Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Presidential Candidates
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 76 of 87 (776853)
01-21-2016 12:37 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by RAZD
01-19-2016 4:52 PM


Re: Hillary? Ack! But still better than ANY republican
RAZD writes:
Certainly she is the only candidate with massive foreign policy experience and knowledge . . .
RAZD writes:
So if it comes down to choosing Hillary or a warmonger GOP I'll hold my nose and vote for Hillary.
RAZD writes:
. . . and her positions on women's rights and health-care are worth supporting.
RAZD writes:
Personally I would be happy with any one of the three {democratic candidates,

_____________________________________________________________________________
RAZD writes:
Note that I did not accuse you, but asked you a question, . . .
YOU introduced a completely unrelated strawman, Bengazi, to this thread, not me. Check the posts, it may surprise you to know your words are recorded.
RAZD writes:
You dodged by the weak counter attack above.
Yeah, I "dodged" your counter-attack by asking you a pertinent on-topic question. Oh my, a slippery eel am I.
Drone writes:
Was the american invasion of Iraq a war crime?
RAZD writes:
the answer is yes*
RAZD writes:
Where the * denotes deluding congress and the UN using false information in order to get approval.
Yes, the Iraqi invasion was/is certainly a war crime. But NO, certainly no intelligent or moral senator was deluded (although 90% of americans were). And NO, the UN never gave the invasion an approval (what orifice did you pull that from?).
RAZD writes:
But the war crimes involved were the torture of prisoners.
Agreed. The torture of prisoners is among many crimes committed during the Iraqi invasion. I'll come back to this later in my reply below.
________________________________________________________________________________________
It seems everybody in this thread has conveniently forgotten history. It appears most convenient when solely criticizing me and not the actual war mongers and the voters who support them. So I will recap much of my evidence with a stroll down memory lane . . .
________________________________________________________________________________________
RAZD writes:
But hey, if you really think she is a criminal then list the crimes and provide the evidence that they are real and not propaganda.
Unlike your un-evidenced propaganda that Hillary was deluded by Bush Jr.'s lies?
(It burns.)
__________________________________________________________________________
Drone writes:
Was the american invasion of Iraq a war crime?
Yes.
And Bush Jr. was not solely responsible for the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq AND its results. A minority of Democrats, INCLUDING Hillary, . . .
quote:
H.J.Res. 114 (107th): Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002
Yea D Clinton, Hillary
. . . are DIRECTLY responsible for the following:
4,500 Americans killed (far larger number permanently wounded)
up to a million innocent Iraqi civilians murdered
trillionS of dollars of US taxpayers' money wasted
anti-American extremism in reaction to the invasion and occupation which has spread and DIRECTLY produced the group ISIL.
quote:
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair says he’s sorry for mistakes made in the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, and says he recognizes elements of truth behind opinion that the invasion caused the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).
http://sayyidali.com/...war-admits-conflict-caused-isil.html
__________________________________________________
RAZD writes:
She made her decision on Iraq based on the misinformation supplied by the Bush\Cheney warmachine, who were looking for any excuse to trump support to invade oil lands.
1. You have just stated that Hillary was EASILY fooled by an immoral, mentally retarded simpleton: Bush Jr.. ANYBODY who can EASILY be fooled by an AWOL coward, cocaine abusing, alcoholic, mentally retarded thinker and talker ("You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test") should NEVER run for office.
What type of person would support or vote for such a mentally slow "person"?
__________________________________________________
RAZD writes:
She made her decision on Iraq based on the misinformation supplied by the Bush\Cheney warmachine, who were looking for any excuse to trump support to invade oil lands.
2. COMPLETELY FALSE. She actually made her decision based partly on patriotic peer-pressure, to not appear soft on terrorism. Additionally, Hillary thought that demonstrating a tough-on-terrorism veneer would help her future political ambitions (at least to voters who are extremely gullible). But mostly because she IS a war-monger: Cruel and unthinking support for Israel (she defended the Israeli assault of an unarmed peace flotilla from Turkey), boycott and invasion of Iraq, supported coups in Honduras and Ukraine, invasion of Afghanistan.
As Secretary of State, she supported defeating Qaddafi. She publicly expressed delight when Qaddafi was killed, and now Libya is worse off after Qaddafi’s removal.
quote:
Secretary Clinton was all smiles on the day of Qaddafi’s death, even paraphrasing Julius Caesar: We came, we saw, he died.
Hillary Clinton's Iraq War Vote Still Matters | The National Interest
She was also more hawkish than anyone, even Robert Gates, in the Obama administration when it concerned intervention in Syria.
quote:
Clinton was a staunch supporter of the war in Afghanistan, yet another in a long list of Clinton-supported wars based on lies, half-truths, and deceit.http://www.activistpost.com/2015/11/hillary-clintons-war-record-100-for-genocide.html
The Iraqi invasion was not a rare anomaly for Hillary. She is a war monger. What type of person would support or vote for such a filthy war monger?
__________________________________________________
RAZD writes:
She made her decision on Iraq based on the misinformation supplied by the Bush\Cheney warmachine, who were looking for any excuse to trump support to invade oil lands.
3. WMD lies were only believed and supported by people who needed a convenient lie to further themSELVES.
During the run up to the invasion, Hillary had many months to investigate and debate Bush Jr.'s claims that Iraq's WMD was a threat, as well as the likely results of a US invasion.
But let's first go back further in time. Project for the New American Century was established in 1997. Ten members went on to serve in the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz.
quote:
Believing that UN sanctions against Iraq would be an ineffective means of disarming Iraq, PNAC members also wrote a letter to Republican members of the U.S. Congress Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott,[26] urging Congress to act, and supported the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (H.R.4655)[27][28] which President Clinton signed into law in October 1998.
Project for the New American Century - Wikipedia
Their pressure to attack Iraq BEFORE 9/11 was NEVER kept secret. Intelligent and informed people instantly saw through the WMD lies and saw PNAC's true intent of controlling middle east oil. Intelligent and informed people were highly active, vocal, and visible. It was not possible for Hillary to not have heard about this through the media, mass protests, and their contacting her office.
quote:
Members of Congress were also alerted by large numbers of scholars of the Middle East, Middle Eastern political leaders, former State Department and intelligence officials and others who recognized that a US invasion would likely result in a bloody insurgency, a rise in Islamist extremism and terrorism, increased sectarian and ethnic conflict, and related problems. Few people I know who are familiar with Iraq were at all surprised that the US invasion has become such a tragedy. Indeed, most of us were in communication with Congressional offices and often with individual members of Congress themselves in the months leading up to the vote warning of the likely consequences of an invasion and occupation. Therefore, subsequent claims by Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Joe Biden, Harry Reid and other leading Democratic supporters of the war that they were unaware of the likely consequences of the invasion are completely false.http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/15100-democrats-share-the-blame-for-tragedy-of-iraq-war
Indeed, I, a new yorker myself, signed many petitions of protest of the invasion that were sent to her office. She can hardly cry ignorance to views other than Bush Jr.
__________________________________________________
RAZD writes:
She made her decision on Iraq based on the misinformation supplied by the Bush\Cheney warmachine, who were looking for any excuse to trump support to invade oil lands.
4. The Iraqi invasion was against international law and treaties. You are trying to tell me Hillary was ignorant that the invasion of another nation was an act of aggression and a SUPREME crime above ALL other crimes? The person you would happily support and vote for doesn't know of things called 'laws?' . . .
quote:
Those who voted in favor of the resolution authorizing the invasion of Iraq did so despite the fact that it violated international legal conventions which the US government is legally bound to uphold. The resolution constituted a clear violation of the United Nations Charter that, like other ratified international treaties, should be treated as supreme law, according to Article VI of the US Constitution. According to articles 41 and 42 of the UN Charter, no member state has the right to enforce any resolution militarily unless the UN Security Council determines that there has been a material breach of its resolution, decides that all non-military means of enforcement have been exhausted, and then specifically authorizes the use of military force.
This is what the Security Council did in November 1990 with Resolution 678 in response to Iraq's ongoing violations of UN Security Council resolutions demanding its withdrawal from Kuwait, but the Security Council did not do so for any subsequent lesser Iraqi violations. The only other exception for the use of force authorized by the charter is in self-defense against armed attack, which even the Bush administration admitted had not taken place.http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/15100-democrats-share-the-blame-for-tragedy-of-iraq-war
In addition . . .
quote:
Kofi Annan, former United Nations Secretary-General, expressed the belief that the war in Iraq was an "illegal act that contravened the U.N. charter."
Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 - Wikipedia
The Iraqi invasion was/is illegal.
__________________________________________________
RAZD writes:
She made her decision on Iraq based on the misinformation supplied by the Bush\Cheney warmachine, who were looking for any excuse to trump support to invade oil lands.
5.
quote:
'We Will, In fact, Be Greeted As Liberators' - Cheney
You believe that Hillary believed THIS??? After DECADES of amerikan support for dictators and human right violators, and impeding democracy in the middle east, Hillary BELIEVED that the amerikan forces would be greeted as liberators?
Can anybody be that mentally retarded?
quote:
Hillary Clinton: No regret on Iraq vote: 'How could they have been so poorly prepared for the aftermath?' April 21, 2004
Unbelievable hypocrisy. "How could THEY be so poorly prepared for the aftermath?"
quote:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said she is not sorry she voted for a resolution authorizing President Bush to take military action in Iraq despite the recent problems there but she does regret "the way the president used the authority."
"How could they have been so poorly prepared for the aftermath of the toppling of Saddam Hussein?" the New York Democrat asked Tuesday night on CNN's "Larry King Live."
"I don't understand how they had such an unrealistic view of what was going to happen."
CNN.com - Hillary Clinton: No regreton Iraq vote - Apr 21, 2004
Seriously, Hillary's hypocritical accusations burn like the China Syndrone.
__________________________________________________
RAZD writes:
She made her decision on Iraq based on the misinformation supplied by the Bush\Cheney warmachine, who were looking for any excuse to trump support to invade oil lands.
6. Accusations about Iraq seeking nuclear weapons capability were KNOWN to be false . . .
quote:
The Senate resolution also falsely claimed that Iraq was "actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability." In reality, Iraq had long eliminated its nuclear program, a fact that was confirmed in a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency in 1998, four years PRIOR to the resolution.
The resolution also falsely claimed that Iraq at that time continued "to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability." In reality, as the US government now admits, Iraq had rid itself of its chemical and biological weapons nearly a decade earlier and no longer had any active chemical and biological weapons programs. This likelihood that Iraq no longer had operational chemical or biological weapons was brought to the attention of members of Congress by a number of top arms control specialists, as well as Scott Ritter, the American who headed UNSCOM's efforts to locate Iraq's possible hidden caches of chemical and biological weapons, hidden supplies or secret production facilities.
The classified full version of the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, while grossly overestimating Iraq's military capability, was filled with extensive disagreements, doubts and caveats regarding President Bush's assertions regarding Iraq's WMDs, WMD programs, and delivery systems.
Astonishly, Hillary was one of many senators who didn't bother to even read the estimate. Can you imagine a more vile "person," someone who willfully goes to war based on ignorance.
quote:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A new biography of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has once again raised the issue of whether members of Congress read a key intelligence report before the 2002 vote to authorize war in Iraq.
Clinton did not read the 90-page, classified National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, according to "Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton."
For members of Congress to read the report, they had to go to a secure location on Capitol Hill. The Washington Post reported in 2004 that no more than six senators and a handful of House members were logged as reading the document.
Records: Senators who OK'd war didn't readkey report - CNN.com
__________________________________________________
RAZD writes:
She made her decision on Iraq based on the misinformation supplied by the Bush\Cheney warmachine, who were looking for any excuse to trump support to invade oil lands.
7. Hillary certainly knew of Han Blix's inspections and his pleading for more time to finalize their findings. Thus the reason Bush Jr. (NOT Saddam Hussein) quickly withdrew the inspectors, so that the findings could not be concluded, and the invasion could proceed. Hillary went along with Bush Jr.
quote:
U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix faults Bush administration for lack of "critical thinking" in Iraq
The important thing to remember, Blix said repeatedly, was that Saddam was cooperating with the inspections,
America's pre-emptive, unilateral actions "have bred more terrorism there and elsewhere."
http://www.berkeley.edu/...ia/releases/2004/03/18_blix.shtml
__________________________________________________
RAZD writes:
She made her decision on Iraq based on the misinformation supplied by the Bush\Cheney warmachine, who were looking for any excuse to trump support to invade oil lands.
8. Hillary falsely INSISTED that Iraq's possession of such weapons was "not in doubt" and was "undisputed."
quote:
Clinton helped kill the Multilateral Use of Force Authorization Act of 2002, also known as the Levin amendment, introduced by Senator Carl Levin during Senate deliberations over whether or not to approve the White House’s own war resolution. The amendment would have required UN Security Council approval, with a few caveats, before hostilities against Iraq could be commenced. Clinton, that consistent believer in coercive diplomacy, international law, and the legitimacy that multilateral institutions provide, as Sahay strives to remind us, nevertheless voted against the Levin amendment and with President Bush.
Yes, Hillary Clinton Is a Hawk | The National Interest
__________________________________________________
RAZD writes:
She made her decision on Iraq based on the misinformation supplied by the Bush\Cheney warmachine, who were looking for any excuse to trump support to invade oil lands.
9. She CONTINUED to support the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq after her original vote:
quote:
{Sanders} has voted along with Clinton for some $300 billion in war funding since entering the Senate in 2005.
Obama defends votes in favor of Iraq funding - The Boston Globe
quote:
October and November 2003: The Senate votes to authorize $87 billion in supplemental funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
What Hillary won't say about Iraq | Salon.com
quote:
The second piece of legislation was S 574, and it came up for a vote on February 17 and had two main points of emphasis : the Senate continued to support the troops already on the ground in Iraq; and the Senate disapproved of the President\'s surge strategy. Hillary Clinton voted in favor of the legislation
SLOT GACOR HARI INI GAMPANG MENANG 2022
quote:
Interestingly enough, Clinton opposed the Bush surge in Iraq in 2007, voting against the plan during her tenure in the Senate.[10] This vote marks virtually the only Clinton vote that was opposed to greater use of the US military. However, it was later revealed that her opposition vote was nothing more than political grandstanding due to the fact that the Democratic Primaries were right around the corner. In fact, this much was revealed by former Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates who wrote that he witnessed Clinton tell Barack Obama that she had opposed George W. Bush‘s last-ditch effort to salvage the Iraq war, the 2007 troop surge, because the politics of the 2008 Democratic primaries demanded it.[11]
This cynical political maneuvering reveals two things: 1.) That Clinton truly supported increasing the number of US forces in Iraq and 2.) Clinton was willing to sacrifice the lives of American service men and women, the financial future of the country, and the countless lives of innocent people on the line for even a minor political strategic position.
Hillary Clinton's War Record - 100% For Genocide - Activist Post
Read that again: "Clinton was willing to sacrifice the lives of American service men and women, the financial future of the country, and the countless lives of innocent people on the line for even a minor political strategic position."
_______________________________________________________________________________________
RAZD writes:
But the war crimes involved were the torture of prisoners.
There were many, many, many war crimes committed.
quote:
Human Rights Watch claimed in 2005 that the principle of "command responsibility" could make high-ranking officials within the Bush administration guilty of the numerous war crimes committed during the War on Terror, either with their knowledge or by persons under their control.[59]United States war crimes - Wikipedia
quote:
Shortly before the end of President Bush's second term, newsmedia in countries other than the U.S. began publishing the views of those who believe that under the United Nations Convention Against Torture, the U.S. is obligated to hold those responsible for prisoner abuse to account under criminal law.[73] One proponent of this view was the United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Professor Manfred Nowak) who, on January 20, 2009, remarked on German television that former president George W. Bush had lost his head of state immunity and under international law the U.S. would now be mandated to start criminal proceedings against all those involved in these violations of the UN Convention Against Torture.[74] Law professor Dietmar Herz explained Nowak's comments by opining that under U.S. and international law former President Bush is criminally responsible for adopting torture as an interrogation tool.[74]United States war crimes - Wikipedia
The use of Cluster bombs, phosphorus weapons on civilians, unproportional use of military power against a civilian presence and the collective punishment of civilians, especially in Fulujah. Use of depleted uranium weapons that continues to cause birth defects:
But ALL of those crimes are contained within the SUPREME crime of aggression: the invasion of Iraq.
quote:
In the wording of the Nuremberg Tribunal, aggression is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole all the evil in the tortured land of Iraq that flowed from the US-UK invasion, for example.https://chomsky.info/20060509/
What this means is EVERYthing that was precipitated by Hillary's and other's vote to illegally and immorally invade Iraq makes them DIRECTLY to blame. Bush Jr. was not solely responsible for the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq AND its results. A minority of Democrats, INCLUDING Hillary are DIRECTLY responsible.
quote:
In the wording of the Nuremberg Tribunal, aggression is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole all the evil in the tortured land of Iraq that flowed from the US-UK invasion, for example.
The concept of aggression was defined clearly enough by US Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, who was chief prosecutor for the United States at Nuremberg. The concept was restated in an authoritative General Assembly resolution. An aggressor, Jackson proposed to the tribunal, is a state that is the first to commit such actions as invasion of its armed forces, with or without a declaration of war, of the territory of another State.
That applies to the invasion of Iraq. Also relevant are Justice Jackson’s eloquent words at Nuremberg: If certain acts of violation of treaties are crimes, they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us. And elsewhere: We must never forget that the record on which we judge these defendants is the record on which history will judge us tomorrow. To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well.https://chomsky.info/20060509/
____________________________________________________________________________________
RAZD writes:
. . . and her positions on women's rights and health-care are worth supporting.
Ugh. This is just an ignorant thing to write. As I wrote,
Drone writes:
Hillary has no compunction in accepting "contributions" from catastrophic human-right violating nations such as Saudi Arabia and Israel. How many Saudi Arabia women have been stoned to death or beheaded this week?
If a Saudi man wants to divorce a wife or cover up his crime, he need only accuse, there is no fair trial:
quote:
Saudi law allows the death penalty for many crimes. For example:
Adultery, lesbianism, Fornication
Capital punishment in Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia
Of the million innocent civilians who were murdered during america's illegal and immoral Iraqi invasion, what percentage was female? RAZD, how do you write, with a straight face, Hillary's positions are pro-women's rights?
____________________________________________________________________________________
RAZD writes:
. . . and her positions on women's rights and health-care are worth supporting.
During the last Democratic debate (1/17/16), while Sanders pushed for an expanded Medicare project to insure ALL americans at a significant savings, Hillary preferred defeatism, stating that the current Obamacare was as good as it will ever get. Perhaps she might tweak Obamacare some. Currently Obamacare has 30-40 million uninsured americans. Also, drug companies can raise prices to extortion levels. Insurance companies throw away 30% of health care dollars through overhead.
quote:
CEO: 5,000-percent drug price hike "not excessive at all"
Turing Pharmaceuticals CEO Martin Shkreli defends 5,000 percent price hike on Daraprim - CBS News
An american voter would be happy with Hillary's health-care support of this status quo?
___________________________________________________________________________________
RAZD, your views . . .
RAZD writes:
Certainly she is the only candidate with massive foreign policy experience and knowledge . . .
RAZD writes:
So if it comes down to choosing Hillary or a warmonger GOP I'll hold my nose and vote for Hillary.
RAZD writes:
. . . and her positions on women's rights and health-care are worth supporting.
RAZD writes:
Personally I would be happy with any one of the three {democratic candidates,
Contrasts with . . .
quote:
Brian Schweitzer, the former Democratic governor of Montana and a potential rival to Clinton in 2016, took a not-so-subtle jab at the former Secretary of State and senator from New York. Schweitzer seemed to suggest that, without citing names, anyone who voted for the Iraq War was still, more than eleven years out from that controversial vote, disqualified from holding the office of the president.
Hillary Clinton's Iraq War Vote Still Matters | The National Interest
quote:
I don’t think anybody should be president of the United States that made that mistake [voting for the Iraq Invasion], he told The Washington Post. - Lincoln Chafee
Indeed.
With all the evidence I have shown, what type of "person" would go ahead and HAPPILY support/vote for Hillary?
Edited by dronestar, : re-upped the Saudi beheading photo.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by RAZD, posted 01-19-2016 4:52 PM RAZD has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by anglagard, posted 04-02-2016 7:19 PM dronestar has not replied
 Message 79 by anglagard, posted 04-02-2016 7:31 PM dronestar has replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 77 of 87 (781246)
04-02-2016 4:53 PM


Bump - Referred to by Admin elsewhere
Admin tries to divert some theme(s) in another topic toward this topic.
I believe a bump might help that a lot.
Adminnemooseus

Or something like that.

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 837 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 78 of 87 (781253)
04-02-2016 7:19 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by dronestar
01-21-2016 12:37 PM


Re: Hillary? Ack! But still better than ANY republican
Oops, double post
Edited by anglagard, : No reason given.

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider. - Francis Bacon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by dronestar, posted 01-21-2016 12:37 PM dronestar has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 837 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


(2)
Message 79 of 87 (781254)
04-02-2016 7:31 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by dronestar
01-21-2016 12:37 PM


Re: Hillary? Ack! But still better than ANY republican
dronestar writes:
It seems everybody in this thread has conveniently forgotten history.
Whoa dude, don't forget me. But that being said a deep and heartfelt thanks for reminding us.
And that should mean a lot to you given the high esteem I hold for RAZD.
As for me, I will never vote for Hilary Clinton for the very reasons you list. Instead, as I said before, I will vote for Gary Johnson. Why you may ask? Because while he won't do squat about the two most pressing issues of our time - namely global warming and income inequality - there will be no more deficit spending or wars of choice. Also, justice will be done - a lot of Clinton's buddies in Wall Street will suddenly discover their 'Get out of jail free' card just got revoked.
And after Johnson ends the War on Drugs and lets everyone convicted of possession and dealing out regardless of substance via blanket Presidential pardon, there should be plenty of room.

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider. - Francis Bacon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by dronestar, posted 01-21-2016 12:37 PM dronestar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by dronestar, posted 04-04-2016 10:20 AM anglagard has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 837 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


(4)
Message 80 of 87 (781259)
04-02-2016 10:54 PM


Listen Up
I have recently read a lot of hogwash about how Bernie Sanders ideas will never work despite evidence to the contrary known as Scandinavia and Canada or that it can never happen here because everyone will respond to the ancient dog whistle 'Commie Pinko Fag'.
I have a question, how many people do you know who are under 30? I work at a junior college library and encounter scores every day. My daughter is 24, she also encounters scores every day. These people are known as millennials. Do you know who gave them that designation? It was Strauss & Howe, who are known for their seminal work Generations. Do you know which generation they compare millennials to? - the GI generation aka the Greatest Generation. Do you know why Strauss & Howe compare the two? Because they give back instead of Baby Boomers (my generation) who just take like a one note opera singer - me, me, me.
Listen up - I admire you but your self-imposed limitation on the art of the possible is gone forever. The millennials, along with generation traitors such as myself, have already made gay marriage legal, next comes transgender rights and marijuana legalization. They will succeed where mine has horribly failed. Brace your britches boomers - organized religion - minimized, war on drugs - gone, homophobia irrelevant, American exceptionalism - an object of derision.
Democratic Socialism is coming, it may not happen tomorrow, it may not happen in a decade or even two, but it is an unstoppable force. I may not live to see the promised land but it will come whether you like it or not.
All your Clinton incrementalism and Republican obstructionism will vanish like a fart in the wind. It's game over for us boomers and our bullshit. Get over it. The millennials will outlive us, outvote us, and create the paradise on the hill.
Edited by anglagard, : turn war one drugs to war on drugs

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider. - Francis Bacon

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Faith, posted 04-02-2016 11:55 PM anglagard has replied
 Message 86 by 1.61803, posted 04-05-2016 5:44 PM anglagard has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 81 of 87 (781260)
04-02-2016 11:55 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by anglagard
04-02-2016 10:54 PM


Re: Listen Up
Wow, quite a rant there.
Problem is, there IS a God in heaven, and the stuff that's getting legalized is defined by Him as sin, and sin committed by a nation brings down judgment on that nation, and judgment is not fun: things like war and economic disaster and increased crime and suicide bombers and 9-11 sorts of things. Since we've been legalizing sin for at least six or seven decades, judgment is already under way.
There is no paradise to be had on this earth, and the paradise dreamed of by fallen humanity is really a ticket to Hell. You may succeed in shutting up the boomers and the religious influences, of course, but you can't shut up God.
Sorry but that's the truth.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by anglagard, posted 04-02-2016 10:54 PM anglagard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by anglagard, posted 04-03-2016 2:15 AM Faith has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 837 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


(2)
Message 82 of 87 (781262)
04-03-2016 2:15 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Faith
04-02-2016 11:55 PM


Re: Listen Up
So your intention is to pollute this thread as you did the last with your god of hate and revenge as you did the last? I believe in the God of the Gospels, in Krishna, in Lao Tse, in Buddha, the White Buffalo Calf Woman - not your shitty OT pathetic version of god which properly belongs to Orthodox Judaism where you need to be schooled in the Torah:
Up yours moron - let Lewis Black explain:
The Bible is not a newspaper, it is a test. Considering the way you treat it, you flunked. God is not in the exclusive domain of white Europeans but rather the God of all which manifests its presence to each according to their level of understanding.
The Lakota have this understanding, to them God is properly referred to as the Great Mystery (not the great spirit of Hollywood). Spinoza provides the proper perspective, Joseph Campbell provides the proper perspective. Russel Means provides the proper perspective.
Why you persist in declaring everyone elses' relationship with the divine your exclusive territory, and why you reject the message of Jesus Christ himself in favor of war and hatred is well beyond my comprehension. Instead of continuously bearing false witness to your threats of leaving, why don't you make good on your promise?
Given our ugly past, I did everything I could to avoid a confrontation. OK, by your choice, it's on now.
Edited by anglagard, : A bit of trouble finding the o on the laptop.

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider. - Francis Bacon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Faith, posted 04-02-2016 11:55 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 83 of 87 (781263)
04-03-2016 2:35 AM


There's only one God and the Bible is His communication to us; there is no salvation in any other religion. I understand you hate the idea but that's a fact, and when you come on as you did recommending that the nation just keep multiplying sin, which can only destroy it by pulling down God's wrath, I have an obligation to bring it up.
ABE: Your list of preferred thinkers is unfortunately anathema to the true God. There IS only one God and the Bible is his communication to us, and there is no other religion that offers salvation from the very wrath your political vision would bring down on us. /abe
But I don't need to continue unless you push me to it. That's how it normally happens.
I don't have any interest in listening to your video.
Have a lovely evening / night, whatever.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by anglagard, posted 04-03-2016 6:31 AM Faith has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 837 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


(2)
Message 84 of 87 (781268)
04-03-2016 6:31 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by Faith
04-03-2016 2:35 AM


Faith writes:
But I don't need to continue unless you push me to it. That's how it normally happens.
Thanks for your restraint in this matter despite my bombast - let us agree to disagree lest we go into pure thermonuclear warfare as we have done in the past. Please don't repurpose any future threads due to your hatred of Islam, I'm sure the mods will be grateful.
I have no wish to debate you however tempting because I know the result will be both agonizing and fruitless, I hope you feel the same way. In the name of peace, please do not respond to my posts and I will return the favor, that is until I find something particularity reprehensible.
Peace on Earth Faith, may we never cross swords again, until the next time .
Edited by anglagard, : in, on, laptops suck when it comes to typing in the dark.

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider. - Francis Bacon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Faith, posted 04-03-2016 2:35 AM Faith has not replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


(1)
Message 85 of 87 (781356)
04-04-2016 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by anglagard
04-02-2016 7:31 PM


Re: Hillary? Better than ANY republican?
dron'n writes:
It seems everybody in this thread has conveniently forgotten history.
anglagard writes:
Whoa dude, don't forget me. But that being said a deep and heartfelt thanks for reminding us.
And that should mean a lot to you given the high esteem I hold for RAZD.
Thanks for your support anglagard, I appreciate it. I believe RAZD understands my supportive evidence, as certainly does Mod.
Even Faith's posts Message 164 and Message 166 earned cheers from me, for her surprisingly lucid posts. Wow.
It's funny how the world's worst problems (today's ISIL or the world-wide immigration problems) stem from injustices caused by the US (decades of support for dictators/terrorists, support for human right's violating nations, toppling of democratic nations, invasions based on lies, largest seller of weapons of small destruction in the world). Yet the american voters cannot/will not acknowledge the primary source of these atrocities: the US government. Although, EVERY election cycle they do have choices (this year: Jill Stein, Gary Johnson, even Bernie Sanders, though Hawkish, is miles more ethical than Hillary), they go on to make extreme excuses why they MUST vote in the same criminals that caused these problems, over and over again.
Edited by dronestar, : better subtitle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by anglagard, posted 04-02-2016 7:31 PM anglagard has not replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


(2)
Message 86 of 87 (781583)
04-05-2016 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by anglagard
04-02-2016 10:54 PM


Re: Listen Up
I like the way you think.
Go Bern man go!
I am seeing momentum in his ideas growing.
A moral justification for selfishness is being challenged.
Just think of all the CRAZY ideas the ol tree hugging hippies had that are coming to fruition. Renewable energy. Recycling, investing in education, letting people who are in love get married. My young daughters are a inspiration to me because they, since very young ages, think in terms of trying to make things better by DOING.
Even if it is reducing ones carbon foot print or volunteering.
It is laughable that Ted Cruz said the other day about 'The Don', that the Donald is actually is a liberal and is saying things that liberals think we want to hear. As if to somehow divorce his GOP ideas and platforms away from the frothing at the mouth lunatic who would punish woman for getting a abortion. Wow.
This election cycle has been so entertaining I am floored every day.
The Chinese have a saying: "May you live in interesting times.
Regardless of what the next General election brings there is going to be some interesting times ahead.
Go Bern man Go!

"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by anglagard, posted 04-02-2016 10:54 PM anglagard has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 837 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


(2)
Message 87 of 87 (781621)
04-06-2016 3:35 AM


Wisconsin
At 97% reporting it's:
Sanders 56.5 % for 45 delegates.
Clinton 43.2 % for 31 delegates.
Cruz 48.3 % for 33 delegates.
Trump 35.1 % for 3 delegates.
Kasich 14% for 0 delegates.
Sanders has now won 7 of the last 8. NY, PA, NJ, CA do your duty and stop voting for Shkreli, the Koch brothers, big pharma, king coal, and the insurance criminals. Despite the traitor states, just say no to the plantation and yes to the volunteer revolution. We won't get fooled again like most the boomers while they continue to let everyone down.
As for that Republican Convention in Cincinnati, it's starting to look brokered to me, glad the forces of that law and order state you love so much pre-ordered all that equipment considering the spectacle which should ensue, and which the lazy and dishonest mass media did so much to create.
This will likely not be the end of self-hatred, but rather the beginning of the end. Go millennials and may God be with you.
Warren 20/20.
Edited by anglagard, : edit out red face, laptops

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider. - Francis Bacon

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024