Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

Yeah, that's not how this all works. 

On what authority does the President rely in justifying our role in supporting the genocide in Yemen?  

Posted
Just now, jimmyjazz said:

Dear Aaron,

Nixon was never impeached.

Signed,

People Who Remember History 

This is silly nitpicking that totally ignores the actual point being made.  Don't be such a dullard, jimmyjazz.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

This is silly nitpicking that totally ignores the actual point being made.  Don't be such a dullard, jimmyjazz.

Well, there's some irony for you.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
27 minutes ago, TornACL said:

We're up to 41 tweets or retweets this morning. 

Today could easily break his record if he keeps up this pace.  I think he retweeted something like 20+ times in one hour this morning.

Posted
9 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

 

As a former Republican, I'd love to know what does the Republican Party stand for?  Because it ain't fiscal responsibility and smaller government (insert joke: it never has been).

  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

There was a point?

You don't find it disturbing that, in a country supposedly under a democratic government, it is more consequential to break into a hotel room than it is  to illegally slaughter innocents by the tens or hundreds of thousands?  That it is more consequential to ask a foreign official to dig up dirt on a political rival than it is to illegally abet genocide?  Murder and genocide seem to be more consequential for those killed, but I suppose their lives don't hold much value in our society.   

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
8 hours ago, Bruh Man said:

Just saw a cut up of Republican pols defending their king today on cable news. My question is, Trump has to have kompromat on the entire party right? My guess is if he goes down, he takes the entire party with him. 

Russian campaign contributions funneled through the NRA and elsewhere.  A lot of them have fed at that trough and they don't want it to come out.

  • Like 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, The People’s Elbow said:

Oh, the details and nuance are important now, are they?

Articles of impeachment had been accepted by the committee.  Had he not resigned he surely would have been impeached, and no one itt disputes that.  Responding to that tweet with "lol well actually he wasn't impeached" is silly and childish.  

  • Like 1
Posted
8 hours ago, Bruh Man said:

Just saw a cut up of Republican pols defending their king today on cable news. My question is, Trump has to have kompromat on the entire party right? My guess is if he goes down, he takes the entire party with him. 

They are all involved in some way.  

Posted
8 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

You don't find it disturbing that, in a country supposedly under a democratic government, it is more consequential to break into a hotel room than it is  to illegally slaughter innocents by the tens or hundreds of thousands?  That it is more consequential to ask a foreign official to dig up dirt on a political rival than it is to illegally abet genocide?  Murder and genocide seem to be more consequential for those killed, but I suppose their lives don't hold much value in our society.   

WTF does that have to do with anything? A democratic government can do all types of horrific shit to external countries and actors and still be a democracy.

When an elected government tries to prevent political opponents from challenging it, then that government ceases to be democratic.  It isn't "just influencing Ukraine to dig up dirt" or "just breaking into a hotel room." Those are the start of the slippery slope away from democracy. If we allow these actions, then the next steps of illegally arresting or killing political opponents is only right around the corner.  It's a delicate balance that keeps our social compact intact. 

Posted
12 minutes ago, kevwun said:

Russian campaign contributions funneled through the NRA and elsewhere.  A lot of them have fed at that trough and they don't want it to come out.

Nope.  It's going to come back to the money.  It always does.  

Posted
14 minutes ago, kevwun said:

Russian campaign contributions funneled through the NRA and elsewhere.  A lot of them have fed at that trough and they don't want it to come out.

That, and they know he could take the GOP down with him at the elections next year and in 2022.  "Hang together or hang separately" or something.

Posted
1 minute ago, Fozzz said:

Articles of impeachment had been accepted by the committee.  Had he not resigned he surely would have been impeached, and no one itt disputes that.  Responding to that tweet with "lol well actually he wasn't impeached" is silly and childish.  

Would you say it’s more or less silly than attempting to re-litigate the Vietnam War right now?  

  • Like 3
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, The People’s Elbow said:

Would you say it’s more or less silly than attempting to re-litigate the Vietnam War right now?  

What is there to re-litigate?  We murdered tens to hundreds of thousands of Cambodians in an illegal war that was largely responsible for bringing to power one of the most sadistic, blood thirsty regimes in human history.  Our involvement was known prior to Nixon's impeachment but yet only played a very minor role in Nixon's impeachment process.  

Edited by Fozzz
Posted
9 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

WTF does that have to do with anything? A democratic government can do all types of horrific shit to external countries and actors and still be a democracy.

When an elected government tries to prevent political opponents from challenging it, then that government ceases to be democratic.  It isn't "just influencing Ukraine to dig up dirt" or "just breaking into a hotel room." Those are the start of the slippery slope away from democracy. If we allow these actions, then the next steps of illegally arresting or killing political opponents is only right around the corner.  It's a delicate balance that keeps our social compact intact. 

It matters because what does it say about the values of a society that is unconcerned by the mass murder it routinely commits?  It's not like these things are kept secret.  Under an autocratic government the citizenry doesn't have a say and is thus not responsible for those crimes in the same way as the citizenry under a democratic government, which could theoretically put an immediate stop to it.  

Posted
1 minute ago, Fozzz said:

It matters because what does it say about the values of a society that is unconcerned by the mass murder it routinely commits?  It's not like these things are kept secret.  Under an autocratic government the citizenry doesn't have a say and is thus not responsible for those crimes in the same way as the citizenry under a democratic government, which could theoretically put an immediate stop to it.  

It says we are a bloodthirsty society with a complete disregard for "others." Again though, that has nothing to do with us being a democracy. As an electorate, we don't wanna stop the wars. 

Posted
30 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

You don't find it disturbing that, in a country supposedly under a democratic government, it is more consequential to break into a hotel room than it is  to illegally slaughter innocents by the tens or hundreds of thousands?  That it is more consequential to ask a foreign official to dig up dirt on a political rival than it is to illegally abet genocide?  Murder and genocide seem to be more consequential for those killed, but I suppose their lives don't hold much value in our society.   

In case you just woke up from a coma, we've been killing innocent citizens of foreign countries in the name of Freedom for over a century.  It's more American than Apple pie...which is actually German.

What isn't American is using the Office of the President to go after political rivals.

 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

It matters because what does it say about the values of a society that is unconcerned by the mass murder it routinely commits?  It's not like these things are kept secret.  Under an autocratic government the citizenry doesn't have a say and is thus not responsible for those crimes in the same way as the citizenry under a democratic government, which could theoretically put an immediate stop to it.  

Start a Vietnam war crimes thread. This is irrelevant. 

  • Like 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Jack Straw said:

Fear

Unjustified anger 

Racism 

Sexism 

Xenophobia

Hatred of others 

Victimization

Taking advantage of the less fortunate 

Cruelty

Cowardice

Pettiness and small-mindedness

Fake Christian zealotry 

Hypocrisy

Enjoyment of the suffering of others 

 

Fake Christian?  You mean the Golden Rule doesn't say "attack others before they can do something to you."?

Posted
37 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

You don't find it disturbing that, in a country supposedly under a democratic government, it is more consequential to break into a hotel room than it is  to illegally slaughter innocents by the tens or hundreds of thousands?  That it is more consequential to ask a foreign official to dig up dirt on a political rival than it is to illegally abet genocide?  Murder and genocide seem to be more consequential for those killed, but I suppose their lives don't hold much value in our society.   

Of course it's disturbing, and I would argue that most here were opposed to both actions. 

What is your ask here? To ignore the laws and rules of our democratic process because there are other examples where they were not followed? 

That is a ridiculous deflection. We should attack both types of lawlessness with equal vigor. 

Posted
Just now, FondrenRoad said:

Fake Christian?  You mean the Golden Rule doesn't say "attack others before they can do something to you."?

They attack others regardless. 

Posted
5 minutes ago, TornACL said:

Of course it's disturbing, and I would argue that most here were opposed to both actions. 

What is your ask here? To ignore the laws and rules of our democratic process because there are other examples where they were not followed? 

That is a ridiculous deflection. We should attack both types of lawlessness with equal vigor. 

But he's probably totally cool with keeping kids in cages for being born on the wrong side of the border.

Posted
1 minute ago, Pancho said:

How will our resident Trumpkins spin this?

 

Parents can afford iPhones but not pay for their kids lunches. Something like that. 

Posted
13 minutes ago, Pancho said:

How will our resident Trumpkins spin this?

 

"We cut taxes for the rich so the peasants could afford a Costco membership.  They can fucking bring their lunches!" 

Posted
3 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

They dont have to. Trumpkins don't give a shit about poor kids. 

This. One of my Trumpiest Facebook Uncles allegedly fudged his income for years so that his brood could chow down on free school lunches. Surely he’s celebrating this move and, without any sense of irony, bad-mouthing all those welfare cases that mooch off honest Americans.  

Trumpkins are the fucking worst.

Posted
28 minutes ago, Jack Straw said:

Fear

Unjustified anger 

Racism 

Sexism 

Xenophobia

Hatred of others 

Victimization

Taking advantage of the less fortunate 

Cruelty

Cowardice

Pettiness and small-mindedness

Fake Christian zealotry 

Hypocrisy

Enjoyment of the suffering of others

The opinions of the ignorant are just as valid as the opinions of the informed. 

Nothing is worth doing unless there's a profit to be made. 

Democracy is fine as long as you're in the majority but if you're in the minority then it must be subverted. 

Posted
26 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

Those kids need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps 

"He's trying to make it easier for them to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, because if they're hungry they'll be skinny and won't weigh as much!"

Posted
1 hour ago, kevwun said:

Russian campaign contributions funneled through the NRA and elsewhere.  A lot of them have fed at that trough and they don't want it to come out.

i know it's tin foil hat territory, but that russian nra money though

Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

i know it's tin foil hat territory, but that russian nra money though

It’s not tinfoil.  There is literally a Russian agent sitting in prison that infiltrated the NRA for the sole purpose of influencing the Republican Party.  It’s insane to think there wasn’t serious money involved in this relationship.

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...