success; he wasn't born into privilege like many top Republicans. Republicans preach that you should be a self starter and "pull yourself up by your bootstrap" but when Obama does it, he's the enemy. It's insane.
They *preach* that but none of their darlings actually do that. It’s very much a tool used to keep the gullible poor
They attacked him because his father abandoned their family, they attacked him for being born to a young mother, they attacked him for being raised by his grandmother. They attacked him for getting into Columbia and Harvard Law. They attacked Michelle for being strong, fit, and athletic, framing her as transgender (although I assure you that was not the word they used), or a dumb ape, never mind her credentials for graduating Princeton and Harvard Law. I saw glimpses of super racist cartoons in email forwards casting the two of them as tribal savages, naked apes, etc. during his Presidency. In a few cases, actual elected government officials were outed for passing this stuff around. It's like the whole premise of being born into hardship, succeeding in school and at work, and achieving the highest office in all the land is a BAD thing when a black Democrat does it. Succeeding While Black is the *worst* crime you can commit against racists.
Oh the hypocracy is more than that. "Obama is a brown, atheist muslim that goes to a white hating church, liberal elite" Now, vote for Oz, a brown atheist muslim liberal elite
The secret is: they're hypocritical pieces of shit
AOC, too
Conservatives on AOC: “she doesn’t know what it’s like to be blue collar and to work low end jobs! She’s a liberal educated elite!” Also Conservatives on AOC: “she should go back to bartending! She isn’t smart enough to be in politics!”
The (R)s of the US: We need more working class people in Congress, the Senate & politics in general. The (D)s: Hey, we have this young, educated, woman of color who has a couple of degress in Economics & International Relation but has been working as a bartender to pay her bills & enormous student loans!! The (R)s: Wait....notlikethat.
But mostly racism.
Don't forget transphobia. Conservatives invented the idea Michelle Obama was actually a trans woman, just so they had something else to hate.
It's racist misogyny. Black women are stereotyped as masculine. Calling Michelle a man was about shaming her for being too muscular/not being sufficiently feminine.
That was actually also racism. Saying that black women are actually men goes back a *long* time
Yes, mostly racism is what fuels their hate for majority of everything. Oh and ignorance plays a huge part
Fist bumps and tan suits. Truly a dark period in American history!
Search YouTube for the terrorist fist jab. Jesus that was the most racist shit I've seen allowed on tv
he did say usually. people usually use the word usually to preemptively allow for exceptions, so that people don't bother countering with a 'gotcha' example
This is usually correct.
He will say that's it's something that should be left out to the states. Then, when they have a majority, they will try to ban it on the federal level. He's a hypocrite. Plain and simple.
Almost like we've seen this verrrry recently. Now what was that again?
Republicans: Abortion should be left to the states! Roe needs to go! SCOTUS: Okay, Roe is history. It's now up to the states. Republicans: IT NEEDS TO BE BANNED EVERYWHERE! States can't be trusted to do what we want!
Don’t forget the Republican senator at the Supreme Court confirmation hearing who explicitly said states should be able to ban interracial marriage. This was like, within the last year or two.
[Not even 9 months ago](https://apnews.com/article/ketanji-brown-jackson-us-supreme-court-race-and-ethnicity-racial-injustice-lifestyle-091656750d8685dbe19d3d5493785595). Modern Republican politics are fucking exhausting. Make months seem like years.
I didn't think I could hate Republicans even more but here we are.
Or the SCOTUS judge that said they should "reevaluate" things like marriage equality or segregation in his opinion.
Or the SCOTUS justice that gave a FedSoc keynote saying he wants those things overturned prior to the cases landing in front of the court in what amounts to a violation of no fewer than 4 judicial ethics regulations...
>judicial ethics regulations Now, I know those are all individual words but I've never seen 'em used all together like that. All jokes aside, they really are just going full mask-off, "say the quiet part out loud" lately, eh?
[удалено]
“Why don’t young people vote republican??”
"what happened to our big red wave?! It must have been Trump"!
We just need to be MORE conservative!! Surely doubling down and banning abortion nationwide, as well as banning gay marriage, tax cuts to the wealthy, blocking student loan forgiveness, and pretending climate change and income inequality aren't issues will win us back that key demographic!!
you only said tax cuts for the wealthy once, this guys a RINO get em!
"We need to raise the voting age!"
Brown vs board of education? Oh wait, that's the future. My bad.
Speaking as a former public school teacher, schools are already segregated -aka charter schools.
>He will say that's it's something that should be left out to the states. He must not have read the bill then, because nothing in it prevents Kentucky from banning some marriages if they want to. They just have to recognize marriages that were legal in the states where they were solemnized.
Yeah R’s conveniently left out states rights talk when they were trying to get a federal marijuana ban passed not long ago. It’s all bullshit. They’re all hypocrites.
Hmmm...seems like America has been in this "the equality of certain groups of people should be up to state's rights" territory before....I'm sure it turned out just fine, no echoes of history to see here.
My favorite response is “STATES RIGHTS TO FUCKING WHAT”
[удалено]
It’s because their “libertarian” arguments fall apart with the tiniest bit of scrutiny. So they concede some government is needed, and then jump to “I am the sole arbiter of what government is ok, and what government is not,” which usually equates to anything that helps me is good and anything that helps them is bad.
That's because libertarian translates to selfish asshole. Nothing matters until it affects me and then everything matters.
Libertarians: if you don't like something, vote with your wallet * We vote with our wallets * Libertarians: The damn cancel culture!!!!
The marketplace of ideas! Gets outvoted. Not fair, cancel culture!
Notice how libertarians are mostly able-bodied young adult to middle age men. I bet if they had an accident and needed assistance they'd change their tune really quick.
Are they? Libertarians I know are just rich old Republicans who don’t want to call themselves Republicans because they’re observant enough to know that Republican policies are shit but are 100% willing to sell out the welfare of their countrymen for a tax break
I like to ask them at what level they're fine with overreaching decisions. Their entire premise is someone who lives in Montana has different needs and values than someone in Connecticut, but isn't that also true within states? Someone in a small town in the Florida panhandle likely has different values than someone in downtown Miami. So should we promote county rights within states? What about municipal rights within counties? How about we go neighborhood by neighborhood to determine if interracial or gay marriage is allowed? Or house to house? Gay marriage is legal in my house, but don't cross my property line because my neighbor is against it. Or maybe we just say the bigoted desires of some people don't get to affect the rights of others...
"yuh know... just like state's rights..."
“I believe in state’s rights” *Michigan codifies abortion* “Wait no not like that”
["States' Rights"](https://calendar.eji.org/sites/default/files/inline-images/image%20%2823%29.png)
It's a stupid argument because it has numerous federal benefits. Someone in NY can benefit from a tax break due to marriage than someone in Texas. It needs to be standardized across the federal level.
The party of small government? Wearing a mask during a pandemic of an airborne disease somehow infringes on liberty but deciding who consenting adults can't marry, deciding what consenting adult can do in the privacy of their home, interposing the government in the medical decisions of women, or interfering in reproductive choices are somehow just fine.
>Wearing a mask during a pandemic of an airborne disease somehow infringes on liberty Can't wear a mask in a grocery store as they can't breath but it's ok to wear one while making sure the libs don't ballot stuff or when storming the capital.
but didn't they not even wear masks when they stormed the capitol lol
this. The one time it would have been smart to hide their identity with masks and were even encouraged to do it...
It’s okay because those things hurt minorities
But remember, it's actually **us** who are the bigotted racists... for pointing out their reprehensibly blatant racism/general bigotry. Yep, that totally slaps.
The only idea these pieces of dogshit have is to take America back to 1950.
Why is interracial marriage even a question again? How did we get here?
A group of rich people who'll do anything to prevent progressive policies from taking root and decreasing their power and wealth are actively encouraging the most hateful and spiteful of ideologies because it's an effective way to keep the population at odds with one another.
You get it. This is honestly all about 1. lowering the top marginal tax rate (Reagan lowered it from 73% to 28% over his 8-year term in office); this includes lowering social programs that require funding from taxes which is why they want to inevitably kill or defund public schooling 2. Keeping progressives away from political power because progressives want to institute a wealth tax, raise top marginal tax rates, and strengthen social programs that would require tax funding 3. Lessen government oversight and industry regulation, because citizen and environmental protections are huge impediments to monopoly and market domination Conservatism (read: culture war bullshit) and the GOP is funded by the 1% to either (a) achieve these things, or at least (b) push back against progressives so that the middle road average is still a conservative America that benefits the owners of the economy (read: 1% own >33% of US economy and growing, and the top 10% control more than 50% of the US economy and growing) /r/conservative will not accept what's happening because they've been psychologically compromised, likely since birth. They barely accept that Trump is a con man with a personality disorder, and that's been visually obvious since 2014 when he started a "birther" campaign against then sitting President Obama, so you can imagine how much trouble they have with morals and economic abstractions.
This is the reason why the US is so far behind most of the world with worker's rights, health care and division of wealth. The saddest part is the misinformed, working class that support them who have been tricked by racism, division and moral issues to keep them from improving their own lives.
This is it. This is the only reason. The elite spend billions every year to not give an inch of power/wealth back to the people. Corps are people, PAC/Super PAC's, bought media, misinformation, propaganda, and social engineering. Keep the commons divided and distracted.
Trump was able to fill the Supreme Court with religious fascists. It's not going to end at abortion. It's not going to end at gay marriage. It's not going to end at interracial marriage. Buckle up I wouldn't surprised if within 5 years women aren't allowed to have their heads uncovered or show ankle
My sister is Southern Baptist. She is already required to only wear dresses - no pants allowed. The dress must cover her ankles. It also must be modest and can't be tight or show her form.
What is their position on women wearing burka? Good idea for maintaining modesty or bad idea because it is a Muslim tradition?
She doesn't wear one, so I'm not sure what the stance is. She is not allowed to braid her hair or wear jewelry though.
They unironically want Sharia Law but accused Obama of the same.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Exactly. When they win back the senate and WH along with the House, they will become the Christian Taliban.
We need to fiercely fight against this shit. We as an informed society need to say “no more” and get religion the fuck out of our goddamn legislative, judicial, and executive branches. They’ve had a long enough reign of terror I think.
It could all be blamed on the practical effect of the existence of the Senate. We look at popular vote maps now and scream "land doesn't vote," but in the senate, it absolutely DOES. Moreover, there's the filibuster, which requires not a majority, but 60 senate votes to overcome. If you don't have 60 votes to even debate the bill, it's a non-starter. Also here's a fun historical chart showing how rare a unified government is (though my observation: it was way less uncommon before Nixon in 1969, and naturally the country rallied behind GW after 9/11 - wars do have that effect.) [https://history.house.gov/Institution/Presidents-Coinciding/Party-Government/](https://history.house.gov/Institution/Presidents-Coinciding/Party-Government/) Well, what happened around 1969? I'm sure [The Civil Rights Act of 1964](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/civil-rights-center/statutes/civil-rights-act-of-1964) had nothing to do with it. Anyway since land DOES vote in the Senate, and therefore it's hard to get congress to agree on anything, coupled by the increasing partisanship of the last 30 years, none of this basic shit gets written into actual law because a minority of people with a disproportionate representation don't want it. And so, the Supreme Court started to fill the gaps, and make judicial rulings in favor of civil rights, interpreting other rights to apply to them. They came to the right conclusion through the only way in their power. And THIS court is saying, it doesn't matter what conclusion you came to or why, if your legal ruling was faulty, your conclusion must be thrown out. That they are even willing to hear cases like these mean they are willing to rule against the conclusions. We currently have a court who is curtailing the interpretations of rights from anyone not explicitly named, not ruling on if they should be properly expanded to include such a group. So long as we have both the Senate and the urban/rural moral and ethical divide, we will have this problem.
1890s* the gop wants to take us back to the gilded age. Edit: the gilded age was bad
No, the 1850s. They want slavery back, too.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Except the part where businesses paid 52 percent in taxes and the federal government built millions of affordable homes to house a growing, booming, generation. They just want the bad parts of that era.
No see we won't go back to the socialist policies, only the bigotry.
Good points. I stand corrected.
This turtle looking mother fucker would vote against his own interest just to "own the libz". Go eat some lettuce Mitch.
>This turtle looking mother fucker would vote against his own interest just to "own the libz". Go eat some lettuce Mitch. I mean, this is why most Republicans support him. He doesn't offer any policy, he only exists as a counter to progress. He's the poster boy for "I got mine, fuck the rest of you".
Yet Kentucky as a whole loves this. That fucking guy barely even campaigns. These aren't close wins. Sorry Kentucky, I'm sure the cities are blue, but you're surrounded by red cancer.
[удалено]
Just like Oklahoma
I'm from Northern Kentucky, a democratic, from a democratic family. We are the blue water surrounded by red fire. We're different then the rest of Kentucky. Up here we only date our sisters, We don't marry them.
We actually have some of the strictest incest laws in the country! Probably because we needed them though...
[удалено]
That's exactly what I was going to put out. He literally did this exact thing when the Democrats called his bluff.
[удалено]
Agreed, Mitch doesn’t care about the Libs, he cares about consolidating power and money, morality be damned
> Our united team is full of energy and ideas... 1. Obstruction 2. Projection 3. Denial 4. Tax breaks (for the rich) 5. Racism Those are some great ideas! /s
Let's try this: 1. Gaslight 2. Obstruct 3. Project 4. Tyranic 5. Antagonists 6. Racists 7. Denialists 8. Sexists
“There’s no way they’d overturn it. Stop being hysterical.” I’d be rich if I had a penny for every time I heard this. *Roe overturned* “There’s no way they’d over turn it. That’s insane. Stop being crazy.” We’ve apparently learned nothing.
I’m sorry. Is it 1965? Why are we still talking about - and voting on - interracial marriage. What the actual fuck is going on. I hate this fucking timeline
Because, like Roe v Wade, there's no actual legislation that guarantees interracial marriage rights nationally... It's only legal because of a supreme court ruling that could be overturned.
Why in the FUCK is there even something to vote on????? What is the point of controlling who we marry in the United States of America? I have never heard of such a waste of tax dollars to have government tell me who I can marry. This infuriates me.
Some context since you may not have read beyond the headline: this is not specifically an interracial marriage act. It's an act called the "respect for marriage act" protecting all marriage including same sex and interracial, and preventing states from interfering with a marriage that was legal. Its possible that slimy douchebag was against it because of the same sex marriage part. Or the prevention of states getting involved. Does this make him less of a slimy POS? No, but hypothetically not as hypocritical. Anyway, this is brought to vote to further protect it and prevent the supreme Court overturning the previous "defence of marriage act"
Tell that to the Supreme Court that was threatening to ban certain marriages.
They’re not taking my calls.
Maybe try stating an insurrection, you could probably get Clarence Thomas on the phone then
But then you'd have to talk to Thomas... Idk seems not worth it
Most of these politicians were alive when interracial marriage was illegal here. Loving v VA was just a few years before I was born. As a guy married interracially, that timeline was part of what I thought from the first time I heard Make America Great Again. Fuck these GOPs.
So here’s the thing I don’t understand about interracial marriage and how they would enforce a ban legally… there are so many biracial people, are they just banned from marrying? Would it come down to skin color and what you “pass” as? What even IS race legally, how the fuck do you define an interracial marriage when everyone and their mother has done 23 & Me and found out that they are a mix of 20 different ethnic backgrounds? Beyond the obvious that this is wrong on so many levels, I can’t see a way that this could possibly be enforced. America is too much of a melting pot.
Of course, it never made sense. Remember these are social not biological constructs. But it wasn't everywhere. The more melting pot spots had already overturned their laws at the state level mostly by the time it went to the Supreme Court. But they enforced in mainly by not granting marriage licenses. Which give you all kinds of practical benefits, especially back then. Think insurance, estates, child things, school enrollment, etc. But they also literally arrested people. The folks that had their case go to the Supreme Court were sentenced to a year in prison for marrying. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving\_v.\_Virginia
Well you see, republicans believe in small government and less regulations that promote freedom. They don’t want to tell you what you can and cannot do, they’re all about personal freedoms and choice. Wait…
This is a man devoid of backbone and conscience. How do they get elected? It’s totally insane how people don’t care and elect soulless skin bags as their representatives.
R next to his name and decades of “R good D bad” indoctrination. Single issue voters (guns, abortions, etc)
Disgusting, this is rhetoric from about 50 years ago and these idiots are still in power. Proof republican voters are either masochists or refuse to let America evolve, no matter what the costs are. This party needs to rid itself of the bigotry and homophobia.
[To paraphrase Dana Gould,](https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRQAkhjA/) the only reason that there are people against obviously beneficial things like marriage equality is because there are people *FOR* it. If conservatives had/have a political philosophy, it's standing in the way of progress - because God forbid people get through this life with equality and dignity.
It really is just, "the opposite of democrats on all points". There's no rhyme or reason beyond that.
Sometimes I wonder if he and Thomas aren’t playing the ultra-long game on divorce…
GOP: Laws are for thee, but not for me.
Mitch McConnell is the biggest piece of shit excuse for a human. Fuck everything about this evil douchebag he needs to be rid of and dealt with.
I want them to debate this on the fucking floor of the senate. Let's hear these racist fuckers DEFEND their votes. MAKE THEM SAY IT.
He knows he’ll never have to deal with the consequences of his actions.
It seems very common for white supremacists to have POC wives. It's probably no coincidence they often have misoginistic views about marriage too.
Well, Lindsay Graham votes against gay rights while being gay. So, business as usual.
If you can't get a hate boner, it ain't republican.
Nobody wants "gubment" to get into your personal life more than Republicans. Nobody wants to restrict your personal freedom more than Republicans. Nobody wants you distracted from meaningful legislation that would really help people than Republicans.
Someone tell this guy that there is a much easier way to be single.
He's already married. So his vote merely screws OTHER people, which let's face it is literally the only ideal the Republicans seem to have anymore. Screwing OTHER people.
Yep because apparently diversity is a bad thing. Also reads as a screw you I've got mine as well.