|
I wonder if the universal public service thing isn't just some sort of Boomer-whistle. I mean, I'm constantly hearing from olds (whether they personally served or not) about how the kids these days should be forced to do a stint in bootcamp so they can learn  respect
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 21:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 18:23 |
|
|
Gripweed posted:https://twitter.com/kathrynw5/status/1207372169002569728?s=20 Dude needs to trim his neck if he's gonna do a beard in that style. Go Riker-style.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 21:26
|
|
|
eviltastic posted:I'm kinda wondering if everyone on the list knows they're on the list. I was shared on the form through a FB group I'm in so that would be correct
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
MinisterSinister posted:I'd argue you're a moron for discounting the possibility. It explains her more baffling stances on things like Assad that don't line up to any coherent strategy, and I simply don't buy "she's just stupid lol" as a good enough explanation. Clearly the only reason not to want to bomb a bunch more children is Slavic Mind Control. Slagging school buses is just too sensible an action for there to be any other explanation behind not waving the flag for piles of charred child corpses VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 21:47 on Dec 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 21:30
|
|
|
MinisterSinister posted:I'd argue you're a moron for discounting the possibility. It explains her more baffling stances on things like Assad that don't line up to any coherent strategy, and I simply don't buy "she's just stupid lol" as a good enough explanation. Yes, not wanting the American military involved in Syria is "baffling". There's no logical reason for anyone to be opposed to any part of endless war.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 21:33
|
|
|
MinisterSinister posted:I'd argue you're a moron for discounting the possibility. It explains her more baffling stances on things like Assad that don't line up to any coherent strategy, and I simply don't buy "she's just stupid lol" as a good enough explanation. They can't accept the concept of active Russian meddling because to do so would open up the tiniest, most minute possibility that Hillary could have won in 2016. And that is an anathema to their worldview, OP.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 21:37
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I wonder if there are going to be any questions at the "debate" about the documents proving the US government has been nonstop lying to America about the Afghanistan War for 18 years Oh my sweet summer child. MinisterSinister posted:I'd argue you're a moron for discounting the possibility. It explains her more baffling stances on things like Assad that don't line up to any coherent strategy, and I simply don't buy "she's just stupid lol" as a good enough explanation. They meddle in our poo poo as much as we meddle in theirs, they just got a bigger payoff in 2016 for their work as a result of a confluence of a bunch of other factors they couldn't have predicted or caused on their own. Mat Cauthon fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Dec 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 21:38
|
|
|
MinisterSinister posted:...the only thing most people have to dismiss it with is absence of evidence.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 21:39
|
|
|
How are u posted:They can't accept the concept of active Russian meddling because to do so would open up the tiniest, most minute possibility that Hillary could have won in 2016. And that is an anathema to their worldview, OP. I'm pretty sure everyone agrees that Hillary could have won. That's kind of the whole thing, she could've won easily if she had made like one less mistake or done anything better. You know she did win the popular vote, right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 21:44
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/hollyotterbein/status/1207653413623746560 For a second I thought this was an old tweet from earlier this month but nope two different groups https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1204350066313564161 zetamind2000 fucked around with this message at 21:47 on Dec 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 21:44
|
|
|
Mat Cauthon posted:
Actually it was the armies of KGB patrolling the streets which suppressed american democracy in 2016. Why doesnt the left talk about that more? that is an anathema to their worldview, OP.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 21:47
|
|
|
Oh poo poo the debate is tonight isn't it? I'd forgotten
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 21:50
|
|
|
Look, I'm just saying, keep an open mind. I still think it is far more likely she is connected to the GOP by now, because she's pretty obviously a spoiler candidate, but if you really aren't questioning anything and everything in the year 2019, after all the crazy poo poo that has been factually confirmed to be true, then you are close-minded and naive. I mean, did you people sleep through the last 3 years? The world is proving to be a lot more complicated then we could've imagined, and it is demonstrably clear to me that there is still way more going on then we know. The political world as average citizens get to see is the tip of the iceberg: the larger, more dangerous unseen part still lurks below. Don't discount anything. Conversely, don't believe anything until confirmed either. Just keep it in mind as a possibility.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:00
|
|
|
MinisterSinister posted:Look, I'm just saying, keep an open mind. I still think it is far more likely she is connected to the GOP by now, because she's pretty obviously a spoiler candidate How on earth is Gabbard a spoiler candidate? Whose chances is she spoiling?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:01
|
|
|
I went to my MiL’s house to pick up my pup from an overnight visit and found an honest-to-god Cory Booker 2020 sign in her yard. I was legit speechless.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:05
|
|
|
This debate is gonna be all about Impeachment right. Tulsi will get thrown to the wolves I think.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:05
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:How on earth is Gabbard a spoiler candidate? Whose chances is she spoiling? Hey now, I didn't say she was a successful spoiler candidate! But if I were to guess, she's there as a counterweight to Biden and the more conservative Dems. She's meant to provide a more palatable options to Never Trumpers, who despite being few in number, seem to be on both the DNC and the GOP's radar. She's not angling to steal Democratic voters from them, but to steal Independents. Remember that in a lot of states (mine included) party affiliation basically doesn't matter as you can announce which party you are voting for when you get to the ballot regardless of registration, so independents do vote and actually have sway in party primaries. Again, she's poo poo at it, but I think that's why she's there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:07
|
|
|
Like, if Tulsi is a Russian asset. How are Pelosi and Schumer not Republican assets?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:08
|
|
|
MinisterSinister posted:Look, I'm just saying, keep an open mind. I still think it is far more likely she is connected to the GOP by now, because she's pretty obviously a spoiler candidate, but if you really aren't questioning anything and everything in the year 2019, after all the crazy poo poo that has been factually confirmed to be true, then you are close-minded and naive. You literally have people on national television screaming about how Tulsi is a secret Russian plant, so why would reasonable skepticism of wild claims that have literally no evidence behind them on a dead comedy forums be a cause for concern? Also the more important thing here isn't whether Tulsi actually factually is a secret Russian agent or not, it's how wild claims of secret Russian allegiance have become a goto position for dumbass liberals to smear people they perceive being on the left, hth. Because that's actually dangerous bullshit and needs to stop like right loving now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:08
|
|
|
Usually opposition parties don’t fast track the government’s judicial appointments, give it immense spying power, or agree to its insane vanity projects
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:09
|
|
|
Gatts posted:This debate is gonna be all about Impeachment right. Tulsi will get thrown to the wolves I think. Tulsi will not be there, she pulled the "you can't fire me, I quit!" move and announced she wouldn't be attending the debate regardless of if she qualified or not (she did not qualify)
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:09
|
|
|
Let’s blow this “asset” business wide open. Schumer is the best asset Republicans have, full stop. Pelosi is a close second, with how masterfully she botched the impeachment proceedings
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:10
|
|
|
Indeed, the posters ITT who then go on to defend these people, by extension, are useful idiots and assets of the Republican Party edit: And saying that Tulsi is a Russian asset, in and of itself is conforming to a narrative that this Republican-asset side of the Democratic Party is pushing
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:11
|
|
|
Obama was an amazing asset for white supremacy in america
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:12
|
|
|
I mean, he was, insomuch as every US president is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:15
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:I'm slightly younger than him and I know who it is. And he's supposed to be this bright Rhodes Scholar type. A bunch of media he grew up with referenced it. You're also a weirdo who posts on an internet forum and had fun in life and not some joyless freak who has only sought power like pete
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:15
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Also the more important thing here isn't whether Tulsi actually factually is a secret Russian agent or not, it's how wild claims of secret Russian allegiance have become a goto position for dumbass liberals to smear people they perceive being on the left, hth. Because that's actually dangerous bullshit and needs to stop like right loving now. Yeah I guess you're right -New Red Scare and all that business probably isn't a good thing. I do think people fail to understand the term "asset" though. Like, there's a difference between saying "Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian asset" and "Tulsi Gabbard is literally paid and groomed by Russia", the latter of which was the claim that Hillary made, and I will admit is quite absurd. But somebody can be an asset without even knowing it. It isn't like these people get handed bags of cash by Russia or the GOP or whatever and get marching orders through encrypted phone calls like a loving spy movie. There are plenty of "useful idiots" in the world who are in part manipulated or coerced by forces beyond their understanding or knowledge into doing poo poo that benefits said forces. They would still be an asset, in that case. They don't have to be willing or even aware that they are working to someone else's benefit. Basically, the idea that Tulsi Gabbard is working for herself, for the GOP, and for Russia are not mutually incompatible. It could be all three; it could be none of the three. That's why I am saying people shouldn't dismiss the possibility outright. But at the same time it's a catch-22 because it is a dangerous accusation that divides the Left at a challenging time, so we walk a thin line of purposeful ignorance or shrieking conspiracies. The former is dangerous because we might ignore something that is uncomfortable to stomach because it might be politically damaging to make accusations, but the latter has the opposite effect of smearing candidates and driving wedges between the various factions of the Left.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:18
|
|
|
Liberals are pushing russiagate (which the Tulsi thing is part of). “The left” is not
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
MinisterSinister posted:The political world as average citizens get to see is the tip of the iceberg: the larger, more dangerous unseen part still lurks below. Don't discount anything. What does the fact that a faction of the people doing all the dangerous unseen poo poo below are the ones screaming "RussiaRussiaRussia is behind everything" tell you
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
 So they're not denying that the serial killer endorsed Warren? They're just saying that they were wrong to put him on the list of Obama staffers backing Warren because he was a bundler rather than a staffer? It is incredible how bad the Warren campaign is at this poo poo. How the gently caress did they see the inquiries coming in from reporters and still not bother to read past the first paragraph of his Wikipedia page? MinisterSinister posted:I'd argue you're a moron for discounting the possibility. It explains her more baffling stances on things like Assad that don't line up to any coherent strategy, and I simply don't buy "she's just stupid lol" as a good enough explanation. There's nothing baffling at all about Gabbard's support for Assad. She's a dedicated Islamophobe who absolutely loves it when secular fascists start purging Muslims. Most of Gabbard's positions are easily explainable by her being a diehard cultural conservative at heart, who only moved away from the right because being a Republican is a political death sentence in liberal Hawaii. The rest of them can be explained by her personal life and upbringing, which doesn't exactly fit into the average good old boy white conservative mold. Frankly, even if she is a Russian asset who's taking orders directly from proxies of the Russian government, so what? There's plenty of candidates and prominent legislators in both parties following orders from the Israeli government, the Saudi government, the Venezuelan rebels, and so on. An inherent bit of racism in the "Russian asset" argument is that Russian influence is treated as uniquely bad in a way that other countries aren't, so that there's no need to discuss what the candidate is supposedly being influenced to do or what Russia's interests actually are - the word "Russian" is enough to brand it as automatically undesirable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:27
|
|
|
Uhm excuse me sir you pointed out that Israel is a state with national interests this is v antisemetic
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:29
|
|
|
MinisterSinister posted:I do think people fail to understand the term "asset" though. Like, there's a difference between saying "Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian asset" and "Tulsi Gabbard is literally paid and groomed by Russia", the latter of which was the claim that Hillary made, and I will admit is quite absurd. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:30
|
|
|
The serial killer is a Buttigieg endorser, and no, Buttigieg is not apologizing for his supporters.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:31
|
|
|
MinisterSinister posted:Yeah I guess you're right -New Red Scare and all that business probably isn't a good thing. That's all well and good except that virtually nobody actually uses the term with all this careful explanation involved, but rather as a shorthand implication that someone is actually controlled by the wily Slav, and secondly, even if they did the definition is so overbroad as to become meaningless. Either way it's a dumb line that should be mocked whenever it's trotted out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:42
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:That's all well and good except that virtually nobody actually uses the term with all this careful explanation involved, yeah there'd be no arguments if every time someone called Tulsi a Russian asset they diligently clarified the benign and incredibly broad meaning they're attaching to that term, but of course since the purpose is to make insinuations to drive fear and hysteria and only fall back to the well-technically definition when challenged, that never happens lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 22:57
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Frankly, even if she is a Russian asset who's taking orders directly from proxies of the Russian government, so what? There's plenty of candidates and prominent legislators in both parties following orders from the Israeli government, the Saudi government, the Venezuelan rebels, and so on. An inherent bit of racism in the "Russian asset" argument is that Russian influence is treated as uniquely bad in a way that other countries aren't, so that there's no need to discuss what the candidate is supposedly being influenced to do or what Russia's interests actually are - the word "Russian" is enough to brand it as automatically undesirable. I think that stems from the supposed connections to Trump's campaign that the Russians had (therefore being associated with Russia is shorthand for being associated with Trump), but it's also because those other influencers you listed have goals in mind that don't involve, y'know, the collapse of the American world order and the suffering of our nation. Israel wants US approval and support so it can keep doing... what it's doing in Palestine, and Saudi Arabia wants US support so that Iran doesn't escalate things with them further. Both nations have self-preservation as their main goal in their political involvement in the US, and that is debatably not as bad as what Russia wants. Again, it is a fact that Russia interfered in the 2016 elections specifically with the intent of introducing damaging radicalism on both sides of the political spectrum. It doesn't take a genius to guess why. They hope that this increasing radicalism will drive the United States apart and cause us to lose our status as global superpower, creating a power vacuum that Russia can exploit to return to its former glory. I wouldn't be surprised if Putin dreams of a Second American Civil War. Israel, Saudi Arabia, the Venezeulan opposition, and even China have a lot to lose if America falls apart. The only nations that might gain are Russia, Iran, North Korea, and maybe many Latin American countries. That is why Russian influence is considered worse than the others: their goal is harming America, not protecting themselves. VitalSigns posted:yeah there'd be no arguments if every time someone called Tulsi a Russian asset they diligently clarified the benign and incredibly broad meaning they're attaching to that term, but of course since the purpose is to make insinuations to drive fear and hysteria and only fall back to the well-technically definition when challenged, that never happens lol Well for future reference, if I do use a term like "asset", I am using it to mean this. Basically, "asset" can cover everything from "actual spy" to "useful idiot". So if I say Trump is a Russian asset, I don't literally mean Putin pays him, I just mean he is someone who is possibly being manipulated by/used by Russia or is doing things for their benefit, whether he realizes it or not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 23:01
|
|
|
Greta Thunberg is a Russian asset as addressing the devastating climate crisis will ensure a more secure and comfortable future for Vladimir to live in, thereby benefiting him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
It was, specifically, the buff bernie picture which caused hildawg to lose the ec by 80000 votes Russian meme technology is a global threat
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 23:14
|
|
|
defining the term "asset" such that everyone saying "it looks like the Iraq war is a bad idea and is going badly" was an Al Queda asset is really loving dumb, op
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 23:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 18:23 |
|
|
MinisterSinister posted:Again, it is a fact that Russia interfered in the 2016 elections specifically with the intent of introducing damaging radicalism on both sides of the political spectrum. Just because something is a fact doesn't mean that that fact is (a) meaningful or (b) something to care about. Bank of America "meddled" in the 2016 elections more than did Russia
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 23:16
|
|