Libtards on Parade: Alcoholism, Corruption, Murder

[Fairweather]

i think most libturds are as interested in hillary being president as you are

 

I think you're all really interested--cuz as long as she speaks the language of libtardism, it doesn't matter one shit to the lot of you if she's part of the most corrupt political machine D.C. has seen since U.S. Grant. Which she most definitely is. Now we know why she had her own email server.

 

[ivan]

i think most libturds are as interested in hillary being president as you are

 

You'll still vote for her. Man up and admit it, bitch ;-)

nah, since 1992, i've maintained a tradition for voting for a guy who wouldn't win

[ivan]

I think you're all really interested--cuz as long as she speaks the language of libtardism, it doesn't matter one shit to the lot of you if she's part of the most corrupt political machine D.C. has seen since U.S. Grant.

w/ respect, you're wrong - every libturd i know is desperate to have warren get in

[KaskadskyjKozak]

i think most libturds are as interested in hillary being president as you are

 

You'll still vote for her. Man up and admit it, bitch ;-)

nah, since 1992, i've maintained a tradition for voting for a guy who wouldn't win

 

if that's true you'are an anomaly. most will pick one of the two contenders who's party affiliation most closely matches their point on the political spectrum

[glassgowkiss]

maybe if we choose somebody w/o a dick we won't have to worry about dictatorships?

 

Like Condoleeza Rice?

Like Carly Fiorina?

 

Condoleeza Rice= Iraq part two. Sorry, but she was was one of the most incompetent secretary of the state, period. As we can see now, her foreign policy was a clear disaster.

[Fairweather]

Wasn't Colin Powell SOS when Iraq began?

 

Anyway, who the f@#$% is this O'malley guy?

[Jim]

I've been thinking about the Bushie, Rice, Powell, Cheney, Rumsfeld cabal. Back then, I think I referred to the Iraq escapade as the significant foreign policy blunder of the past 50 years. Hmmm, how time flies.

 

The easily predicted unstable Iraq has given rise to ISIS, instead of the domino effect of democracy throughout the Middle East as predicted by Cheney and Rummey we have, what could be easily called chaos and multi-headed terrorist groups with increasing influence, a humanitarian crisis from the flood of refugees, and generally - a pretty good shit storm.

 

Bravo I say, bravo! I wonder if Bushie is water-coloring any of this in retirement.

[Fairweather]

Smarter than Hillary? Yes.

Less corrupt than Hillary? Yes. But then, who isn't?

More articulate than Hillary? Yes. (This requirement seems to be a libtard must.)

Less wealthy than Hillary? Yes. (Hillary is, like, in the top 1% of the top 1%)

 

Do you hate her because she speaks fluent Russian? Because she holds a doctorate? Or for some "other reason."

[Fairweather]

I've been thinking about the Bushie, Rice, Powell, Cheney, Rumsfeld cabal. Back then, I think I referred to the Iraq escapade as the significant foreign policy blunder of the past 50 years. Hmmm, how time flies.

 

The easily predicted unstable Iraq has given rise to ISIS, instead of the domino effect of democracy throughout the Middle East as predicted by Cheney and Rummey we have, what could be easily called chaos and multi-headed terrorist groups with increasing influence, a humanitarian crisis from the flood of refugees, and generally - a pretty good shit storm.

 

Bravo I say, bravo! I wonder if Bushie is water-coloring any of this in retirement.

 

You mean the war that Senator Hillary voted for?

 

Edit: Can you define "cabal?"

Edited April 24, 2015 by Fairweather

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I've been thinking about the Bushie, Rice, Powell, Cheney, Rumsfeld cabal. Back then, I think I referred to the Iraq escapade as the significant foreign policy blunder of the past 50 years. Hmmm, how time flies.

 

The easily predicted unstable Iraq has given rise to ISIS, instead of the domino effect of democracy throughout the Middle East as predicted by Cheney and Rummey we have, what could be easily called chaos and multi-headed terrorist groups with increasing influence, a humanitarian crisis from the flood of refugees, and generally - a pretty good shit storm.

 

Bravo I say, bravo! I wonder if Bushie is water-coloring any of this in retirement.

 

Ah yes, a convenient distraction. Instead of focusing on what is wrong now with our foreign policy and what risks and threats exist, look to the past to blame the "other". It must make you feel good, a favorite past time.

 

 

[ivan]

i think most libturds are as interested in hillary being president as you are

 

You'll still vote for her. Man up and admit it, bitch ;-)

nah, since 1992, i've maintained a tradition for voting for a guy who wouldn't win

 

if that's true you'are an anomaly. most will pick one of the two contenders who's party affiliation most closely matches their point on the political spectrum

I've never lived in a state where the outcome was anything but a foregone conclusion - in such a situation, I like to order off the menu

[Jim]

I've been thinking about the Bushie, Rice, Powell, Cheney, Rumsfeld cabal. Back then, I think I referred to the Iraq escapade as the significant foreign policy blunder of the past 50 years. Hmmm, how time flies.

 

The easily predicted unstable Iraq has given rise to ISIS, instead of the domino effect of democracy throughout the Middle East as predicted by Cheney and Rummey we have, what could be easily called chaos and multi-headed terrorist groups with increasing influence, a humanitarian crisis from the flood of refugees, and generally - a pretty good shit storm.

 

Bravo I say, bravo! I wonder if Bushie is water-coloring any of this in retirement.

 

Ah yes, a convenient distraction. Instead of focusing on what is wrong now with our foreign policy and what risks and threats exist, look to the past to blame the "other". It must make you feel good, a favorite past time.

 

 

Yea, that's the United States of Amnesia sure enough. Never ask how the hell did we get here in the first place. We'll be picking up the broken pottery for a long time on this one.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I've been thinking about the Bushie, Rice, Powell, Cheney, Rumsfeld cabal. Back then, I think I referred to the Iraq escapade as the significant foreign policy blunder of the past 50 years. Hmmm, how time flies.

 

The easily predicted unstable Iraq has given rise to ISIS, instead of the domino effect of democracy throughout the Middle East as predicted by Cheney and Rummey we have, what could be easily called chaos and multi-headed terrorist groups with increasing influence, a humanitarian crisis from the flood of refugees, and generally - a pretty good shit storm.

 

Bravo I say, bravo! I wonder if Bushie is water-coloring any of this in retirement.

 

Ah yes, a convenient distraction. Instead of focusing on what is wrong now with our foreign policy and what risks and threats exist, look to the past to blame the "other". It must make you feel good, a favorite past time.

 

 

Yea, that's the United States of Amnesia sure enough. Never ask how the hell did we get here in the first place. We'll be picking up the broken pottery for a long time on this one.

 

Uh-huh, selective amnesia. As if every Cold War president, and post Cold War president - has not contributed to the current World Cluster Fuck. And let's not forget the Imperialism Legacy that's put Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, and many other countries in their current state. Diplomacy and mutual ass licking of superpowers tends to yield the same long term rotten fruit and B-Ho and all his predecessor Dem's have helped yield that cornucopia right along with their right-of-center mirror images.

 

But keep on with your "Bush fucked-up everything" mantra. Do you whack off to his picture while you do that?

 

[Jim]

Well, then. I'd just plain old disagree on the relative scale of it. How say, did Bush I, Reagan, or Clinton knock down a hornet's nest that is comparable to the Idiot? Over 4k US service men and women dead, over 32,000 wounded. A major hit to the Treasury, and a rise in terrorist coalitions to a new level, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, --- a mess. Iran handed new influence.

 

Simply marvelous. Really? The three prior Presidents had similar miscalculations? I don't think so. "they all do it" is not a serious argument.

 

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Well, then. I'd just plain old disagree on the relative scale of it. How say, did Bush I, Reagan, or Clinton knock down a hornet's nest that is comparable to the Idiot? Over 4k US service men and women dead, over 32,000 wounded. A major hit to the Treasury, and a rise in terrorist coalitions to a new level, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, --- a mess. Iran handed new influence.

 

Simply marvelous. Really? The three prior Presidents had similar miscalculations? I don't think so. "they all do it" is not a serious argument.

 

 

Maybe Bush 41 should have just let Suddam take Kuwait. Then there never would have been 10 years of no fly zones, posturing, threats of WMDs, inspectors, US occupiers in Saudi Arabia pissing the fuck out of Arabs, the rise of OBL, and so on.

 

But like I said, keep on with "Bush sucks and is responsible for everything". Fuck, the oceans are rising 'cos of Bush too you know!

[Fairweather]

Well, then. I'd just plain old disagree on the relative scale of it. How say, did Bush I, Reagan, or Clinton knock down a hornet's nest that is comparable to the Idiot? Over 4k US service men and women dead, over 32,000 wounded. A major hit to the Treasury, and a rise in terrorist coalitions to a new level, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, --- a mess. Iran handed new influence.

 

Simply marvelous. Really? The three prior Presidents had similar miscalculations? I don't think so. "they all do it" is not a serious argument.

 

 

So, you vote Democrat because of the great job LBJ and McNamara did in Vietnam?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Well, then. I'd just plain old disagree on the relative scale of it. How say, did Bush I, Reagan, or Clinton knock down a hornet's nest that is comparable to the Idiot? Over 4k US service men and women dead, over 32,000 wounded. A major hit to the Treasury, and a rise in terrorist coalitions to a new level, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, --- a mess. Iran handed new influence.

 

Simply marvelous. Really? The three prior Presidents had similar miscalculations? I don't think so. "they all do it" is not a serious argument.

 

 

So, you vote Democrat because of the great job LBJ and McNamara did in Vietnam?

 

those weren't blunders FW . Really can you compare the 4000 dead in Iraq to the 50000+ Americans KIA in Vietnam? come on now, take your blinders off! GWB was the worstest president ever! His foreign policy blunders are clearly far beyond those of anyone else - especially any Democrat!

[ivan]

Well, then. I'd just plain old disagree on the relative scale of it. How say, did Bush I, Reagan, or Clinton knock down a hornet's nest that is comparable to the Idiot? Over 4k US service men and women dead, over 32,000 wounded. A major hit to the Treasury, and a rise in terrorist coalitions to a new level, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, --- a mess. Iran handed new influence.

 

Simply marvelous. Really? The three prior Presidents had similar miscalculations? I don't think so. "they all do it" is not a serious argument.

 

 

So, you vote Democrat because of the great job LBJ and McNamara did in Vietnam?

yes, i do. do you remember what his opponent, goldwater, wanted in south-east asia instead? do you remember his presidency, while sadly and in shakespearan fashion undone by the flaw of vietnam, also brought us the great society and civil rights acts? that vietnam (cuba & iran, too) itself had its beginning in eisenhower and the insanity mccarthy unleashed? i do agree, both american political idealogies are heavy on global military domination, but, as jim points out, there is a difference in how brutal and heavy-handed republican administrations tend towards.

[Fairweather]

Well, then. I'd just plain old disagree on the relative scale of it. How say, did Bush I, Reagan, or Clinton knock down a hornet's nest that is comparable to the Idiot? Over 4k US service men and women dead, over 32,000 wounded. A major hit to the Treasury, and a rise in terrorist coalitions to a new level, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, --- a mess. Iran handed new influence.

 

Simply marvelous. Really? The three prior Presidents had similar miscalculations? I don't think so. "they all do it" is not a serious argument.

 

 

So, you vote Democrat because of the great job LBJ and McNamara did in Vietnam?

yes, i do. do you remember what his opponent, goldwater, wanted in south-east asia instead? do you remember his presidency, while sadly and in shakespearan fashion undone by the flaw of vietnam, also brought us the great society and civil rights acts? that vietnam (cuba & iran, too) itself had its beginning in eisenhower and the insanity mccarthy unleashed? i do agree, both american political idealogies are heavy on global military domination, but, as jim points out, there is a difference in how brutal and heavy-handed republican administrations tend towards.

 

Wow, gotta love the way libtards are willing to overlook a whole lotta death from above--as long as Dear Leader adheres to certain socialist tenets here at home. FDR's firebombing of city after city? No problem! He brought us Social Security and codified organized labor! LBJ's radical escalation in Vietnam? No problem! He brought us the (so-called) Great Society!

 

As for your Ike revisionism, well, I'm speechless (for once). If you really like, we can trace Vietnam all the way back to Woodrow Wilson's racist refusal to meet the young Ambassador Ho Chi Min at Versailles. No, Ivan, the blame for Vietnam lies squarely at the feet of LBJ (and Strange). Kennedy would have never escalated it to the level it ended up at. Coincidentally, he was the last decent Democrat this country had.

[Fairweather]

For your recollection, Ivan, here are the Congressional vote totals for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Looks like Democrats had a bigger problem with it than did Republicans:

 

Totals are in "Yea–Nay" format:

 

The original House version:

 

Democratic Party: 152–96 (61–39%)

Republican Party: 138–34 (80–20%)

 

Cloture in the Senate:

 

Democratic Party: 44–23 (66–34%)

Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

 

The Senate version:

 

Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%)

Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

 

The Senate version, voted on by the House:

 

Democratic Party: 153–91 (63–37%)

Republican Party: 136–35 (80–20%)

[glassgowkiss]

Well, then. I'd just plain old disagree on the relative scale of it. How say, did Bush I, Reagan, or Clinton knock down a hornet's nest that is comparable to the Idiot? Over 4k US service men and women dead, over 32,000 wounded. A major hit to the Treasury, and a rise in terrorist coalitions to a new level, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, --- a mess. Iran handed new influence.

 

Simply marvelous. Really? The three prior Presidents had similar miscalculations? I don't think so. "they all do it" is not a serious argument.

 

 

So, you vote Democrat because of the great job LBJ and McNamara did in Vietnam?

 

those weren't blunders FW . Really can you compare the 4000 dead in Iraq to the 50000+ Americans KIA in Vietnam? come on now, take your blinders off! GWB was the worstest president ever! His foreign policy blunders are clearly far beyond those of anyone else - especially any Democrat!

 

You can't compare death ratios in Vietnam and Iraq, because of advances in emergency medicine. Besides, Iraq is not over. There are 2 suicides per day committed by returning vets. And this is a statistics nobody wants to discuss. On the top, tell us how many WIN are there and how many of them are severely disabled. Simply people who lost limbs and had these types of wounds did not have a chance to survive in a humid jungle, where they simply died from sepsis, before they were able to deliver them to a medical facility. So what you presented with your statement is a totally distorted picture, so you can promote your agenda. In the meantime, you just extended your middle finger to all those, who served there. Good job, asshole.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Good job, asshole.

 

Gargle butt gravy, you brain-addled, donkey-fellating clown-puncher.

 

Oh yeah, your Mom.

 

[Fairweather]

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/201

 

 

18 U.S. Code § 201 - Bribery of public officials and witnesses

 

(2) being a public official or person selected to be a public official, directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally or for any other person or entity, in return for:

(A) being influenced in the performance of any official act;

(B) being influenced to commit or aid in committing, or to collude in, or allow, any fraud, or make opportunity for the commission of any fraud, on the United States; or

© being induced to do or omit to do any act in violation of the official duty of such official or person;

[ivan]

 

Wow, gotta love the way libtards are willing to overlook a whole lotta death from above--as long as Dear Leader adheres to certain socialist tenets here at home. FDR's firebombing of city after city? No problem! He brought us Social Security and codified organized labor! LBJ's radical escalation in Vietnam? No problem! He brought us the (so-called) Great Society!

 

As for your Ike revisionism, well, I'm speechless (for once). If you really like, we can trace Vietnam all the way back to Woodrow Wilson's racist refusal to meet the young Ambassador Ho Chi Min at Versailles. No, Ivan, the blame for Vietnam lies squarely at the feet of LBJ (and Strange). Kennedy would have never escalated it to the level it ended up at. Coincidentally, he was the last decent Democrat this country had.

who's overlooking it? as i said, he's a shakespearan figure, LBJ - ultimately he deserved his downfall, due to that fatal flaw - are you sure you're not overlooking the question: would the world have been a better place if goldwater had been elected?

 

as to the #s of dems who voted against civil rights, yeah, of course - we all know that, ultimately, parties care mostly about being in power and pander to whoever to get there - southern democracts, die-hard dixie lovers, were entering into their twilight at that time (i seem to recall the last of them finally got cashiered this past November?) - and who was it that led them like moses away from that monstrosity that was the Sunny ante-bellum South?

[LUCKY]

Fiscal conservative Reagan 200 billion deficit

Fiscal conservative 1st Bush 300 billion deficit

Tax and spend liberal Bill Clinton 200 billion surplus

Fiscal conservative George W Bush 482 billion deficit

 

Vacation days first year in office

Carter : 19, Reagan : 42, Bush sr : 40, Clinton : 21, W Bush : 77, Obama : 26