If you HAD to Vote for One...

[Thefishguy77]

Hey, if you like Wikipedia as a source then have at it.



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant



2014, my ass. That Breitbart drivel is the most obvious and basic simplistic attempt to conflate ISIS and Hillary/Democrats I've seen - it's so pathetic I can hardly believe people accept it (not really there's worse.)



"ISIS bad > Democrats made ISIS > Democrats bad."



Saving your precious time in response, Dems do it too. Be above it, folks.

Democrats didn't make ISIS. President Obama gave ISIS the chance to develop.

He has slowly purged the upper pentagon brass of anyone that disagreed with him. And he "kept his promise" to end the war in his first term. He campaigned on the fact that he pulled the combat troops out of Iraq. This was against the advice of most all of his military advisors. They warned this move would create a power vacuum and could result in militants taking over Iraq. The fact that the president gave a public date of when we would be finished pulling out was foolish. All they had to do was wait and then when we were gone take over.

I'm not agreeing with the premiss of the start of the war. But once we committed to it we had to see it through regardless. The fact that we gave up put all the Iraqi men and women that helped us in mortal danger. It made all the blood spilled by American men and women and the other collation members that helped us, spilled in vain

Obama, in my opinion, did this so he could almost certainly win this election. The blame should be put solely on the shoulder of the president and not the Democratic Party. The S.O.S Hillary Clinton should bear a bit of the burden but not much. I am sure some members of both sides of the isles were encouraging him along.

This is only my opinion. It is not meant to be gospel or make people feel like I am "Attacking" them [emoji1303][emoji482]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ndcent]

*whoosh*

 

[ThorInc]

*whoosh*

Twilight Zone sound track.....

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[Gunslinger-13]

Communist Party USA Endorses Hillary; Media Yawns

So with all this attention to Trump on David Duke, surely you read the news about John Bachtell, right? He endorsed Hillary and the headlines were everywhere. Oh, wait, sorry. Mr. Bachtell’s Hillary endorsement was apparently not newsy enough to make the mainstream media headlines. Curious, yes? If the endorsement of Trump by the ex-head of the Ku Klux Klan is big news, one would expect a Hillary endorsement by the head of the Communist Party USA would be a big deal as well.

That’s right. Hillary-supporter Bachtell is, as seen here, the very proud “national chair of the Communist Party USA.” That’s right, Mr. Bachtell is a literal card-carrying Communist. You recall the Communists, yes? The folks who produced Stalin and Mao? The advocates of a political philosophy that is described in The Black Book of Communism as being responsible for “between 85 million and 100 million” deaths? in “the most colossal case of political carnage in history.” Ring a bell? The Soviet Union? The Cold War? The Iron Curtain? Korea? Vietnam? The Khmer Rouge? Come on, you remember.

Apparently the mainstream media does not remember what Mr. Bachtell’s Communist Party represents — or maybe it’s something else. Maybe, just maybe, the media doesn’t care about Hillary receiving the Communist Party chairman’s endorsement because, well, if you’re a lefty to begin with there’s nothing seen as out of the ordinary much less wrong with this.

cont;

http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines...ry-media-yawns

Seeing some of the posts here recently, I guess a lot of folks on this board would see this endorsement as a good thing...yikes!

 

[ThorInc]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

 

[Hepar]

Sounding like a broken record, but communism isn't the problem. A lot of the ideas make logical sense to me. The problem is that it fails the second it enters human hands.

And I don't think the issue was that David Duke endorsed Trump. But more the reaction Trump had to that endorsement.

*edit* If any of you guys haven't read Marx's Communist Manifesto, I'd suggest giving it a go.

 

[Gunslinger-13]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

What's your point?

Communism is responsible for WAY MORE deaths than the KKK.


I am not a fan of either- both Communists and KKK members are a bunch of freaking morons.

My point is that the media's bias is glaringly obvious and ridiculous.

 

[ThorInc]

What's your point?
.................................................................................


I am not a fan of either- both Communists and KKK members are a bunch of freaking morons.
.............................................

I think you made my point. There is no equivalency...hence the difference in coverage.

 

[Gunslinger-13]

I think you made my point. There is no equivalency...hence the difference in coverage.

I never said they were equivalent, just that the media sucks, because they cherry pick what to report and who to demonize based on agendas and bias.

If the media was still the fourth pillar instead of the fifth estate, they would report on things evenly and allow the end recipient of ALL the info to cogitate on the info and come to their own opinions.

Instead they vomit opinion, bias, bullshit and propaganda onto the TV and Computer screen.


Interesting photo- both dated September 1st:

 

[Hepar]

Interesting photo- both dated September 1st:

WSJ often releases several editions in a single day. So, yes both headlines were from the same day, but at different points within the day. And given how he flip-flopped on what he was saying, thus the different sides of the story.

 

[Thefishguy77]

WSJ often releases several editions in a single day. So, yes both headlines were from the same day, but at different points within the day. And given how he flip-flopped on what he was saying, thus the different sides of the story.

If the were different editions wouldn't they have a slightly different cover. Not just the headline in trump. I am asking because I don't know. Other than that they seem identical.

Like they made up 2 stories and waited to decided what one to send out.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hepar]

If the were different editions wouldn't they have a slightly different cover. Not just the headline in trump. I am asking because I don't know. Other than that they seem identical.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It all depends on the story as far as I know. I believe they change as little as possible if they can. But say it's a completely different story that has broken since the previous edition, then it may be a whole new cover. The stars in the top right indicate on a WSJ on which edition it is. If you receive the morning edition, it will have one star. You can get new editions (at least in NYC) throughout the day at newsstands.

 

[mckennar]

Whoops:

Gary Johnson admits he's never heard of Syrian refugee-crisis city Aleppo | Daily Mail Online

 

[ndcent]

Robert Reich remarks..

"Of many oddities last night in Donald Trump’s handling of questions over how he’d function as commander-in-chief, during NBC’s “Commander-in-Chief Forum” last night, 4 stand out:

1. Instead of explaining his previous comment that he knew more about the Islamic State than America's generals, he instead disparaged those generals by saying they'd been "reduced to rubble." Then he suggested his plan to defeat the Islamic State — long something he said was a secret — would instead be formulated with help from top generals. Then he casually indicated he might just fire most of the generals anyway.

2. Trump returned to the old idea that America should have taken Iraq's oil after ousting Saddam Hussein, in violation of international law. He once suggested this should have happened to provide revenue to wounded soldiers; now he argues it would have blocked the rise of the Islamic State (or ISIS, as he calls the group). He also said he had always been against the Iraq War, when in fact he’s on record in the past as supporting it.

3. He said he’d have “different generals” heading the military. But under law, a president can’t summarily fire generals. During a debate in March, Trump was asked what he would do if the military refused to carry out his orders to commit acts of torture or target civilians. "They won't refuse," Trump replied. "They're not going to refuse me. Believe me."

4. Trump said that Russian president Vladimir Putin has "been a leader far more than our president has been." Hello? Putin -- who has squelched dissent in Russia and taken over parts of Crimea is more of a leader than President Obama? Apparently, to Trump, "leadership" means dictatorial control.

At a forum specifically designed to probe how Trump would function as command-in-chief, he displayed complete ignorance of his authority as commander-in-chief, as well as of democracy.

What do you think?"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...nship-between-the-president-and-the-military/

What do you think? Bonus points for not mentioning Hillary in response.

I think Trump is a bafoon snake oil salesman.

 

[mckennar]

Seems like Trump gets all of his "news" from Russia Today... If you read RT's version of events re: Russia's recent ass jackery in the Crimea, it sounds downright reasonable.

So Trump's lack of experience + Johnson's lack of global awareness + Jill Stein's ... well... being Jill Stein ( Warrant out for Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein's arrest in ND - CBS News ) where does this leave those of use who don't want to vote for Hillary?

Write-ins.

 

[Gravity_Knight]

Trump no question.. though I have to throw this out there.... This is the USA... and seriously... these two clowns are the best that we were able to come up with? I mean wow, really... well done :rockthrow: :sobbing: :clap2::suspicious:

 

[Thefishguy77]

So Bill Clinton referenced a comment made by trump and making America great again. He said something to the extent of. If you an old white southerner you know what that mean. And that he remembers those days and they weren't that great.
It was a reference that to me sounded like putting black people back in society
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57d06ccfe4b0a48094a749fc

Watch for yourself and decide what he meant.

So how does he explain this photo of Hillary and himself at a party

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ThorInc]

So Bill Clinton referenced a comment made by trump and making America great again. He said something to the extent of. If you an old white southerner you know what that mean. And that he remembers those days and they weren't that great.
It was a reference that to me sounded like putting black people back in society
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57d06ccfe4b0a48094a749fc

Watch for yourself and decide what he meant.

So how does he explain this photo of Hillary and himself at a party

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just for the record & to help the misinformed move foward:
http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-blackface-photo/

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[Ron4RNevada]

What is everyone complaining about?

YOU, the voting public, had about twenty pretty good people to vote for during the primaries/caucuses and YOU picked these two.

So now YOU have to select one of those who remain.

I voted for one of those other ones but now I have to vote for Trump.

Oh well - - -

 

[Thefishguy77]

While we will never be able to tell for sure who the blackface woman is. The nose ears and cheek bones are correct for Bill Clinton. As for the "fuller" face. It's quite easy to fluctuate weight in your 20's.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk