Allegra Escorts Collective
Toronto Escorts

Hillary on Stern

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,709
3,405
113
HAHAH.
Wow.

You and smallcock are awesome. Like a scientific study in gullibility.
I'd say you are the gullible one. Her voting record and policy decisions as SoS in Libya and Syria are proof enough of her warmongering. Add in her fanning the flames for a new Cold War and I see her opening up new fronts in Syria and Venezuela if she had been elected.
 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
27,495
48,731
113
She is more willing to rely on military force than I would like, absolutely. Claiming she would govern like a Republican is ignorant nonsense. Smallcock's list of laughable conspiracy theories at least has the charm of just being charmingly old school in its ridiculousness.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,709
3,405
113
She is more willing to rely on military force than I would like, absolutely. Claiming she would govern like a Republican is ignorant nonsense. Smallcock's list of laughable conspiracy theories at least has the charm of just being charmingly old school in its ridiculousness.
She would. There would not even be a conversation right now about healthcare, lip service to the environment, Wall st would be free to do as they please(look at her donor list) and military spending would have risen as she ramped up a new Cold War with Russia and invaded Syria( what do you think the False Flag chemical weapons fiasco was set up for, as well as arming the factions to destabilize the area).

She is a Neo Liberal warmonger.
 

Smallcock

Active member
Jun 5, 2009
13,703
21
38
I used to be a big fan of Stern. For the longest time, his only discernible political view was that the government had no business interfering with freedom of speech. Then he married Beth, who is clearly liberal. Since then, he's just become another comedian/opinion host shilling for the Democrats, just like Colbert, Kimmel, etc. The Democrats are the party of big government and the prohibition of "hate speech". That seems to run contrary to everything that made Howard who he is. I've lost interest in him, just as I've lost interest in the late night shows.
Stern hasn't been relevant for over 15 years. He's lucky to have a pre-internet legacy fanbase, because that's all he has.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,744
17,570
113
She would. There would not even be a conversation right now about healthcare, lip service to the environment, Wall st would be free to do as they please(look at her donor list) and military spending would have risen as she ramped up a new Cold War with Russia and invaded Syria( what do you think the False Flag chemical weapons fiasco was set up for, as well as arming the factions to destabilize the area).

She is a Neo Liberal warmonger.
Trump is even more of a warmonger, he's just more inept.

He's killing more civilians through drones and making Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq into bigger failures instead of ending them, like he said he would.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,709
3,405
113
Trump is even more of a warmonger, he's just more inept.

He's killing more civilians through drones and making Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq into bigger failures instead of ending them, like he said he would.
Obama was the drone king with a 90% civilian casualty rate on his strikes. Trump is, at this point just carrying on the tradition of presidents before him. He is just as bad. But no worse than the previous two.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,744
17,570
113
Obama was the drone king with a 90% civilian casualty rate on his strikes. Trump is, at this point just carrying on the tradition of presidents before him. He is just as bad. But no worse than the previous two.
You are excusing more warmongering, not criticizing it here.
You're just as bad as you claim Clinton would have been.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,709
3,405
113
You are excusing more warmongering, not criticizing it here.
You're just as bad as you claim Clinton would have been.
Certainly not an excuse. That's why I support Sanders and Gabbard.

And not Biden or Buttigieg.

Why are you a Butti-bro?
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
5,904
1,172
113
Certainly not an excuse. That's why I support Sanders and Gabbard.

And not Biden or Buttigieg.

Why are you a Butti-bro?
Frank is into Butti??
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,709
3,405
113
Frank is into Butti??
He was touting him as a contender due to his connections to Zuckerburg(who also had a private dinner with Trump)

I call them Butti-bros because in 2016 that's what the Sanders haters used when his base was white males.

And that's Buttigieg this year.
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
5,904
1,172
113
I know the Bernie-bros. I just don't know if we should be calling a gay candidate's followers Butti-bros. ;)
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,744
17,570
113
He was touting him as a contender due to his connections to Zuckerburg(who also had a private dinner with Trump)

I call them Butti-bros because in 2016 that's what the Sanders haters used when his base was white males.

And that's Buttigieg this year.
I don't back Buttigieg at all, was just stating he's likely to take over the Biden/mainstream role now that Zuckerberg appears to be backing him.
Certainly his numbers went way up afterwards.

Certainly not an excuse. That's why I support Sanders and Gabbard.
You don't support either of them, you continue only to defend Trump and refuse to support any of Sanders calls to impeach Trump.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,709
3,405
113
I don't back Buttigieg at all, was just stating he's likely to take over the Biden/mainstream role now that Zuckerberg appears to be backing him.
Certainly his numbers went way up afterwards.



You don't support either of them, you continue only to defend Trump and refuse to support any of Sanders calls to impeach Trump.
I can support a candidate and think he is wrong on one issue.

That's called maturity.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,709
3,405
113

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
27,495
48,731
113
Obama was the drone king with a 90% civilian casualty rate on his strikes. Trump is, at this point just carrying on the tradition of presidents before him. He is just as bad. But no worse than the previous two.
A tradition both Sanders and Gabbard support. Sanders at least talks a bit about "dialing down" drone strikes, but he was quite clear in his 2016 run he would use drones. Gabbard, of course, is aggressively pro drone. She argues that we can reduce "regime change" wars and use drones to bomb terrorists and any enemies that are "evil".

I am quite certain Sanders would reduce drone strikes compared to Trump (who is far worse than Obama on this issue and who also got rid of the reporting requirements about drone strikes which is why we don't have his civilian casualty numbers). Gabbard it is harder to say. I suspect she could even be more aggressive than Trump in her drone use if elected.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,709
3,405
113
Where are your threads on how much better than Trump Sanders is?
The record speaks for themselves. I continue to support him to be the Dem Nominee for President.

I also understand it's a long haul and I have absolutely no say in the out one of the primaries.

What I have done repeatedly is when I come across a positive moment underreported in the press about him I pass it along. And also point out to others the foilables of his Dem opponents.

Here is another one. Bidens lead over Sanders in South Carolina has dropped to single digits.

27% Biden
20% Sanders
Warren I think came in at 13%

The rest single digits.

This is important as it shows a crack in the South Firewall Biden had. And if trends continue and the outsider vote comes out Sanders is looking even better.

Add In far superior fundraising, volunteers, campaign excitement and a 50+ state ground game and I'm confident in Sanders ability to win.

That's why Bloomberg is lurking. He and the Dem leadership also see it in their internal polling and are scared shitless. And why the #BernieBlackout in the MSM continues. They can't attack him, so they are trying to ignore him.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,709
3,405
113
A tradition both Sanders and Gabbard support. Sanders at least talks a bit about "dialing down" drone strikes, but he was quite clear in his 2016 run he would use drones. Gabbard, of course, is aggressively pro drone. She argues that we can reduce "regime change" wars and use drones to bomb terrorists and any enemies that are "evil".

I am quite certain Sanders would reduce drone strikes compared to Trump (who is far worse than Obama on this issue and who also got rid of the reporting requirements about drone strikes which is why we don't have his civilian casualty numbers). Gabbard it is harder to say. I suspect she could even be more aggressive than Trump in her drone use if elected.
A reduction is good. I'm not naive, I understand part of the President's job description is to kill people. What I object to is doing it for profiteers and not real national security reasons. He does as well.

Gabbard is more of a hawk. But again she won't get bogged down in 20 year wars. I tout her as a VP because she would be a force to send overseas. No one would treat her lightly. As well honestly it would be an insurance policy for certain people not to try to take out Sanders. She would hunt them down. And no one domestically would fuck with her either. That's a nice hammer for President Sanders to have in his toolbox.
 
Toronto Escorts