Carla Richburg of Cypress … proposed eight resolutions to the party platform, including outlawing all sex education in schools; mandatory death penalties for anyone convicted of murdering a police officer or murders committed during other felonies; a call to “wage war against all invaders” related to Texas borders that authorizes deadly force; considering all Chinese nationals as spies and removing them from the country; refusal to recognize transgender identification; and removal of the word “marriage” from official documents.
The resolutions were roundly rejected by the local Republican Party advisory board which forwarded them to voters, noting, “we unanimously condemn the tone and content”.
That’s where we are in American politics today. Loud voices on the extremes left and right. A media driven by ratings anxious to exploit the extreme division in our country. What we once called “middle America” or “the moderates” are drummed out by the shrill voices on the left or the right so that no one hears the other. I no longer identify myself with either party. I agree with parts of both agendas and reject parts of their extreme agendas. The example Johnny posted represents an example of what I speak and I could give examples from the Democratic Party as well.
Strange respond to a radical call getting shut down by its own party. Doesn’t this prove the inverse, radical ideas do not represent the majority. Wonder if that “silent majority” term comes back, no its too connected to tricky Rich Nixon
I agree with the last one. never thought the govt should have any say in marriages.
from a property and income standpoint and even family governance, differing forms of legal partnerships would make more sense.
When George Bush was prez , it was the last presidency with no ramped up rage on either side. As soon as Obama was elected it got out of control bc maybe he said things and pushed Obamacare which was actually good if you want to debate it then the republicans attacked and it continued with trump who did some good things but was hated and never ended today. This is what I see. Just saying and I think it will continue. We’re in a new political error of fierce fighting on both sides that I haven’t witnessed prior to Obama.I’m moderate and vote on issues vs party lines.
Its social media, I believe it pits us against each other by exposing us to the nut jobs on the other side. I don’t think its on purpose, I think its about clicks. Social media platforms need you to stay on their platform in order to sell you stuff, the longer you are watching the platform the more ads you see and the better chance there is of you clicking on one. So they bombard you with things that grab your attention in order to keep you there. The problem is it has really polarized folks.
I’d agree and it started under Obama then got worse. I really don’t think police are out right killing people and if the criminal that is caught behaves, he likely lives. There are a few exceptions like when the criminal can’t breath and dies. I’d say taze him and access the situation better. I do think it’s very stressful being a cop and your dealing with people with nothing to lose and they keep trying to get away and now they know cameras are there so the media is on their side. It’s a difficult situation being a cop today. Any traffic pull over can turn bad.
Outlandish as chasing every Chinese National out of the country? Shoot to kill at the border? Remove sex education from classrooms? Mandatory death penalties.
Really? “Both sides” are the same?
My point was about when do we hear that argument. Just saying. It shouldn’t be hard to see.
On a side note:
I’m watching the Grisham documentary “The Innocent Man” (great book too) and zealots are dangerous.
What “side” is pushing bills in about 30 state legislatures allowing those same state legislatures to overturn results in presidential elections? Ok, I’ll stop.
Being anti Israeli occupation isn’t anti American or necessarily anti Israel either m. Is it? Being pro Palestinian self-determination isn’t either, in my mind. I owe my allegiance to this flag not this one or any other.
Edit: one could want to boycott Saudi Arabia for their treatment of women and not be anti American, right?
Al Franken was removed from office by pressure from Democrats. The lady above isn’t getting the same treatment from her party though they feign displeasure.
You don’t advocate a boycott of America’s closest ally in the Middle East, the only free country in the Middle East (according to Freedom House), and the only pro-gay Western style liberal democracy in the Middle East, as Tlaib does.
That’s just RIDICULOUS!!!
Moreover, you don’t take the anti-gay Pro-Hamas terrorist voting Palestinian side, as Tlaib does.
That’s even more ridiculous.
When you’re the leader of the free Western style pro-gay democracies, like the USA, you’re supposed to take the side of similar countries, like Israel, and oppose entities with the opposite outlook, like Israel’s enemies.
I’m sorry if Tlaib doesn’t understand that.
But as long as she doesn’t (and she apparently doesn’t), she deserves to be criticized and harshly lampooned for it.
not this one 
or any other.