Jump to content

Fact Checking The New Socialist Darling!

Reagan

By Reagan
in Political Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 262
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Reagan
Reagan
Hagar
Hagar

Saw a great meme.  Picture of about a 5 yr old girl.. And at the top it says, My little brother ate all the scrabble tiles... And at the bottom,  And his sh~t makes more sense than Alexander

Hagar
Hagar

It’s to be expected.  While the average Marxist peasant lives from day to day, the leaders (Politburo) live high on the hog.  And ain’t it a good thing too.  Bernie and this wee lassie are used to bet

LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted

This is the hidden content, please

From the article:

Institute for Energy Research president Tom Pyle was more blunt: “One hundred percent renewable energy defies the laws of physics. It would be impossible to achieve.”

Nevertheless, approximately 70 Democratic lawmakers have so far tentatively endorsed a Green New Deal plan, including Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and California Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris.And Paul Bledsoe, a strategic adviser at the Progressive Policy Institute, said progressives were overcompensating. “I understand the value of aspirational goals,” Bledsoe said. “My personal view is, that undermines the credibility of the effort.”

 

It won't work...

...WE DON'T CARE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BS Wildcats

BS Wildcats

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, LumRaiderFan said:

This is the hidden content, please

From the article:

Institute for Energy Research president Tom Pyle was more blunt: “One hundred percent renewable energy defies the laws of physics. It would be impossible to achieve.”

Nevertheless, approximately 70 Democratic lawmakers have so far tentatively endorsed a Green New Deal plan, including Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and California Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris.And Paul Bledsoe, a strategic adviser at the Progressive Policy Institute, said progressives were overcompensating. “I understand the value of aspirational goals,” Bledsoe said. “My personal view is, that undermines the credibility of the effort.”

 

It won't work...

...WE DON'T CARE!

Reminds one of obamacare.  Dims knew it wouldn't work, but they were going to push it through come hell or high water.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hagar

Hagar

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

I'm sure their reasons would sound a lot like the responses you'd get from a lot Trump voters.  

Not even close.  She essentially won the election in the primaries against an incumbent Democrat.  I suspect her opponent then had an infinitely higher IQ than she, but then again, who doesn’t.  A large number of Trump voters did so in order to avoid getting Hillary, who would abuse the presidency even more than she did SOS.  Sell our uranium to Russia - had she been elected president, she’d probably sold Texas to Russia.

If there’s such a thing as demonic possession, and I believe there is, she appears to have all the symptoms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted

This is the hidden content, please

From the article:

The Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel issued a blistering critique of the proposed Green New Deal, saying that the proposal reads like a parody of the Democratic Party done by Republicans.

“By the end of the Green New Deal resolution (and accompanying fact sheet) I was laughing so hard I nearly cried,” Strassel wrote on Twitter. “If a bunch of GOPers plotted to forge a fake Democratic bill showing how bonkers the party is, they could not have done a better job. It is beautiful.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CardinalBacker

CardinalBacker

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Hagar said:

Not even close.  She essentially won the election in the primaries against an incumbent Democrat.  I suspect her opponent then had an infinitely higher IQ than she, but then again, who doesn’t.  A large number of Trump voters did so in order to avoid getting Hillary, who would abuse the presidency even more than she did SOS.  Sell our uranium to Russia - had she been elected president, she’d probably sold Texas to Russia.

If there’s such a thing as demonic possession, and I believe there is, she appears to have all the symptoms.

Trump beat out something like 2 dozen more experienced politicians (and Carly Fiorina and Dr Ben Carson) to win the Republican nomination.  If you go back to the first debate, there were at least 15 guys on that stage that were better prepared to lead the nation.  Anybody that argues any differently is probably not worth debating. 

Here's my opinion. I was surprised when the Dems selected Obama in 08 with so limited qualifications.  I was flabbergasted in 2012 when he was re-elected despite really accomplishing nothing except speeding up the implosion of the healthcare system.  I really felt like the Ds had harnessed the "stupid" vote and would continue to get re-elected over and over again.  The Rs proved in 2016 that the Ds haven't locked up the uninformed vote just yet. 

The scary part is that I'm afraid it's a trend and we can only expect more of the same.  You go from somebody like Bill Clinton (first to have NOT served in the military, but played a decent sax) to GWB who was a great guy but honestly probably not the best Commander in Chief we've ever had, to the coolest pres ever in Obama, to Trump.  The next step is gonna be a big one, and I'll be surprised if it isn't a cross-dressing wanna-be punk rocker from El Paso or some other whack-a-doodle who spouts off all of the benefits of socialism... like our fathers and grandfathers didn't fight wars (hot and cold) to stop it in the last 50 years. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UT alum

UT alum

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, CardinalBacker said:

Trump beat out something like 2 dozen more experienced politicians (and Carly Fiorina and Dr Ben Carson) to win the Republican nomination.  If you go back to the first debate, there were at least 15 guys on that stage that were better prepared to lead the nation.  Anybody that argues any differently is probably not worth debating. 

Here's my opinion. I was surprised when the Dems selected Obama in 08 with so limited qualifications.  I was flabbergasted in 2012 when he was re-elected despite really accomplishing nothing except speeding up the implosion of the healthcare system.  I really felt like the Ds had harnessed the "stupid" vote and would continue to get re-elected over and over again.  The Rs proved in 2016 that the Ds haven't locked up the uninformed vote just yet. 

The scary part is that I'm afraid it's a trend and we can only expect more of the same.  You go from somebody like Bill Clinton (first to have NOT served in the military, but played a decent sax) to GWB who was a great guy but honestly probably not the best Commander in Chief we've ever had, to the coolest pres ever in Obama, to Trump.  The next step is gonna be a big one, and I'll be surprised if it isn't a cross-dressing wanna-be punk rocker from El Paso or some other whack-a-doodle who spouts off all of the benefits of socialism... like our fathers and grandfathers didn't fight wars (hot and cold) to stop it in the last 50 years. 

 

 

Nah, it’ll be a Biden/Harris ticket is my bet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

Trump beat out something like 2 dozen more experienced politicians (and Carly Fiorina and Dr Ben Carson) to win the Republican nomination.  If you go back to the first debate, there were at least 15 guys on that stage that were better prepared to lead the nation.  Anybody that argues any differently is probably not worth debating. 

Here's my opinion. I was surprised when the Dems selected Obama in 08 with so limited qualifications.  I was flabbergasted in 2012 when he was re-elected despite really accomplishing nothing except speeding up the implosion of the healthcare system.  I really felt like the Ds had harnessed the "stupid" vote and would continue to get re-elected over and over again.  The Rs proved in 2016 that the Ds haven't locked up the uninformed vote just yet. 

The scary part is that I'm afraid it's a trend and we can only expect more of the same.  You go from somebody like Bill Clinton (first to have NOT served in the military, but played a decent sax) to GWB who was a great guy but honestly probably not the best Commander in Chief we've ever had, to the coolest pres ever in Obama, to Trump.  The next step is gonna be a big one, and I'll be surprised if it isn't a cross-dressing wanna-be punk rocker from El Paso or some other whack-a-doodle who spouts off all of the benefits of socialism... like our fathers and grandfathers didn't fight wars (hot and cold) to stop it in the last 50 years. 

 

 

Ah, yes, that's what we needed, another experienced politician.

I'm sure with all their experience they would have picked better SCJs, renegotiated NAFTA better, given us better across the board tax cuts, cut many more Obama era regulations, and gotten the economy jump-started much better than Trump has.

Yes, I'm sure that's it, we need a seasoned GOP candidate that would have done a much better job...just ask the GOP, they'll tell you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hagar

Hagar

Posted
Posted

Here’s my problem with any Govt run HC.  If we’re all under GRHC, we’ve essentially lost our Freedom.  Your HC will be available at the will of the Govt.  Think about that.  There’s a quote, I don’t know the author but I’ll just paraphrase, Govt run HC will invariably reduce coverage to offset cost.  Some hospitals in Great Britain are delaying treatment for the obese and smokers for up to 6 months.  So if we’re under GRHC, what freedoms have we lost?  Virtually everyone needs HC at one time or another.  So our Govt delays HC to the obese & smokers.  Currently, OCortez has proposed that in 10 years we only use alternate energy sources, no longer have airplanes and a surcease to eating meat (and a ton of other things).  So if you’re a meat eater you could be restricted.  It could, and would, get worse.  You own a gun?  Turn your gun in or your whole family will be refused HC.  If you think that’s absurd, you’re not familiar with the current Dem Party.  Or 10 years from now some right wing nut job may take over and use this power.  IMO, that’s entirely to much power to put in the hands of any government.

If anyone can refute what I’ve posted, please do.  The thought of it scares the poo out of me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Member Statistics

    45,935
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined


×
×
  • Create New...