Sign In

Register

Random Political comments...

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Bliss, Mar 6, 2013.

Page 167 of 395

Ra Well-Known Member
So the Real AmeriKKKan President has been very outspoken about the recent London bombing but yet has remained very silent about a recent terrorist act that took place in Oregon where a Make America Great Again Trump Supporter & known White Supremacist killed two men & wounded another for helping two women targeted by the MAGAT who he believed were Muslim. One of the men killed was a 20 year Army veteran.

Ra, Jun 4, 2017

#3321
- Like x 2
- List
Beasty Well-Known Member
Ra said: ↑

So the Real AmeriKKKan President has been very outspoken about the recent London bombing but yet has remained very silent about a recent terrorist act that took place in Oregon where a Make America Great Again Trump Supporter & known White Supremacist killed two men & wounded another for helping two women targeted by the MAGAT who he believed were Muslim. One of the men killed was a 20 year Army veteran.
Click to expand...

Rightwinger deflecting to Obama in 5, 4, 3......

Beasty, Jun 4, 2017

#3322
- Like x 2
- List
RicardoCooper Well-Known Member
Wait, what? Far-left messiah St. Bernie and his wife Jane lawyer up amid bank fraud charges? SAY IT AIN'T SO

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-...bi-investigation-for-bank-fraud-hire-lawyers/

RicardoCooper, Jun 26, 2017

#3323
- Funny x 1
- List
Ra Well-Known Member
RicardoCooper said: ↑

Wait, what? Far-left messiah St. Bernie and his wife Jane lawyer up amid bank fraud charges? SAY IT AIN'T SO

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-...bi-investigation-for-bank-fraud-hire-lawyers/

Click to expand...

But...but...that's from a mainstream media news source. You can't trust that. If it's not from some alternative information source like Bernie Is That Nigga.com or Fuck Them Dems News or Better Trump than Clinton Infosource.org they don't tell the truth.......

Ra, Jun 26, 2017

#3324
- Funny x 5
- List
RicardoCooper Well-Known Member
Ra said: ↑

But...but...that's from a mainstream media news source. You can't trust that. If it's not from some alternative information source like Bernie Is That Nigga.com or Fuck Them Dems News or Better Trump than Clinton Infosource.org they don't tell the truth.......
Click to expand...

Gettin the popcorn ready for the resident Bernie-Bots to either try to a) rationalize this shit or b) sidestep it altogether

RicardoCooper, Jun 26, 2017

#3325
- Like x 1
- List
andreboba Well-Known Member
Ra said: ↑

But...but...that's from a mainstream media news source. You can't trust that. If it's not from some alternative information source like Bernie Is That Nigga.com or Fuck Them Dems News or Better Trump than Clinton Infosource.org they don't tell the truth.......
Click to expand...

What I love avbout this newstory is that it shows Berniebots if he had won the Democratic primary, it was no lock he was going to defeat Trump.
The Right and the MSN would have gone after him just as hard as they did HRC and BHO, and painted him as an atheist, Zionist, Marxist commie to boot.

In fact I bet this is an 'old' news story within MSN.

andreboba, Jun 26, 2017

#3326
- Like x 1
- List
RicardoCooper Well-Known Member
andreboba said: ↑

What I love avbout this newstory is that it shows Berniebots if he had won the Democratic primary, it was no lock he was going to defeat Trump.
The Right and the MSN would have gone after him just as hard as they did HRC and BHO, and painted him as an atheist, Zionist, Marxist commie to boot.

In fact I bet this is an 'old' news story within MSN.
Click to expand...

Still crickets. Which is weird because head Bernie-Bot @The Dark King lives to argue and dispute and deconstruct everything under the sun but is strangely silent on this topic

Bueller????

RicardoCooper, Jun 27, 2017

#3327
- Funny x 1
- List
The Dark King Well-Known Member
RicardoCooper said: ↑

Still crickets. Which is weird because head Bernie-Bot @The Dark King lives to argue and dispute and deconstruct everything under the sun but is strangely silent on this topic

Bueller????
Click to expand...

Oh sorry if you haven't realized I'm out here caking but by all means keep thinking about me lol

Sorry your candidate had no integrity, no insight, and plain old was electable. Not once but twice she lost to inexperienced people. People don't trust her and for the record I voted for her, made me sick to my stomach but I did it know she was better than 45. I wanted a populus candidate, someone who fought for the people and had a record of it. Someone who didn't need to be convinced that the minimum wage should be higher, someone who understood the necessity for real healthcare reform and didn't let people hang the bullshit song of "how are you gonna pay for it" without challenge. But hey keep cheering for the DNC all they know how to do is lose, straight up losers who get NOTHING done.

The Dark King, Jun 27, 2017

#3328
- Like x 2
- Informative x 1
- List
RicardoCooper Well-Known Member

The Dark King said: ↑

Oh sorry if you haven't realized I'm out here caking but by all means keep thinking about me lol

Sorry your candidate had no integrity, no insight, and plain old was electable. Not once but twice she lost to inexperienced people. People don't trust her and for the record I voted for her, made me sick to my stomach but I did it know she was better than 45. I wanted a populus candidate, someone who fought for the people and had a record of it. Someone who didn't need to be convinced that the minimum wage should be higher, someone who understood the necessity for real healthcare reform and didn't let people hang the bullshit song of "how are you gonna pay for it" without challenge. But hey keep cheering for the DNC all they know how to do is lose, straight up losers who get NOTHING done.
Click to expand...

Nice speech but I notice you avoided the actual topic (as I knew you would). "Corrupt" HRC isn't under FBI investigation for bank fraud but your messiah and his wife are

RicardoCooper, Jun 27, 2017

#3329
The Dark King Well-Known Member
RicardoCooper said: ↑

Nice speech but I notice you avoided the actual topic (as I knew you would). "Corrupt" HRC isn't under FBI investigation for bank fraud but your messiah and his wife are

Click to expand...

You really want to play the investigation card? Lol

The Dark King, Jun 27, 2017

#3330
- Like x 2
- List
andreboba Well-Known Member
The Dark King said: ↑

Oh sorry if you haven't realized I'm out here caking but by all means keep thinking about me lol

Sorry your candidate had no integrity, no insight, and plain old was electable. Not once but twice she lost to inexperienced people. People don't trust her and for the record I voted for her, made me sick to my stomach but I did it know she was better than 45. I wanted a populus candidate, someone who fought for the people and had a record of it. Someone who didn't need to be convinced that the minimum wage should be higher, someone who understood the necessity for real healthcare reform and didn't let people hang the bullshit song of "how are you gonna pay for it" without challenge. But hey keep cheering for the DNC all they know how to do is lose, straight up losers who get NOTHING done.
Click to expand...

And yet the country would still be in a much better position with a Dem or HRC as POTUS than any GOP candidate.

HRC wasn't trying to dismantle the federal government so that the oligarachs and corporate powers were in absolute control of the future of the USA.
But I still give you props for holding your nose and voting for HRC in the general.

We need more pragmatists among the progressive movement who still understand the big picture.

HRC would have been the perfect pawn for the progressive movement and could have been FORCED to do whatever they wanted, or she risked being primaried by her OWN party in 2020.

(The enemy of my enemy is my friend......)

Not enough wisdom on the progressive side of politics nowadays, I'm afraid.

andreboba, Jun 27, 2017

#3331
- Like x 1
- List
The Dark King Well-Known Member

andreboba said: ↑

And yet the country would still be in a much better position with a Dem or HRC as POTUS than any GOP candidate.

HRC wasn't trying to dismantle the federal government so that the oligarachs and corporate powers were in absolute control of the future of the USA.
But I still give you props for holding your nose and voting for HRC in the general.

We need more pragmatists among the progressive movement who still understand the big picture.

HRC would have been the perfect pawn for the progressive movement and could have been FORCED to do whatever they wanted, or she risked being primaried by her OWN party in 2020.

(The enemy of my enemy is my friend......)

Not enough wisdom on the progressive side of politics nowadays, I'm afraid.
Click to expand...

No one said differently. I don't think anyone outside of Bliss would say differently

The Dark King, Jun 27, 2017

#3332
ColiBreh1 Well-Known Member

Fox News recently posted an article entitled, Conservative in Hollywood? Be a Democrat publicly, industry vet says.’ And the article is all about how, if you’re a conservative, you better keep your opinions to yourself, if you wanna work in Tinsel Town.
Click to expand...

ColiBreh1, Jun 27, 2017

#3333
ColiBreh1 Well-Known Member
https://www.facebook.com/groups/825116924174850/permalink/1588523491167519/

http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/29/media/greta-van-susteren-msnbc-out/index.html

ColiBreh1, Jun 29, 2017

#3334
- Funny x 1
- List
The Dark King Well-Known Member

ColiBreh1 said: ↑

Click to expand...

Holy fuck balls I never use the term privilege anymore because I've come to realize it's not a privilege to be blind to how oppression doesn't stop at people you don't like but I keep seeing how some people look at this shit as an academic not recognizing how corrosive the GOP is. They want to take away healthcare and leave millions to die just so already incredibly rich people get more money they don't need. They support oppressive laws that police only the poor demographic in this country. They take away school lunches from school children they make it illegal to feed the poor. This is textbook Voldermort, Darth Vader levels of evil and yet some people act like there are two sides to this shit. Smh

The Dark King, Jun 30, 2017

#3335
ColiBreh1 Well-Known Member
https://twitter.com/NYTmag/status/882706301587005442

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/05/...the-left-who-wants-to-be-liberal-anymore.html

‘‘Liberal’’ has long been a dirty word to the American political right. It may be shortened, in the parlance of the Limbaugh Belt, to ‘‘libs,’’ or expanded to the offensive portmanteau ‘‘libtards.’’ But its target is always clear. For the people who use these epithets, liberals are, basically, everyone who leans to the left: big-spending Democrats with their unisex bathrooms and elaborate coffee. This is still how polls classify people, placing them on a neat spectrum from ‘‘extremely conservative’’ to ‘‘extremely liberal.’’

Over the last few years, though — and especially 2016 — there has been a surge of the opposite phenomenon: Now the political left is expressing its hatred of liberals, too. For the committed leftist, the ‘‘liberal’’ is a weak-minded, market-friendly centrist, wonky and technocratic and condescending to the working class. The liberal is pious about diversity but ready to abandon any belief at the slightest drop in poll numbers — a person who is, as the folk singer Phil Ochs once said, ‘‘10 degrees to the left of center in good times, 10 degrees to the right of center if it affects them personally.’’ The anonymous Twitter account ‘‘liberalism.txt’’ is a relentless stream of images and retweets that supposedly illustrate this liberal vacuousness: say, the chief executive of Patagonia’s being hailed as a leader of ‘‘corporate resistance to Trump,’’ or Chelsea Clinton’s accusing Steve Bannon of ‘‘fat shaming’’ Sean Spicer.

This shift in terminology can be confusing, both politically and generationally — as when baby boomers describe fervent supporters of Bernie Sanders as ‘‘very liberal,’’ unaware that young Sandersistas might find this vomit-inducing. It can also create common ground. Last year, the young (and left-leaning) writer Emmett Rensin published a widely read piece on Vox deriding liberals for their ‘‘smug style’’; soon enough, one longtime adept of the right, National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru, was expressing his partial approval, writing in Bloomberg View that what contemporary liberalism lacked most was humility. Here was a perspective common to both sides of the old spectrum: that liberals suffered from a serene, self-ratifying belief in their own reasonableness, and that it would spell their inevitable defeat.

When it comes to diagnosing liberalism, both left and right focus on this same set of debilitating traits: arrogance, hypocrisy, pusillanimity, the insulated superiority of what, in 1969, a New York mayoral candidate called the ‘‘limousine liberal.’’ In other words, the features they use to distinguish liberals aren’t policies so much as attitudes. The profane hosts of the popular podcast ‘‘Chapo Trap House,’’ prime originators of the left’s liberal-bashing, spend a good deal of airtime making fun of liberal cultural life, with one common target being fervor for the musical ‘‘Hamilton.’’ ‘‘Nothing has represented them more: a hagiographical musical where they can pretend to be intersectional and pretend to be multicultural,’’ said Felix Biederman, a co-host, on the second episode of the show. ‘‘They have no policy. They’re all cultural signifiers.’’

To be a ‘‘liberal,’’ in this account, is in some sense to be a fake. It’s to shroud an ambiguous, even reactionary agenda under a superficial commitment to social justice and moderate, incremental change. American liberalism was once associated with something far more robust, with immoderate presidents and spectacular waves of legislation like Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal and Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society. Today’s liberals stand accused of forsaking the clarity and ambition of even that flawed legacy. To call someone a liberal now, in other words, is often to denounce him or her as having abandoned liberalism.

Liberal-bashing on social media has reached a kind of apogee, but its targets have not yet produced much real defense of the ideology. This means the word ‘‘liberal’’ is, for the moment, almost entirely one of abuse. It is hard to think of an American politician who has embraced it, even going back two or three generations. If liberalism is dead, then, it’s a strange sort of demise: Here is an ideology that has many accused sympathizers, but no champions, no defenders.

America’s version of liberalism has always been a curious one. In Europe, the word has traditionally meant a preference for things like limited government, separate private and public spheres, freedom of the press and association, free trade and open markets — what’s often described as ‘‘classical liberalism.’’ But the United States had many of those inclinations from the beginning. By the 20th century, American liberalism had come to mean something distinct. The focus on individual liberties was still there, but the vision of government had become stronger, more interventionist — ready to regulate markets, bust monopolies and spend its way out of economic downturns. After the end of World War II, this version of liberalism seemed so triumphant in the United States that the critic Lionel Trilling called it the country’s ‘‘sole intellectual tradition.’’ Its legislation legalized unions and, with Social Security, created a pension system; a health plan for older Americans, Medicare, was on the way.

But as these same liberals initiated anti-Communist interventions in Korea and Vietnam, or counseled patience and moderation to civil rights activists, they quickly found themselves in the same position we see today: under heavy abuse from the left. In a landmark speech at an antiwar rally in April 1965, Paul Potter, the president of Students for a Democratic Society, asked: ‘‘What kind of system is it that justifies the United States or any country seizing the destinies of the Vietnamese people and using them callously for its own purpose? What kind of system is it that disenfranchises people in the South?’’ The first step, as he saw it, was clear: ‘‘We must name that system.’’ In a speech later that year, his successor as S.D.S. president, Carl Oglesby, did precisely that, calling it ‘‘corporate liberalism’’ — an unholy alliance of business and the state that was enriching to elites but destructive to working-class Americans and the world’s poor.

It was the 1980 victory of Ronald Reagan and his brand of conservatism that set in motion the villainizing of American liberalism from the right — this time not for warmongering but for supposedly being soft on crime and communism, bloating the government with ineffective social programs and turning American universities into hothouses of fetid radicalism. Many demoralized liberals responded by abandoning the label completely. The nasty 1988 presidential campaign may have been a watershed. In one debate, Bush demanded that his opponent, Gov. Michael Dukakis of Massachusetts, explain ‘‘some of these very liberal positions.’’ Dukakis’s reply, a weak ‘‘Let’s stop labeling each other,’’ only confirmed the word as an insult. A few weeks before the election, dozens of distinguished figures — from novelists to editors to former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara — bought a full-page ad in The Times to print a letter titled ‘‘A Reaffirmation of Principles,’’ expressing their alarm at the use of ‘‘liberal’’ as a term of ‘‘opprobrium.’’ But their own definition of it was oddly vague: They called it ‘‘the institutional defense of decency.’’ All those attacks on liberalism seemed to be weakening people’s sense of what liberalism even meant.

As the insult gathered steam in the ’90s, Bill Clinton was studiously aiming for the political center, ‘‘ending welfare as we know it’’ and pushing through a tough-on-crime bill. In 2011, Barack Obama made a deal with Republicans to adopt a program of fiscal austerity, prompting the left-wing critic William Greider to declare, in The Nation, the ‘‘last groaning spasms of New Deal liberalism.’’ Conservatives will fight one another to the death over who’s the truer conservative, but the people most accused of being liberal have often seemed as if they’re the ones most ambivalent about actual liberalism.

If liberalism really is America’s core, hegemonic intellectual tradition, it’s easy to see how it has become the word we use to deride the status quo. For the left, that’s a politics in which government cravenly submits to corporate power and cultural debates distract from material needs. For the right, it’s one in which government continually overreaches and cultural debates are built to punish anyone who isn’t ‘‘politically correct.’’ But in both cases, ‘‘liberal’’ points to the consensus, the gutless compromise position, the arrogant pseudopolitics, the mealy-mouthed half-truth.

Each side has drawn tremendous energy from opposing this idea of liberalism. At the same time, the space occupied by liberalism itself has shrunk to the point where it’s difficult to locate. Different strands of it now live on under different names. Conservatives have styled themselves as the new defenders of free speech. Democrats have sidestepped ‘‘liberal’’ and embraced ‘‘progressive,’’ a word with its own confusing history, to evoke the good-government, welfare-state inclinations of the New Deal. Some of the strongest defenses of liberalism’s achievements come from people who identify as ‘‘socialists.’’ And free-trade advocates, with no more positive term to shelter under, are now tagged, often derisively, as ‘‘neoliberal.’’ The various ideas to which ‘‘liberal’’ has referred persist, in one form or another, among different constituencies. Liberalism may continue. But it may well end up doing so without any actual liberals behind it.
Click to expand...

ColiBreh1, Jul 6, 2017

#3336
- Like x 1
- List
bodhesatva Well-Known Member
So my random political comment: the fact that some people want their representatives to have no political experience drives me crazy.

People seem to be under the impression that politics is easy: the answers are obvious! Just go out there and fix stuff! I guess I just don't see it that way. When my friends and I get together, we can't even agree on what type of fast food pizza to get, let alone something complicated like healthcare. And we're only 4 girls, not 310 million people with a variety of different backgrounds and needs. Politics strikes me as a job that could be really complicated and tough as soon as you start thinking about how to work with people who strongly disagree with you. In my experience, that's hard!

And so I'm always amazed when people seem to hate lifelong politicians as if that's a bad thing. Doing any profession for 20-30+ years typically (but not always) makes you better at it. Imagine that with any other job: a plumber comes over to your house to fix your toilet. As he walks in the door you ask, "Wait, wait, wait. You've never done this before have you?" And he replies, "Oh god no. I just bought this wrench from the hardware store on the way over." And you sigh in relief because you were afraid he was one of those career plumbers.

Last edited: Jul 6, 2017

bodhesatva, Jul 6, 2017

#3337
- Like x 4
- Funny x 2
- List
Soulthinker Well-Known Member

bodhesatva said: ↑

So my random political comment: the fact that some people want their representatives to have no political experience drives me crazy.

People seem to be under the impression that politics is easy: the answers are obvious! Just go out there and fix stuff! I guess I just don't see it that way. When my friends and I get together, we can't even agree on what type of fast food pizza to get, let alone something complicated like healthcare. And we're only 4 girls, not 310 million people with a variety of different backgrounds and needs. Politics strikes me as a job that could be really complicated and tough as soon as you start thinking about how to work with people who strongly disagree with you. In my experience, that's hard!

And so I'm always amazed when people seem to hate lifelong politicians as if that's a bad thing. Doing any profession for 20-30+ years typically (but not always) makes you better at it. Imagine that with any other job: a plumber comes over to your house to fix your toilet. As he walks in the door you ask, "Wait, wait, wait. You've never done this before have you?" And he replies, "Oh god no. I just bought this wrench from the hardware store on the way over." And you sigh in relief because you were afraid he was one of those career plumbers.
Click to expand...

True it is like they want a plummer to do IT work or a brick mason to bake a cake.

Soulthinker, Jul 6, 2017

#3338
MightyLighty Well-Known Member

@bodhesatva I have always had this feeling "politics", is overrated, you feel me?

MightyLighty, Jul 6, 2017

#3339
Soulthinker Well-Known Member

It is overrated but,it is important.

Soulthinker, Jul 6, 2017

#3340

(You must log in or sign up to reply here.)

Page 167 of 395

Share This Page

White Women Black Men.com

#1 Interracial Dating site for White Women and Black Men