| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's as likely that Clinton had Rich killed as it is that the GOP had him killed because they knew they could pin it on Clinton - i.e., not likely at all.
And you also have to remember that to many people, the accusation will be the only "proof" they need. Clinton has a believability problem with the demographics who support her, much less the one ready to blame her for everything up to asteroid impacts.
Clinton causes Asteroid Impacts?
How did she gain that type of power?
(just in case someone out there really thinks I'm being serious, I'm being facetious, just so they are clear this is NOT truly being serious...because invariably someone ALWAYS thinks a post like this is serious unless I'm am explicitly clear it is not...which unfortunately kind of kills the humor of it).
*Looks*
If it makes you feel better, the top match was only talking about the Black Death being caused by an asterioid, and stuff about Clinton simply appearing on the page.
Which, as all good conspiracy theorists know, is clear evidence of an irrefutable link proving the two are related. 8D Huzzah!
[/Joking]
Clinton causes Asteroid Impacts?
How did she gain that type of power?
(just in case someone out there really thinks I'm being serious, I'm being facetious, just so they are clear this is NOT truly being serious...because invariably someone ALWAYS thinks a post like this is serious unless I'm am explicitly clear it is not...which unfortunately kind of kills the humor of it).
Poe's Law.
You can't assume people will know you're not being serious when there are people out there making the exact same claim in all seriousness.
The asteroid one might be a little far out, but for the sake of the remaining scraps of my faith in humanity, I'm not going to search for people actually believing it.
I don't know about that, but I do remember the Republicans blaming the weather for their 2012 convention on Obama.
At what point does Hillary pull a season 7 game of thrones cersie and just embrace the fact that she's going to be called a supervillianess anyway..Because that maneuver only works if you're a man.
Most men make terrible supervillianesses. A few can pull off the high heels though...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Clinton causes Asteroid Impacts?
How did she gain that type of power?
(just in case someone out there really thinks I'm being serious, I'm being facetious, just so they are clear this is NOT truly being serious...because invariably someone ALWAYS thinks a post like this is serious unless I'm am explicitly clear it is not...which unfortunately kind of kills the humor of it).
Poe's Law.
You can't assume people will know you're not being serious when there are people out there making the exact same claim in all seriousness.
The asteroid one might be a little far out, but for the sake of the remaining scraps of my faith in humanity, I'm not going to search for people actually believing it.
Not sure how you'll feel about humanity, but i did a search.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok... so Trump says he was talking about the 'organizational strength' of the 'second ammendment people' when he said they could stop Hillary appointed judges from 'repealing the 2nd ammendment'.
Except... how can their organizational strength and/or voting help after Hillary has already been elected and appointed the judges? He had clearly just said that after the judges were appointed it would be too late to do anything... except for the 'second ammendment people'... who have some kind of ability to stop the judges from being appointed... after they have already been appointed... because of how 'organized' they are...
OMG!
The NRA has a time machine!
Trump just really wants voters to be organized and active in their communities!
Remember that RT is owned by the Russian government.
And remember that Julian Assange is literally the worst.
Considering that Clinton has vigorously pushed for his arrest and imprisonment, I can't say that I blame him for making it personal.
No, there's lots of other things to blame that human s*%&stain for.
Clinton causes Asteroid Impacts?
How did she gain that type of power?
Only Clinton can protect us from the aboleths! Vote for her or face extinction!
I wish it was parody...
I believe unintentional self-parody qualifies.
Or are you seriously suggesting we lend ANY CREDENCE AT ALL to the idea that Bill and Hillary Clinton are among the most prolific serial killers in U.S. history? o.O
Not revisiting this topic.
Probably for the best.
To be clear, I, Thomas Blaine Seitz, am the 665th clone of the Anti-Christ that the CIA was going to use to help them assassinate and then replace Fidel Castro and start WWIII.
I also know for a fact that the CIA had a time machine and used it to create the Black Death to kill King Edward III.
Wait, are you the guy who hid those jars of honey in the pyramids?!
K-Cleaver,
No that was some CIA guy named Stan Smith. I think he had two kids. Never heard from him again.
So...who has Trump dog-whistled for assassination today?
Too soon?
K-Cleaver,
No that was some CIA guy named Stan Smith. I think he had two kids. Never heard from him again.
Did Hillary kill him? We all know she's shilling for BIG HONEY!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It must be nice
It must be niiiice
(Follow the honey and see where it goes)
It must be nice
It must be niiice
(The pharaoh has no clothes)
So Trump seems to be continuing this narrative that the election is rigged and that the Clinton people will "steal" the presidency. I thought the Daily Show did a rather funny piece regarding gerrymandering and voter ID laws to show how the elections are actually rigged (but in Trump's favor) but I do find this a bit troublesome as it feels like he's pushing for some violent finish to the elections. He's not polling well right now, it's always felt like he was unlikely to win, and so calling for 2nd amendment people to do something is kind of scary. Some of his supporters don't seem particularly stable.
Your understatement is bigger than Donald's hands are small.
Did Hillary kill him? We all know she's shilling for BIG HONEY!K-Cleaver,
No that was some CIA guy named Stan Smith. I think he had two kids. Never heard from him again.
No I'm pretty sure it was the Pharaoh's curse. That or the 10 plagues. I forget which.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am worried about where the rage of Trump's supporters is going to go when he loses, though.Hopefully they'll just occupy landfills and bird sanctuaries.
I know this was a joke, but as a birder and environmentalist the Malheur Refuge occupation is not something I want repeated. The Bundy led occupiers damaged Native American graves, prevented a lot of important management work (invasive carp control, dike management)at one of the most significant migration stopping points on the Pacific Flyway, threatened the families of refuge personnel (causing them to flee the area) and cost taxpayers millions.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I know this was a joke, but as a bird
erand environmentalist the Malheur Refuge occupation is not something I want repeated.
:)
In today's news, Trump denied that the Secret Service spoke to him about his 'Second Amendment People' comment, and says that CNN was lying about it happening.
I'm beginning to understand how all those turtles got stack up so high.
*Rubs chin* If I had to summarize... right now, Donald Trump feels like a certain kind of schoolboy to me. Let's see if I can adequately describe this.
It's like... every school has at least one of them - a kid who acts like he was raised with no real limitations on anything he said or did. The teachers spend a lot of effort on trying to get him to like learning, but he couldn't care less, and in fact seems to enjoy making them work for no reward. He might come in late on a regular basis, and when asked about it, he'll just smirk and shrug and say something like his car broke down so it's obviously not his fault, when it's so new it hasn't even had to go in for its first regular maintenance yet. Everyone knows he's totally full of nonsense, but he's used to nobody ever truly calling him out on it or punishing him for what he says, and sometimes he lies just because he knows people will grumble a bit but ultimately knuckle under. He enjoys pushing their buttons and getting them to react.
That's how he comes across to me right now.
In a related comment, former Director of the CIA General Michael Hayden (ret.), said "If someone else had said that outside the hall, he'd be in the back of a police wagon now with the Secret Service questioning him." and "You're not just responsible for what you say. You are responsible for what people hear."
Relevantly, I think Trump's attempted defense has fallen flat. He was saying stuff like "they're good organizers" and "they can vote", but he was talking about a time when Clinton had already been elected and, basically, there'd be no current voting on the subject.
MMC,
I'm sorry if that upset you. I didn't realize how much damage those idiots did up there.
In any case I'll go fire up my time machine.
It's like... every school has at least one of them - a kid who acts like he was raised with no real limitations on anything he said or did.
having gone to school a literal stones throw from his childhood Alma mater there were a LOT of those there.
On The subject of Assange's apparent anti-Clinton bias.
The piece is very gentle in what criticism it does make, but the comments react as though the author was calling for immediate execution of Assange.
Hatred of Clinton runs strong. And I guess the Anonymous dorks probably see Assange as a hero.
|
Trump isn't the problem. Rather, the Republican party has descended into collective insanity. Trump is just another symptom. Like Palin... Cruz... even Reagan in the early days. Slowly but surely an entire political party has become divorced from reality. If anything, what comes after Trump may be much worse.
*Rubs chin* If I had to summarize... right now, Donald Trump feels like a certain kind of schoolboy to me. Let's see if I can adequately describe this.
It's like... every school has at least one of them - a kid who acts like he was raised with no real limitations on anything he said or did. The teachers spend a lot of effort on trying to get him to like learning, but he couldn't care less, and in fact seems to enjoy making them work for no reward. He might come in late on a regular basis, and when asked about it, he'll just smirk and shrug and say something like his car broke down so it's obviously not his fault, when it's so new it hasn't even had to go in for its first regular maintenance yet. Everyone knows he's totally full of nonsense, but he's used to nobody ever truly calling him out on it or punishing him for what he says, and sometimes he lies just because he knows people will grumble a bit but ultimately knuckle under. He enjoys pushing their buttons and getting them to react.
That's how he comes across to me right now.
In a related comment, former Director of the CIA General Michael Hayden (ret.), said "If someone else had said that outside the hall, he'd be in the back of a police wagon now with the Secret Service questioning him." and "You're not just responsible for what you say. You are responsible for what people hear."
Relevantly, I think Trump's attempted defense has fallen flat. He was saying stuff like "they're good organizers" and "they can vote", but he was talking about a time when Clinton had already been elected and, basically, there'd be no current voting on the subject.
I honestly don't know if Trump was intentionally sending a dogwhistle call for assassination, or if he's just so utterly, utterly thoughtless that one just sorta fell out of his mouth. The thing is, it being unintentional is actually more frightening to me. (Not that I'm happy with him meaning to.)
I don't think Trump will get pissed off at another nuclear power and start a nuclear war just to prove he's a tough guy. There are a few more steps to get to an exchange of nuclear weapons, though he doesn't seem to understand that. I do think it's inevitable that, if elected president, Trump will be negotiating with some foreign power and say something like, "I should show you respect 'cause you're a president, too? Sure, of the Federated States of Micronesia. Suck my dick!" At that point, the US won't be capable of international diplomacy until we elect a president who's willing to personally apologize to every single national head of state on earth. That's my best case scenario for a Trump presidency.
Island nations, you gotta treat 'em like s!$!.
Trump isn't the problem. Rather, the Republican party has descended into collective insanity. Trump is just another symptom. Like Palin... Cruz... even Reagan in the early days. Slowly but surely an entire political party has become divorced from reality. If anything, what comes after Trump may be much worse.
...Given that Trump seems to be behind the whole Birther thing, wouldn't it be more accurate to say he is the problem with their party right now? Or at least part of it?
It's more likely that a 2008 Clinton campaign staffer is the source of the birther theory, since it arose during the 2008 primaries.
Initially they were lobbing attempts to disprove his citizenship through various legal theories that were all half-baked and relied on untruths (state department travel bans, the age of his mother at the time of his birth). They were actual legal challenges that had zero merit, since they relied on things that never happened (and were provably so) or incorrect readings of the law.
Trump joined the bandwagon 3 years later.
Huh.
Well, he still seems like he's been busy fanning the flames of things he knows to be lies for personal benefit, so I think I'll keep him in the 'guilty' column on this one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...Given that Trump seems to be behind the whole Birther thing, wouldn't it be more accurate to say he is the problem with their party right now? Or at least part of it?Trump isn't the problem. Rather, the Republican party has descended into collective insanity. Trump is just another symptom. Like Palin... Cruz... even Reagan in the early days. Slowly but surely an entire political party has become divorced from reality. If anything, what comes after Trump may be much worse.
The problem is that actual conservatives made a deal with the devil and attached themselves to a group of people embodied by trump in order to win elections. Trump didn't cause this problem, he is a consequence of it. For years the republican party stopped being a party focusing on conservative economics and restrained government and focused on courting people who were angry, afraid, and ignorant.
Heck, the last republican president had one of the least conservative (in the traditional sense) administrations in our history. And he was able to get away with it because the base of his party no longer cared about the details of policy, but instead wanted buzzwords and rhetoric.
He signed the defense of marriage act, while drastically expanding federal power (patriot act) and took a budget surplus and turned it into a massive deficit (hardly a fiscal conservative).
Trump didn't cause this problem. The republican party rolled out the carpet for him. It started in the 60's and is coming to a head now. Turns out when you constantly stir up fear, bigotry and ignorance, eventually you lose control of it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
To me the core reason why the republican party is going off the rails is because they decided to change the political debate to a debate on morality.
If you and I are discussing the best way to change a tire, we may initially disagree on the best course of action, but eventually we'll get a first step done, then a second, etc. If we disagree a lot, we might take a long time to finish it, but it'll get done eventually.
If instead I start with the premise that it's morally evil to change the tire, progress is going to happen much slower, if at all.
What started happening 30-40 years ago is that one party stopped talking about how to solve issues and instead started talking about whether things were moral or not. The problem with debating morality in the public sphere is that there isn't much room for compromise on morality. We can agree that there might be grey areas and how far something is towards one end or the other, but there are clear and definite things outside the grey area, things that are black and white.
Once something is placed in the black or white area, there's no real discussion to be had. It's just shouting and demonizing. It's no longer a debate or argument, but a fight. You either agree or disagree, there's no compromise or persuasion.
When people talk about the parties being the same, go back and listen to the rhetoric used at the conventions. During the RNC they were chanting "lock her up". They don't want to just defeat Hillary in the election, they want to throw her in prison. Conversely, at the DNC, it was about going to the polls and defeating Trump. When you paint the opponent as a criminal who needs to be imprisoned, you can't sit down and have a conversation with that person. Why would you? They're a criminal! It's the same reason no one invites NAMBLA to debate relevant sections of the criminal code, you'd be morally disgusted by what they have to say.
Before Trump, you see the effects of this strategy in the Senate and House. Routinely members of both houses refused to negotiate across the aisle because they had campaigned on the morality of their beliefs and refusing to compromise on them. John Boehner regularly had issues bringing votes from his own party on negotiated deals that were acceptable more broadly. The Tea Party caucus in general could be described as having a general strategy of refusing to compromise.
Thinking about it now, it's probably part why Trump did so well in the primaries. He's built a reputation of being tough and getting what he wants in a deal, which stomping your opponent in a negotiation sounds like "not compromising". It isn't his pure morality that is appealing, but rather his image of being able to get what he wants, regardless of the opposition. He seems pure in the sense that he doesn't compromise with others.
|
|
During the RNC they were chanting "lock her up". They don't want to just defeat Hillary in the election, they want to throw her in prison.
That's out of date. Now they're yelling "kill her" and "hang the b~*@%".
If the secret service really investigates every verbal threat against a presidential candidate, they're going to be awfully busy.
During the RNC they were chanting "lock her up". They don't want to just defeat Hillary in the election, they want to throw her in prison.That's out of date. Now they're yelling "kill her" and "hang the b&@!~".
If the secret service really investigates every verbal threat against a presidential candidate, they're going to be awfully busy.
as hanging is the constitutionally proscribed penalty for treason calling for the hanging of someone you're genuinely (albeit stupidly) think is a traitor is legal.
Trump did not say what people are saying he said. He's a meathead and all sorts of other potentially scary things, but he did not advocate having her killed.
He continues to play out plenty of rope to hang himself with. Let him do so with what actually comes out of his mouth.
|
Trump did not say what people are saying he said. He's a meathead and all sorts of other potentially scary things, but he did not advocate having her killed.
He continues to play out plenty of rope to hang himself with. Let him do so with what actually comes out of his mouth.
He may not have meant it that way, but it is not a stretch to interpret his statement as suggesting violence. The response has been a bit overblown, but is not unfounded.
|
|
Trump did not say what people are saying he said. He's a meathead and all sorts of other potentially scary things, but he did not advocate having her killed.
Technically true... in that it seemed like he was suggesting killing her judges rather than Hillary herself.
What he said was that once Hillary had appointed her judges there would be no way to stop them from 'taking our guns'... except possibly that the 'second ammendment people' could do... something.
Once the judges are appointed no amount of 'political pressure' means a thing. Ergo, Trump was either NOT talking about political activity (and has thus been lying about it ever since) or his statement was inherently self-contradictory nonsense.
To me the core reason why the republican party is going off the rails is because they decided to change the political debate to a debate on morality.
If you and I are discussing the best way to change a tire, we may initially disagree on the best course of action, but eventually we'll get a first step done, then a second, etc. If we disagree a lot, we might take a long time to finish it, but it'll get done eventually.
If instead I start with the premise that it's morally evil to change the tire, progress is going to happen much slower, if at all.
What started happening 30-40 years ago is that one party stopped talking about how to solve issues and instead started talking about whether things were moral or not. The problem with debating morality in the public sphere is that there isn't much room for compromise on morality. We can agree that there might be grey areas and how far something is towards one end or the other, but there are clear and definite things outside the grey area, things that are black and white.
Once something is placed in the black or white area, there's no real discussion to be had. It's just shouting and demonizing. It's no longer a debate or argument, but a fight. You either agree or disagree, there's no compromise or persuasion.
When people talk about the parties being the same, go back and listen to the rhetoric used at the conventions. During the RNC they were chanting "lock her up". They don't want to just defeat Hillary in the election, they want to throw her in prison. Conversely, at the DNC, it was about going to the polls and defeating Trump. When you paint the opponent as a criminal who needs to be imprisoned, you can't sit down and have a conversation with that person. Why would you? They're a criminal! It's the same reason no one invites NAMBLA to debate relevant sections of the criminal code, you'd be morally disgusted by what they have to say.
Before Trump, you see the effects of this strategy in the Senate and House. Routinely members of both houses refused to negotiate across the aisle because they had campaigned on the morality of their beliefs and refusing to compromise on them. John Boehner regularly had issues bringing votes from his own party on negotiated deals that were acceptable more broadly. The Tea Party caucus in general could be described as having a general strategy of refusing to compromise.
Thinking about it now, it's probably part why Trump did so well in the primaries. He's built a reputation of being tough and getting what he wants in a deal, which stomping your opponent in a negotiation sounds like "not compromising". It isn't his pure morality that is appealing, but rather his image of being able to get what he wants, regardless of the opposition. He seems pure in the sense that he doesn't compromise with others.
This is quite true. And its the biggest cause of the deadlock in congress. The word compromise has been turned into a dirty word. When our entire political system is specifically designed to REQUIRE compromise. It is explicitly designed to not allow people to just strong arm others into their way of thinking.
Particularly when you try so very hard to demonize people instead of simply attacking their policy and ideas. You end up with an impossible task when you actually try to govern. Republicans are not exclusively responsible for this, but they have truly embraced the idea. Compromise is how a society works. You literally cannot have society without compromise. But when you paint the other side as morally wrong, as opposed to just politically so, you cannot then later sit down and negotiate with each other. Which you will have to do. Even if you somehow win a majority in the house, senate and win the white house, there are still mechanisms for your opponents to block you if you don't sit down with them and work things out.