The Many Faces of US Politics...

Started by Tyrones own, March 20, 2009, 09:29:14 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

seafoid

Quote from: johnneycool on July 27, 2017, 02:07:06 PM
Considering Seafoids comments on the number of US Army personnel coming back to the US minus their bits;

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2017/07/27/trump-to-allow-current-transgender-military-personnel-to-sweep-for-landmines/
That's not funny at all.

some of those videos of mangled soldiers minus their dangly bits are very hard to watch
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

J70

Quote from: whitey on July 27, 2017, 02:42:06 PM
Quote from: J70 on July 27, 2017, 02:23:02 PM
Quote from: whitey on July 27, 2017, 01:47:07 PM
Quote from: J70 on July 27, 2017, 12:20:30 PM
Quote from: whitey on July 27, 2017, 03:20:01 AM
Quote from: J70 on July 27, 2017, 02:00:18 AM
Quote from: whitey on July 23, 2017, 01:59:22 AM
So Republicans are for wage inequality, but the Obama White House and the Clinton Campaign BOTH pay their female staff less than their male staff

Republican policies cause inequality, yet Hillary gives us all a lecture about inequality while wearing a $12K jacket

Republicans wage war against women, yet Democrats eulogize a man like Ted Kennedy who left a young woman to drown (a young woman he was screwing, while married to his wife)

The Republicans are all for fossil fuel, yet Democrats like the Kennedys and others throw a $hit fit when an offshore wind farm is planned for Nantucket Sound (because it will spoil their yachting)

Joe Scarborough uses a great term all the time....self awareness.  Do the Democrats not realise they have become a parody of themselves. They foisted a candidate onto the ballot who was so distasteful, that people who voted for Barack Obama TWICE, turned sides and voted for Donald fvckin Trump

You posted this before.

Its no more correct now than it was then.

First, were the males in the Obama admin and Clinton campaign getting paid more for the same jobs?

Second, hypocrisy on the part of a person or even a family (both Kennedys) are irrelevant when it comes to the veracity of actual policies and facts espoused by a political party or movement. That the likes of Susan Collins is exhibiting some measure of sanity and compassion when it comes to the healthcare debate currently taking place doesn't mean that the overall Republican Party leadership and most of its congressional party are serious and realistic about addressing the healthcare issue.

Hypocrites have ZERO credibility

Don't fvckin lecture me about inequality wearing a $12k jacket

Don't lecture me about pay inequLity when your campaign and foundation pay their female staffers less thaN their male staffers

Don't dare lecture me about paying my "fair share" when you and your family use every trick known to mankind to avoid paying YOUR fair share.

Anyone with half a brain knows these sound bites Democrats use are nonsense and are used by Dems to "explain" to their less well informed supporters why they're not getting ahead in life....

What does a 12K jacket have to do with anything?

Every person running for president is well off. Even Bernie, while much less wealthy than your average senator, is a millionaire.

This jacket nonsense is just a red herring. Simple ad hominen attack.

And once again, given that you're repeating it yet again, was this pay disparity you're upset about for people doing the same or similar jobs or with the same experience and expertise?

And given that you're on the record as supporting Romney, who said it would basically be unpatriotic to pay a cent more in taxes than he was legally required to do, your "outrage" once again smacks of attacking the man so you don't have to deal with the message.


The Democrats have you well and truely codded.

They play this class warfare card as a way to gin up support among their less well informed supporters, yet they themselves participate in exactly the same 1% behaviors that they find so offensive among Republicans. 

They are essentially telling poor people that they are poor because other people (ie Republicans) are rich, which if you have live in this country for more than 10 minutes you know is a crock

If the Dems have me "truly codded", it shouldn't be too difficult for you to address my points instead of ignoring them.

And I fail to see how advocating for progressive tax and public services/safety net and gay rights and environmental protection amount to fraudulent policies designed to hoodwink.

Especially coming from a man who supports the party of alternative facts which is beholden to conspiracy theories about everything from vote fraud to evolution to climate change to sharia law to martial law to the gay agenda and Agenda 21.


You keep chaninging the subject.

The reason I dislike so many Democratic politicians is that they are hypocrites, and in my view hypocrites have no credibility. They are classic "Do as I say, not do as I do" types, because what they do is exactly what the "1% Republicans" do.

Just because I despise the false rhetoric perpetrated by the likes of Hillary Clintonand Elizabeth Warren does not mean I automatically agree with everything the Republican Party stands for. In fact I probably agree with the Democrats on more issues than I disagree with them on....eg climate, guns, minimum wage, LGBT rights, policing.

And by the way I'm not a Republican, I'm a conservative.

Where have I changed the subject?

I've made valid points about the wealth of the individual candidate being irrelevant given that they're ALL wealthy. The policies they run on and implement are what matters. Warren fought for and got the consumer protection agency, which has done real good for real people. Republicans (or conservatives if you prefer) are trying to defang it. All the whining and calling her Pocahontas in the world doesn't alter that, nor does the fact that she is wealthy change the fact that she tried to help citizens against the legal might of the corporate world.

seafoid

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ivanka-faces-backlash-after-trans-military-ban

In June, Ivanka Trump tweeted, "I am proud to support my LGBTQ friends and the LGBTQ Americans who have made immense contributions to our society and economy."

The tweet received some initial backlash when Twitter users called Ivanka Trump out for supporting "the most anti-LGBTQ+ presidential ticket in recent times," as one Twitter user put it, adding, "Your words mean nothing to us."

After President Trump announced the transgender military ban Wednesday, his daughter's statement faced even more scrutiny for what some saw as hollow words.

President Trump faced backlash of his own for the ban, which was announced on the same day as the anniversary of former president Harry Truman desegregating the armed services, and many active transgender service members expressed dismay over the decision.
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

screenexile

I find it hilarious that whitey thinks being a hypocrite is the sole preserve of Democrats . . . Republicans have probably served up the most hypocritical POTUS in history!!

He's going to make sure everyone in the country is covered on Healthcare with reduced premiums but now he's in office he's trying to kick 27million Americans off their insurance.

Having said he is the most LGBTQ friendly Presidential candidate there has ever been he's now decided to kick transgender people out of the military.

Save your hypocrisy speeches for your next Townhall with your Republican "Conservative" mates!!

whitey

Where did I ever say that?

Post it up if you can find it and I'll happily recant

screenexile

Quote from: whitey on July 27, 2017, 03:35:43 PM
Where did I ever say that?

Post it up if you can find it and I'll happily recant

If not the case why do you hammer Dems for it and no Republicans??!!

stew

Quote from: J70 on July 27, 2017, 01:46:36 AM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 20, 2017, 04:40:26 PM
Quote from: J70 on July 19, 2017, 03:51:28 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 19, 2017, 03:19:21 PM
How come the media aren't reporting the riots in Minneapolis after that policeman shot the unarmed woman?

j70, Eamon and usual liberals - you must be outraged surely.

Where's Black Lives Matter on this one?

Yeah, I am outraged and feel awful for that poor woman, her fiance and her family.

You, on the other hand, see some sort of political advantage apparently, popping your head up above the parapet after weeks of silence to once again stick the boot in on black people.

That isn't the case. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of liberals and BLM. No issue if a black police officer shoots a white person. That's totally fine. It's not racist. She came out of nowhere and the officer was defending himself. Maybe she had a spatula in her hand.
Just like Ferguson eh?
Without the robbery and the assault on the police officer. But let that slide.

Also note that there are no riots, no looting to mark the occasion. I guess those white folk don't want free stuff.

You will have to point out where liberals and BLM said that its ok for a black (or any other race of) cop to shoot a white person. I've obviously missed it.

And on your last idiotic comment, if white people had suffered at the hands of the state and the police the way black people have, there absolutely would be riots.

Pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon! Ring a bell?

f**k blm.
Armagh, the one true love of a mans life.

J70

Quote from: stew on July 27, 2017, 04:14:13 PM
Quote from: J70 on July 27, 2017, 01:46:36 AM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 20, 2017, 04:40:26 PM
Quote from: J70 on July 19, 2017, 03:51:28 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 19, 2017, 03:19:21 PM
How come the media aren't reporting the riots in Minneapolis after that policeman shot the unarmed woman?

j70, Eamon and usual liberals - you must be outraged surely.

Where's Black Lives Matter on this one?

Yeah, I am outraged and feel awful for that poor woman, her fiance and her family.

You, on the other hand, see some sort of political advantage apparently, popping your head up above the parapet after weeks of silence to once again stick the boot in on black people.

That isn't the case. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of liberals and BLM. No issue if a black police officer shoots a white person. That's totally fine. It's not racist. She came out of nowhere and the officer was defending himself. Maybe she had a spatula in her hand.
Just like Ferguson eh?
Without the robbery and the assault on the police officer. But let that slide.

Also note that there are no riots, no looting to mark the occasion. I guess those white folk don't want free stuff.

You will have to point out where liberals and BLM said that its ok for a black (or any other race of) cop to shoot a white person. I've obviously missed it.

And on your last idiotic comment, if white people had suffered at the hands of the state and the police the way black people have, there absolutely would be riots.

Pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon! Ring a bell?

f**k blm.

And your little anecdote has what, exactly, to do with my comment?

whitey

Quote from: screenexile on July 27, 2017, 04:00:13 PM
Quote from: whitey on July 27, 2017, 03:35:43 PM
Where did I ever say that?

Post it up if you can find it and I'll happily recant

If not the case why do you hammer Dems for it and no Republicans??!!


Oh believe me there are plenty of mega-hypocrites in the Republican Party too......just the things issues they are hypocritical about are not the main issues they attack the Democrats on.

J70

Quote from: whitey on July 27, 2017, 05:22:54 PM
Quote from: screenexile on July 27, 2017, 04:00:13 PM
Quote from: whitey on July 27, 2017, 03:35:43 PM
Where did I ever say that?

Post it up if you can find it and I'll happily recant

If not the case why do you hammer Dems for it and no Republicans??!!


Oh believe me there are plenty of mega-hypocrites in the Republican Party too......just the things issues they are hypocritical about are not the main issues they attack the Democrats on.

So what's the real problem here?

That Democratic politicians advocate for progressive economic policies or that they're rich while doing so?

Hardy

Quote from: whitey on July 27, 2017, 02:45:28 PM
Quote from: Hardy on July 27, 2017, 02:32:09 PM
Quote from: whitey on July 27, 2017, 01:21:42 PM
You just did

I did? Where? When?

Your own words

"Positing a moral equivalence between the behaviours of Warren and Trump is like getting upset about waiting too long at the manicure salon where a gunman has murdered half the  staff."

I never did any such thing

So, as I asked, where did I say you supported Trump? Don't pretend you missed the point.

whitey

Quote from: Hardy on July 27, 2017, 07:14:39 PM
Quote from: whitey on July 27, 2017, 02:45:28 PM
Quote from: Hardy on July 27, 2017, 02:32:09 PM
Quote from: whitey on July 27, 2017, 01:21:42 PM
You just did

I did? Where? When?

Your own words

"Positing a moral equivalence between the behaviours of Warren and Trump is like getting upset about waiting too long at the manicure salon where a gunman has murdered half the  staff."

I never did any such thing

So, as I asked, where did I say you supported Trump? Don't pretend you missed the point.

By you stating that I "Positied a moral equivalence between the behaviors of Elizabeth Warren and Trump" you are implying I am in some way supporting or defending Donald Trump..I never did any such thing.

I detest Trump and I am embarrassed that he was elected President.

whitey

#9822
Quote from: J70 on July 27, 2017, 05:51:55 PM
Quote from: whitey on July 27, 2017, 05:22:54 PM
Quote from: screenexile on July 27, 2017, 04:00:13 PM
Quote from: whitey on July 27, 2017, 03:35:43 PM
Where did I ever say that?

Post it up if you can find it and I'll happily recant

If not the case why do you hammer Dems for it and no Republicans??!!


Oh believe me there are plenty of mega-hypocrites in the Republican Party too......just the things issues they are hypocritical about are not the main issues they attack the Democrats on.

So what's the real problem here?

That Democratic politicians advocate for progressive economic policies or that they're rich while doing so?

Neither......The issue for me is that if you want to lecture on an issue, at least let it be an issue where your and your surrogates' actions match your words. If they don't, it's just meaningless and empty empty rhetoric your using to whip low information voters up into a lather.

Eg. Donald Trump is an absolute disgrace when it comes to his treatment of women, but you then give Bill Clinton a standing ovation every time he gives a speech.

If Joe Kennedy III gave a speech about the gender pay gap I would be willing to listen...I might not agree with him, but at least I'd listen. If Hillary Clinton gave the same speech, I would not listen because her campaign and the Clinton Foundation pay their female staffers less than their male staffers. Likewise, Elizabeth Warren got paid more for teaching 2/3 classes at Harvard than the Dean of The  Medical School or the Dean of the Business School so I would not be interested in her opinions either.  I'm interested in and support her positions on numerous other topics, but they tend not to be the topics she leads with. She goes for the easy mark

stew

Quote from: J70 on July 27, 2017, 04:34:33 PM
Quote from: stew on July 27, 2017, 04:14:13 PM
Quote from: J70 on July 27, 2017, 01:46:36 AM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 20, 2017, 04:40:26 PM
Quote from: J70 on July 19, 2017, 03:51:28 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 19, 2017, 03:19:21 PM
How come the media aren't reporting the riots in Minneapolis after that policeman shot the unarmed woman?

j70, Eamon and usual liberals - you must be outraged surely.

Where's Black Lives Matter on this one?

Yeah, I am outraged and feel awful for that poor woman, her fiance and her family.

You, on the other hand, see some sort of political advantage apparently, popping your head up above the parapet after weeks of silence to once again stick the boot in on black people.

That isn't the case. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of liberals and BLM. No issue if a black police officer shoots a white person. That's totally fine. It's not racist. She came out of nowhere and the officer was defending himself. Maybe she had a spatula in her hand.
Just like Ferguson eh?
Without the robbery and the assault on the police officer. But let that slide.

Also note that there are no riots, no looting to mark the occasion. I guess those white folk don't want free stuff.

You will have to point out where liberals and BLM said that its ok for a black (or any other race of) cop to shoot a white person. I've obviously missed it.

And on your last idiotic comment, if white people had suffered at the hands of the state and the police the way black people have, there absolutely would be riots.

Pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon! Ring a bell?

f**k blm.

And your little anecdote has what, exactly, to do with my comment?

BLM are responsible for their supporters killing innocent cops, you seem to endorse these knackers! Speaks volumes.
Armagh, the one true love of a mans life.

Gabriel_Hurl

This new Comms guy sounds level headed hahahahahaha

An actual WH employee gave this interview to a journalist

http://www.newyorker.com/news/ryan-lizza/anthony-scaramucci-called-me-to-unload-about-white-house-leakers-reince-priebus-and-steve-bannon

Quote"I'm not Steve Bannon, I'm not trying to suck my own c**k," he said, speaking of Trump's chief strategist. "I'm not trying to build my own brand off the f**king strength of the President. I'm here to serve the country." (Bannon declined to comment.)

Quote"Reince is a f**king paranoid schizophrenic, a paranoiac. 'Oh, Bill Shine is coming in. Let me leak the f**king thing and see if I can c**k-block these people the way I c**k-blocked Scaramucci for six months.'"

"They're trying to resist me, but it's not going to work. I've done nothing wrong on my financial disclosures, so they're going to have to go f**k themselves."