United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: What is the textbook definition of a democrat
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Nov 11, 2018
Author: Definition
Post Date: 2018-11-11 11:27:06 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 5515
Comments: 68
Democrat noun 1. A murderer of innocent children. 2. A person who is attracted to someone of their same sex. 3. A thief that wants to live off of someone else's labor. Feels a sense of entitlement to others labor. 4. An anti christian bigot who hates God and morals. 5. Someone who cuts off or has someone cut off their penis because they are mentally ill and do not know their own sex.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-11) not displayed.
.
.
.
#12. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
That is a lie. They tax minimum wage earners so that they cannot live without government assistance or someone else helping them. Stealing from people trying to make a living and giving it to others is unchristian and wrong. You may think 50 or 60 percent taxes are ok. But that is because you are a communist hypocrite. Or at least close to a communist mindset.
A ponzi scheme that is like gambling.
They don't give a shit about the poor. They hate the poor. That is why they like abortion. They want the poor to kill themselves.
Not true. A real safety net. Not your version commie lite. You like the state over the individual. You are a statist hypocrite. Walk the walk. Give your stuff away and quit trying to use the force of the government to take away from people who are trying to make ends meet for your Utopian stupidity.
Stone, your reaction to what the Democrats are is the standard Republican response. Democrats are what I wrote. Republicans are what you are. There are more Independents than either Democrats or Republicans, because most people don't like various aspects of what Democrats offer (such as abortion, or anti-military postures, or race pandering, or open-borders policies), and most people find your Republican viewpoint about people, so clearly stated in your four preceding e-mails and the one before that by a different poster, to be quite ugly and wrong. You go on being a Republican. Democrats will go on being Democrats. I'll go on being Independent, because I don't agree with either side. The Democrats have too much bad in their platform, and Republicans are way too evil.
I’m an independent... and you are full of shit. Do some soul searching. You’ve allowed yourself to be indoctrinated left, more than you can see. It’s people like you, blind fuckers who don’t know what they are, that caused me to register independent.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Almost touches The axis of liberals - insanity That’s where the libertarians hover Spot on. The comical thing is, most of the Paultards don’t honestly know how similar they are to the snowflakes.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Adolph Hitler was also an "independent" with his self-proclaimed blitzkrieg; nope, you are a loser, lamer cross-walk guard destined towards no real good deed in life.
A soft, weak, self important... asshole.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Fuck off, 3rd world jungle boy. lol
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
——————/´ ¯/)
I think you have misspelled, it what you describe is a demorat; although I know how you could make the mistake as democrats seem individually to have similar characteristics. Allegedly a democrat is some one who believes in free speech, somewhat an oxymoron in the way they behave believing that unless you believe as they do you have no right to express an alternative opinion. There are things you cannot say such as; a baby has a right to live migrants must obey the law I can do what I like on my own property I can own a gun
You too. Go right to the heart of the Republican complaints on this board. Now imagine what life would be like if we eliminated, just wiped out, the three largest Democrat programs: Universal Public Education, Medicare and Social Security. Just those three consume the bulk of the government (local + state + federal) budgets of the United States. Poverty relief programs are a drop in the bucket compared to those three things: public education, Medicare and Social Security. If you do the soul searching and come to the conclusion: kill all three, you're a Republican - and you will also see THE issues that are THE reason why you'll always be in the minority. You'll say that it'e because the majority of the country are immoral and greedy and wrong. The majority of the country will say that you think the way you do because you're evil. This is THE battlefield on which Republican majorities always fall out of reach. It's THE reason why conservative Democrats don't change parties, and why Independents don't join the GOP. Republicans are just determined to reduce the middle class to poverty by not educating people and leaving them sick and destitute in old age, unable to retire, forced to work until they die - or to dump old parents into the houses of their children like dependents during the final decade of their lives. Republicans believe their approach to be morally right. Really it's just a love of money that exceeds the bounds of reason (the bulk of Republicans are also dependent on these programs to get their education, their retirement and their health care in retirement, but they seem to have convinced themselves that they can do without.) We lived without those things for thousands of years. Africa lives without them today. Our way, having these things, works better. The first country to adopt them was Germany, and Germany became a powerhouse that took the rest of Europe united, plus us, to bring to heel. We became a superpower and the world's dominant economy with these things. It is simply not true, objectively, that they weaken the country. But Republicans will go on believing it does until the day they die. Which is their right. But it's why they never are able to gain and keep majorities. It's why the Democrats have basically set the primary budgetary agenda since 1934. If Republicans got reasonable about necessary things, they could very easily become the dominant party - there's a whole lot wrong with Democrats. But - as we see right here on this board - Republican minds are not capable of being reasonable. There's something wrong with them. So all they can do is gain temporary advantages on emotional and hot button issues, win an election or two, dilly-dally around the edges, plunge us into debt with huge military spending and overseas adventure, but never be permitted to touch public education, Social Security and Medicare - the primary drivers of the budget - the true necessary target for them if they're going to slash taxes without blowing up the budget and, eventually, the economy, like they've done twice in my lifetime.
Allegedly a democrat is some one who believes in free speech, somewhat an oxymoron in the way they behave believing that unless you believe as they do you have no right to express an alternative opinion. There are things you cannot say such as; a baby has a right to live migrants must obey the law I can do what I like on my own property I can own a gun Yes. These and many other issues are the Democrats' Achilles' Heel. They are totalitarians on social and freedom issues. They want to control speech - unless it's theirs. They don't care about the freedom of religion or the right to keep and bear arms. They don't really care about the Constitution, except when it serves their purposes. They worship at the altar of abortion, and they have made public sexual deviancy into a civil right. They're not at all keen on law and order, or - post Vietnam - national defense. Because of all of these bad traits, Democrats are unable to get a lock on power. Independents like me find them disgusting. Because Republicans are terrible at economics and hate poor people, sick people, old people and anybody they have to spend money on, they're disgusting in their own right. And so the 28% or so who are Republican and the 32% or so who are Democrat take their positions in every election cycle, and the 40% of us who are Independents choose between two bad options, taking a "Shoot the wolf closest to the sled" approach. In general, the key Democratic social programs are so deeply entrenched that a few years of Republican rule - with substantial numbers of Democrats in the Senate and in the judiciary and administrative agencies to slow down or stop any sort of radical elimination program - cannot really touch them. So we can have relative financial irresponsibility under Republican rule but not have to endure the Democrat totalitarianism on religious, speech and personal liberty issues. Once the Republicans fuck up the economy again, as they always do with steep tax cuts uncoupled with spending cuts, we end up putting a Democrat back in their to right them ship. But the Democrats' odious school-marm tone costs them power once things have stabilied. If Democrats weren't such cunts they'd be the permanent majority. The same is true if Republicans didn't hate working people so much. But it is what it is. And that's why Independents decide all American elections, and why neither party gets a lock on power - although Democrats did largely have a lock during a half- century of building the Social Welfare state.
You consider that a true statement? You are a dirty liar. Like the democrat you are. You are not pro life. You were ready to vote for Hillary if Cruz won. Oh fuck you asshole. Liar.
You make stuff up. You know lying. Romney won the independents and lost the election. According to exit polls. You're not an independent. You are an anti christian catholic. You once said don't call you a Christian because you are not. Or something to that affect.
You are a good decent man. Honorable.
Comical.
I like to think so
They had a lock on power when people had nothing, now 64% of voters don't care enough to turn up, but listen to them howl about the result
When have the American people had nothing? This has always been a relatively rich, middle class country. Slaves had nothing, and immigrants fresh off the boat from Ireland and Italy, etc., often started with nothing, but pretty soon they had something, because they were able to easily get jobs and earn money, and farmers were able to easily buy land (something virtually impossible for the poor in crowded, cramped old Europe). People had something, but there was a gaping hole when they got hold or sick. Social Security covered that. The first universal public school system in the world, for both sexes, was Massachusetts Bay colony, and it was a fantastic success. New England may have been rustic and very much a farmer-and-tradesman society in the 1600s and 1700s, but it was also the most educated place on the planet, with a higher literacy rate than London or Paris or Rome. That New England model spread from there to the Midwest by way of the Northwest Ordnance, which partition one- thirty-sixth of the land specifically for public education purposes. Americans, more than any other people, have mostly always had something, mostly always been "middle class" by the standards of the time. They always "had something". And were relatively well-educated. It was a well-educated middle class population that voted for Social Security and Unemployment benefits and Medicare, because we decided we needed it.
I give you exhibit A: the Republican on his home turf, expressing the way he feels. This is why you are not, and never will be, the majority. You drip hatred. People don't like that. Whoever doesn't think like you is a liar and an asshole, according to you. When you Republicans do this, you drive people over to other side. It's why you're so hated.
If the KKK, NAZI's and the commie's had a child it would be a Demoncrat! They are still stuck in eugenics and this time its to murder off the white races. The religion they wish to destroy is Christianity because it gives hope to the people they are genociding. They are still using the politics of identity politics. Everything is pushed by intellectuals ie college professors. Its the same old shit, from the same old people just different day!
LIar. You are a liar because you lied and said republicans hate poor people. It is ok to call a liar a liar. Ok liar!
Libtards socialist and Paultards might false propagate this concept, to further their enabling agenda... and I’m sure I come off as a hater of poor people. The fact of the matter is, I HATE SHEEP that rely on others to survive, that don’t need to. I saw your post... good post.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
But you DO hate poor people. Their poverty is THEIR fault - THEIR laziness, THEIR irresponsibility - never mind disability or disease or old age or all of the other aspects of life that cause people to be of modest means. You call Social Security, Medicare and Universal Public Education THEFT, because they are paid for by taxes. Without those three pillars, the levels of destitution and suffering and poverty in America would rise to the levels that we had before those things, and to the levels of those parts in the world that still don't have those things. You say "Trust God." Well, yes, and God sent a Savior who TOLD US that we would be judged by how we looked after the old, the infirm, the sick, the orphan and the prisoner. Note, please, the PRISONER - the people who get punished, even if they deserve it: we are not exempt from taking care of them too, according to Jesus, and he's merely the Son of God. NOPE, you say, no social welfare - that's THEFT (what a lie!) and that's contrary to God (another whopping lie!), and then you round on me for saying what God explicitly said, and call ME the liar (yet ANOTHER lie!). And how you RAGE about it! How you kick at the goad! The truth is, the reason that your party stays in the minority is because of common sense and human charity - the NEED for social welfare, and the cool, dispassionate logic as to why - versus your raging hatred against those who support it. You call us thieves, liars, people who are against God. How you roar! And your fellow hyenas pick up the chorus with you, right on this thread. They agree: KILL Social Security! KILL Medicare and Medicaid! KILL Public Education! All that expensive stuff is paid for by taxes, and it's all THEFT! HATE the weak! Damned sheep! There's a great big stinking turd of a lie laid down by you guys right in the middle of the table. Everybody sees it, and it makes people draw back from you. It's WHY you're the minority, and will stay there.
Don'T forgeT AgainsT free speech Too ATTacking the news Puke Ps You're a personificaTion Of the euro model Top heavy sTaTisT FeeT of Toes of clay
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
I’m don’t buy the whole European social model. Feet of clay? Not hardly.
You do know that was a depression in the US about 100 years ago, a US led depression, and at that time many had nothing and were prepared to sign on to a socialist agenda. Of course you conveniently forgot that in the rush of nationalist fervour that acclaimed what the rich did in the eighteenth century that ripped your nation apart and again what they did in the nineteenth century. It seems the rich love to bathe in blood, the blood of the poor. You know what it is they always HAD, pride and it is not a virtue
Vic is all for the socialist agenda. He once said America should be taxed and spread our wealth to the whole world. He wants worldwide globalist welfare. He said so. FDR the socialist is practically a god to him. Vic thinks there hasn't been a greater president since FDR.
That's true. FDR ended the Great Depression, established the modern social welfare state, and won World War II WITHOUT destroying democracy, individual liberty and capitalism, as the other nations did. He faced the two worst existential threats to America since the Civil War, and mastered them, and the people voted for him four times on account of it. FDR was great. The near-greats right behind him were Eisenhower and Reagan. JFK would have been great - he was on the right track - but he was killed before he could do it. LBJ and Nixon could have been great, and did some good things. But their personal demons caught up with them. That may be the future of Trump as well. He is definitely doing a lot of positive things that are very good for America as a whole, but the seamy side of the man himself may come to engulf his Presidency, as was the case with Nixon, LBJ and Clinton. Truman, Ford, HW Bush, Clinton, W Bush and Obama - meh. Mediocre. Obama proved that a well-educated, articulate, smart, charismatic black man can be as incompetent and mediocre a President as a comparable white guy. Of course the Democrats demonize the Republicans, and the Republicans demonize the Democrats. And the rest of us sane people see them and judge both political mafia families to be hypocritical and blind to their own faults.
Capitalists ended the depression. That prick FDR extended it. He also stole the peoples gold. He was a worthless pile of shit just like his cunt wife.
Why yes, yes I DO know that there was a worldwide Depression starting in 1929. To blame the Depression entirely on the US is quite blind really: the destruction of Europe in World War I, Revolution and civil war all across the East of Europe, and the trauma of German economic collapse thanks to war reparations and hyperinflation - imposed on Germany by the victorious European powers through the Versailles Treaty (which America did not ratify) - these were the primary drivers of European misery. The American stock market crashed - not for the first time, not for the last time. The reason that was a worldwide depression was primarily because the Europeans were a bunch of cunts, earnestly desiring to devour each other and playing Risk with the world map (British Empires, French Empires, exclusive economic zones, holding down India and Indochina, and holding down Germany). The US withdrew into the Isolation we had ALWAYS PRACTICED since the dawn of our republic. We had come out of it ONCE, just once, to save France and Britain from being overrun by the Germans in 1918. We won the war for the West, but then were ignored in the peace treaty - Germany was punished at Versailles, very much against the will of the United States. So we refused to ratify the Treaty and went home, embittered. We returned to our traditional posture of isolation. It was BECAUSE OF the disregard of the United States at Versailles that the people of US wanted nothing to do with the European War when it broke out again in 1939. France and Britain had relied on us to save them in 1918, but then ignored our wishes at Versailles. Therefore, the American people opted to stay out of European affairs for good. The fall of France in 1940 and the neutrality of the USA during the London Blitz and the long siege of Britain in 1940 and 1941 was the direct result of British and French arrogance at the end of World War I. We came to their rescue in 1918, and they ignored our wishes at the end of that war, imposing their own will, and setting themselves up for a repeat war with Germany - a war that we had no intention of participating in. France and England made their bed in 1918. They were the world empires. Let them lie in it in 1939 and 1940 and 1941. That was the American view. Truth is, the US probably would have NEVER entered the European war at all. After Pearl Harbor the United States declared war on Japan, not Germany. It was Hitler, the madman, who dragged the US into the European war on December 10, 1941, by declaring war on the United States. We didn't declare war on Germany - Pearl Harbor did not trigger war with Germany. The Germans, stupidly, declared war on us. If Hitler had not done so, the US would have concentrated on Japan and made quicker work of the Japanese, and may never have become involved in war against Germany at all. So, this whole business of the US nationalist fervor, and US-led depression and all of that claptrap. Newsflash: in 1929 the US was NOT responsible for running "the world system". The British and French had very arrogantly and confidently pushed us off the stage at Versailles and assumed the role of world co-hegemons. WE did the heavy lifting at the end of the war, stopping the Ludendorff Offensive after the Germans had already broken through the British and French lines. Had the US Army and Marine Corps not been present, Paris would have fallen and Germany would have won that war. We won the war, but we immediately lost the peace. Clemenceau famously said "Wilson bores me with his 14 points. The Almighty only needed 10 commandments." It's funny, and arrogant, and archetypical of the patent disdain with which the English and the French held the Americans at the end of 1918. We were nothing but muscle to them, muscle they were happy to use for their purposes but, having defeated the German threat with American arms, the British and the French had no intention of listening to the Americans, or sharing power, or allowing the US to expand freely into their colonial markets. Nope. They reassumed their "world leadership", and sent the American diplomats home, tail between our legs. The US won the war but was diplomatically humiliated by Britain and France after the war. They humiliated us, and they humiliated the Germans too. But they had to live with the Germans. We went home and stayed there. And they provoked the Germans by what they did, and proved themselves militarily inferior to the Germans once again, and had to rely on American rescue once again, but this time the Americans, rightly, did not come to the rescue of Britain and France. France was overwhelmed. And Britain was bombed flat, and forced to fight alone until she was utterly bankrupted. When the Americans finally came in, only after the Germans declared war on us, Britain was a convenient aircraft carrier, and the British Army and Navy became to us what the American Army and Marines had been to them in the previous war: muscle to be ultimately commanded on the chessboard by Americans. In short, we LEARNED from our humiliation in World War I, and stayed out this time, until France was destroyed and Russia was ruined and Britain was bankrupt, and then we came in, as a colossus, at the end of the war, and have ruled the world ever since. American-led Depression? No. Britain and France were the leaders of the world in 1929, not us. The Americans had a stock market bust, as had happened many times before. The Depression was worldwide because the British and French were cunts to the Germans after World War I - very much AGAINST the will of the Americans - and crashed the German economy with their reparations demands - the Americans did not demand reparations. But Britain and France were too weak to hold down Germany or Russia, so they faced the rise of the Nazis and the Soviets, and had nothing like the power necessary to stop either. Meanwhile, the Americans were back home in their own continent AS THEY ALWAYS HAD BEEN, taking care of their own local affairs AS WE HAD ALWAYS, and protecting our markets AS WE ALWAYS HAD for over a century. There was nothing NEW about American behavior. What WAS new was that the British and French were not strong enough or rich enough to be able to actually rule the world, or to contain either the German OR Soviet threat, or the Japanese threat in the East. They NEEDED American muscle, but they were arrogant cunts who would not share power. They expected America to serve their interests but not let our own will be the rule. They isolated us at Versailles, so we went home. And we did not come back until they were all destroyed. Then we came in, picked up the pieces, and have not shared power ever since. We won World War I but lost the peace at Versailles. So we returned to our native posture of isolation and local development, and did not enter World War II at all. We let the world burn itself down. The world - the Japanese and Germans - dragged us into the war by declaring war on us. When we came in, we conquered them both, and imposed the new world order afterwards. The US did not cause the Great Depression. We merely won it. Europe went Communist, National Socialist and Imperialist. American preserved democracy and capitalism, with just enough social welfare to prevent us from following the stupid path of Europeans and Asians. So we emerged the victor. That's what happened. Could it all have been avoided? Sure. In two ways. One was for the US to stay out of World War I. Then the Germans would have conquered France in 1918, thereby rejuvenating the German economy and allowing the Germans to transfer forces en-masse to the Middle East to shore up their ally Turkey. The UK would have had to sue for peace or lose their empire. The result: a German-dominated Europe, which would have gotten on pretty well with the USA, probably. The other was for the English and French to respect American wishes at Versailles and not impose crippling reparations on Germany. Then the Americans would have stayed allied and engaged, the German economy would not have collapsed, and there would have been no rise of national socialism in Germany. The borders of Free Europe would be pretty much where they are now, and the USA would have been integrated into the structure. You would have had the equivalent of NATO with much more equal partners: the USA, the British Empire (intact), the French Empire (intact), a German Republic, and a free Eastern Europe that never would have fallen under the Warsaw Pact. Neither of those things happened. So the US went home, Britain and France ruled the world for about 20 more years, then lost it all, the US was dragged back out of our shell by Japan and Germany. We beat both of them, and ended up in 2018 where we COULD HAVE ended up in 1920, except that today it's the USA alone as the hegemon, with Britain and France and Germany and Italy and Canada and Australia and the other little countries all part of a grand alliance headed by the USA. It could have been a union of equals, but Britain and France refused to respect the Americans in 1918. Now here you are blaming us for the Great Depression. WE didn't cause it. The British and French did, by imposing reparations on Germany. Nor did we cause World War II. What we did is win both the Depression and the Second World War and essentially conquered the world. That's why you resent us so much and retroject blame upon us that properly falls primarily on the British Empire and the French Empire. Not guilty. We didn't do it. We didn't start it. We didn't cause it. We didn't want to be part of any of it. We wanted to be left alone in our hemisphere. The world dragged us in against our will. So we conquered it. We were able to do so because our political philosophy and economic and military structures are all superior to anything that Europe or Asia ever came up with. That's why we won and they lost. That's why we rule the world, and always will for the rest of our lives, and our children's lives, and our great- grandchildren's lives. The Pax Americana is a good thing, on balance. Except for our enemies. Our enemies choose to be our enemies. It would be better for everybody to just submit. Makes commerce flow better, and that raises all boats.
Capitalists caused it with an unregulated stock market and laissez-faire refusal to intervene with any sort of systematic unemployment relief. FDR was able to rearrange the system sufficiently to save capitalism AND democracy, no thanks to the capitalists who resisted him. They also resisted US preparation for World War II, but FDR outfoxed them.
The Federal Reserve was the cause simpleton.
Unregulated markets were the cause of the crash in the US. German meltdown was the cause of the depth and width in Europe. Federal Reserve policies made recovery more difficult in the USA.
The shout of every tyrant, and tyrant you are. So you took your bat and went home after WW1, you didn't like the fact that those who had done the heavy lifting for four years wanted to call the shots and make sure Germany could not rise again. Unfortunately they we unsuccessful and you still have your knickers in a knot about it. The Soviets did as much to win the war (WWII) in Europe as you did afterall they had more to pay Germany back for. You did not loose millions in either war so stop griping. Your manifest destiny is not to rule the world
Not only are people sacrificing their children, they are killing the "firstborn" in over 60% of cases. The best and the brightest children are invariably the first born.
THIS IS A TAG LINE...Exercising rights is only radical to two people, Tyrants and Slaves. Which are YOU? Our ignorance has driven us into slavery and we do not recognize it.
The only thing I agree with is forcing Hospitals to treat injured and critically sick people. Not children with a cough, or kids with a running nose. Social Security - Medicare - Universal Public Schooling - Medicaid - Housing initiatives for the poor - Food stamp and school meal programs for the poor. - Student aid - Home heating assistance for the elderly - Disability benefits - Unemployment benefits. SS? is a waste of money. Medicare? it is a joke for the elderly. I know about both because I am forced to be on one, and it is nearly as bad as the VA. The other? I am getting rich now baby.... Public Schooling? Mothers can do a better job than school teachers. Medicaid? NOPE, get a job and pay for your own care. Housing? again, bunk with someone who wishes to be the host for your parasitic ass. Student Aid? Take out a loan, or work your way through school. Home heating assistance? Isn't that what children are for? Disability benefits? Yessir, lets pay $2-4 an hour to a government board so they can give us a little bit back when we are hurt. I can self finance my own insurance, at about $50 a month instead of $320 a month. Ditto for Unemployment. It is called being frugal and saving up for a rainy day.
THIS IS A TAG LINE...Exercising rights is only radical to two people, Tyrants and Slaves. Which are YOU? Our ignorance has driven us into slavery and we do not recognize it.
It was. We do.
Comments (53 - 68) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest1) Favor policies that provide a safety net for the poor
#13. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
Social Security - Medicare
#14. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
Housing initiatives for the poor - Food stamp and school meal programs for the poor. -
#15. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
Republicans generally oppose the social safety net.
#16. To: A K A Stone (#15)
#17. To: Vicomte13 (#16)
You go on being a Republican. Democrats will go on being Democrats. I'll go on being Independent
#18. To: BorisY (#7)
The outer axis of sanity
#19. To: GrandIsland (#17)
I’m an independent.
#20. To: A K A Stone (#0)
What is the textbook definition of a democrat
#21. To: buckeroo (#19)
#22. To: GrandIsland (#21)
—————--/—-/
—————-/—-/
———--/´¯/'--'/´¯`•_
———-/'/--/—-/—--/¨¯
——--('(———- ¯~/ '--' )
———————-'—--/
———-''————_-•´
———————--(
#23. To: GrandIsland, Bingo Bango Bongo Independents, Fred Mertz, buckeroo (#21)
#24. To: A K A Stone (#0)
#25. To: GrandIsland (#17)
Do some soul searching.
#26. To: paraclete (#24)
(Edited)
I know how you could make the mistake as democrats seem individually to have similar characteristics.
#27. To: Vicomte13 (#26)
Because Republicans are terrible at economics and hate poor people, sick people, old people and anybody they have to spend money on, they're disgusting in their own right.
#28. To: Vicomte13 (#26)
But it is what it is. And that's why Independents decide all American elections
#29. To: paraclete (#24)
#30. To: Vicomte13 (#26)
nd the 40% of us who are Independents
#31. To: A K A Stone (#29)
#32. To: Vicomte13 (#26)
#33. To: paraclete (#32)
They had a lock on power when people had nothing, now 64% of voters don't care enough to turn up, but listen to them howl about the result
#34. To: A K A Stone (#27)
You are a dirty liar. Like the democrat you are. You are not pro life. You were ready to vote for Hillary if Cruz won. Oh fuck you asshole. Liar.
#35. To: A K A Stone, All (#0)
#36. To: Vicomte13 (#34)
Whoever doesn't think like you is a liar
#37. To: A K A Stone (#36)
(Edited)
You are a liar because you lied and said republicans hate poor people.
#38. To: A K A Stone (#36)
(Edited)
You are a liar because you lied and said republicans hate poor people.
#39. To: Vicomte13 (#38)
(Edited)
boris
#40. To: BorisY (#39)
#41. To: Vicomte13 (#33)
Americans, more than any other people, have mostly always had something,
#42. To: paraclete (#41)
and at that time many had nothing and were prepared to sign on to a socialist agenda.
#43. To: A K A Stone (#42)
(Edited)
Vic thinks there hasn't been a greater president since FDR.
#44. To: Vicomte13 (#43)
#45. To: paraclete (#41)
(Edited)
You do know that was a depression in the US about 100 years ago, a US led depression, and at that time many had nothing and were prepared to sign on to a socialist agenda. Of course you conveniently forgot that in the rush of nationalist fervour that acclaimed what the rich did in the eighteenth century that ripped your nation apart and again what they did in the nineteenth century. It seems the rich love to bathe in blood, the blood of the poor.
#46. To: A K A Stone (#44)
Capitalists ended the depression.
#47. To: Vicomte13 (#46)
#48. To: A K A Stone (#47)
The Federal Reserve was the cause simpleton.
#49. To: Vicomte13 (#45)
(Edited)
It would be better for everybody to just submit.
#50. To: A K A Stone (#14)
#51. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
#52. To: paraclete (#49)
Your manifest destiny is not to rule the world
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]