Jump to content

hpslugga

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3307
  • Joined

Posts posted by hpslugga

  1. 47 minutes ago, Smax said:
    8 hours ago, Thetexashammer said:
    Show me where I "approved" of anything. If you know how to read, you understand that none of it is morally acceptable and that's exactly what I said. However, as a TDS sufferer, and I have to keep saying, you lack the ability to understand english. So I will repeat my statement.
    There have been lots of bad people who were presidents. Probably most of them. Didn't like it when Clinton was President, don't like it now. 
    Everyone agrees Trump isn't a good guy. Why won't you take yes for an answer? He's obviously a dirt bag. We would be completely in agreement about how despicable he is if you didn't go crazy with fake, over the top politicized bullshit. 
    You and your fellow TDS sufferers are going to get Trump reelected. Use your brain, the constant stream of unhinged hatred, Russia hoaxes, impeachment porn, and the never ending drumbeat of race baiting isn't a good look and won't get a Dem elected. It's makes the left look ridiculous.

    Read more  

    Ignore them as there is no reasoning with them. If you arent a far left socialist ready to tear down what this country was built upon you're a racists

    That’s just another word/concept that you haven’t the foggiest clue what it means. You’re bullshitting and not very good at concealing it, either.

  2. 1 hour ago, Message Board User said:

     

    Liz Cheney’s views are her father’s. It reminds me of when Pat Dye said of Condi Rice, when learning she’d be on the CFP Committee “the only thing she knows about football is what someone else told her.”

    The only thing Liz Cheney knows about politics is what her father told her. AOC isn’t questioning her right to speak like Cotton is with that insipid first paragraph. She’s contesting, as I am, the idea that Liz is an “independent woman.” She may be on a number of fronts, but political opinion is not one of them.

    In deference to Mr. Cotton, Liz’ shit is a learned behavior. His being completely incapable of rendering a single correct/honest statement is genetic. It has to be. He does this shit on a pathological level. His whole life is an inverse version of that scene in Liar Liar where Jim Carrey is trying to say that a blue pen is red. In this case, Cotton wants to say that the blue pen is blue, but the word “red” keeps escaping his mouth.

  3. 7 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

    This article contains a curious photo, I think.   

    https://medium.com/@TheDemCoalition/lindsey-graham-russian-oil-money-a-campaign-finance-scandal-f0ef9442ef2a

    It's a photo of Lindsay Graham, Russian oligarch Len Blavatnik, and none other than Alan Dershowitz at something called the Len Blavatnik Awards for Young Scientists in 2016.

    0*TaUNe5QFMr4LPVu3

     

     

     

     

     











     

    Nothing to see there.

    And I don’t even say that regarding the Russian. Being around Dershowitz is bad enough

  4. 2 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

    Ideas are great, but one of the things I look for in a candidate is whether or not they seem Presidential.  Bernie doesn't fit the bill for me...Warren does. 

    To me, Bernie is the left's version of Ron Paul.

     

    What does this even mean?

  5. 9 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

    Enough times that some believe the recession began in 2008 instead of 2007, which is information that Fox helped spread. 

    Even if the 2008 thing was true, that doesn't explain how Obama could be responsible as his first inauguration was in January of 2009. I don't follow Fox all that closely anymore as they're just 24/7 falderal, but if that's what they're really pushing, they're either A) dumber B) more cynical C) all of the above than I previously understood.

  6. 10 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

    Did Dotard promise Lindsay a good buggering?

    That guy truly is the mascot of that chickenshit organization. If he were in a men's locker room, he'd be whistling Stranger in Paradise.

  7. 21 minutes ago, NowThis said:

    1988 went back more towards to normal though 

     

    1988_large.png

     

    That’s because the country had just begun to open its eyes to what a repulsive nightmare the Reagan years really were. 

    Why else do you think 1992 swung far more dramatically than 1988 other than the fact that HW was basically running as a 4th term of Ronald Reagan? 

    When Reagan’s critics speak, they speak of the actual guy and the actual president.

    When his supporters speak of him, they’re remembering the mythology. They remember the brave cowboy who talked about “Morning in America,” the guy who championed the absolutely abhorrent economic policy known as Trickle Down, the guy who said that the Contras in Nicaragua were following in the footsteps of America’s founding fathers, or as you parroted not too long ago, the so-called “liberator of Grenada.”

    That shit was man-made mythology and there wasn’t a word of truth to it. When you cite the 1984 election, the evidence you’re submitting is known as sanity-by-consensus.

  8. 23 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

    So a thread in 2019 about what Ronald Reagan said to Richard Nixon 50 years ago has devolved into sniping about the existence of God, debating the legacy of Washington/Lincoln, and positing an alternative timeline where Jimmy Carter runs a peanut plantation via slave labor.

    Sounds about right.

    Don't forget what precipitated the god stuff: the idea that "making Iran great again" means returning it to the time of 2,500 years ago.

  9. 58 minutes ago, Born to Run said:

    There is a God 

     

    1 hour ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

    God said I will bless those that bless Israel and curse those who curse it. 

    It is dishonest to assert as fact that which is either not evidently true or evidently not true.

  10. 1 hour ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

    PAAIA  like the NIAC are paid agents of the Islamic Republic and have no legitimacy. Take a look at the most popular Iranian opposition leader. #RESTART IRAN. MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN.

    I'd be delighted to know exactly when this was.

  11. 3 hours ago, NowThis said:

    he did liberate Grenada

    He didn't "liberate" jack shit. That was a 1953-Iran-style war crime and just about everyone who followed it at the time knew it. Grenada had a population of about 100K, produced a little nutmeg, no one could find it on a map, etc. They underwent a very mild social revolution, and then the twits hit the fan. They sold the action on the idea that if Moscow decided to attack Western Europe, a hostile Grenada could interdict the oil that flowed from there to Europe and we wouldn’t be able to defend our allies (paraphrasing John Vessey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time). It was as fictitious as was "need" of our intervention in Nicaragua on the grounds that "the Sandinistas are a two-day jeep drive away from Harlingen, TX" and in inevitably doing so were "re-writing the script from Mein Kampf." Everything Reagan did in Latin America was sold with a steaming pile of horseshit.

    • Like 4
  12. 1 hour ago, elfenix said:

    six years after we finally got the fuck out of vietnam, we were going to invade another country halfway around the world to prop up another puppet dictator?  that's totally reasonable.

    Not only that, Ike and his CIA were responsible for setting off that whole chain of events in motion. It's easy to play Make Believe by pretending that Iran's "issues" started in a vacuum in 1979, but that revolution was 26 years in the making, was set off by a Republican administration, exacerbated by 2 Democrats and 2 more Republicans before Carter even took the oath of office. It's beyond dishonest to lay the blame of Iran opting for a theocracy on the shoulders of Jimmy Carter. 

    Icono can make any dishonest excuse he fancies, but he cannot escape this one fact: the only reason any of us even remotely know of the name Ruhollah Mūsavi Khomeini is because a legitimately democratically elected government was overthrown by the US and the UK and replaced by a vicious, brutal tyrant.

    • Like 2
  13. 4 hours ago, Tuco said:

    Have you heard his press secretary joking about AIDS as the epidemic was ramping up, killing Americans. Not a private conversation; it was in multiple press conferences, teasing reporters on why they would be concerned about a disease predominantly killing gay men.

    As bad as Trump is and as bad as Trumpkins are, we do need to step back, review recent history, and acknowledge progress.

    Trump is a step back from Reagan, and he was a nightmare.

    Reagan could at least hang his hat on the INF Treaty and the Simpson–Mazzoli Act. Trump has absolutely no skins on the wall, unless that "wall" is the imaginary Trump Wall that lies solely between the ears of emotionally arrested degenerates like Icono.

  14. 13 minutes ago, Js1 said:

    Rich white guy trying to challenge the scary socialists?

    Media: FUCK YES. 

    I was gonna say, why else does anyone think they framed the first question the way that they did?

    The thing is that Delaney, to the average voter, came off like Roman Reigns in the WWE last night: the establishment tried to force him down the public’s throat, and the audience seemed to react in the same way...as in they didn’t appreciate it. They’re trying to push him to the freaking moon, it’s not working, and if he doesn’t drop out by New Year’s, I will be impressed. 

    But this isn’t about Delaney. This is about the mainstream of corporate media. They may dislike Trump, but their political leanings (well to the right of the global center) haven’t changed a bit. 

    • Like 3
  15. 25 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

    So this guy is condemning the military, social security, medicare, US Mail and the interstate highway system?  That's fucked up bro. 

    Like I said, they have no idea what it is they’re condemning. This is a real life manifestation of Old Man Yells At Cloud

    • Like 1
  16. 1 minute ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

    Meh, he wasn't going to win that state anyway is how I look at it.

    That was the sentiment of my very first thought when I first heard of this: "Meh. Wake me up when Abbot does it for Texas."

  17. 9 minutes ago, retread said:

     

    So they're introducing a resolution that condemns a broad range of political/economic systems, none of which do they have the slightest idea what they actually are?

    That's...cute. I suppose that on similar grounds, they'll condemn "climate science" since they also know oh so much about that too.

    • Like 1
  18. 3 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

    Remember when one of the rationalizations for Drill, Baby, Drill was energy independence that would free us from having to deal with unsavory actors in the Middle East?

    That was never a serious claim. I mean maybe it was by people like Sarah Palin, but not to people who know things.

  19. 7 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    The “republic” part of our democracy was supposed to be a safeguard against factions and the danger of pure partisan politics, at least according to Madison.

    Madison preferred the "republic part of the democracy" so as to act as a safeguard against the general population.

    "Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority."

     

    • Like 1
Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...