US Politics

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

1 hour ago, kelownabomberfan said:

I don't agree about not engaging with white nationalists, obviously, because here I am engaging with you.

The ****?

[17to85]

interesting that you call me a communist... Did you know that I've voted for a conservative party every election of my life so far? But I am not beholden to an ideology. If something is a problem I can see it. Things are not better for people now than they were in the 70s... maybe people of your generation, but not the following generations. I honestly feel like my generation is the last one that's been able to make something decent happen, but even then it's not as easy it was for my parents generation. The growth that previous generations experience isn't going to happen going forward. The truth is the boomer generation are greedy fucks. They were born into everything and have played the system for so long to ensure that they're going to keep it all. Once they're gone you will see a big change in how the world operates. 

[kelownabomberfan]

2 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

The ****?

it appears that the only criterion in this thread to get you labeled a "white nationalist" is to disagree with the policies of a foreign politician who isn't Caucasian.  I assumed TUP disagrees with Castro's policies in Cuba, and Maduro's policies in Venezuela.  I assume that he even disagrees with Kim Jong in North Korea, but I am giving TUP the benefit of the doubt.  It's basically impossible to not be a white nationalist if that's how you are judging people.  

Edited March 23, 2019 by kelownabomberfan

[kelownabomberfan]

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

interesting that you call me a communist...

Interesting that that was how you interpreted my comment.  

1. I wasn't calling you a communist, because I know you aren't a communist

2. You labeled me a "hard-core conservative", even though I'm not a "hard-core conservative". 

It was the juxtaposition.  Your label for me was just as ridiculous as my label for you, though my label for you wasn't really a label, I was actually asking you since you like defining others, how you would define yourself, and using an extreme example of "communist", mostly because you used an extreme example for me.

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

 

 Things are not better for people now than they were in the 70s... maybe people of your generation, but not the following generations.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.  It's hard to say that you have a harder life, when you weren't even around at that time you are comparing to.

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

 

I honestly feel like my generation is the last one that's been able to make something decent happen, but even then it's not as easy it was for my parents generation. The growth that previous generations experience isn't going to happen going forward.

I will agree with this, but only if the AOC's and Omars of the world are successful in taking over.  Then the next generations are definitely doomed.

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

The truth is the boomer generation are greedy fucks. They were born into everything and have played the system for so long to ensure that they're going to keep it all. Once they're gone you will see a big change in how the world operates. 

Fair enough.  I think you and I could clink beers on this, as I believe we both hope for the betterment of mankind, all mankind, and in the end, that's what really matters.

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

46 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

it appears that the only criterion in this thread to get you labeled a "white nationalist" is to disagree with the policies of a foreign politician who isn't Caucasian.  I assumed TUP disagrees with Castro's policies in Cuba, and Maduro's policies in Venezuela.  Even Kim Jong in North Korea, but I am giving him the benefit of the doubt.  It's basically impossible to not be a white nationalist if that's how you are judging people.  

None of this is even remotely true. 

Wait- you are giving Kim Jun Un the benefit of the doubt? What?

[kelownabomberfan]

4 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

None of this is even remotely true. 

how is not "remotely true"?  It's 100% true.  

BTW - right now I wouldn't care what the ethnicity or gender of my Conservative candidate is in my riding, I will be voting for them in order to rid ourselves of the arrogant, corrupt and morally bankrupt Liberals.  So if the Conservatives run a Somali immigrant in my riding, and I vote for her, am I still a "white nationalist"?  This whole labeling people based on a few posts in a forum thing is just so confusing.

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

3 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

how is not "remotely true"?  It's 100% true.  

It's not though,  not sure how you get 100%.

Thanks for your opinion,  you have every right to say that- but the facts don't support your opinion. 

 

Also- you didn't clarify your comment about giving KJU the benefit of the doubt. 

•  

[JCon]

20 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

The ****?

He's just baiting you. When they lose an argument, they throw names. He's proven time and time again, who he truly is. 

Just block and move on. 

[Mark F]

edit 

Edited March 24, 2019 by Mark F

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

On 2019-03-22 at 2:05 PM, kelownabomberfan said:

.  Anything that disagrees with this political group's ideology is immediately labeled "regressive" (whatever that even means) no matter what the points of disagreement may be. 

First of all- that's bullshit and I wish you would stop spreading bullshit. That is hyperbole- not ANYTHING- just regressive ideology.

 

On 2019-03-22 at 2:05 PM, kelownabomberfan said:

.  Anything that disagrees with this political group's ideology is immediately labeled "regressive" (whatever that even means) no matter what the points of disagreement may be. 

and why are you even arguing a point if you don't even know what it means? That is pretty ignorant- you should look something up before arguing against it, that would help your argument. 

 

On 2019-03-22 at 2:05 PM, kelownabomberfan said:

Case in point - if you question the 12 year death sentence certain politicians have put on the planet due to the man-made climate change hypothesis, you are suddenly "regressive", which is just plain silly.  

You're making a silly argument here- no one is labeling anyone a regressive solely on that person questioning the 12 year death sentence - hell I question even question it and no one other than you are calling me a regressive. So- I fail to see where you are getting this idea from...

 

On 2019-03-22 at 2:05 PM, kelownabomberfan said:

 Being "progressive" seems to be to actually be pretty regressive in a lot of ways, and extremely damaging to the environment and the economy.  

 I will concede that there is potential that there will be harm to the economy as we know it- I have full confidence that there will still be an economy that it will do fine after a period of adjustment. 

How is it damaging to the environment? to be concerned with the environment and doing something to help it? please explain. 

One thing I noticed is that you are all on board and tout the line that the GREEN NEW DEAL WILL DESTROY THE ECONOMY!!!! when you don't know if it will- yet you are so sure that THE ENVIMENT WILL NOT BE DESTOROYED IN 12 YEARS! You have certainty with both things yet have ZERO proof of either- yet you spread that bullshit all the time.  

On 2019-03-22 at 2:05 PM, kelownabomberfan said:

So to sum up, the moral preening of those labeling themselves "progressive" is pretty hard to stomach, and also pretty hypocritical.

Nobody here is preening around as self labeled progressives- so grab a Tums, it may have been all that altright and fox propaganda you are gobbling up that is upsetting your stomach. 

 

Once again: 

Thanks for your opinion,  you have every right to say that- but the facts don't support your opinion. 

 

Also waiting on your KJU benefit of the doubt remark- really curious as to where you are going with that one. 

Edited March 24, 2019 by wanna-b-fanboy

[The Unknown Poster]

22 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

The ****?

The old “I know you are but why am I” Defense.  Sadly we all know. And the goal here is to stifle discussion and get threads locked. Unfortunately.  We can’t play into those games.  Too much important and interesting things to discuss. Easier to dismiss the rhetoric with an Lol . 

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

7 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

The old “I know you are but why am I” Defense.  Sadly we all know. And the goal here is to stifle discussion and get threads locked. Unfortunately.  We can’t play into those games.  Too much important and interesting things to discuss. Easier to dismiss the rhetoric with an Lol . 

True- but you have to call out the bullshit sometimes and try to keep them honest. 

[The Unknown Poster]

4 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

True- but you have to call out the bullshit sometimes and try to keep them honest. 

That works on most people. Not all. 😉

[The Unknown Poster]

In actual news, congress has the summary. 

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

4 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

In actual news, congress has the summary. 

Wow, awesome.

 

The thing I am worried about is that the report will be more of a roadmap (as a report should be) and less of a Drag the PoTUS out in handcuffs trype of thing... and the result will be rebuplicans will be shouting as musch as they can NO COLLUSSION NO CLLUSION no further INDICTMENTS!  meanwhile- there is a clear roadmap to start more investigations and most of the heavy lifting will be done by different lawyers and other courts and so forth. 

 

This next year is going to be INSANE. 

[Zontar]

Imagine being Hillary and her people this morning.

You rigged the nomination process and stole debate questions from media helpers to beat Sanders

You run a horrible campaign and ignore states even your own people said were vulnerable.

Rather than admit the above you create a narrative your rightful election was stolen from you by Russian agents and american conspirators.

You then enlist the near full weight of  narrative sympathizers in media to paint Trump,and others as traitors.

Out of revenge you fund  a fake dossier for party loyalists in  FBI and DOJ to manipulate the basis for an investigation to, essentially,  over turn an election you fairly  lost at the same time getting legal cover for your own crimes from the same people.

You pin hopes on Mueller, with media cheerleaders, he finds at least one thing impeach able even if you couldn't get him removed for said treason 

Now you have nothing. 

Welcome to Hell. 

 

Edited March 24, 2019 by Zontar

[kelownabomberfan]

3 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

Wow, awesome.

 

The thing I am worried about is that the report will be more of a roadmap (as a report should be) and less of a Drag the PoTUS out in handcuffs trype of thing... and the result will be rebuplicans will be shouting as musch as they can NO COLLUSSION NO CLLUSION no further INDICTMENTS!  meanwhile- there is a clear roadmap to start more investigations and most of the heavy lifting will be done by different lawyers and other courts and so forth. 

 

This next year is going to be INSANE. 

LOL - yes, and unfortunately it will result in Trump being re-elected, thanks to this nonsense.  What you've written above is just so far from actual reality I literally can't stop shaking my head.  Talk about a giant nothing-burger.  What the Democrats need to do is exactly what Pelosi said to do, work on being elected, and forget this impeachment garbage.

[bustamente]

Make no mistake the summary released today is a big win for Trump both politically and personally. He will crow about this for days and days and days, the Mueller probe was to find collusion which he did not rule on leaving AG Barr to make the decision that there was no collusion. Trump will have more problems with the SDNY investigations that are far more reaching and may bring him done, in the coming days the House will continue to investigate, in all probability will bring in Mueller, they will go after Ivanka and Jared and Trump's taxes.The Democratic party best interest is to focus on getting the best possible candidate to beat Trump. It's going to be a hell of a year down south.

[kelownabomberfan]

6 hours ago, JCon said:

He's just baiting you. When they lose an argument, they throw names. He's proven time and time again, who he truly is. 

Just block and move on. 

I hear you, but I don't block people, just not in my nature.  It is sad that anyone who dares disagree with the "acceptable narrative" immediately is subjected to baiting, and after losing the argument, those who have chosen to enforce said "acceptable narrative" start babbling and labeling people "white nationalists".   While I agree that certain people here have shown their true colors, time and time again, and it certainly is ugly, it is what it is.  Only by encouraging discussion, can people reach some sort of understanding about their differences.  Shutting down discussion seems to be a popular tactic of both the far left and far right, and it's never a good thing.  Neither is labeling people.

Edited March 24, 2019 by kelownabomberfan

[kelownabomberfan]

4 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

The old “I know you are but why am I” Defense.  Sadly we all know. And the goal here is to stifle discussion and get threads locked. Unfortunately.  We can’t play into those games.  Too much important and interesting things to discuss. Easier to dismiss the rhetoric with an Lol . 

I agree, but yet the "I'm going to immediately label you with the far-left perjorative term dejour if you dare disagree with my opinion" defence is even weaker.  The goal is to encourage discussion from ALL points of view, not just creating an echo-chamber fed by Buzzfeed and Vox (and Rolling Stone).  No one is asking you to "play games", but you can stop labeling people if they dare have a different opinion.  THAT is what gets threads locked.  Enough with the insults.  

[kelownabomberfan]

4 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

True- but you have to call out the bullshit sometimes and try to keep them honest. 

you should start with your own posts, and work your way out from there.  If you really are committed to this "honesty" thing.  Seriously, just because you and the people who tell you how to think tell you that other opinions are "bullshit", doesn't make it so.

Edited March 24, 2019 by kelownabomberfan

[The Unknown Poster]

I’m not sure it’s a win for trump. It basically means he was a useful idiot rather than a willful conspirator. Lol 

[kelownabomberfan]

1 minute ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I’m not sure it’s a win for trump. It basically means he was a useful idiot rather than a willful conspirator. Lol 

pretty much.  Most politicians are.  Look at the guy we have running Canada right now.  No one is going to accuse Justin Trudeau of being a genius.

[Zontar]

New narrative

"Investigation was incompetent, biased, incomplete, compromised..Mueller was handcuffed etc.."

Or

"Mueller investigation was never a serious threat to Trump so stop hyping the result, it's the other stuff, that's what's REALLY important"

*flips coin*

[bustamente]

2 different points of view

"The Special Counsel did not find any collusion and did not find any obstruction. AG Barr and DAG Rosenstein further determined there was no obstruction. The findings of the Department of Justice are a total and complete exoneration of the President of the United States," White House press secretary Sarah Sanders, in a tweet.

 

"Attorney General Barr's letter raises as many questions as it answers. The fact that Special Counsel Mueller's report does not exonerate the president on a charge as serious as obstruction of justice demonstrates how urgent it is that the full report and underlying documentation be made public without any further delay. Given Mr. Barr's public record of bias against the Special Counsel's inquiry, he is not a neutral observer and is not in a position to make objective determinations about the report," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., Senate Democratic Leader, in a joint statement.

 

and of course from the Supreme leader

"It's a shame that our country had to go through this. To be honest, it's a shame that your president has had to go through this for -- before I even got elected, it began. And it began illegally. And hopefully, somebody is going to look at the other side. This was an illegal takedown that failed. And hopefully, somebody is going to be looking at the other side," Trump, just before boarding Air Force One in Palm Beach, Florida, to return to Washington.

and before he clutched his pearls and fainted on his couch

"Good day for the rule of law. Great day for President Trump and his team. No collusion and no obstruction. The cloud hanging over President Trump has been removed by this report. Bad day for those hoping the Mueller investigation would take President Trump down. Great job by Mr. Mueller and his team to thoroughly examine all things Russia. Now it is time to move on, govern the country, and get ready to combat Russia and other foreign actors ahead of 2020," Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., in a statement.