Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
(11-21-2016, 04:09 PM)Galen Wrote: (11-21-2016, 03:38 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (11-21-2016, 01:49 PM)Marypoza Wrote: (11-21-2016, 01:40 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: No, that would be the Russians ![[Image: angry.png]](http://generational-theory.com/forum/images/smilies/angry.png) (and the Republicans)
--- no Eric, it was the DNC. They were caught redhanded & tried to blame the Russians. Nobody believes that lie except you & Odin
Nope. The incidents and the blabbing on emails was all they could prove about DNC "rigging." IOW nuthin.' Hillary won fair and square. The government is investigating the Russian hacking; that's more than me and Odin and Mr. X. Trump advocated that the Russians do more of it too.
But we shouldn't let facts get in the way of emotions, I guess
The amount of psychological projection in this statement is truly astounding. Eric the Obtuse has truly out done himself this time. 
WORD!!
jesus Eric, you think you're Goering or something? repeat a lie often enough & it becomes true?
 my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 12
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2016
(11-22-2016, 09:44 AM)Marypoza Wrote: (11-21-2016, 04:09 PM)Galen Wrote: (11-21-2016, 03:38 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (11-21-2016, 01:49 PM)Marypoza Wrote: (11-21-2016, 01:40 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: No, that would be the Russians (and the Republicans)
--- no Eric, it was the DNC. They were caught redhanded & tried to blame the Russians. Nobody believes that lie except you & Odin
Nope. The incidents and the blabbing on emails was all they could prove about DNC "rigging." IOW nuthin.' Hillary won fair and square. The government is investigating the Russian hacking; that's more than me and Odin and Mr. X. Trump advocated that the Russians do more of it too.
But we shouldn't let facts get in the way of emotions, I guess
The amount of psychological projection in this statement is truly astounding. Eric the Obtuse has truly out done himself this time.
WORD!!
jesus Eric, you think you're Goering or something? repeat a lie often enough & it becomes true?
I'm shocked at the level of delusion among many Democrats lately.
Full disclosure: I'm a Democrat.
Clinton is very similar to Bush. The only significant difference is the audience and the language used to pander to them.
Bush pandered to the religious right and casually conservative suburbanites.
Clinton pandered to social justice warriors and casually conservative suburbanites.
Their foreign policy is the same. Aggressive Hawks destabilizing the world for corporate profit.
Socially, the difference lies in a difference of a decade. Clinton was not pro LGBTQ until recently, she is opposed to marijuana, and still promotes mass incarceration of minorities.
And once and for all, the Trump-Russia connection is completely ridiculous. Amateur hour to begin with, ridiculous on its face (polls showed less than 10% of Americans bought this le during the election), *and* proven to be false.
Lets focus on what we have in common rather than what pulls us apart.
Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
(11-22-2016, 10:43 AM)2Legit2Quit Wrote: (11-22-2016, 09:44 AM)Marypoza Wrote: (11-21-2016, 04:09 PM)Galen Wrote: (11-21-2016, 03:38 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (11-21-2016, 01:49 PM)Marypoza Wrote: --- no Eric, it was the DNC. They were caught redhanded & tried to blame the Russians. Nobody believes that lie except you & Odin
Nope. The incidents and the blabbing on emails was all they could prove about DNC "rigging." IOW nuthin.' Hillary won fair and square. The government is investigating the Russian hacking; that's more than me and Odin and Mr. X. Trump advocated that the Russians do more of it too.
But we shouldn't let facts get in the way of emotions, I guess
The amount of psychological projection in this statement is truly astounding. Eric the Obtuse has truly out done himself this time.
WORD!!
jesus Eric, you think you're Goering or something? repeat a lie often enough & it becomes true?
I'm shocked at the level of delusion among many Democrats lately.
Full disclosure: I'm a Democrat.
Clinton is very similar to Bush. The only significant difference is the audience and the language used to pander to them.
Bush pandered to the religious right and casually conservative suburbanites.
Clinton pandered to social justice warriors and casually conservative suburbanites.
Their foreign policy is the same. Aggressive Hawks destabilizing the world for corporate profit.
Socially, the difference lies in a difference of a decade. Clinton was not pro LGBTQ until recently, she is opposed to marijuana, and still promotes mass incarceration of minorities.
And once and for all, the Trump-Russia connection is completely ridiculous. Amateur hour to begin with, ridiculous on its face (polls showed less than 10% of Americans bought this le during the election), *and* proven to be false.
Lets focus on what we have in common rather than what pulls us apart.
-- hi Legit, welcome to our famiy 
Lemme give you a heads up: Eric has a, um guilty pleasure- oh hell let's call it what is- an addiction. To koolaid. He drinks lots & lots & lots of it. On a daily basis
my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
11-22-2016, 04:20 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-22-2016, 04:23 PM by Eric the Green.)
(11-22-2016, 11:41 AM)Marypoza Wrote: (11-22-2016, 10:43 AM)2Legit2Quit Wrote: (11-22-2016, 09:44 AM)Marypoza Wrote: (11-21-2016, 04:09 PM)Galen Wrote: (11-21-2016, 03:38 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Nope. The incidents and the blabbing on emails was all they could prove about DNC "rigging." IOW nuthin.' Hillary won fair and square. The government is investigating the Russian hacking; that's more than me and Odin and Mr. X. Trump advocated that the Russians do more of it too.
But we shouldn't let facts get in the way of emotions, I guess
The amount of psychological projection in this statement is truly astounding. Eric the Obtuse has truly out done himself this time.
WORD!!
jesus Eric, you think you're Goering or something? repeat a lie often enough & it becomes true?
I'm shocked at the level of delusion among many Democrats lately.
Full disclosure: I'm a Democrat.
Clinton is very similar to Bush. The only significant difference is the audience and the language used to pander to them.
Bush pandered to the religious right and casually conservative suburbanites.
Clinton pandered to social justice warriors and casually conservative suburbanites.
Their foreign policy is the same. Aggressive Hawks destabilizing the world for corporate profit.
Socially, the difference lies in a difference of a decade. Clinton was not pro LGBTQ until recently, she is opposed to marijuana, and still promotes mass incarceration of minorities.
And once and for all, the Trump-Russia connection is completely ridiculous. Amateur hour to begin with, ridiculous on its face (polls showed less than 10% of Americans bought this le during the election), *and* proven to be false.
Lets focus on what we have in common rather than what pulls us apart.
-- hi Legit, welcome to our famiy
Lemme give you a heads up: Eric has a, um guilty pleasure- oh hell let's call it what is- an addiction. To koolaid. He drinks lots & lots & lots of it. On a daily basis
You aren't disclosing what YOu drink yet, to be so deceived over the DNC and Hillary. I don't drink Kool-aid at all. Sugar water is not so good for you. I just recite the facts. Dumping on Hillary has gotten us all into very deep doo-doo. We could have had an honest professional, with Bill sizing up the drapes; now we have a raving maniac amateur; god knows how much trouble the heartland-Americans have given the world. And over what? Damn emails and stupid claims about email gossip?
If you want to focus on what we have in common, then don't run down Hillary with lies and boost Trump with lies. I'm shocked with the delusions among many on the left these days, although the delusion on the right is many times greater.
Just because Julian Assange claims Russia didn't give him the email leaks, doesn't mean it's true. I don't believe a word that idiot says. The FBI was investigating, and even McCain and Graham want to know. More may come out about the Russian hacking. Certainly, Trump is a Russian stooge. Hillary would have stood up to the dictator bear. But comparisons of Hillary to Bush are so ludricous as to defy belief. NO, Hillary did NOT start any wars for profit. IF you want the Left to come together, Mr. 2Legit, and Maryposa, then stop peddling nonsense about Hillary, and let's move on. And see Trump as the enemy, and Democrats as potential allies.
If we would progress, Republicans must be defeated. Bottom line, period, end of story.
And agreeing with Galen about anything, Marypoza, does you no credit.
Posts: 1,131
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
(11-22-2016, 04:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Just because Julian Assange claims Russia didn't give him the email leaks, doesn't mean it's true. I don't believe a word that idiot says. The FBI was investigating, and even McCain and Graham want to know. More may come out about the Russian hacking. Certainly, Trump is a Russian stooge. Hillary would have stood up to the dictator bear. But comparisons of Hillary to Bush are so ludricous as to defy belief. NO, Hillary did NOT start any wars for profit. IF you want the Left to come together, Mr. 2Legit, and Maryposa, then stop peddling nonsense about Hillary, and let's move on. And see Trump as the enemy, and Democrats as potential allies.
Wikileaks has not published a false document in ten years which gives Assange more credibility than you have. God, you sound worse than the Cold Warriors that you used to protest a half-century ago. Congratulations, you have just become what you hate most.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
One thing that we all must say of the Cold Warriors from Truman to Obama: they didn't appease, and (the atom bomb blasts on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not part of the Cold War), there were no atomic bomb blasts on any cities. Seventy years? That;s a good record. I'll take that over a peace-love-and-dope foreign policy, Bomb! Bomb! Bomb! Bomb-bomb Iran!, or appeasement.
I supported Hillary Clinton and I ended up defending the Reagan-Bush I foreign policy that Obama took by default.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(11-22-2016, 05:09 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: One thing that we all must say of the Cold Warriors from Truman to Obama: they didn't appease, and (the atom bomb blasts on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not part of the Cold War), there were no atomic bomb blasts on any cities. Seventy years? That's a good record. I'll take that over a peace-love-and-dope foreign policy, Bomb! Bomb! Bomb! Bomb-bomb Iran!, or appeasement.
I supported Hillary Clinton and I ended up defending the Reagan-Bush I foreign policy that Obama took by default.
That's a good point.
Posts: 1,970
Threads: 6
Joined: Sep 2016
(11-22-2016, 05:09 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: One thing that we all must say of the Cold Warriors from Truman to Obama: they didn't appease, and (the atom bomb blasts on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not part of the Cold War), there were no atomic bomb blasts on any cities. Seventy years? That;s a good record. I'll take that over a peace-love-and-dope foreign policy, Bomb! Bomb! Bomb! Bomb-bomb Iran!, or appeasement.
I supported Hillary Clinton and I ended up defending the Reagan-Bush I foreign policy that Obama took by default.
Cold warriors didn't appease? While Kennedy was making a big deal of objecting to Russian IRBMs in Cuba, he was quietly removing U.S. IRBMs from Turkey. We were definitely realistic at times about what might be achieved, and when we weren't we got into messes like Vietnam.
Obama took the younger Bush's foreign policy. He tripled the number of U.S. troops - and U.S. casualties - in Afghanistan, and helped bomb Libya. But then, the elder Bush didn't use the Reagan foreign policy either, what with his own invasion of Iraq.
Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
(11-22-2016, 04:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (11-22-2016, 11:41 AM)Marypoza Wrote: (11-22-2016, 10:43 AM)2Legit2Quit Wrote: (11-22-2016, 09:44 AM)Marypoza Wrote: (11-21-2016, 04:09 PM)Galen Wrote: The amount of psychological projection in this statement is truly astounding. Eric the Obtuse has truly out done himself this time.
WORD!!
jesus Eric, you think you're Goering or something? repeat a lie often enough & it becomes true?
I'm shocked at the level of delusion among many Democrats lately.
Full disclosure: I'm a Democrat.
Clinton is very similar to Bush. The only significant difference is the audience and the language used to pander to them.
Bush pandered to the religious right and casually conservative suburbanites.
Clinton pandered to social justice warriors and casually conservative suburbanites.
Their foreign policy is the same. Aggressive Hawks destabilizing the world for corporate profit.
Socially, the difference lies in a difference of a decade. Clinton was not pro LGBTQ until recently, she is opposed to marijuana, and still promotes mass incarceration of minorities.
And once and for all, the Trump-Russia connection is completely ridiculous. Amateur hour to begin with, ridiculous on its face (polls showed less than 10% of Americans bought this le during the election), *and* proven to be false.
Lets focus on what we have in common rather than what pulls us apart.
-- hi Legit, welcome to our famiy
Lemme give you a heads up: Eric has a, um guilty pleasure- oh hell let's call it what is- an addiction. To koolaid. He drinks lots & lots & lots of it. On a daily basis
You aren't disclosing what YOu drink yet, to be so deceived over the DNC and Hillary. I don't drink Kool-aid at all. Sugar water is not so good for you. I just recite the facts. Dumping on Hillary has gotten us all into very deep doo-doo. We could have had an honest professional, with Bill sizing up the drapes; now we have a raving maniac amateur; god knows how much trouble the heartland-Americans have given the world. And over what? Damn emails and stupid claims about email gossip?
If you want to focus on what we have in common, then don't run down Hillary with lies and boost Trump with lies. I'm shocked with the delusions among many on the left these days, although the delusion on the right is many times greater.
Just because Julian Assange claims Russia didn't give him the email leaks, doesn't mean it's true. I don't believe a word that idiot says. The FBI was investigating, and even McCain and Graham want to know. More may come out about the Russian hacking. Certainly, Trump is a Russian stooge. Hillary would have stood up to the dictator bear. But comparisons of Hillary to Bush are so ludricous as to defy belief. NO, Hillary did NOT start any wars for profit. IF you want the Left to come together, Mr. 2Legit, and Maryposa, then stop peddling nonsense about Hillary, and let's move on. And see Trump as the enemy, and Democrats as potential allies.
If we would progress, Republicans must be defeated. Bottom line, period, end of story.
And agreeing with Galen about anything, Marypoza, does you no credit.
-- rofl omfg Eric you are soooo funny! !
& l disclosed what l drink in the mood for the1st T thread
my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 12
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2016
Thanks for the welcome.
Im not sure if you all are serious or taking the piss.
Hillary as the good guy? I get trump is a loose cannon but Hillary is a corporate shill and hardly a Democrat. She's the definition of corrupt crony capitalism and it's a blessing thar she lost.
In any case, time to move forward.
Posts: 1,131
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
(11-22-2016, 11:24 PM)2Legit2Quit Wrote: Thanks for the welcome.
Im not sure if you all are serious or taking the piss.
Hillary as the good guy? I get trump is a loose cannon but Hillary is a corporate shill and hardly a Democrat. She's the definition of corrupt crony capitalism and it's a blessing thar she lost.
In any case, time to move forward.
Welcome to the wonderful world of Eric the Obtuse and his tenuous, at best, contact with reality. I think he fried his brain sometime in the sixties and has never really recovered.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises
Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
11-23-2016, 07:03 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-23-2016, 07:06 AM by Marypoza.)
(11-22-2016, 04:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (11-22-2016, 11:41 AM)Marypoza Wrote: (11-22-2016, 10:43 AM)2Legit2Quit Wrote: (11-22-2016, 09:44 AM)Marypoza Wrote: (11-21-2016, 04:09 PM)Galen Wrote: The amount of psychological projection in this statement is truly astounding. Eric the Obtuse has truly out done himself this time.
WORD!!
jesus Eric, you think you're Goering or something? repeat a lie often enough & it becomes true?
I'm shocked at the level of delusion among many Democrats lately.
Full disclosure: I'm a Democrat.
Clinton is very similar to Bush. The only significant difference is the audience and the language used to pander to them.
Bush pandered to the religious right and casually conservative suburbanites.
Clinton pandered to social justice warriors and casually conservative suburbanites.
Their foreign policy is the same. Aggressive Hawks destabilizing the world for corporate profit.
Socially, the difference lies in a difference of a decade. Clinton was not pro LGBTQ until recently, she is opposed to marijuana, and still promotes mass incarceration of minorities.
And once and for all, the Trump-Russia connection is completely ridiculous. Amateur hour to begin with, ridiculous on its face (polls showed less than 10% of Americans bought this le during the election), *and* proven to be false.
Lets focus on what we have in common rather than what pulls us apart.
-- hi Legit, welcome to our famiy
Lemme give you a heads up: Eric has a, um guilty pleasure- oh hell let's call it what is- an addiction. To koolaid. He drinks lots & lots & lots of it. On a daily basis
You aren't disclosing what YOu drink yet, to be so deceived over the DNC and Hillary. I don't drink Kool-aid at all. Sugar water is not so good for you. I just recite the facts. Dumping on Hillary has gotten us all into very deep doo-doo.
--jesus Eric you drop the f-bomb on me in l forget which thread & now you're saying doo-doo??!!!!!????
puh--leeeeeeeze 
Quote:We could have had an honest to gawd warmongering bitch who cheated her way into the WH, with Bill sizing up the interns; now we have a trashy reality show star; god knows how much entertainment the heartland-Americans have given the world. And over what? The TPP & the jobs that will disappear with it, provoking war with Russia as well as wars for oil, fracking, expanding obummercrap & the insurance companies' strangle hold on us, the banksters stranglehold on us, fixing elections & gloating about it, being told we're "deplorables" & "basement dwellers", & on & on & on...
-- there, fixed it for ya
my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 128
Threads: 2
Joined: May 2016
I don't think it was intended this way but it sure appears that this thread is proving the premise within its title.
Posts: 1,970
Threads: 6
Joined: Sep 2016
(11-15-2016, 11:35 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: RE: Your third paragraph. While it is true that CA does not currently have deployed nukes (a consequence of base closures and realignments during the 90s and 00s), we do have manufacturing facilities that are currently producing ICBMs and planes (e.g. current and potential delivery systems), as well as warhead pits. We control, at least partially, the means of production.
I was thinking recently about how this crisis might involve a nuclear war, and what kind of state nuclear weapons drive. I was wondering if it would drive successful states to a distributed model, where population was spread across a large geographic area rather than concentrated in highly populous cities.
I just realized the implications for any civil war between red and blue America. Blue America is highly concentrated in big cities, perfect targets for nuclear weapons. Red America has a population distributed throughout "flyover country".
While I'd prefer not to have the crisis resolved in a civil war in America, if it comes down to a nuclear civil war between these two sides, I think I have to bet on red America for those simple geographic reasons.
Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
(11-23-2016, 12:59 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: (11-15-2016, 11:35 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: RE: Your third paragraph. While it is true that CA does not currently have deployed nukes (a consequence of base closures and realignments during the 90s and 00s), we do have manufacturing facilities that are currently producing ICBMs and planes (e.g. current and potential delivery systems), as well as warhead pits. We control, at least partially, the means of production.
I was thinking recently about how this crisis might involve a nuclear war, and what kind of state nuclear weapons drive. I was wondering if it would drive successful states to a distributed model, where population was spread across a large geographic area rather than concentrated in highly populous cities.
I just realized the implications for any civil war between red and blue America. Blue America is highly concentrated in big cities, perfect targets for nuclear weapons. Red America has a population distributed throughout "flyover country".
While I'd prefer not to have the crisis resolved in a civil war in America, if it comes down to a nuclear civil war between these two sides, I think I have to bet on red America for those simple geographic reasons.
-- don't forget the silos are in flyover country. They are targets too
my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
11-23-2016, 02:42 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-23-2016, 02:49 PM by Eric the Green.)
I think if CA secedes, it should develop nuclear weapons, if Red America threatens attack. So with any other blue states so inclined. It doesn't matter if the population here is more concentrated. The possession of nucs deters any nation from attacking another.
With our greater technical know-how, we'll be able to develop a better nuclear shield too.
It will be an interesting situation in DC too, since it votes 90% or more Democratic. Could the capital declare secession? Would Red America have to relocate its capital to Montgomery Alabama, like Jefferson Davis eventually did?
Mind you, secession probably cannot be a legal matter; it would likely not get the support needed to pass legally.
Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
(11-23-2016, 12:05 PM)tg63 Wrote: I don't think it was intended this way but it sure appears that this thread is proving the premise within its title.
-- yup
my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
(11-23-2016, 02:42 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I think if CA secedes, it should develop nuclear weapons, if Red America threatens attack. So with any other blue states so inclined. It doesn't matter if the population here is more concentrated. The possession of nucs deters any nation from attacking another.
With our greater technical know-how, we'll be able to develop a better nuclear shield too.
It will be an interesting situation in DC too, since it votes 90% or more Democratic. Could the capital declare secession? Would Red America have to relocate its capital to Montgomery Alabama, like Jefferson Davis eventually did?
Mind you, secession cannot be a legal matter; it would not get the support needed to pass legally.
-- & that's where things get messy. CA has what- Edwards, Vandenburg, San Diego, the Alameda Shipyards.. would the Govt even let CA secede? Or would the personnel on these bases be called on to stop move for seccession?
my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(11-22-2016, 11:24 PM)2Legit2Quit Wrote: Thanks for the welcome.
Im not sure if you all are serious or taking the piss.
Hillary as the good guy? I get trump is a loose cannon but Hillary is a corporate shill and hardly a Democrat. She's the definition of corrupt crony capitalism and it's a blessing thar she lost.
In any case, time to move forward.
Maybe so, but you'd have to realize that most Democrats are still going to be "corrupt crony capitalists," if you define Hillary as such. The money-dominated system still enthralls most candidates. Only a bold revolutionary with some charisma like Bernie Sanders can break through the spell. How many such leaders are there in America? Given the nature of America, with its retrograde attitudes so dominant in the half of the country that controls the most Senate and Electoral votes, we must all remember there's a limit to how good a candidate we can get, or that the Democrats can put up. I am as idealistic as anyone, but a little realism about the country we live in might have saved us from the disaster that is befalling us now.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(11-23-2016, 02:54 PM)Marypoza Wrote: (11-23-2016, 02:42 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I think if CA secedes, it should develop nuclear weapons, if Red America threatens attack. So with any other blue states so inclined. It doesn't matter if the population here is more concentrated. The possession of nucs deters any nation from attacking another.
With our greater technical know-how, we'll be able to develop a better nuclear shield too.
It will be an interesting situation in DC too, since it votes 90% or more Democratic. Could the capital declare secession? Would Red America have to relocate its capital to Montgomery Alabama, like Jefferson Davis eventually did?
Mind you, secession cannot be a legal matter; it would not get the support needed to pass legally.
-- & that's where things get messy. CA has what- Edwards, Vandenburg, San Diego, the Alameda Shipyards.. would the Govt even let CA secede? Or would the personnel on these bases be called on to stop move for secession?
That's where things get messy, all right. Californians would have to be ready militarily to defend themselves and to take over those bases. That's how the Civil War started, when a military base was taken over in SC.
|
