Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Kidnostad3

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 88
Politics / Re: Fake Law
« on: Today at 08:27:25 AM »
The MSM is engaged in a conspiracy to nullify Trump's election to the Presidency.  When negative news is manufactured for the sole purpose of damaging a President and hindering his ability to govern it is an act of sedition against the Nation.  The media are the enemy of the people.

Politics / Re: The Alpha Male POTUS
« on: May 26, 2017, 02:57:27 PM »
Idiot. He's rude. A peasant. A barely evolved caveman. If he's such a man, feel free to explain his rice paper thin skin.

He just doesn't take shit from snarky assholes.  That may be why you feminized Brits find him so threatening.


We are raising a generation of feminized, spineless, characterless neurotics.  God help us. 

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 23, 2017, 02:13:39 PM »
Infowars journalist is an oxymoron.  Alex Jones is a regular moron.

Alex Jones is anything but "regular."  There was a time when I would be hard pressed to call Info Wars a legitimare news outlet.  However, given that the MSM has abrogated all journalistic standards in waging it's war on Trump and the American Right,  I now consider that news source to be as legitimate as any and much preferable to listening to left wing propagandists that dominate the corporate media, some of whom are pictured below. 

Politics / Re: Political Parody
« on: May 23, 2017, 01:41:47 PM »
Starr, you are a breach breath of fresh air.

Sorry about that typo Starr. 

Politics / Re: OMG, Arians Grande bombed in UK
« on: May 23, 2017, 08:35:27 AM »
Muslims, maybe? How much are our societies supposed to take before we ask a question: the behavior of Islam and the goals of Islam hasn't changed much iin centuries and like the other times in history when they wanted to invade Europe. Now due to technology and political correctness it just is easier to attack randomly. It took pogroms, wars, and even putting them on pikes as a warning in some cases. Back then Europeans didn't accept a "new normal" of being killed, enslaved, or invaded.

"... Turkish messengers came to [Vlad] to pay respects, but refused to take off their turbans, according to their ancient custom, whereupon he strengthened their custom by nailing their turbans to their heads with three spikes, so that they could not take them off.
— Antonio Bonfini: Historia Pannonica"

Obviously I'm not advocating genocide or something like targeting Muslims for death, but just a no more Muslim immigrant policy and surveilling/monitoring of the mosques, schools, and Muslims currently residing in our countries. No more political correctness and hand-wringing and worrying about their feelings. Bans on Halal shops, Muslim garb in public or schools, and no more Mosque building. No Muslim schools allowed. You are Muslim, you are an immigrant you are presumed to be a suspect. Don't like the extra scrutiny or "profiling?" Then move back to some Muslim land or your country.

I agree 100%.  It's not Eskimo communities in which Muslims who are citizens of a western nation or hold various types of resident visas are radicalized, develop their support networks, conceal themselves and thrive.   It's a mathematical certainty that the threat of terrorism in western nations increases in direct proportion to the number of muslims residing in the nation.  For every Muslim who actively participates in efforts to identify potential terrorists within their community there are 10,000 who do not.  There will be no real cooperation from Muslims in stopping terrorists until the community as a whole feels pressure to cooperate and I am for any legal means available to exert that pressure to include revocation of citizenship and deportation of those who have  knowledge of a planned attack and do not report it.   

Muslims should feel a collective guilt for the heinous acts of members of their peaceful religion but I have yet to see it manifested.  I have never heard a Muslim offer anything but weak lip service in condemning these attacks. What I have heard is the conviction expressed by believers, ostensibly with no connection to these bloodlettings, that these acts of terrorism are the will of Allah and nothing more than chickens coming home to roost in western nations.   I think that it is naive to the point of foolhardiness to believe that a majority of expatriate Muslims have an abiding loyalty to their new countries  and are not sympathetic to a large degree with their fellow believers who slaughter innocents in the name of Allah.  The deafening silence of the Muslim community in the face of attacks on their adopted homelands amounts to tacit approval of the heinous acts of their coreligionists. 

As it stands Muslims are treated like an unassailable privileged minority and woe betide anyone who points out the obvious evils of their belief system and their duplicity in dealing with non Muslims.  Their good book tells the faithful that it is okay to lie to and take advantage of the infidel and it sanctions the assassination of those who speak ill of Islam or the Prophet.  What's more, it is a central tenant of the religion that Allah has ordained that all peoples of the world will bow to Islam and that it is the duty of the faithful to strive towards that end.  What will it take to convince the bleeding heart liberal apologists for Islam that these are broadly held articles of faith and not just faulty interpretation of Islamic scripture by a few outlying sects.  Did not Erdogen in a recent public statement urge expat muslims to outbreed the people of their host countries in order to achieve the critical mass necessary to control the culture and political system?  Why is it so difficult for some to believe Islamist when they freely proclaim that their aim is to destroy western culture and for them to stop supporting government policies that facilitate accomplishment of this evil objective?  One is tempted to recommend that they remove their heads from their asses.

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trumprit
« on: May 21, 2017, 12:27:49 PM »
But Trump. What of him? Its quite telling you list verbatim the qualifications of someone you believe has written less than flattering things about Obama, yet completely try to denigrate similar qualified people who give insight into how Trump functions, who its fair to say has no convictions, political or otherwise apart from trying to beat anyone who disagrees with him. Shit is he going to get a wake up in Brussels with the NATO delegates. Well, assuming his brain can digest more than sixty words a minute.

 Having Marxist parents isn't a crime in the free world. Honestly. Neither is it having parents who are neo nazis.

1. How many things are these anti-Trump journalist going to have to get wrong before you realize that the facts don't matter to them as long as the story damages Trump? 

2. The NATO membership realizes who the big frog on the pond is and they will be more than gracious to a Trump.  Depend on it.

3.  Most certainly no one should be held responsible for the beliefs of their parents but in Obama's case he held those same beliefs well into adulthood.  Some of his leftist cohorts who are in a position to know claim he has publicly disavowed the more extreme of those beliefs as a political expedient but that he still holds them privately.  They consider this duplicity and his failure to more aggressively advance socialism while President to be a betrayal. 

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trumprit
« on: May 21, 2017, 11:26:36 AM »
Right-wing talkers keep it simple and adversarial. They don't have any ideas, they just tell you that things would be better if their designated targets were sacked/imprisoned/humiliated or whatever. That sort of thing resonates with the uneducated who need an enemy and don't have the interest or capacity to deal with policy. The majority of comments from Trumpets bear this out, and the rage and bitterness after the election that was shown by a group that actually won was something to behold.

I know you think all your ideas come to you newly-minted but so much of what you say tracks with the right-wing zeitgeist that Rush might as well be be working you from behind. Calling a vaguely centre-left figure like Obama a Marxist just shows that you need to broaden your reading, if you read at all.

Conservatives have a useful role to play, but it's too much work for you. Like many boomers you are incredibly lazy and would much rather throw stones than engage an opponent. Conservatives value continuity whereas you want to tear it all down. You are so full of fear and hatred that you cannot see straight.

I just finished reading "Rising Star, the Making of Barak Obama" by David Garrow who is a self-identified ardent progressive.   (I have included a summary of his background below.). I have also read books on Obama by Bob Woodward and other moderate to left leaning authors who voice the exact same criticisms of him that Garrow does.  All confirm that he was brought up by a mother and grandparents that were admitted communists and that Obama's orientation was decidedly in that direction until relatively late in life when, with the help of Bill Ayers, Valerie Jarrett and others, he became convinced that his manifest Marxist tendancies were extremely limiting with respect to his political viability.  So, according to Garrow, he began taking steps to distance himself from his well known advocacy of Marxist doctrine.  He did the same thing for the same reasons in obscuring his attachment to the Muslim faith by becoming a member of Wright's congregation.  The central theme of Garrow's book is that Obama is an unscrupulous moral and political chameleon.  I would suggest that you read the two books I cite above to facilitate an informed opinion of Obama.  Until then you should not waste the time of others by speaking from ignorance.  (Let me know if Garrow is not left wing enough for you.)

"Garrow served as a senior adviser for Eyes on the Prize, the award-winning PBS television history of the Civil Rights Movement covering the years 1954–1965. He has taught at Duke University, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the City University of New York, The Cooper Union (where in 1992–1993 he served as Visiting Distinguished Professor of History), the College of William and Mary (where in 1994–1995 he served as Harrison Professor of History), American University (where in 1995–96 he served as Distinguished Historian in Residence), Emory University (where from 1997 until 2005 he was Presidential Distinguished Professor). Between 2006 and 2011 he was a Senior Research Fellow at Homerton College, University of Cambridge, and since 2011 he has served as Research Professor of History and Law at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law."

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trumprit
« on: May 21, 2017, 09:41:01 AM »
Instead plumping for a self confessed Leninst (Bannon) and a fat oaf who adores dictators, especially ones who routinely have political opponents killed.

Pish tosh. You answer none of my questions and resort to name calling and bromides.

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trumprit
« on: May 21, 2017, 09:11:20 AM »
We have an affirmative. MD does believe that Conservative Talk Radio is Journalism.
Thank you.

“Our system depends on a healthy debate” — you say (appearing to recognize and advocate-for this, if not demand it). So which among the top Conservative Talk Radio hosts would you say is “healthy”? Which of them fulfils that vital need?

In the short-list provided below, please add an "x" in front of the name(s) of any you would endorse and recommend for said Health-maintenance purposes — i.e. those who you believe do earnestly pursue and purvey truth, fairness, and balance in their presentation of the relevant spectrum of political/social/cultural/moral "ideas".

  Rush Limbaugh
  Glenn Beck
  Mike Savage
  Mark Levin
  Sean Hannity
  Ann Coulter
  Laura Ingraham
  Dennis Prager
  Bill O'Reilly

You silly shit.  The reason for the success and popularity of the aforementioned personalities is that their commentary resonates with millions of Americans who feel they have been abandoned by their govermment and the media.  Can you name an equal number of leftist commentators who have anything approaching the following than have the conservative/libertarian commentators you cite.
How do you account for the disparity.  Moreover, how do you account for the trend away from the traditional news outlets towards net-based outlets?

The fact is that the majority of Americans have seen where the neo marxists policies of Obama have taken  the country and they have rejected it.  You and your fellow left wing ideologues do not occupy the high ground in terms of morality or wisdom in the eyes of most Americans as your inane posts suggest.  On the contrary, you represent all that is wrong with America. 

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 21, 2017, 08:09:54 AM »

*Sorry MD, not all all traditional media is on the level of talk shows... There is still lots that is useful.

There once was a time when I would agree with you.  It seems to me that that since the MSM essentially stood down in its vetting of Obama it has evolved into an agenda driven instrument of left wing globalists and Trump's election has served to dispel any doubt about it.  The recent study conducted by Harvard merely quantifies corporate media's malice towards Trump and demonstrates its willingness to dispense with any pretense of journalistic integrity to cause him damage.  I would be hard pressed to name any major MSM outlet that hasn't jumped on the bandwagon in the effort to nullify Trump's election.  Maybe you can help me with that.

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 20, 2017, 06:28:07 PM »

Hmmmm... This is what Trump said when the Obamas went to SA in 2015,

Many people are saying it was wonderful that Mrs. Obama refused to wear a scarf in Saudi Arabia, but they were insulted.We have enuf enemies
8:40 AM - 29 Jan 2015

Still, you can't expect him to remember that.

Like everyone else, the Saudis felt that the more of Michelle that is covered the better.  Melania on the other hand...

Radio and Podcasts / Re: Caravan to Midnight
« on: May 20, 2017, 01:18:08 PM »
I know, Right?  :o

I'm just glad we are all above that sort of thing.

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 20, 2017, 01:04:47 PM »

Donald Trump bows to a dictator.  Or is it a curtsy?

Maybe rather than bending at the waist a little to facilitate the king  bestowing an honor upon him, Trump should have insisted that they fetch the royal step ladder.  Obama did a full frontal genuflection when he met the king or might it have been an offer of oral  sex.  Either way it would be consistent with Obama's true character.

Radio and Podcasts / Re: Caravan to Midnight
« on: May 20, 2017, 12:41:48 PM »
I think last nights guest was outstanding!

I thought LCOL Massengill was outstanding too.  (Okay, I know it's hard not to go for the obvious cheap joke that his last name tempts one to make but anyone who would do that would be a real douchebag.)

Politics / Re: Political Parody
« on: May 19, 2017, 09:46:51 AM »
Starr, you are a breach of fresh air. 

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 18, 2017, 08:29:59 PM »
That would be meth or something similar, made right here in labs across America. Colombia and Mexico blamed for heroin, which is now mixed with Fentanyl and 100x stronger Carfentanil, being produced in illicit labs across China. With so many goods being shipped in from China, it's easy to slip in the potent, compact fentanyl. No wall on the US-Mexico border will stop these shipments from China.

Meanwhile Trump and the GOP promise to cut substance abuse treatment programs and the Medicaid to pay for them. In the "war on drugs", the wall is a Trump fantasy.

You sound like a chemical gourmet.  How long have you been clean and sober?

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 18, 2017, 02:13:24 PM »
But they are inconsistent. He must be the world's worst poker player, everything is a tell with him.

It would be like you ordering oatmeal at that care home of yours (only mush allowed for you) only to hurl the bowl at your nurse and claim you wanted mashed banana instead, before soiling your diapers in protest.

Yeah they really get upset when I do that but what really pisses them off is when, after they have  cleaned the oatmeal up and gotten it out of their hair, I ask them why they're taking so fucking long to bring me my oatmeal.  It's a riot!

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 18, 2017, 01:59:26 PM »
Subpeonas are not "optional" -- is "contempt of Congress" to (attempt to) refuse.

OMG Stop the Presses!  Meister has made yet another amazing revelation.  Certainly there will be dire consequences:

"In 2012, Eric Holder was found in contempt of Congress, with this resolution passing both a committee and the full chamber. However, the Obama Administration’s Department of Justice cited executive privilege and did not pursue a case against Holder.

In May 2014, Lois Lerner was found to be in contempt of Congress when she would not testify before a committee. A contempt of Congress resolution passed in the House of Representatives, but the United States attorney for the District of Columbia subsequently said that no charges against Lerner would be pursued.

In 2016, Bryan Pagliano, the Hillary Clinton aide who helped set up her private email server, refused to testify before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The committee found him in contempt of Congress in a vote, but this did not end up being voted on by the full House. In February 2017, House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz urged the Department of Justice to pursue charges against Pagliano, but no such charges have come."

Imagine, Flynn can be fined as much as $1000.00.  That'll teach the bastard to mess with Congress.

Flynn's attorney advised him well.  But thank you Captain Obvious for letting us know about Flynn's continuing criminal behavior.  OBTW, has Susan RIce testified before Congress or is she waiting to be subpoenaed?

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 18, 2017, 01:25:51 PM »
Just so everyone is in no doubt. Last night Trump stated he was looking forward to the conclusion of the investigation by Mueller....

This morning its a witch hunt. Clear?

Those statements are not contradictory. 

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 18, 2017, 12:59:00 PM »
The WH staff believed it would quieten down after the announcement of Mueller's role. Somehow I don't think that's true; Cry baby Donny was tweeting earlier how he's all hard done to and and and Obama and Clinton never had a special prosecuter investigating them. Didn't he say in the campaign that Clnton would stand trial and go to jail? So now he's (as he keeps reminding anyone who still cares to listen) POTUS, why doesn't he get the ball rolling n that?

Its not fair!!!

Other than to ask the AG to look into it, Trump will have nothing to say about whether or not Hilliary is prosecuted.   That determination is the sole province of DOJ.  However, given the DAG's assessment  of the way in which Comey handled the Clinton email investigation it seems to me that it behooves him to, at the very least, reexamine the evidence on which Comey based his findings plus any additional facts that may be uncovered as a result of the Weiner investigation.  Whether she will be indicted for her mishandling of classified material is anyone's guess.  Of course the Clinton Foundation is an entirely different matter and all indications are that that investigation is ongoing and has been for some time.  I think it more likely that the latter produces an indictment(s) rather than the former. 

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 18, 2017, 07:49:18 AM »
I am buoyed by the appointment of a special prosecutor.   He may uncover some minor infractions on  the part of individuals connected to the Trump campaign but he will also uncover those in the government who worked to sabotage Trump's presidency and the complicity of the MSM in this effort.  In the end it will be a net plus for Trump as it will highlight the perfiidy of establishment politicians and their allies in the MSM and it will elicit sympathy for Trump among fairminded voters.  Any failure of Trump to implement the policies that he ran on will be rightfully seen as being due to the obstructionism of Democrats.

The sword being swung is two edged and the investigation could go anywhere.  This is good for the Country.. 


Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 17, 2017, 09:10:50 PM »
It would be nice if the Dems (or anyone in politics for that matter) would discuss important shit like the mass incarceration of minor offenders in private for profit prisons, the decriminalization of marijuana (first two are directly related), the insane cost of college keeping younger people in constant debt, the billions of dollars spend on foreign wars, how to get a healthcare system that isn't shit, repealing gun laws that infringe on the 2nd amendment, pass REAL banking regulations, regulate the drug companies and stop the price gouging, ending the mass surveillance state, ending torture, stop droning in the middle east (ends up killing more civilians) and stop arming terrorists to fight other terrorists who will eventually be the terrorist we have to fight later

But no f all that, we have to fan the flames of WWIII. Fuck the Dems they caused half this shit and fuck the republicans they did the other half and both are complicit with most the real issues facing the population today.

Here, here.  And the horses they rode in on. 

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 17, 2017, 09:06:36 PM »
May doesn't have an 'r' in it, much like our English friends' accents.  I imperiled my digestion last week, too, but we have much colder water and I survived unscathed.

Hipp Hipp Hurra for 17. mai!

OMG!  Do you mean to say that all my suffering might have been due to the lack of an r?  Who can keep up with all these things one must know. 

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 17, 2017, 09:00:16 PM »
i know it's a joke dude i'm not trying to be a dick, but like, it's the future of western civilization too, you know what i mean??

I feel ya bro.

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 17, 2017, 08:55:34 PM »
even this facetious thought experiment doesn't work in the context of the analogy. put a cat in a box. put dynamite inside the box. see if the cat has any chance to survive when you look inside the box. it also specifically only refers to the time before you look in the box.

schrodingers cat relates to the collapse of wave functions and a mathematical quandry in quantum physics. if you put a cat in a box and set off (series of events A) then (outcome B) is always going to be the same when you open the box up.

in this case, when the election results came through and were broadcast on air, the wave function collapsed and even according to quantum mechanics, the outcome (and past events leading up to it) were all fixed. in short, no. schrodingers cat, even in an esoteric, abstract sense, would have absolutely no relevance to this discussion or the analogy regarding the ball and the screen :(

It was a joke.  Lighten the fuck up.

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 17, 2017, 08:38:12 PM »
if you're even serious (which i don't believe you are), i have to say that dealing with low IQ people is really fucking tedious.

let's use "occams razor" and test the simplest explanation first. if you can tell me why millions of people wouldn't vote their own interests when there's nothing stopping them, then you can be considered to have some sort of maybe-sort-of argument. but if you can't, then you have no argument, absent evidence that none of it happened.

the burden of proof here lies on the individual who is arguing for the COUNTER "common sense" outcome to be true?

so if i am holding a ball behind a screen that nobody can see, and i say "i'm going to drop this and it's going to hit the floor", you're essentially saying "no it's not going to hit the floor unless you can remove the screen and prove that it happened". in order for your assertion to be taken seriously, you need to provide some sort of evidence or reasoning to back it up, otherwise people will just laugh at you (as they do)

in our case and in our metaphor, the vote is the ball and the measures which protect even the US government from reviewing which ballots were cast for who is the screen that's blocking our view. is that still too complicated for you?

According to Schrodinger the ball may or may not actually be in a dropped state and would remain in a"superposition" and not have collapsed into a state of reality (i.e. being in the dropped or undropped  state) until it is actually observed.  But that's just the Schrodinger's Cat Theory so take it for what it's worth. 

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 17, 2017, 07:47:49 PM »
You're okay with impartiality as long as the impartial one has brought democrats to book and you favour them? Is that correct?

Yes that's exactly right.  I want all democrats jailed or at least beaten severely about the head and shoulders. 

Politics / Re: President Donald J. Trump
« on: May 17, 2017, 07:43:49 PM »
Your problem, of course, is that you are incapable of reasoning because in your heart of hearts you believe that you're superior based upon the color of your skin.  Admit it.

Could it be that in your heart of hearts you know that were  it not for your skin shade you would have no claim to victimhood and would be required to measure up (or not) with no excuse to fall back on?  People of color have been given 50+ years of prerential treatment in this country and some have used it to achieve a higher status in life.  Those people have my sincere respect and admiration.  However, many others still cannot ride the bicycle of life without the training wheels and it seems it will ever be thus.  When will more of you rise above bestial behavior and be able to compete on an equal basis.  (Maybe after you have all been paid reparations?).   If having the belief that many many more could and should makes me a racist then I will wear the name proudly. To think otherwise is to perpetuate the problem. 

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 88