Why is the Republican Party like this?

Only in mentally ill tranny lala land. A liberal alternative reality they only leave when they cry themselves to sleep. Maga faggot

Nah, rage on fat kid.

Attached: biden-weak-failure.png (661x701, 89.98K)

>not a single actual rebuttal or argument, just insults and deflection
conservitards on suicide watch

Attached: OyKJUHn.jpg (1284x1801, 493.24K)

mentally deranged just like their supporters.

OUR WORLD.

NOT YOUR.

Attached: index.jpg (1023x795, 303.67K)

Attached: 16546100527440.png (680x511, 562.26K)

>I have no brain to think with
thats right. literally.

That's because the 'pork' isn't just a sentence at the end that says "oh, also, send 20 billion to Ukraine". its written in such a way to obscure whats actually in it to the common man. but then they write the stuff they want you to *think* its about in commonese so us peasents think we know what its about.

Republucks are just going this to block progress and make Democrats look bad before an election. Only idiot white trash believes that are on their side. See comments below.

Why would anyone want to fund a Democratic publicity stunt? They caused the baby formula shortage, and instead of taking action to solve the underlying problem, they're wasting money on photo ops of a couple airplanes from Europe, with maybe a few days supply of baby formula. It's political theater, nothing more.

When it comes to the oil shortage, why would anyone want to take the one action that basically every economist agrees is the stupidest possible thing to do? Price fixing -- which is what anti-"gouging" (lie) bills do -- will always lead to shortages. It's why there were breadlines in the Soviet Union, and why there were gas lines in the 1970s.

Republicans are incompetent do-nothings, but you can't point out the evil being done by the Democrats and claim the Republicans are evil for not supporting them.

let me guess
>1 post by this ID

Where's the GOP politicians saying this?

Let's take the baby formula bill, if that is true then why aren't the Republican politicians who voted against it explaining that they had these apparently good reasons to vote against it?

>Let's take the baby formula bill, if that is true then why aren't the Republican politicians who voted against it explaining that they had these apparently good reasons to vote against it?
They are.

Oh, I get it. You only listen to ridiculously biased news sources that would never run anything that might portray a Republican in a positive light.

>everything that doesn't agree with me is biased
I guess being a conservative is easier than thinking critically

The reason the GOP voted against that bill specifically is because it also added in a large chunk of money that would have went to the FDA. Their argument is that the FDA was the organization that caused the issue in the first place, so why give them a bonus. Plus the GOP is generally less about giving more money to the government.

I'm also sure you missed the bill that did pass the GOP senate that would make it easier for those on food stamps to get baby formula if they were struggling. So you know, helping those that actually need help instead of just throwing money at "it".

Can you tell me where the $28 million in the proposed baby formula bill would have actually went?

because unlike dems, they read the bill

>implying the one-line description was the only thing in the bill

If you were thinking critically, you would have done a basic search, and would have been able to find several articles, like I did, where the Republicans explained why they opposed the baby formula bill.

If you've seen lots of coverage of the baby formula bill, but never seen a Republican explain their position, or never seen a "journalist" explain their position for you, then you should probably treat all your sources as highly biased. Because the only that could plausibly happen is if your news sources were deliberately excluding them, and thus only providing one side of the story.