|
PupsOfWar posted:Scott Walker married his wife on Reagan's birthday and celebrates his anniversary/Reagan's Birthday as a joint holiday where they eat all of Reagan's favorite foods. He seems like a cargo cult imitation of Reagan more than anything, and I dunno how far that can get him.
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 22:33 |
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:He seems like a cargo cult imitation of Reagan more than anything, and I dunno how far that can get him. More importantly, Walker is acharismatic and unlikeable, firmly situated at the opposite end of the image spectrum from Ronnie. No way he can pull off Reagan's aw-shucks-I-dunno-about-that thing to avoid all public backlash when he does something wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:More importantly, Walker is acharismatic and unlikeable, firmly situated at the opposite end of the image spectrum from Ronnie. I'm laughing right now imagining the Koch brothers telling him "listen you loving doofus, just tell the press 'my heart and best intentions tell me I was right, but the facts and evidence tell me I was wrong'" and him bungling it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
With regards to Walker, I just don't see how someone can run a presidential campaign when their home state has done so absolutely horrible economically under his leadership that they're considering missing a debt payment. Even if I was a Republican that liked all the other horrible things he's done, I can't see how someone could look at him and say, "yeah, I want that for the rest of the country." Plus the whole no-degree thing - how is this guy in any sense a viable candidate? Either one of those should make you a joke candidate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
OneTwentySix posted:With regards to Walker, I just don't see how someone can run a presidential campaign when their home state has done so absolutely horrible economically under his leadership that they're considering missing a debt payment. Even if I was a Republican that liked all the other horrible things he's done, I can't see how someone could look at him and say, "yeah, I want that for the rest of the country." Plus the whole no-degree thing - how is this guy in any sense a viable candidate? Either one of those should make you a joke candidate. Republicans are fine with terrible jobs numbers so long as the people losing their jobs are blacks and jewesses
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:Scott Walker married his wife on Reagan's birthday and celebrates his anniversary/Reagan's Birthday as a joint holiday where they eat all of Reagan's favorite foods. Ok, I did not need to know that. gently caress you. I generally love your posts but now I'm gonna have loving nightmares.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
OneTwentySix posted:With regards to Walker, I just don't see how someone can run a presidential campaign when their home state has done so absolutely horrible economically under his leadership that they're considering missing a debt payment. Even if I was a Republican that liked all the other horrible things he's done, I can't see how someone could look at him and say, "yeah, I want that for the rest of the country." Plus the whole no-degree thing - how is this guy in any sense a viable candidate? Either one of those should make you a joke candidate. He did the Right Thing by conservative ideology. It doesn't matter that he trashed his state. Ideological purity matters more than results.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:Republicans are fine with terrible jobs numbers so long as the people losing their jobs are blacks and jewesses Too bad Wisconsin is 86% white.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Too bad Wisconsin is 86% white. sure, but Wisconsin public-sector unions ain't
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
And his power base, which propelled him to victory in the 2010 primary, was suburban Milwaukee, where the local AM radio hosts endorsed him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Too bad Wisconsin is 86% white. You are from Idaho too, right? No one loving cares about job numbers. Seriously, no one cares. Well, they might care if they are unemployed; but gently caress that guy, he is unemployed. What a lazy gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
OneTwentySix posted:With regards to Walker, I just don't see how someone can run a presidential campaign when their home state has done so absolutely horrible economically under his leadership that they're considering missing a debt payment. Even if I was a Republican that liked all the other horrible things he's done, I can't see how someone could look at him and say, "yeah, I want that for the rest of the country." Plus the whole no-degree thing - how is this guy in any sense a viable candidate? Either one of those should make you a joke candidate. I don't think having a degree should be a requirement to be President or Governor. Like going to College doesn't suddenly make you actually smart or qualified. That aside, Walker is a terrible Candidate and a complete and utter idiot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
Pohl posted:You are from Idaho too, right? No one loving cares about job numbers. Seriously, no one cares. I left Idaho when the housing bubble was still a quarter of the economy but I'm getting the same vibes here in Texas.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
forbidden lesbian posted:I don't think having a degree should be a requirement to be President or Governor. Like going to College doesn't suddenly make you actually smart or qualified. I don't think it should be a requirement, but I certainly didn't learn much about critical thinking until I was in college. I also had a professor that was crazy as hell and talked about pot endlessly. Funnily enough, I never really smoked pot, but I took every class from him I could and he was in charge of my two required classes for graduation. What I am saying is, gently caress Scott Walker.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I left Idaho when the housing bubble was still a quarter of the economy but I'm getting the same vibes here in Texas. I moved to San Diego.  Is it horrible here? Yes, but it is not loving Idaho.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
TheBalor posted:All "nipping the soviet union in the bud" would have done is get a lot of people killed. Soviets had massive numerical superiority. The only card we had to play was to nuke every soviet city, at a very slow pace because our bomb production wasn't very quick back then. bad dumb stuff (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) hakimashou fucked around with this message at 07:14 on Mar 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:We could have exterminated them forever when we had the only nuclear arms. Get help you sick gently caress. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:14
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:We could have exterminated them forever when we had the only nuclear arms. Hey, look at you!
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:Get help you sick gently caress. Nuking every important soviet city at the same time would have prevented the murder of tens of millions of peope at the hands of communist butchers across the world. The one enduring shame of the United states is that we failed to press home our advantage when we had it. all the tragic consequences of not exterminating the soviet Union are our cross to bear forever.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Nuking every important soviet city at the same time would have prevented the murder of tens of millions of peope at the hands of communist butchers across the world. Ok, I'm drunk as poo poo and even I can't parse this. Pohl fucked around with this message at 20:23 on Feb 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
Pohl posted:Ok, I'm drunk as poo poo and even I can't parse this. Cold warriors never die, they just fade away.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
Pohl posted:Ok, I'm drunk as poo poo and even I can't forgive the obvious typos. Try harder. I fix them in edits its a fuckin ipad. The space bar Is elusive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Nuking every important soviet city at the same time would have prevented the murder of tens of millions of peope at the hands of communist butchers across the world. Actually it wouldn't have because the vast majority of the really awful communist murders were done by 1950 unless you are counting the Mao starvation, in which case you must also believe that communists have the ability to control weather and intentionally caused a drought. And of course to prevent those deaths you would be committing wholesale slaughter on a scale the world has never seen. If you nuked 'every major Soviet city' the kill could would be in the tens of millions at least. You sick gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
Caros posted:Actually it wouldn't have because the vast majority of the really awful communist murders were done by 1950 unless you are counting the Mao starvation, in which case you must also believe that communists have the ability to control weather and intentionally caused a drought. The number of people who were murdered as a result of communist horror is so large that if we killed a million people, and just one more person survived than in the alternative, it would be well worth it. Such is the value of a human life that killing a million people to save a million and one is a decision that doesn't require a moments hesitation. Also,we could have stopped the communists in 1946 or 47. How many atom bombs would it really have taken to force surrender? hakimashou fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Feb 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:I fix them in edits its a fuckin ipad. Oh sure blame other people because you are a sociopath. You have an old account and you just started posting recently. What the hell is going on in your head? I take that back, you've been posting in Star Trek and Ayn Rand threads. Pohl fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Feb 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:We could have exterminated them forever when we had the only nuclear arms. I don't think you understand what the words "the right thing to do" mean. "We could have prevented the needless slaughter of millions with the needful slaughter of millions! Pay no attention to the radioactive wasteland we've left behind in the name of making the world safer!" That's not exactly what one might call an internally consistent argument. Put the bong and the Tom Clancy books down, brother.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
It's very simple. To save Eastern Europe from the Soviets, we needed to destroy Eastern Europe. Better dead than red.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Pohl posted:Oh sure blame other people because you are a sociopath. Do I blame the leaders back then for not dealing with the USSR in a permanent way? For not being historic in the best possible sense? Eh, hindsight is 20/20. Clearly they couldn't see the future. Back to the thread topic though. Does anyone actually like Hillary Clinton? I don't think she will get the nod. Don't get me wrong, if she does I will vote for her of course, but the primaries are a ways off still.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
DivineCoffeeBinge posted:I don't think you understand what the words "the right thing to do" mean. How much of the deadly conflict and the slaughter of the post war 20th century can be put down to communism and the Cold War? Imagine no Cold War, imagine a unipolar world where the Anglo American alliance had absolute dominion. All the terror of the threat of MAD and the nuclear holocaust not existing. That whole generation brought up a different way. Think about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:The number of people who were murdered as a result of communist horror is so large that if we killed a million people, and just one more person survived than in the alternative, it would be well worth it. Such is the value of a human life that killing a million people to save a million and one is a decision that doesn't require a moments hesitation. Yeah.... no. You are arguing in favor of the US government engaging in full on atomic warfare against its ostensible ally shortly after the end of the most devistating war in human history based on a faulty understanding of the deaths related to communism. You'd kill four million people in Moscow alone in your attempt to force a Russian surrender so as to 'save' lives. Well I have news that would shock you, almost all the post war deaths related to Soviet Russia are from loving famine. Yes you might save one or two million in various crackdowns, but you'd be killing tens of millions dropping bombs, assuming that you are actually successful in forcing their surrender, which isn't necessarily certain. Get help.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:39
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:How much of the deadly conflict and the slaughter of the post war 20th century can be put down to communism and the Cold War? How much of it can be put down to the US engaging in bloody overthrows of countries for no reason. If someone dropped a nuke on say... Miami and threatened to keep dropping nukes if the US went ahead with the Iraq war do you think that would have been justified it it kept the US from going to war? It would have saved about a million iraqi lives.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Caros posted:How much of it can be put down to the US engaging in bloody overthrows of countries for no reason. Hakimashou's position appears to boil down to "It's okay being an inhuman monster as long as I'm on the side of the monsters," so I wouldn't count on getting through to him in this fashion. Just saying.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
Caros posted:Yeah.... no. You are arguing in favor of the US government engaging in full on atomic warfare against its ostensible ally shortly after the end of the most devistating war in human history based on a faulty understanding of the deaths related to communism. And it would have been worth it to create a world without the threat of nuclear Armageddon. Without a soviet Union, with only one superpower. None of this was apparent at the time, but hindsight is 20/20. Imagine an America without the red scare, without the gargantuan military expenditure of the Cold War. Imagine if the free world had always been safe from harm. You can't argue that people back then should have known, but you can't argue that it wouldn't have lead to the best outcome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
-
Pohl fucked around with this message at 20:48 on Feb 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:And it would have been worth it to create a world without the threat of nuclear Armageddon. Without a soviet Union, with only one superpower. None of this was apparent at the time, but hindsight is 20/20. Commit nuclear Armageddon in order to prevent it? And if it wasn't the Reds it would have been something else, you dunce. Politicians using the fears of the populace (or inventing fears for the populace to hold) wasn't invented in the 20th century. And quit saying hindsight is 20/20. Your understanding of history is loving myopic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:And it would have been worth it to create a world without the threat of nuclear Armageddon. Without a soviet Union, with only one superpower. None of this was apparent at the time, but hindsight is 20/20. With some sort of Anglo-American master race perhaps? Imagine a Russia with tens of millions dead, with cities wiped clean off the map. Imagine the reaction from the rest of the world when America decided that rather than trying to act like civilized people our best response was to act like we were playing Civ V Ghandi and murder millions of innocent civilians. Your suggested world is one in which America is the sole superpower by dint of standing atop the biggest pile of scorched human bones. And you think that this is a good thing. you think the world would be better if we'd murdered millions upon millions without provocation. And you somehow think that this would have led to a more peaceful world.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
poe's law guys
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
Caros posted:With some sort of Anglo-American master race perhaps? The atomic bomb is the only machine that ever created peace. Like I said before, a human life is so valuable that killing a million people to save a million and one is a decision that can be taken without hesitation. hakimashou fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Feb 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
Which presidential hopeful is most likely to nuke ISIL so as to save us from the Islamic Menace? I'm going to say Santorum, maybe Rand "Drones are a great way to deal with shoplifters" Paul.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 22:33 |
|
|
hakimashou posted:The atomic bomb is the only machine that ever created peace. You are a sociopath who jerks off on the idea of murdering millions of people. Get help.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:55
|
|