Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Left Loses Again!
#1
The Face of an Egotistical, Psychopath that just Can't Take NO For An Answer!  minusculewtf
[Image: Hillary+Clinton+Hillary+Clinton+Signs+Co...KgtXXl.jpg]
Quote:Is Hillary Clinton secretly planning to run in 2020?


[Image: hillary-clinton.jpg?quality=90&strip=all...410&crop=1]
She is,,,, You Know She Is,,,,,, she can't except the Fact, Most Honest People Don't Want Her!

Quote:Hillary Clinton is up to something.

Five times in the last month alone, she sent e-mails touting her super PAC’s role in combating President Trump.
Most seized on headline events, such as the family-separation issue at the southern border.

Under the message line, “horrific,” she wrote June 18: “This is a moral and humanitarian crisis. Everyone of us who has ever held a child in their arms, and every human being with a sense of compassion and decency should be outraged.” She said she warned about Trump’s immigration policies during the 2016 campaign.

Three days later, she was back again, saying that her group, Onward Together, raised $1 million and would split it among organizations working to change border policy, including the American Civil Liberties Union and a gaggle of immigrant, refugee, Latino and women’s groups.
And the day after Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement, Clinton introduced a newly minted resistance partner.

Called Demand Justice, it promises to protect “reproductive rights, voting rights and access to health care” by keeping Senate Democrats united in opposing any conservative Trump nominee.
Now read this and notice that she is getting her people ready to start her Campaign.
Even her Old Campaign Manager is Active.



Quote:The instant, in-house nature of Demand Justice was reflected by the name of its executive director: Brian Fallon, Clinton’s campaign press secretary.

In truth, Fallon’s role doesn’t tell us something we didn’t know.
Onward Together, formed in May of 2017, is a Clinton 2020 campaign vehicle in waiting.

Its homepage says the group “is dedicated to advancing the vision that earned nearly 66 million votes in the last election.”

Advancing the vision?
More like advancing the candidate who collected those votes despite not having a vision.
With the Democratic Party locked in a battle between its far left wing and its far, far left wing, no single leader has emerged to unite it.

Clinton is trying to play that role by being a mother hen to the fledgling activists drawn to politics by their hatred of Trump.
 Read the rest of the Disgusting Article Here: Throw-Up in My Mouth

Did she REALLY get 66 Million Votes From Actual America's????  tinywhat  I Don't Think there are THAT many Stupid People in America!

Just imagine Hillary as The Mother Of The Democratic Party,,,,, or Your Mother!?  minusculepuke 

I think she'd be the First President that is Wearing Adult Diapers.


 
Once A Rogue, Always A Rogue!
[Image: attachment.php?aid=936]
Reply
#2
tinylaughing  She must like losing.  Let her run, we'll beat her again, and maybe this time she'll have a nervous breakdown and have to be put in an insane asylum... that is if she's not locked behind bars first.




Reply
#3
Hillary is nothing if not entertaining. I think it's just so cute the way she thinks that any person capable of independent thought gives a fat rat's ass what she thinks!


For example:


Quote:    Under the message line, “horrific,” she wrote June 18: “This is a moral and humanitarian crisis. Everyone of us who has ever held a child in their arms, and every human being with a sense of compassion and decency should be outraged.” She said she warned about Trump’s immigration policies during the 2016 campaign.


Exactly zero shits are given about this "issue" here. Social Services separates children from their parents every god damned day the sun rises for allegations of "abuse", but when Mexicans et al abuse their children by dragging them across a couple thousand miles of desert and subjecting them to the abuses of drug cartels and coyotes, and then they get to The Land of the Big PX and are promptly separated from those abused kids, the left screams bloody murder about it. Cry me a goddamned river, whiny bitches!


Personally, I think that we ought to leave them all together, and fire the lot of them them out of a cannon back across the border from whence they came. Harsh? Possibly... but I guarantee that after a hundred or so "repatriations" of that nature, there would be a lot less need for such measures. What part of "ILLEGAL border crossing" are these asswipes unable to comprehend? If we are to be expected to turn a blind eye to THAT criminal activity, why not just ignore ALL criminal activity in a free-for-all society in America?

And this:


Quote:Called Demand Justice, it promises to protect “reproductive rights, voting rights and access to health care” by keeping Senate Democrats united in opposing any conservative Trump nominee.


"Reproductive rights"? We all have the right to reproduce as frequently as we like. What they really mean is "the right to NOT reproduce by murdering your children", which Social Services always turns a blind eye to so long as the murder is done at the abortion clinics. I have no patience with folks who believe that murder (legal definition: "an unjustifiable homicide", as opposed to a mere killing, which may be justified) is a viable method of birth control. A safer, cheaper, and more efficient method involves a coin. It is accomplished by sitting down in a comfortable chair, placing a coin against the inside of the left knee, then holding it in place with the right knee. Works like a charm, every time - and it's a great deal cheaper than an abortion.


"Voting rights"? EVERY US citizen has the right to vote, and has had it for over 100 years. What they really mean is "the right to vote in US elections, regardless of citizenship or death status". They want to do away with the requirement to prove you are a citizen with an actual vested interest in US elections, and the need to prove you are an actual living person - both of which are accomplished via production of a simple ID card. If someone is not a citizen of your country, they HAVE NO RIGHT to vote for who will govern YOU, and protect you from THEM. It's a no-brainer, and no-brainers are right up Hillary's... alley... since she has no brain.


"Access to health care"? Every person in the US, citizen or not, can walk into ANY emergency room in the country and gain access to health care, without exception. What they really mean is "fix my fuck up, and make someone else pay for it" and/or "make everyone buy a product they neither need nor want, from a private company, and call it 'health care' instead of what it is, 'insurance'". Insurance is NOT health care - doctors do health care, insurance is a useless product sold by thieves. Don't believe me? Walk into any insurance office in the land and demand that THEY stitch your open wound up. If you do, you'll quickly figure out the difference between "health care" and "insurance".


All of these unthinking, brain-dead dumbasses are nothing if not entertaining - it's like watching a slow motion train wreck, with Hillary pulling the train... take that last comment any way you like!


.
" I don't mind killin' a man in a fair fight... or if I think he's gonna start a fair fight... or if there's money involved... or a woman... "

 - Jayne Cobb, Hero of Canton
Reply
#4
Thumbs Up 
(07-14-2018, 12:06 AM)Ninurta Wrote: ...All of these unthinking, brain-dead dumbasses are nothing if not entertaining - it's like watching
a slow motion train wreck, with Hillary pulling the train... take that last comment any way you like!

I agree and this is what I mean by the expression 'dumbing-down' and quickly add that my comment isn't
in regards of Ninurta's fine counterpoints!

A point of view is just that, a rational suggestion based on grounded, mature evidence which improves lives for both
parties. If a contradicting view is offered, this must also have equal -if not better evidence to negate the former.
Negotiation where sacrifices of parts of both opinions are discarded and accepted, can bring about an agreed
compromise.

And that's it! No emotional platitudes or insincere pleadings for unsaid reasons that only benefits one party, that's
the act of a dishonourable person and undeveloped children. This might seem nieve to some reading this, but the
benchmark of a civilised discourse must be high to reach a sensible agreement.

That's why there's hardly any worthy politicians in current official positions. To deceive is to 'get away with it' -instead
of pointing out a missed opportunity to counter a claim. We've been indoctrinated to win only, when serious problem
-solving isn't a competition, it's arriving at a place where -hopefully, everyone succeeds.

Some might suggest lawyers decieve and they do. But it's done in a form of broaching, an manipulative act to draw
out information that may enhance their client's claims. It's subtle, but it falls within an agreed framework of ethics to
acquire neutral justice.

Free speech is just that, every legal citizen of a country where free speech is held to a high standard can lie... it's not
noble or principled, but it occurs because it's deemed necessary to win an argument. The deliberate use of falsehood
carries none of the highborn ideals that we currently pretend we possess in debate forums and therefore, we struggle
in a mire of ego-caressing bickering.

That's where 'Fake News' resides in regards of the media. As long as it doesn't defame an individual, an article can be
created from nothing and be just a Trojan horse to display a preferred message.
Truth is a creature rarely fed, these days!

The two decades-old (maybe more?!) conditioning of beating your opponent at any cost doesn't work in a social-control
setting. A law is created after all the facts are in and not by looking from one angle.

To ignore a binding accordance because it doesn't suit a personal purpose is to trespass on a majority's claim for reasons
that only benefit the minority. When forming laws, that minority has already been considered and baked into the whole ruling.
In a mature world, such an act of ignoring that a known law is to leave the forum of civil conduct.
One might even say, behave like a child.

Of course there's arguments for and against a subject and of course, one may find themselves on the ropes in a discussion
through lack of fact-diligence, but it's not a competition. You don't win or lose in a problem-solving situation, you just succeed
or fail to solve the problem.

To offer another side to that, 'winning' peace through strength isn't a bullying tactic either, it's a nuanced reminder from a force
more powerful than oneself that obliteration doesn't benefit either party and there are better roads to global welfare and emotive
harmony.

We're currently wallowing in ratings-hungry media misstatements and ten-word political pharisaicalness. The laws of a land
are to be upheld to protect a nation's contents and the safety of those within and outside that land. To suggest otherwise is the
act of an uneducated trickster who revels in using virtues has chess-pieces and carry no prudence.

Some say that within the movie 'The Godfather' resides all the wisdom one needs to be a well-formed adult.
In this case of mewling outrages of shallow conversation, Michael Corleone's quote to his brother might be in order.
"...It's not personal. It's strictly business".

Basically speaking, it means the grizzled Woods-Runner is right again.
minusculethumbsup
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)