birdog1960
-
Posts
7,653 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by birdog1960
-
-
You blindly support a candidate who should be in prison. I would hardly say you're in a position of morally principled superiority.
this is bare knuckle politics. moral superiority isn't a consideration.
gowdy = fail.
The South Carolina Republican, a former federal prosecutor, insisted that former House speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) and current speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) never “asked me to do anything about presidential politics” on the panel, which was formed in May 2014.
“My job is to report facts,” Gowdy told reporters. “You can draw whatever conclusions you want to draw.”
yeah. sure. you lose.
-
Why so defensive? You've cared little about the Americans left for death by Obama and Hillary and everyone else on the left. Suddenly you're upset with Gowdy?
Sounds like someone had a nerve hit.
what hit a nerve was empowering some half wit to run a witch hunt. not that it's never been done before,. but not in a couple hundred years.
-
Stock up on ammo & Spam. Where's Dwight Drane when you need him?
awe geez. you guys are pathetic. stock up on wisdom and smartness. i was recently heartened by a morons citation of an orwell classic. things are good!
o yeah, trent, i mean tray, i mean trey. yup one of those trendy names where it's cool but it's really not cool..sorry. i still prefer "bernie". it's unpretentious. not some monkey's manufracturered, loser band drop outrageous bands joke that they're too embarrassed to acknowledge. on behalf of the realty and trayettre, trumpeters, id like to to disavow allegiance. from anyone i know still supporting trump.
-
you've been played, by such a fly speck as whatever-his-first name-is, gowdy. pathetic.
-
Considering it was in this morning's WSJ and Economist, you should update your news sources to papers that actually matter.
the economist is , you know, a british publication, and a fine one. shadow cabinet and wsj gives no recent results but i rarely read it anyway. far too much conservative bias. murdoch's dirty fingerprints all over it.
-
Uhm, it was all over the news that informed people read.
umm, google shadow cabinet results in 2 us sources in the 1st 5 pages: huff post 1st and on page 4 politico. i'm guessing you waded through the weeds to the latter. can't see you huffing. so i presume informed people all read one of those 2 sources regularly. by that definition, ill bet there are few informed posters here.
when i posted the bbc link it was about 4 hours old
-
interesting that this isn't hitting the news here: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/brexit-labour-mps-tell-corbyn-to-resign-in-uk-parliament/news-story/04c19f975315ead12f5d7d10a5e65c31?nk=ef7eb7962e56d6dfc7339f807fccb403-1467071197. parliament is a wreck. liberals in shadow cabinet resign en masse. wouldn't have known had i not gotten a call from the uk tonight. interesting, indeed.
try this instead: http://labour shadow cabinet resignation
-
Maybe it's not other people with money that are holding you back? Maybe it's because you don't know the difference between a labrum and a spleen?
im not being held back. I would never have voted for brexit if I were an Englishman. the ones voting for exit or those most likely to be held back.
-
here's the real reason for brexit: http://moneymorning.com/acq/frontrunners/new-rankings-the-richest-people-in-america-and-what-theyre-doing-that-youre-not?advText=yes&ad=za1a-nrfarb-l&iris=522029
contemplate these numbers for just a minute.
yes, I know it's a rip off ad but the numbers are real:
1,810 billionaires made this year’s World’s Billionaires List, with a total net worth of $6.48 trillion, down from $7.05 trillion last year. Altogether, 221 former billionaires dropped out of the rankings, while 198 newcomers joined for the first time.
this much of the worlds wealth in less than 2000 peoples hands is the true lunacy.
-
That would be because there's no meaningful difference between D and R when it comes to economic policy. They're almost unanimously pro- "free" trade agreements.
there are no d's and r's in Europe. this is about smart versus dumb as I said before. when dumb wins, the markets justifiably freak.
-
The Brexit vote is not cleanly conservative, but it's interesting that US conservatives are mostly supporting the LEAVE result, despite it being a vote against free trade. Conservatives were once the party of free trade and now have become protectionists who don't believe in open trade. It's a curious turn to find them in bed with trade unions and the left.
That conservatives (the current crop of them) vote anti immigration is no shock. There was a moment here where it seemed the right in the US might tackle immigration reform in a meaningful way, but the Trump ascendency ensures that won't happen.
This too. on economic policy it's hard to tell the cowboys from the Indians.
-
I'm not here to comment on what Bman implied with his statement but the Brexit vote was not a "conservative" vote. It was a vote against the status quo, a vote against free trade, a vote against more immigration and a vote of frustration for the middle class.
Their anxieties are well-placed but I'm not so sure that their votes were. To be honest, I haven't read enough of the pros and cons to form a sound opinion on whether or not the vote will be a net positive but I'd venture to guess that it won't be.
Also, I'm not sure that I've heard the term "elites" as often as I've had to describe the opposition as much as I've heard over these past few days.
Is that the new populist parroted term that the cool kids are saying now a days?
this. but this was the opposite of Orwellian (what ever that is..hmmm dystopia:utopia, no, this certainly wasn't utopian) anywho, we finally agree. i'd bet the house the outcome will be net negative in a big way. there's a reason stocks are tanking. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/jim-rogers-on-brexit---worse-than-any-bear-market-you-ve-seen-in-your-lifetime-154317566.html# actually there are many reasons but this lunacy is right up near the top. and there are too many tone deaf elites. it's true and a valid complaint. this just wasn't the appropriate response.
-
Comprehension please.
My comment about Liberals was clearly about the WAPO reaction, not who voted for wha
so wait, a conservative pm begs people to stay eu and loses and someone at wapo calls out the masses for being stupid and you assume he's taking a liberal stance? do you not imagine Cameron privately saying "what a bunch of idiots" after the results of the referendum came back? it's certainly what my conservative English in laws are still saying.
-
It's stupid to vote out of an undemocratic union where sovereignty is completely ignored?
it's stupid to commit economic hari kari in the midst of already turbulent and precarious economic times. these people apparently think things can't get worse for them they are mistaken.
-
What better evidence do you need ?
Liberals push for democracy until the people vote conservative
Cameron was the conservative leader and he was solidly against brexit
this isn't cons vs liberals. it's smart versus stupid. -
The WWII "generation" didn't carry this vote. There are barely any of them left, and that is a shame, but it's also a mathmatical fact.
I see two polls showing 56 and 58% of 25-49 voted stay. Link
I see the SKy Data data too. Goes to show how crappy UK polling data is. If you look at the link, the trend is clear so I'd be surprised to see the 18-49 demo voted as Sky Data calculated.
ouch. the angry uk working class just screwed everyone including themselves. i get the anger but suicide is not the solution. ww2 generation would have sucked it up and pushed someone willing to buck the establishment while having an actual plan to fix the mess we are in...and it wouldn't be trump.
i rarely empathize with millennials but in this case i do:
Over the course of a single night, baby boomers have rejected expert opinion and torn apart my generation’s future. Why? Because a vague notion of making our country “great again,” combined with an infectious hysteria about immigration, was enough to convince them that things have to change. They were so convinced, in fact, that they were happy to vote for Leave without any definition of what “great” looks like, and no road map to actually achieving it.
-
I could care less about the kochs.
Oh and speaking of useful idiots
https://amp.twimg.com/v/7b0bb47f-6655-435a-8906-99529534de58
how many americans of similar intellect will be voting for trump?
oh, and I think you meant "exacerbating".
-
And yet the champion of inequality or the left will be making a bundle on this move exasperating inequality.
Care to guess who I'm referring to?
ummm, let me think...George soros bankrolls good causes but his methods are pretty awful. he's not a hero to me. possibly similar to how you feel about the kochs.
-
Welcome to the revolution. The EU is a cooked goose. Other countries will follow.
It makes me curious as to whether the United States would ever quit NAFTA should Trump become President.
I believe it is the beginning. this is what results from the concentration of wealth. there are many more have nots than haves and the have nots are getting poorer. totally predictable but the Nero's of the current world fiddled and continue to do so.
-
Just like London...................3 to 1
Edinburgh, #EUref result:
Remain: 74.4% (187,792)
Leave: 25.6% (64,498)
It's pretty easy to see the comparison with the urban vote percentages in the U.S.
well, no. it's not similar at all.
-
Got it. You only do things when there is a tangible benefit for yourself.
You should admit you're an unprincipled asshat and be done with it.
not to benefit me you fool. to benefit the country as a whole. if I were to vote based on who would most likely benefit me personally, i'd rarely if ever vote dem.
-
Huh? Bernie's been portraying himself as the overlooked underdog his whole campaign. He was the one playing off of "the government thinks I don't have a shot."
Yeah, a man of principles like Bernie would support you voting for someone you find morally reprehensible because they are the only one "with a chance to win." That's how idealistc, conscientious and moral men behave. Sure thing birddog. That's why he's packed up the whole campaign right?
yes, he really was an underdog. and he made a really good run. I think he'd have won California if the press didn't already anoint Hillary the winner the night before. but he has no realistic path to the prez now. if I were a superdelegate i'd give him my vote at the convention but i'm not and there won't be enough superdelegates willing to do that.
I think an argument can be made to vote for an outlier with no chance in the primaries just so he/she can get their message out; to be a gadfly. Bernie was certainly that and forced Hillary towards more liberal positions on many issues. in that way, it was a benefit to vote for him despite his losing. at this point, there is no more benefit to be had.
-
Perhaps?
You, without a shred of self-awareness, just said its no use voting with your conscience, morals or ideals if that candidate can't win. You, an admitted Bernie supporter because of his conscience, morals and ideals.
In short, you're a !@#$ing moron. Bernie would think you're the problem with America. Think about that.
I didn't sat that at all. I said that voting for someone that will never have a chance to win the presidency is wasting your vote. Bernie had a chance. I voted for him. now he doesn't. I won't be voting for him.
I don't believe he would see any contradiction in any of this.
voting conscience, morals and ideas are fine if there is some possible benefit (other than self congratulation). in bernie's case, if he were 8 years younger he might have a chance after hillary's run. walker has absolutely no chance. ever. unless...far right wingers start having babies at an unprecedented rate. even then it would be a long shot and would be 20+ years down the road.
-
What?
This is horrible, cynical take out of you.
perhaps. still it's always nice to have an excuse to see Sophia loren in her prime.
Benghazi
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
who were president and sec state when this happened? http://adst.org/2013/04/the-bombing-of-u-s-embassy-beirut-april-18-1983/ is their saliva on the graves of those that died that day in 1983?
my opinion is that it is not. it's a dangerous world with evil people and terrorists. tragedies like this will inevitably occur.