|
Spunky Psycho Ho posted:Who do you think 85% of the military voted for slugger. Psssst - a lot of the military are really, really not-smart.  Spunky Psycho Ho posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8JxoKfl5PM When someone as dumb as Wolf Blitzer is verbally kicking Trump's surrogates in the nuts on-air, you know it's bad. Spunky Psycho Ho posted:Naw, he's not evil. If anything he's a bit simple The Muslim ban was pretty drat malevolent. And also stupid.
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 12:24 |
|
|
OXBALLS DOT COM posted:Except the only people "above him" are to a man evil selfish assholes, so I hope he continues lashing out at them Notice my phrasing because Trump feels threatened by anyone who questions or insults him, not just people who actually are powerful
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
He is an angry toddler in a gross obese man's body and people voted for him because they saw themselves in him lmao
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:Notice my phrasing because Trump feels threatened by anyone who insults him, not just people who actually are powerful Hm maybe don't insult people??
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Embarrassingly out-of-touch and filled with hubris, which is why most of us here supported her primary challenger. Thats not a nice thing to say to 65 million people (- millions of dead/illegal/fake voters)
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
OXBALLS DOT COM posted:Hm maybe don't insult people?? suck my nuts you dumb idiot shitsucker. I'll beat your rear end behind the Hardees off of main
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:11
|
|
|
Majorian posted:The Muslim ban was pretty drat malevolent. And also stupid. Huh? Can't hear over the sound of Sweden slamming their doors shut
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Psssst - a lot of the military are really, really not-smart. haha cool fake new reference with the "muslim ban"
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:13
|
|
|
The ban got blocked twice and he gave up anyway so it doesn't even matter
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:14
|
|
|
Like he hasn't accomplished poo poo
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:14
|
|
|
Blue Train posted:Like he hasn't accomplished poo poo A certain newly repaved airfield would like a word with you
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:15
|
|
|
"Yeah, Crown Prince Rudolf VonPickleshtein is an inbred hunchback with his tongue in backwards and is also a raving lunatic, but I'm glad he's going to be king because I love watching him fling his feces at all those stuck-up dukes and barons, ha ha!" -a subject of the Stupid Idiot kingdom 1 week prior to the coronation of Mad Prince Rudolf "Oh no, having feces on you doesn't stop you from governing and without a sane king to hold them in check, all the dukes and barons are running roughshod over us common folk! Oh! Oh no! Oh who could have seen this coming? What an unpredictable course of events!" -that same subject less than 100 days later, watching his village burn.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
He swung his tiny dick around they were running sorties from the base the same day
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
Applewhite posted:"Yeah, Crown Prince Rudolf VonPickleshtein is an inbred hunchback with his tongue in backwards and is also a raving lunatic, but I'm glad he's going to be king because I love watching him fling his feces at all those stuck-up dukes and barons, ha ha!" -a subject of the Stupid Idiot kingdom 1 week prior to the coronation of Mad Prince Rudolf Lol, VonPickleshtein sounds alright in my book
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:17
|
|
|
Blue Train posted:He swung his tiny dick around they were running sorties from the base the same day Yah I was joking lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
Prorat posted:haha cool fake new reference with the "muslim ban" What a shame for Trump that the courts didn't agree. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:21
|
|
|
Applewhite posted:"Yeah, Crown Prince Rudolf VonPickleshtein is an inbred hunchback with his tongue in backwards and is also a raving lunatic, but I'm glad he's going to be king because I love watching him fling his feces at all those stuck-up dukes and barons, ha ha!" -a subject of the Stupid Idiot kingdom 1 week prior to the coronation of Mad Prince Rudolf Wait why would the king look out for the common folk
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
OXBALLS DOT COM posted:Wait why would the king look out for the common folk That's outside the scope of the analogy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:26
|
|
|
OXBALLS DOT COM posted:Wait why would the king look out for the common folk Better answer: because it's in the King's best interests to keep his court from dissolving into dozens of feuding fiefdoms and even though he's not doing it for the common people, they also benefit from the stability.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:30
|
|
|
Applewhite posted:Better answer: because it's in the King's best interests to keep his court from dissolving into dozens of feuding fiefdoms and even though he's not doing it for the common people, they also benefit from the stability. Stability where they're serfs? Doesn't sound that great, really. Oh good, the King has consolidated power and now he's going to invade the neighboring kingdom, which he couldn't do before because he had to worry about keeping his vassals happy. Time for another ruinous war that bankrupts the kingdom!
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:36
|
|
|
OXBALLS DOT COM posted:Stability where they're serfs? Doesn't sound that great, really. Yeah well I'm not saying that eventually there shouldn't be a democratic revolution where the serfs rise up and become fully enfranchised, but being a serf in a stable kingdom beats the hell out of being a serf in an unstable one. Baby steps.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:38
|
|
|
Mad King Pickleshtein ain't consolidating poo poo. Except for the literal poo poo he excretes from his rear end, rolls into a ball with his bare hands and flings at anyone in his field of vision.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:39
|
|
|
Blue Train posted:Like he hasn't accomplished poo poo His minions are busy dismantling the innards of our institutions. Does that count?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:47
|
|
|
SirPablo posted:His minions are busy dismantling the innards of our institutions. Does that count? It's almost as if...Trump is just like any other Republican, only with no filter. Which is why it's so funny that Prorat et al. thought they were getting anything else.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:02
|
|
|
Majorian posted:It's almost as if...Trump is just like any other Republican, only with no filter. Trump is definitely not any other Republican. I mean he doesn't know how to govern so he's being pushed in that direction but we've been over his lack of conviction or interest on any topic that isn't his prestige or money Even George W had like, at least religious convictions and never seemed like an entirely vacant body of greed and pleasure seeking. I dunno. Whoever said Trump is a blank slate anyone even moderately dumb can project theirselves or their beliefs onto was right and it really wasn't that hard to see as his campaigns evolved
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:08
|
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:Trump is definitely not any other Republican. I mean he doesn't know how to govern so he's being pushed in that direction but we've been over his lack of conviction or interest on any topic that isn't his prestige or money It's just like the episode of Rick and Morty when Jerry went to Pluto and all the Plutonians were kissing his rear end because he said something that confirmed what they already wanted to believe, no matter how spurious his arguments were.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:10
|
|
|
Applewhite posted:Yeah well I'm not saying that eventually there shouldn't be a democratic revolution where the serfs rise up and become fully enfranchised, but being a serf in a stable kingdom beats the hell out of being a serf in an unstable one. Baby steps. Revolutions don't happen in stable kingdoms. If you want things to change for the better, it's usually after poo poo hits the fan. The depression brought the new deal and banking regulations/laws. Jim Crow and the horrible racism of the 50s brought about the civil rights era. This is not a defense of trump, just that if you want things to be business as usual, things are likely to keep going on in a slow spiral of death for the poor and vulnerable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:42
|
|
|
Spunky Psycho Ho posted:Who do you think 85% of the military voted for slugger. Yes, dumb people have voted against their interests at times, but hey at least they may get the chance to see a foreign place again! OXBALLS DOT COM posted:Hm so how is this different from when Bush and Obama did it? You think I give a gently caress if obama or bush did it as well? it's still bad you loving idiot. I THOUGHT TRUMP WAS GONNA MAKE IT ALL BETTER!
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:43
|
|
L
|
Did someone really say they didn't think Donald Trump was malevolent? We're talking about the guy who sends threats to people telling them how sorry they're going to be that they wronged him?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:46
|
|
|
The liberal defense force is in full effect ITT More energy tonight, I like that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:48
|
|
|
BUSH IS A MILITARISTIC rear end in a top hat OBAMA WILL MAKE IT BETTER OBAMA IS A MILITARISTIC rear end in a top hat TRUMP WILL MAKE IT BETTER TRUMP IS well he's basically the same thing just dumber
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:48
|
|
|
yeah if only we voted hillary, she wouldn't have bombed syriahahahahaha
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:49
|
|
|
"everyone I don't like is a liberal"
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
"Just remember, I always seem to find a way to get even." - A benevolent man scrawled on a brick thrown through your window
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
a bone to pick posted:yeah if only we voted hillary, she wouldn't have bombed syriahahahahaha I bet Hillary wouldn't have missed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:51
|
|
|
a bone to pick posted:yeah if only we voted hillary, she wouldn't have bombed syriahahahahaha wasn't that supposed to be the difference here I don't remember Hillary being toted as the anti-interventionist candidate
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:53
|
|
|
So the first federal election since THE election happened tonight. A republican won, sure it was a republican in KS replacing another but still... maybe instead of focusing on parroting the media's talking points maybe you libs should try and flip a seat. I mean it can't be that hard, BIG DUMB republicans have been flipping them for the last 6 years and TOTALLY STUPID Trump flipped a bunch of states. It can't be that hard with the democrat party is the enlightened intellectual superior party right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:57
|
|
|
Prorat posted:So the first federal election since THE election happened tonight. A republican won, sure it was a republican in KS replacing another but still... maybe instead of focusing on parroting the media's talking points maybe you libs should try and flip a seat. I mean it can't be that hard, BIG DUMB republicans have been flipping them for the last 6 years and TOTALLY STUPID Trump flipped a bunch of states. It can't be that hard with the democrat party is the enlightened intellectual superior party right? It's almost as if both parties are bad!
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 06:59
|
|
|
All of this goes way back. The progressive era at the turn of the century was where the realignment and the trend towards socialism began. Both parties became progressive, and the low tax / small government / anti-central banking classical liberals eventually abandoned the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party had originally inherited the anti-federalist platform from classical liberals like Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry, but after the civil war, largely influenced by populist and marxist movements of the time, they instead became MORE progressive and MORE federalist than the Republicans, a party that had originally inherited the Federalist platform from classical conservatives like John Adams and Alexander Hamilton. The Dem's position as the more federalist and progressive party was solidified with Wilson and later FDR. Wilson's signing of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913 cemented the central bank's power, and we've had unprecedented deficit spending ever since. FDR's new deal and his reliance on John Maynard Keynes' economic policies of debt spending and expanding government programs during bust times to get us out out of the Great Depression actually had the reverse effect and really extended the Great Depression an additional decade longer than it should have lasted. It took victory in WWII to finally get us out of it. The rest of the world's economy was shattered and we came out of it in much better shape. But we never really got out of the debt spending mentality and we allowed the military industrial complex to become a parasite to our increasingly bloated federal government. This has led to other large corporations following suit. Now the government is one big corporate monopoly. The term "neoliberalism" was coined by Alexander Rustow, a Keynesian. The neoliberal movement started in the late 30s in reaction to the rise totalitarianism. Even western states, like America and England, were thought to have become too authoritarian during this period and there was an effort to return to limited governments with classically liberal principles and more of a free market, but with the socialism-lite keynesian economic principles adopted by FDR during the Great Depression. Neoliberals, like Rustow, still foolishly believed that Keynes' policies helped get us out of the Great Depression. There was a split though, and the Austrian School of Ludwig Von Mises and Friedrich Hayek, often lumped in as neoliberals even though they were more closely associated with later paleo-conservatives like Milton Friedman and Barry Goldwater, challenged the ideas of the Keynesian Neoliberals. The Neoliberals unfortunately won, however, and moved us further in a progressive/federalist and yes even socialist direction with LBJ and Nixon, and many of the Austrian School paleo-conservatives with progressive leaning views on social issues formed their own libertarian party in 1971. Reagan did adopt some Austrian School rhetoric in his campaign, but his policies really just amounted to a more conservative version of neoliberal policies that is actually more often referred to as neoconservativism (a movement actually founded by disenchanted neoliberal Democrats in the 60s). The main difference being that neocons prefer lower taxes, fewer regulations and privatizing government programs rather than keeping them single payer. But there really is not much of a difference as long as Daddy Government is paying the bills. It's still one big military backed government/corporate monopoly dominating all of us. It's still socialism. Neoconservatives and Neoliberals are both warmongers, but IMO the neocons are worse. The Neoconservative movement started in the 60s. They were originally Neoliberal Democrats that thought the Democrats had gotten too soft on communism under JFK (he who fights monsters ...). So they split off and co-opted the Republican Party. Prior to the neocon co-option, the paleo-conservatives in the Republican Party were actually less interventionist and more classically liberal than the Keynesian Neoliberal Democrats. President Eisenhower knew that the rapid growth of the MIC was a major problem and was against getting the US involved in more police actions like the Korean War. He was also against runaway debt spending and made it his priority to pay off the debts we incurred from WWII and the Korean War (which is why taxes were temporarily so high during his administration). His vice president, Nixon, held the same view, although, unfortunately, Nixon eventually became a compromised Keynesian neocon by the time he became president. He put an end to the gold standard and pretty much finished what Wilson had started when he established the Federal Reserve. We could now fund our wars on a limitless amount of debt. Still I credit him for at least having the guts to pull out of Vietnam against the wishes of the MIC. But that may have been the primary reason the neoliberal Democrats and some of the neocon Republicans turned on him during the watergate scandal. Better examples of paleo-conservatives prior the neocon co-option are Austrian economists like Milton Friedman and Barry Goldwater who were very much against the Keynesian neoliberal movement coined by Alexander Rustow in the 1930s and, though they agreed with the neolibs on some issues, namely that both the paleocon and neolib factions wanted to move away from the authoritarianism of the 1930s, paleo-conservatives were much more isolationist than the more globalist neoliberals and very much against intervention in foreign conflicts. But the paleo-conservatives were pushed out of the Republican Party by the neoconservatives in the 60s and 70s (some of the exiled paleocons formed the Libertarian Party in 1971) and now both parties are very hawkish on foreign policy with a few exceptions (ie your Bernie Sanders and Rand Pauls who are at the very fringes). Tactics against non-interventionists have always been the same. Smeared as bigots, traitors, blackmail, character assassination, and perhaps even literal assassination in some extreme cases.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 07:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 12:24 |
|
|
Applewhite posted:It's almost as if both parties are bad! yes but then you're presented a viable third party and you still vote for one of the lizard people
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 07:01
|
|