This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

In Trump Nation, the response to the lies about the Russians earned the response of Meh

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Guest


Guest
That doesn't parlay well for Democrats who are busy slinging so much mud and hoping something sticks that they have forgotten to realize that they aren't in power anymore and won't be for a very long time. The left and the mainstream media has an inclusive suicide pact that doesn't end well for them. Folks have caught on to the absolute tizzy fit being pitched by the party that rigged the election against Sanders for Hillary and the fact that they cannot accept the idea that their policies, aside from the inner cities, have been rejected wholesale by an America that withered away under the last commander-in-chief.

People want to say Trump is for the 1%. HAHHAHAH. How much wealth was gained under the last president for the 1% in the eight years prior to Trump? How many billionaires were made with Obama in charge?

No wars were ended by the last administration. There was just a pause between our sending troops for a bit and then it began ramping back up, yet if Trump shoots 60 cruise missiles, something another Democratic president once did years ago and almost wiped out the stockpile, then he is the devil?

We actually expanded our footprint across the world with combat troops and advisors in places most of you could not find without Google. Syria, Jordan, and some places in Southeast Asia are the simple places to find, but there is more and it was all done under the last administration.

And then there is Russia allegedly screwing with the elections. Really? Did some Russians come over here and persuade people to vote for Trump? Did they force people to vote under duress? Is it the fault of Trump that Hillary was so power hungry and money hungry that she used her position as Secretary of State to enrich her family at the cost of the entire world for what many believed would be favors owed as she ascended to the Presidency? It seems she and the Democrats overplayed their hands. Nobody wanted Hillary as President but establishment Democrats and people owed favors for the donations they made to a sham foundation that stole billions from a nation like Haiti in a dire time of need. The Democrats best shot was with Sanders who was brushed aside and then sucked up to Hillary on each debate saying, "...we're tired of the damn questions Madame Secretary." Well, the rest of America who put Trump into power is tired of the BS that began the day after Trump was elected. They are tired of the Democrats playing Americans off against each other with race and class warfare. Nothing in the Constitution claims that equal opportunity has to match an equal outcome.

Dems, if the army you are raising to try and subvert the government is made up of people living in their parents basement's who would rather play X-Box, PlayStation or need a safe space and you expect those to be the next version of Hitler's Brown Shirts (Antifa, Occupy, New Black Panthers, BLM...), this civil war you are fomenting will be over as soon as it starts. And yes, the Democratic party is fomenting a civil war due to the fact that they lost an election they should have won, but they ran the wrong candidate told to them by their establishment and the world powers who were owed favors by Hillary.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-country-on-leak-charges-meh/ar-BBBdpd1?li=AA5a8k&ocid=spartanntp

Good... learn nothing... ignore the populace... talk social justice but pander to the wealthy elite.

Great strategy comrade.

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:Good... learn nothing... ignore the populace... talk social justice but pander to the wealthy elite.

Great strategy comrade.



View user profile

Guest


Guest
This is funny.

Putin calls the political left "schizophrenic."


Complaining about what he said were signs of "political schizophrenia" in the United States, Putin said Trump was not being allowed to do his job properly.

"It's hard to imagine what else can these people who generate such nonsense and rubbish can dream up next," said Putin.

And finally,

"What surprises me is that they are shaking up the domestic political situation using anti-Russian slogans. Either they don't understand the damage they're doing to their own country, in which case they are simply stupid, or they understand everything, in which case they are dangerous and corrupt."

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-putin-idUSKCN18D1EA?il=0

Waiting wrote:That doesn't parlay well for Democrats who are busy slinging so much mud and hoping something sticks that they have forgotten to realize that they aren't in power anymore and won't be for a very long time.  The left and the mainstream media has an inclusive suicide pact that doesn't end well for them.  Folks have caught on to the absolute tizzy fit being pitched by the party that rigged the election against Sanders for Hillary and the fact that they cannot accept the idea that their policies, aside from the inner cities, have been rejected wholesale by an America that withered away under the last commander-in-chief.

People want to say Trump is for the 1%. HAHHAHAH. How much wealth was gained under the last president for the 1% in the eight years prior to Trump? How many billionaires were made with Obama in charge?

No wars were ended by the last administration. There was just a pause between our sending troops for a bit and then it began ramping back up, yet if Trump shoots 60 cruise missiles, something another Democratic president once did years ago and almost wiped out the stockpile, then he is the devil?

We actually expanded our footprint across the world with combat troops and advisors in places most of you could not find without Google.  Syria, Jordan, and some places in Southeast Asia are the simple places to find, but there is more and it was all done under the last administration.

And then there is Russia allegedly screwing with the elections.  Really? Did some Russians come over here and persuade people to vote for Trump? Did they force people to vote under duress?  Is it the fault of Trump that Hillary was so power hungry and money hungry that she used her position as Secretary of State to enrich her family at the cost of the entire world for what many believed would be favors owed as she ascended to the Presidency? It seems she and the Democrats overplayed their hands.  Nobody wanted Hillary as President but establishment Democrats and people owed favors for the donations they made to a sham foundation that stole billions from a nation like Haiti in a dire time of need. The Democrats best shot was with Sanders who was brushed aside and then sucked up to Hillary on each debate saying, "...we're tired of the damn questions Madame Secretary."  Well, the rest of America who put Trump into power is tired of the BS that began the day after Trump was elected.  They are tired of the Democrats playing Americans off against each other with race and class warfare.  Nothing in the Constitution claims that equal opportunity has to match an equal outcome.

Dems, if the army you are raising to try and subvert the government is made up of people living in their parents basement's who would rather play X-Box, PlayStation or need a safe space and you expect those to be the next version of Hitler's Brown Shirts (Antifa, Occupy, New Black Panthers, BLM...), this civil war you are fomenting will be over as soon as it starts. And yes, the Democratic party is fomenting a civil war due to the fact that they lost an election they should have won, but they ran the wrong candidate told to them by their establishment and the world powers who were owed favors by Hillary.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-country-on-leak-charges-meh/ar-BBBdpd1?li=AA5a8k&ocid=spartanntp


Here we go again, the same old reactionary drivel: HILLARY! OBAMA! OBAMA! HILLARY!  

Your comments about Russian interference in the election demonstrate a lack of understanding of what happened and what the controversy is. Imagine that.

The accusation that Democrats are trying to foment civil war is laughably absurd. Dissent is not anti-democratic: Democracy IS dissent. No dissent, no democracy.

Accusing Democrats of trying to subvert the government is so fundamentally an anti-democratic comment that it's prima facie evidence of the reactionary urge to create an authoritarian one-party state.

The Republican party went along with this doofus and now they're paying the price. He's toast and Hillary and Obama have nothing to do with it.

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/
Waiting wrote:This is funny.

Putin calls the political left "schizophrenic."


Complaining about what he said were signs of "political schizophrenia" in the United States, Putin said Trump was not being allowed to do his job properly.

"It's hard to imagine what else can these people who generate such nonsense and rubbish can dream up next," said Putin.

And finally,

"What surprises me is that they are shaking up the domestic political situation using anti-Russian slogans. Either they don't understand the damage they're doing to their own country, in which case they are simply stupid, or they understand everything, in which case they are dangerous and corrupt."

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-putin-idUSKCN18D1EA?il=0

PUTIN! You're using a Putin quote to buttress your pathetic argument?

MANY MUCH OUT LOUD LAUGHINGS!

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/
[quote="del.capslock"]Your comments about Russian interference in the election demonstrate a lack of understanding of what happened and what the controversy is. Imagine that.[quote]

Understanding? There's no understanding yet... and there likely won't be. Speculation isn't understanding.

Silly comrade... lol.

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:
del.capslock wrote:Your comments about Russian interference in the election demonstrate a lack of understanding of what happened and what the controversy is. Imagine that.


Understanding? There's no understanding yet... and there likely won't be. Speculation isn't understanding.

Silly comrade... lol.

No understanding, huh?

Are you familiar with The National Review, the conservative, semi-monthly magazine? It's been referred to as "the bible of American conservatism".

Well, they had an article in one of their issues. Do you know what I mean when I say article in a magazine? Usually that's a piece of written prose about a particular subject. It has lots of words.

In the ones grown-ups read, in order to understand what all the words mean, the reading comprehension skills required may exceed those of a fifth-grade child, so I suppose you're not really very familiar with them.

In this grown-up magazine, The National Review, they had an article called "A Beginner’s Guide to the Trump/Russia Controversy".

In that article--ask a grown-up to read it to you--there was a section about the recent election sub-titled "Well, if the Russians didn't "hack" the election, what did they do?"

In that section, there were these words:

"They sowed confusion and chaos, and there’s strong evidence (according to multiple intelligence agencies) that they ultimately sought to help Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton. Their most infamous move was the theft of e-mails from the Democratic National Committee, which were likely passed to WikiLeaks before becoming the basis of a slow drip of damaging information about Clinton and the Democratic party released into the news cycle.

"At the same time, Russia was allegedly using “trolls” and “bots” to impact the news cycle by creating artificial “surges” of commentary online. They also used propaganda outlets such as RT to try to affect the national debate, and intentionally tried to plant certain ideas and themes into the American electorate’s consciousness, including the notion that the election was “rigged” against Trump (a theme Trump himself picked up)."

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446339/donald-trump-russia-2016-election-controversy-explained

So, see, little PkrBoy, there really is understanding of what happened. And it doesn't matter if it affected the outcome of the election, it's the fact that it happened that is so bad.

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/
Cliff notes? What are you... seagoat2?

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:Cliff notes? What are you... seagoat2?


Aw, does little PkrBoy not really have any comments to refute my post?

Poor little PkrBoy, I think it must be your nap time. You're getting all cranky and not making much sense.

Now, go lay down, little PkrBoy, and let the grown-ups talk.

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/

Guest


Guest
del.capslock wrote:
Waiting wrote:That doesn't parlay well for Democrats who are busy slinging so much mud and hoping something sticks that they have forgotten to realize that they aren't in power anymore and won't be for a very long time.  The left and the mainstream media has an inclusive suicide pact that doesn't end well for them.  Folks have caught on to the absolute tizzy fit being pitched by the party that rigged the election against Sanders for Hillary and the fact that they cannot accept the idea that their policies, aside from the inner cities, have been rejected wholesale by an America that withered away under the last commander-in-chief.

People want to say Trump is for the 1%. HAHHAHAH. How much wealth was gained under the last president for the 1% in the eight years prior to Trump? How many billionaires were made with Obama in charge?

No wars were ended by the last administration. There was just a pause between our sending troops for a bit and then it began ramping back up, yet if Trump shoots 60 cruise missiles, something another Democratic president once did years ago and almost wiped out the stockpile, then he is the devil?

We actually expanded our footprint across the world with combat troops and advisors in places most of you could not find without Google.  Syria, Jordan, and some places in Southeast Asia are the simple places to find, but there is more and it was all done under the last administration.

And then there is Russia allegedly screwing with the elections.  Really? Did some Russians come over here and persuade people to vote for Trump? Did they force people to vote under duress?  Is it the fault of Trump that Hillary was so power hungry and money hungry that she used her position as Secretary of State to enrich her family at the cost of the entire world for what many believed would be favors owed as she ascended to the Presidency? It seems she and the Democrats overplayed their hands.  Nobody wanted Hillary as President but establishment Democrats and people owed favors for the donations they made to a sham foundation that stole billions from a nation like Haiti in a dire time of need. The Democrats best shot was with Sanders who was brushed aside and then sucked up to Hillary on each debate saying, "...we're tired of the damn questions Madame Secretary."  Well, the rest of America who put Trump into power is tired of the BS that began the day after Trump was elected.  They are tired of the Democrats playing Americans off against each other with race and class warfare.  Nothing in the Constitution claims that equal opportunity has to match an equal outcome.

Dems, if the army you are raising to try and subvert the government is made up of people living in their parents basement's who would rather play X-Box, PlayStation or need a safe space and you expect those to be the next version of Hitler's Brown Shirts (Antifa, Occupy, New Black Panthers, BLM...), this civil war you are fomenting will be over as soon as it starts. And yes, the Democratic party is fomenting a civil war due to the fact that they lost an election they should have won, but they ran the wrong candidate told to them by their establishment and the world powers who were owed favors by Hillary.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-country-on-leak-charges-meh/ar-BBBdpd1?li=AA5a8k&ocid=spartanntp


Here we go again, the same old reactionary drivel: HILLARY! OBAMA! OBAMA! HILLARY!  

.

Unfortunately, it is quite relevant.

Guest


Guest
del.capslock wrote:
PkrBum wrote:
del.capslock wrote:Your comments about Russian interference in the election demonstrate a lack of understanding of what happened and what the controversy is. Imagine that.


Understanding? There's no understanding yet... and there likely won't be. Speculation isn't understanding.

Silly comrade... lol.

No understanding, huh?

Are you familiar with The National Review, the conservative, semi-monthly magazine? It's been referred to as "the bible of American conservatism".

Well, they had an article in one of their issues. Do you know what I mean when I say article in a magazine? Usually that's a piece of written prose about a particular subject. It has lots of words.

In the ones grown-ups read, in order to understand what all the words mean, the reading comprehension skills required may exceed those of a fifth-grade child, so I suppose you're not really very familiar with them.

In this grown-up magazine, The National Review, they had an article called "A Beginner’s Guide to the Trump/Russia Controversy".

In that article--ask a grown-up to read it to you--there was a section about the recent election sub-titled "Well, if the Russians didn't "hack" the election, what did they do?"

In that section, there were these words:

"They sowed confusion and chaos, and there’s strong evidence (according to multiple intelligence agencies) that they ultimately sought to help Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton. Their most infamous move was the theft of e-mails from the Democratic National Committee, which were likely passed to WikiLeaks before becoming the basis of a slow drip of damaging information about Clinton and the Democratic party released into the news cycle.

"At the same time, Russia was allegedly using “trolls” and “bots” to impact the news cycle by creating artificial “surges” of commentary online. They also used propaganda outlets such as RT to try to affect the national debate, and intentionally tried to plant certain ideas and themes into the American electorate’s consciousness, including the notion that the election was “rigged” against Trump (a theme Trump himself picked up)."

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446339/donald-trump-russia-2016-election-controversy-explained

So, see, little PkrBoy, there really is understanding of what happened. And it doesn't matter if it affected the outcome of the election, it's the fact that it happened that is so bad.

Given that 99% of the mainstream media is liberal leaning, are you saying that the liberal side participated in ensuring Hillary wasn't elected? That's rich.

Waiting wrote:
Given that 99% of the mainstream media is liberal leaning, are you saying that the liberal side participated in ensuring Hillary wasn't elected? That's rich.

A little touched in the brainpan, aren't ya?

"99% of the mainstream media is liberal leaning"??

Hahahahaha ...

No Poindexter, 99% of the mainstream media is profit-driven, corporatist leaning.

Thus the astounding amount of free press given to Trump, and thus the remarkable disparity of time spent on the Clinton email non-story compared to all policy discussions combined.

Welcome to reality.


View user profile
Waiting wrote:
Given that 99% of the mainstream media is liberal leaning, are you saying that the liberal side participated in ensuring Hillary wasn't elected? That's rich.

99%, huh? How about backing that up with some facts.

This is more bullshit from the right. They're nothing but a bunch of crybabies squealing that "things aren't fair!"

Talk's cheap, asshole. Now back it up with hard evidence.

And hurry it up, mommy's coming home and you know she doesn't like it when you use her computer without permission.

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/

Guest


Guest
Sal wrote:
Waiting wrote:
Given that 99% of the mainstream media is liberal leaning, are you saying that the liberal side participated in ensuring Hillary wasn't elected? That's rich.

A little touched in the brainpan, aren't ya?

"99% of the mainstream media is liberal leaning"??

Hahahahaha ...

No Poindexter, 99% of the mainstream media is profit-driven, corporatist leaning.

Thus the astounding amount of free press given to Trump, and thus the remarkable disparity of time spent on the Clinton email non-story compared to all policy discussions combined.

Welcome to reality.



Wrong answer.

Guest


Guest
del.capslock wrote:
Waiting wrote:
Given that 99% of the mainstream media is liberal leaning, are you saying that the liberal side participated in ensuring Hillary wasn't elected? That's rich.

99%, huh? How about backing that up with some facts.

This is more bullshit from the right. They're nothing but a bunch of crybabies squealing that "things aren't fair!"

Talk's cheap, asshole. Now back it up with hard evidence.

And hurry it up, mommy's coming home and you know she doesn't like it when you use her computer without permission.

With Fox gone to the liberals, it's almost 100%. There are no conservative news organizations. Especially on TV where most of you folks get your propaganda.

Waiting wrote:
del.capslock wrote:
Waiting wrote:
Given that 99% of the mainstream media is liberal leaning, are you saying that the liberal side participated in ensuring Hillary wasn't elected? That's rich.

99%, huh? How about backing that up with some facts.

This is more bullshit from the right. They're nothing but a bunch of crybabies squealing that "things aren't fair!"

Talk's cheap, asshole. Now back it up with hard evidence.

And hurry it up, mommy's coming home and you know she doesn't like it when you use her computer without permission.

With Fox gone to the liberals, it's almost 100%. There are no conservative news organizations. Especially on TV where most of you folks get your propaganda.

Not to worry, kid. You'll still have right-wing crazy drivel like OpsLens and SilenceIsConsent to amuse you. Fake news is better than no news at all, eh?

Your suckbuddy Trump is toast. Rosenstein just appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as Special Counsel to investigate the Trump/Russia debacle.

Buh-bye, sonny boy.

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/

Guest


Guest
del.capslock wrote:
Waiting wrote:
del.capslock wrote:
Waiting wrote:
Given that 99% of the mainstream media is liberal leaning, are you saying that the liberal side participated in ensuring Hillary wasn't elected? That's rich.

99%, huh? How about backing that up with some facts.

This is more bullshit from the right. They're nothing but a bunch of crybabies squealing that "things aren't fair!"

Talk's cheap, asshole. Now back it up with hard evidence.

And hurry it up, mommy's coming home and you know she doesn't like it when you use her computer without permission.

With Fox gone to the liberals, it's almost 100%. There are no conservative news organizations. Especially on TV where most of you folks get your propaganda.

Not to worry, kid. You'll still have right-wing crazy drivel like OpsLens and SilenceIsConsent to amuse you. Fake news is better than no news at all, eh?

Your suckbuddy Trump is toast. Rosenstein just appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as Special Counsel to investigate the Trump/Russia debacle.

Buh-bye, sonny boy.

Must have renewed that Xanax script with how giddy you are.

Wow, look at all the horseshit.

It's got everything -- the "rigged against Sanders" horseshit, the "America withered away under Obama" horseshit (and whoo, that is a big fucking pile if you've, y'know, actually compared the real data on anything), the jab at "inner cities" (sucks that ya can't say the n-word anymore, doesn't it?). Then there's the stuff about Russia "allegedly" screwing with elections (like that's still in any doubt), the "no one wanted Hillary as president" horseshit (because the 3 million more who voted for her are all illegals -- Donnie The Liar says so!), the "Democrats are doing race and class warfare" horseshit, the "Democrats are the real Nazis" horseshit, and, of course, the "all Democrats live in their parents' basement and play video games all day" horseshit. And, my absolute favorite, the "civil war will be over in no time because Dems are all weak and unarmed" fantasy horseshit.

It's gonna be hilarious, seeing the look on somebody's face when they actually show up at my house in their neo-Confederate uniform for their "drag the liberals to the curb and kill 'em" pogrom when they get a look at what they'll be staring down the barrel of. Smile Too bad I won't get to look at it long.

You keep right on believin' the stuff you're belivin', budreaux. You're fighting cardboard characters you've made up in your own mind, and have no freakin' idea about reality. And, according to Sun Tzu, that fast-tracks you for losing.

Provided you are that dumb, for reals, and this isn't just some chain-yankin' character you're playing online to provoke a reaction, In which case, well played.

If you actually do believe all that stuff, though, I know a certain exiled Nigerian prince who's just gonna love you. But, if you voted for Trump, I'm sure that prince already has your simple ass on speed dial.

View user profile
zsomething wrote:Wow, look at all the horseshit.  

It's got everything  -- the "rigged against Sanders" horseshit, the "America withered away under Obama" horseshit (and whoo, that is a big fucking pile if you've, y'know, actually compared the real data on anything), the jab at "inner cities" (sucks that ya can't say the n-word anymore, doesn't it?).   Then there's the stuff about Russia "allegedly" screwing with elections (like that's still in any doubt), the "no one wanted Hillary as president" horseshit (because the 3 million more who voted for her are all illegals -- Donnie The Liar says so!), the "Democrats are doing race and class warfare" horseshit, the "Democrats are the real Nazis" horseshit, and, of course, the "all Democrats live in their parents' basement and play video games all day" horseshit.  And, my absolute favorite, the "civil war will be over in no time because Dems are all weak and unarmed" fantasy horseshit.  

It's gonna be hilarious, seeing the look on somebody's face when they actually show up at my house in their neo-Confederate uniform for their "drag the liberals to the curb and kill 'em" pogrom when they get a look at what they'll be staring down the barrel of. Smile  Too bad I won't get to look at it long.

You keep right on believin' the stuff you're belivin', budreaux.   You're fighting cardboard characters you've made up in your own mind, and have no freakin' idea about reality.  And, according to Sun Tzu, that fast-tracks you for losing.

Provided you are that dumb, for reals, and this isn't just some chain-yankin' character you're playing online to provoke a reaction,  In which case, well played.

If you actually do believe all that stuff, though, I know a certain exiled Nigerian prince who's just gonna love you.   But, if you voted for Trump, I'm sure that prince already has your simple ass on speed dial.

YEAH! What he said!

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/
Sooo... the talkingpoint now is that the dnc didn't rig against Sanders... the dem party flourished under Obama... that Hillary is just shy of mother Teresa... that there is no "social justice" agenda... that the dems created the kkk but the pubs are to blame for racism... etc. Good work comrades... lol.

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:Sooo... the talkingpoint now is that the dnc didn't rig against Sanders... the dem party flourished under Obama... that Hillary is just shy of mother Teresa... that there is no "social justice" agenda... that the dems created the kkk but the pubs are to blame for racism... etc. Good work comrades... lol.

Nah, not a talking point, just what I think about things.

Nope, things weren't "rigged" against Sanders. It was a hotly contested primary, both sides fought hard (and sometimes a little nasty), and more people voted for Hillary than Bernie. That's not "rigging," that's the breaks.

I don't know if the Dem party flourished under Obama, but the country sure as hell did. The stock market doubled, health care coverage increased greatly, unemployment dropped, there were no major terrorist attacks on our soil, etc.

I never said Hillary was just shy of Mother Teresa. That's totally your invention. Hillary's a politician and often a dirty fighter, but, it's a dirty game. Nobody "clean" is going to get anywhere, in either party. That may suck, but, reality doesn't owe it to anybody to be "nice." I'd never say Hillary was a saint, but she was competent and easily a better choice than Trump. Granted, that's a low bar to hurdle, but, she'd clear it with stratosphere to spare.

What ya got against social justice, anyway? I get it that "social justice warriors" can be annoying in their methods, but being against social justice is a pretty hard position to defend, unless you just revel in being an asshole. And, maybe you do, I don't know.

Okay, the "Dems created the KKK" thing again. Do I really have to recount the history of the South for yet another Republican? This is just a trick to make me spend a lot of time typing, isn't it? But, okay, here we go, Reader's Digest condensed version: back in the day, the two parties were not as identified with "conservative" and "liberal" as they are now. The South -- due to the Republicans under Lincoln stopping slavery (which was what that war was about, unfortunately for our history) -- was staunchly yellow-dog Democratic. And it was, as always, extremely conservative. Conservatives started the Klan. They happened to be in the Democratic party at the time, yeah. When the Civil Rights era started, the conservative Southern Democrats were opposed to it, and the Northern Democrats -- who were more liberal -- were in favor of Civil Rights. This pissed off the Democrats in the South, who felt betrayed by their party, so they tried to form the "Dixiecrat" party. They soon found out they weren't going to get anywhere with that, and, since Republicans were courting them by mostly being anti-Civil Rights (as they apparently still are, given your disdain for "social justice"), they saw that to have any power, they'd have to start voting Republican. And, so they did. Rather than understand that the KKK was a conservative thing, they just point fingers at the Democrats and hope their voters are too frickin' stupid to bother looking at the real history. And, since it fits your agenda that "Democrats are the KKK," you don't... even if it makes you look just a wee bit moronic to simultaneously try to snark at me with stuff against social justice and smears of being KKK-ish.

You can drag up ol' Robert Byrd if ya want, that's fine, but if you do, we're gonna bring out Richard Spencer and the whole alt-right Hitler-heilin' neo-Nazi movement and put that around your neck, a'ight? Sound fair? 'Ciz it is. You gonna decry those bastards... or are you just gonna giggle about "social justice" and feel like you're keeping up in any way a'tall?

And, by the way, you don't get to call anybody "comrade" when your party's the one enabling the Ruskies and you're defending 'em for doing it, there, Red. My party, I'm proud to say, is the one holding Putin accountable. So, sorry, I'm not accepting any "comrades" from the likes o' you.

View user profile

Guest


Guest
zsomething wrote:
PkrBum wrote:Sooo... the talkingpoint now is that the dnc didn't rig against Sanders... the dem party flourished under Obama... that Hillary is just shy of mother Teresa... that there is no "social justice" agenda... that the dems created the kkk but the pubs are to blame for racism... etc. Good work comrades... lol.

Nah, not a talking point, just what I think about things.

Nope, things weren't "rigged" against Sanders. It was a hotly contested primary, both sides fought hard (and sometimes a little nasty), and more people voted for Hillary than Bernie. That's not "rigging," that's the breaks.

.

Well, here's where I call baloney-

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-clinton-sanders-democrats-20160516-snap-story.html

Hillary Clinton keeps losing. So how come she's winning?

zsomething wrote:
PkrBum wrote:Sooo... the talkingpoint now is that the dnc didn't rig against Sanders... the dem party flourished under Obama... that Hillary is just shy of mother Teresa... that there is no "social justice" agenda... that the dems created the kkk but the pubs are to blame for racism... etc. Good work comrades... lol.

Nah, not a talking point, just what I think about things.

Nope, things weren't "rigged" against Sanders.  It was a hotly contested primary, both sides fought hard (and sometimes a little nasty), and more people voted for Hillary than Bernie.  That's not "rigging," that's the breaks.

You may want to catch up on the wikileaks of podesta's emails. It's clear that the primary was rigged.

http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com

View user profile

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum