|
Job Truniht posted:That's literally, unironically fascist. I mean, literally. You have no goddamned idea what half the words you used even mean. Edit: I even highlighted some for you! It was even worse than I thought. Acebuckeye13 fucked around with this message at 05:12 on Jun 28, 2015 |
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 05:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 02:47 |
|
|
Job Truniht posted:That's literally, unironically fascist. I mean, literally. Wait, you mean literally? Well, better pack it up guys, he really means it now. Like, literally. Job Truniht you really sound atm like you are off your medication. Maybe if you relaxed for a bit and stopped calling people fascist imperialists whose only solace in their black heart is the death of innocents, you'd be a bit more convincing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:That's literally, unironically fascist. I mean, literally. No, it isn't, unless you're using some bizarre usage of the word fascist no one else does. Job Truniht posted:And the United States was never culpable for anything Gadaffi ever did ever, but we were culpable in aiding islamists and fueling some of the political climate leading to the formation of the Islamic State. Uh yeah we were, seeing as we had decided to grant him recognition and treat him as One Of The Good Ones shortly before the civil war broke out. Seriously were you not paying attention? He went from being near Axis Of Evil material to a grudgingly accepted ally for quite some time. The US refusing to participate would have meant the ongoing endorsement of his actions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:I read in between the lines: People who vote for the same party I do are literally warmongering psychopaths.  Nintendo Kid posted:We could always end up with the glory of a Double Paul (Ron and Rand) Primary. Or Paul Ryan trying to hop in. Nah, I think 2012 killed off any nascent interest Ryan had in the executive branch. He's maneuvering to take over for Boehner as Speaker, though. And since his main opposition right now is McCarthy and Hensarling, i think he's in a pretty good position.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 05:13
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:You guys are all reactionaries. You just haven't realized it yet. This thread, seeing all of these hawks come out of their holes and recite poo poo that should've been banned the Soviet Union fell, has deeply, deeply, worried me about the political alignment of my generation 10-20 years down the future. Why? The Republicans aren't going to come to sane social positions until their base dies off, and without those no matter how reactionary you think I am I'm voting as hard left as possible. Even becoming centrists would require a massive change in their economic policies. You can't really get equality without getting it everywhere after all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 05:13
|
|
|
Gadaffi called himself a socialist and anti-imperialist so he was the good guy dontcha know
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 05:15
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Unfortunately, she seems to be the only one who's clued into "maybe running for 2016 would be a bad idea". She's honestly probably better off that way, leaving the public eye for a while at the same time as her internet network thing is kinda crashing and burning. Might want to take some time to help her daughter with the kids anyway. edit my bony fealty posted:Gadaffi called himself a socialist and anti-imperialist so he was the good guy dontcha know Don't forget the National Socialist German Workers' Party. Sir Tonk fucked around with this message at 05:20 on Jun 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 05:16
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:Welp pack it up, two candidates have lost the support of National Organization of Marriage It's not going to happen, but how hilarious would it be if Bush and Rubio were totally turned on by the base because the aren't throwing a tantrum over gay marriage. The only guys with a chance, and they aren't even turned on for their immigration heresy, but for not being angry enough about something an ever growing majority of the country is cool with
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
my bony fealty posted:Gadaffi called himself a socialist and anti-imperialist so he was the good guy dontcha know No joke, I know a girl who argued that unironically.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:No joke, I know a girl who argued that unironically. Was that girl named Hugo Chavez?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Was that girl named Hugo Chavez? allegedly not, but I never saw the birth certificate. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
Eh, this discussion over the previous pages... If HRC follows the trends in the society, doesn't it make more sense to give her the right trends to follow than to complain that she is a flexible politician? She'll want something as her legacy, because there's no chance someone of her ambition will settle on 'first woman president'. So, sure, the Republicans will want to make the general election a "referendum on health care and gay marriage", but, uh, why let them? Isn't this also what the Sanders candidacy is about - to talk about the forward trends? Similarly, if she's evolving/flexible (though not a Romney), isn't her more recent record on foreign affairs issues, and the direction of her evolution, more important than what happened ten years ago, when the world was in a different place? She isn't becoming more hawkish, is she? Personally, as a dirty foreigner aware that the COP21 talks are this year in December, I'd love to see her forced to talk more about GCC and ecological inequality, water rights etc.. That said, I fully understand that from the inside of a country, other things feel more important.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:58
|
|
|
She was fully behind intervention in Syria, and has said Obama has not intervened enough in the conflict. She has also completely avoided the TPP, which makes her newfound populism pretty laughable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 08:13
|
|
|
I think I'm gonna vote for Bernie in the primary because I like his positions. I don't really care about political chess games.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 08:17
|
|
|
Jesus Christ dude, Libya is a loving perfect outcome compared to the continuing civil war in Syria that has generated millions of refugees and lead to hundreds of thousands of dead on all sides and is the biggest ongoing conflict in the world. Saying intervention was blatant U.S. Imperialism likewise is loving wrong on many levels. We were literally begged by our allies in England, France and Italy and the rebels in Libya to move in and support them after Gadaffi literally said he was going to kill everyone in Benghazi. We used air power to blunt his offensives at the cost of zero lives of American servicemen. Our actions in Libya lead to the majority of the country being dominated by western friendly groups (albeit divided) who as a result were outmaneuvered by a minority of Islamist groups working together to pass unpopular laws which lead to the current problems. Even the much bitched about Benghazi attack on our consulate had pro-american mobs burn down the compounds of the guys who launched the attack.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 08:58
|
|
Venom Snake posted:Hillary has a voting record that as progressive as Sander is. You want a progressive candidate? You got one. This is the new Millennium of trolling
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 13:50
|
|
|
Here's a pretty nice story about Graham in Iowa.quote:“Towel heads,” grumbled a man sitting at the bar, sporting a denim shirt with the arms cut off. “Sand n*****s.”
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 14:52
|
|
|
2016 Presidential Primary: Lindsay Graham is guaranteed to beat at least one person in Iowa
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 15:00
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:She was fully behind intervention in Syria, and has said Obama has not intervened enough in the conflict. She said she doesn't support the TPP. And yeah I'm sure all those Syrians being gassed agree with her Obama has not intervened enough.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:She has also completely avoided the TPP, which makes her newfound populism pretty laughable. This doesn't follow.  I don't see why you think not enthusiastically supporting something that not even a full half of the country supports is against populism. Unless you meant to say she should have been opposing it, which as you can see, would be even less in keeping with the popular spirit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:She said she doesn't support the TPP. And yeah I'm sure all those Syrians being gassed agree with her Obama has not intervened enough. Hillary Clinton negotiated TPP before she was against TPP. Also, she failed to convince Obama to support French groundtroops in Libya, and for that failure, Benghazi occured. How many more emails has Clinton been hiding?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
Is Lindsey Graham the only GOPer who isn't a total loving shitheel? he's gay
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
meristem posted:Eh, this discussion over the previous pages... If HRC follows the trends in the society, doesn't it make more sense to give her the right trends to follow than to complain that she is a flexible politician? She'll want something as her legacy, because there's no chance someone of her ambition will settle on 'first woman president'. So, sure, the Republicans will want to make the general election a "referendum on health care and gay marriage", but, uh, why let them? Isn't this also what the Sanders candidacy is about - to talk about the forward trends? If hillary gets into office, she is going to continue the same trend of being beholden to her campaign donors rather than her constituency and continue the same policies that are gutting the middle class. All of her populism is lip service and is against her history. I can't believe I'm explaining that politicians lie on a regular basis in campaigns in order to get more votes. You absolutely have to compare and contrast campaign rhetoric with past actions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 15:43
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:why vote for a chameleon candidate who makes campaign speeches based on polls backed by millions in wall street money when you could vote for a candidate with 40+ years of being genuine on the same economic and progressive issues If a billionaire has the same goals as the rest of the country what exactly is the hold up? Like you do understand there are rich people out there that are interested in societal and leftist progression right? The most leftist presidents in this countrys history came from some of the richest families in this countries history.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Hillary Clinton negotiated TPP before she was against TPP. Also, she failed to convince Obama to support French groundtroops in Libya, and for that failure, Benghazi occured. How much of the TPP has she even negotiated? After all, she left office nearly three years ago, and there's a good chance that significant portions of the agreement have changed since then.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
Just so we're all on the same page here, this is the only thing Hillary Clinton has said about TPP this year:quote:“Any trade agreement is going to be fraught with all sorts of problems. I’ve voted for them and I’ve voted against them and I voted against Fast Track in the Bush Administration, so I am someone who has seen the pluses and the minuses of trade agreements. Our goals should always be to make as many winners as possible…I think that in today’s world it is a very hard road to manage any trade agreement, especially with so many parties…What I have advised…is that the president take the opportunity offered by staunch allies like Nancy Pelosi…and try to figure out how to use this as leverage, to go back to the other countries and say: ‘You want a lot out of this. I need more. Our market is still the biggest, most consumer friendly in the world, but I can’t go forward unless I get X, Y and Z from you and I think that there is at least a potential opportunity for him to take this moment and as I said kind turn lemons into lemonade…Convince people who are convincible…that you have answered some of the legitimate questions that have been raised.”
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:If a billionaire has the same goals as the rest of the country what exactly is the hold up? Like you do understand there are rich people out there that are interested in societal and leftist progression right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Where are the emails Hilary?!? Face The Nation is still talking about Benghazi lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Just so we're all on the same page here, this is the only thing Hillary Clinton has said about TPP this year:
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:How much of the TPP has she even negotiated? After all, she left office nearly three years ago, and there's a good chance that significant portions of the agreement have changed since then. What a great question. Wouldn't it also be great if there were some kind of records law, administered by the Library of Congress, which Hillary was in full compliance with, so that we could know? Unfortunately, Clinton refused to turn over her emails in full, despite having ample capacity to do so. Because of her deletions, we'll likely never know the full extent of her participation in negotiating TPP, and cannot afford her the benefit of the doubt since the doubt is entirely a product of her creation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:The billionaires in this country do not have the same goals as the rest of the country. Do you believe that some of Hillary's top campaign contributors, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, et al., have the same goals as the rest of the country? This might come as a shock to you but the Republicans are really, really bad at capitalism and a lot of big corporations know that. Do you think Walmart wants less food stamps? Nah, they don't because that's how they make their money. Leftist progress is good for everyone on all tiers of the social ladder.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:This might come as a shock to you but the Republicans are really, really bad at capitalism and a lot of big corporations know that. Do you think Walmart wants less food stamps? Nah, they don't because that's how they make their money. Leftist progress is good for everyone on all tiers of the social ladder.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:We're going to have to agree to disagree that the interests of Walmart and Goldman Sachs are aligned with the American people on leftist progress, especially in the economic realm. Do you seriously think they are opposed to paying more taxes if the the money they make back from poor people having better social services outweighs it? Social Services are good for the economy and good for the people. You are fooling yourself into thinking this all about Us versus Them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Just so we're all on the same page here, this is the only thing Hillary Clinton has said about TPP this year: That's a lot of words to say nothing at all. Venom Snake posted:Do you seriously think they are opposed to paying more taxes if the the money they make back from poor people having better social services outweighs it? Social Services are good for the economy and good for the people. You are fooling yourself into thinking this all about Us versus Them. All evidence pretty much points to the fact that you are wrong.Everything points to the fact that large financial and commercial corporations care nothing for long term gains, but only juicing as much cash out of the system before it fails, and hiding it away in tax haven so that it can't be touched with the axe comes down. Seriously, transnational corporations are just that: trans-national. They don't think that American workers/consumers are any different from Thai, Brazilian, or Canadian workers/consumers. If you think they're part of "Us" you're the one who's fooling himself. Weltlich fucked around with this message at 16:23 on Jun 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 16:11
|
|
|
You're assuming Captains of Industry are rational actors all the time, Venom Snake. They aren't. Venom Snake posted:Leftist progress is good for everyone on all tiers of the social ladder. wait, pfftahahaha
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:Leftist progress is good for everyone on all tiers of the social ladder. Absolutely not. Miltank fucked around with this message at 16:16 on Jun 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
Weltlich posted:That's a lot of words to say nothing at all. Saying Obama should stand with Pelosi is the same thing as essentially saying that TPP (as the Republicans want it) is bad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:You're assuming Captains of Industry are rational actors all the time, Venom Snake. Exactly, the Koch Brothers vote and spend against their interests just like the rest of the GOP base does. Miltank posted:Absolutely not. Are you saying FDR was a masochist for helping construct the New Deal?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 16:13
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:You're assuming Captains of Industry are rational actors all the time, Venom Snake. the Executives I've raised money from usually donate to gently caress somebody else over. Never underestimate just how spiteful one becomes while raising their first billion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 02:47 |
|
|
Venom Snake posted:
He was working against his own class interests.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 16:15
|
|