Dump Shithole

[cantstopthemusic]

Now even Sweden is trolling Trump and his shit show:

Cool, so you're against the Muslim ban?

There is no "Muslim ban."

Maybe you should concentrate your piss-poor gaslighting efforts on your amateur porn career.

Maybe you should fuck off, twink.

[exitflagger]

I liked her better before she got all political and just worked with Johnny.

Dude, you are giving Kellyanne far too much fuckability credit.

My thought is you could put her and Ann Coulter together and make a pair of right-wing loony bitch chopsticks.

[exitflagger]

[poisonheart]

Now even Sweden is trolling Trump and his shit show:

There is no "Muslim ban."

Maybe you should concentrate your piss-poor gaslighting efforts on your amateur porn career.

Maybe you should fuck off, twink.

Canttop only accepts applications from bears.

[That-guy]

Is it weird that I find Michael Monroe hotter?

[Bianca]

[Olds_71_442]

Is it weird that I find Michael Monroe hotter?

Nope. I saw this on Facebook last night and thought the same thing.

[Caustic Queen]

Is it weird that I find Michael Monroe hotter?

Mike was my first lesbian crush...

[Pierce Foreskin]

Conway is now saying she meant to say "terrorists" instead of "massacre". It was all just a use of the wrong word. No biggie.

Her exact quote was: "I bet it's brand new information to people that President Obama had a six-month ban on the Iraqi refugee program after two Iraqis came here to this country, were radicalized and they were the masterminds behind the Bowling Green massacre. It didn't get covered."

She claimed they were masterminds behind a massacre in Bowling Green... How the fuck do you mix up massacre and terrorist? Massacre is an event. Terrorist is a person.

I'm beginning to see why Drumpf hasn't given Sarah Palin a position, she and this Conway broad would be constantly competing for stupid quote of the day..

Which just goes to show how bad of a business person he really is. If he were smart he'd hire Sarah immediately so the two of them could push each other into giving the absolute perfect stupid quote, one that would go over biglyer then the last.

[platoon2063]

I also didn't support going into Iraq and Libya. I also don't believe bombing the shit out of countries everyday is solving anything either. I would rather the USA completely pull out of the Mid East. But, unfortunately, it is too late for that because the USA caused the whole mess in the first place.

But it really isn't too late though. The "too late" excuse has been trotted out by both administrations and the pundit class for 16 years. It's the same playbook, "Oh well if we withdraw it will be worse/We can't be isolationists". Nations should be responsible and be held accountable for what their interventions cause and have caused in the past, not what might happen if they don't interfere or withdraw. We know that our interventions, meddling, and occupation in the Middle East is a complete failure, has caused millions of deaths and destroyed whole countries. Trump has the ability to change that if he wants to. If he's Mr. Anti-Establishment as he claims he is, he can show it be reversing the course of warmongering that the establishment of both parties have implemented for 70 years. And I don't mean "making better deals" or different but equally warmongery strategy as other administrations. The US Government is not obligated to assist the Saudis in destroying and starving Yemen. The USG is not obligated to assist either side in the Syrian Civil War. The USG is not obligated to nation build in Libya. Let's see him make the best deal possible for Middle East and its people: stop killing and oppressing them.

I agree with some of what you stated here. The "too late" excuse is lame for sure. Its never too late, IMO. However, as long as there's that smelly, black product found underneath the earth's surface, the US may never leave that part of the world. I do agree that the US over the past few decades has contributed to issues in that region. That part of the globe has been unstable for hundreds of years, though. Long before the US put their hand in the cookie jar. Israelis vs Palestinians, Sunnis vs Shiites , religious zealots, terrorists groups: these are the predominate contributors to the unstable conditions that exist in that region. Unfortunately, there will be no peace in that region in our lifetime.

[Turner Coates]

[SeminiferousButtNoid]

I also didn't support going into Iraq and Libya. I also don't believe bombing the shit out of countries everyday is solving anything either. I would rather the USA completely pull out of the Mid East. But, unfortunately, it is too late for that because the USA caused the whole mess in the first place.

But it really isn't too late though. The "too late" excuse has been trotted out by both administrations and the pundit class for 16 years. It's the same playbook, "Oh well if we withdraw it will be worse/We can't be isolationists". Nations should be responsible and be held accountable for what their interventions cause and have caused in the past, not what might happen if they don't interfere or withdraw. We know that our interventions, meddling, and occupation in the Middle East is a complete failure, has caused millions of deaths and destroyed whole countries. Trump has the ability to change that if he wants to. If he's Mr. Anti-Establishment as he claims he is, he can show it be reversing the course of warmongering that the establishment of both parties have implemented for 70 years. And I don't mean "making better deals" or different but equally warmongery strategy as other administrations. The US Government is not obligated to assist the Saudis in destroying and starving Yemen. The USG is not obligated to assist either side in the Syrian Civil War. The USG is not obligated to nation build in Libya. Let's see him make the best deal possible for Middle East and its people: stop killing and oppressing them.

I agree with some of what you stated here. The "too late" excuse is lame for sure. Its never too late, IMO. However, as long as there's that smelly, black product found underneath the earth's surface, the US may never leave that part of the world.

When I first converted to the anti-war movement ~2003, I also believed the Iraq War and other ME meddling was based on oil (i.e. money). But as I read the history and philosophy of war over the years I have come to believe that money and land are secondary and tertiary reasons for nations to warmonger. The driving reason is ideology. If you read the books and treatises of many of the neoconservatives who manufactured the Iraq War, economic benefit is a sidethought if it is mentioned at all. Paul Wolfowitz, Bill Kristol, and Michael Ledeen don't give a damn about oil, I can tell you that. We already have plenty of oil. Haliburton and oil companies had billions of dollars before the Iraq War. Money by itself is not enough of an animating principle to generate the kind of campaign it took to implement Iraq War. There's too much risk for not enough return.

But if you are ideological, then risk is irrelevant. If you're ideological, there's no need to reflect on your failures. There's no need to examine whether your actions were moral or effective or not. It explains why we continue to intervene in the ME and it turns into a disaster over and over and over again. Their ideology is an idealistic, imperialist obsession with imposing democracy, so-called democracy, on weaker countries. Make the World USA; and it's very little difference from Make The World England of the British Empire or Make The World Rome 2000 years ago. All of these empires wanted the rest of the world to think, live, and act like they do, and if they don't then they need to be force fed. They just don't know what their missing, you see...

[gruentransfer]

So let me get this Australia thing straight. They absolutely 100% do not accept any refugees. They currently have 2,000, mostly from Iran, Afghanistan and Iraq that are in detainment camps because of this rule. Obama agreed to take 1200 of them. Trump doesn't want them. Am I missing anything?

We take a lot of refugees but not one that try and enter via boats. The government thought the number was getting out of hand and so made a blanket rule a few years ago & have been trying to find a place for the ones in detention for ages. That's who these people are. Lots and lots of debate about it here.

Deterrence policy never worked, there's people dying off the shores because our standard of living is simply more important than their lives. We should call it what it is. The detention of asylum seekers is almost as fucked up - and largely illegal, according to the UN.

It was a boat sinking with a large amount of deaths that started the government just saying no to people coming here by boat. They thought if they cracked down and didn't accept anyone that way, the smugglers would stop. Trouble was they slowed down but kept coming. Off-shore detention camps were created to "process" the people. People are shoved into there and forgotten, sometimes for a few years. The conditions in the camps are horrible. Our government tut tuts about what other governments do and then does exactly the same but tries to use fancy language to cover it up. It's shit.

There was a mum and baby bought to a local hospital and the staff refused to release them and people picketed the exits of the hospital so police couldn't remove them as they were to be returned to a camp. Went on for a few days. They were finally released into community care when the government realised that all the doctors at a public (government) hospital were prepared to lose their jobs over it.

I work in a very multicultural school - I'm actually head of the department that looks after students with a language background other than English along with students with disability. The stories I hear from some of our refugees are appalling. We have students who have watched their mothers being raped to death in front of them. Whose fathers and brothers have been marched away and slaughtered. Most of these students are Muslims who just want a peaceful life and a chance for an education and a safe place to live.

[Bludegeon]

I also didn't support going into Iraq and Libya. I also don't believe bombing the shit out of countries everyday is solving anything either. I would rather the USA completely pull out of the Mid East. But, unfortunately, it is too late for that because the USA caused the whole mess in the first place.

But it really isn't too late though. The "too late" excuse has been trotted out by both administrations and the pundit class for 16 years. It's the same playbook, "Oh well if we withdraw it will be worse/We can't be isolationists". Nations should be responsible and be held accountable for what their interventions cause and have caused in the past, not what might happen if they don't interfere or withdraw. We know that our interventions, meddling, and occupation in the Middle East is a complete failure, has caused millions of deaths and destroyed whole countries. Trump has the ability to change that if he wants to. If he's Mr. Anti-Establishment as he claims he is, he can show it be reversing the course of warmongering that the establishment of both parties have implemented for 70 years. And I don't mean "making better deals" or different but equally warmongery strategy as other administrations. The US Government is not obligated to assist the Saudis in destroying and starving Yemen. The USG is not obligated to assist either side in the Syrian Civil War. The USG is not obligated to nation build in Libya. Let's see him make the best deal possible for Middle East and its people: stop killing and oppressing them.

Agree with this 100%

[Bludegeon]

He's using all cuntstop's pussyass moves. Make some tired joke that clearly puts him on one side of an issue and then dance out of it by claiming no support for Trump. "I don't support Trump, I just use all his supporters' pat bullshit arguments."

Who really needs to STFU? I'd say it's the waffling bitch who doesn't have the nuts to own his opinions. (Hint: That's you. Pussy.)

What are you going on about? What fucking Trump argument did I use? . My opinions have been stated on here.,

You didn't make a tired joke. You changed a quote to what you wanted. That is where the media clown came from .

[SebastianLeeDanzig]

Trump about to do away with the Dodd-Frank wall street reform law.

Is that what he meant when he was campaigning against the influence of the financial industry and attacked bankers and hedge fund managers? Is this what "draining the swamp" looks like? Do you proud renegade voters appreciate this awesome working class approach? Just askin' questions!

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-e ... SKCN0Y900J

[grishnak boss]

[grishnak boss]

Just changed my facebook profile pic:

[exitflagger]

What are you going on about? What fucking Trump argument did I use?

You should give this routine another two or three go rounds, making sure to wait a day or two in between. Maybe after that I'll go ahead and EXPLAIN YOUR OWN FUCKING JOKE TO YOU. (Spoiler alert: No I won't)

FUCK. OFF.

[platoon2063]

But it really isn't too late though. The "too late" excuse has been trotted out by both administrations and the pundit class for 16 years. It's the same playbook, "Oh well if we withdraw it will be worse/We can't be isolationists". Nations should be responsible and be held accountable for what their interventions cause and have caused in the past, not what might happen if they don't interfere or withdraw. We know that our interventions, meddling, and occupation in the Middle East is a complete failure, has caused millions of deaths and destroyed whole countries. Trump has the ability to change that if he wants to. If he's Mr. Anti-Establishment as he claims he is, he can show it be reversing the course of warmongering that the establishment of both parties have implemented for 70 years. And I don't mean "making better deals" or different but equally warmongery strategy as other administrations. The US Government is not obligated to assist the Saudis in destroying and starving Yemen. The USG is not obligated to assist either side in the Syrian Civil War. The USG is not obligated to nation build in Libya. Let's see him make the best deal possible for Middle East and its people: stop killing and oppressing them.

I agree with some of what you stated here. The "too late" excuse is lame for sure. Its never too late, IMO. However, as long as there's that smelly, black product found underneath the earth's surface, the US may never leave that part of the world.

Paul Wolfowitz, Bill Kristol, and Michael Ledeen don't give a damn about oil, I can tell you that. We already have plenty of oil. Haliburton and oil companies had billions of dollars before the Iraq War.

Make the World USA; and it's very little difference from Make The World England of the British Empire or Make The World Rome 2000 years ago. All of these empires wanted the rest of the world to think, live, and act like they do, and if they don't then they need to be force fed. They just don't know what their missing, you see...

Wolfowitz and Kristol may not care about oil but guys like Rex Tillerson (Exxon) and Paul Lesar (Halliburton) sure do. And don't get me started with Lesar who worked for those incompetent crooks over at Arthur Andersen. Although, he personally may not have worked on the Enron account. You know that these wealthy energy company CEO's always want more. To get more they use their wealth and influence to leverage elections, write legislation and of course, escape any accountability if something goes awry.

While I'm no scholar as it pertains to the Brits and Romans, but I'm not sure I would place the US ideology along side that of the Romans or British Empire. Perhaps its too early to tell because the US as it relates to the British Empire and the Roman Empire is too recent and too young.

[radiobed]

Trump about to do away with the Dodd-Frank wall street reform law.

Let's not pretend you or really any of the lefty loonies have any clue what Dodd Frank really encompasses and whether it's appropriate or a crippling over reach. So let's just skip that discussion altogether.

Instead, let me ask why the progressives are so up in arms about Wall St or businesses that actually produce tax revenues that pay for all our social programs. At the same time, they are completely silent on powerful, corrupt unions that essentially forced a taxpayer bailout on the US Auto Industry. Actually, maybe it would be more appropriate to call it a union bailout since they strong armed these companies to pay almost twice as much per employee compared to Toyota or Honda and still expected them to compete. Or how about taxpayers in ILLINOIS bailing out pension obligations from an out of control and unrealistic teacher's union. Silence from Bernie and Warren, significant contributions from unions. Oh the hypocrisy.

So go ahead and freak out about Wall St. I'm sure once these regulations are lifted, these banks will be so relieved that they can repeat the same mistakes and hopefully get bailed out again. Or maybe they'll actually not want that themselves and would just appreciate less crippling regulations that went beyond common sense.

[SebastianLeeDanzig]

Let's not pretend you or really any of the lefty loonies have any clue what Dodd Frank really encompasses and whether it's appropriate or a crippling over reach. So let's just skip that discussion altogether.

Instead, let me ask why the progressives are so up in arms about Wall St or businesses that actually produce tax revenues that pay for all our social programs. At the same time, they are completely silent on powerful, corrupt unions that essentially forced a taxpayer bailout on the US Auto Industry. Actually, maybe it would be more appropriate to call it a union bailout since they strong armed these companies to pay almost twice as much per employee compared to Toyota or Honda and still expected them to compete. Or how about taxpayers in ILLINOIS bailing out pension obligations from an out of control and unrealistic teacher's union. Silence from Bernie and Warren, significant contributions from unions. Oh the hypocrisy.

So go ahead and freak out about Wall St. I'm sure once these regulations are lifted, these banks will be so relieved that they can repeat the same mistakes and hopefully get bailed out again. Or maybe they'll actually not want that themselves and would just appreciate less crippling regulations that went beyond common sense.

Yeah, there was no financial crisis, the recession was really caused by unions and teacher bail-outs. LMFAO @ Mr. Rational Common Sense over here. The reforms were completely unnecessary, the banks learned their lesson! They only want what's best for you!

[radiobed]

Yeah, there was no financial crisis, the recession was really caused by unions and teacher bail-outs. LMFAO @ Mr. Rational Common Sense over here. The reforms were completely unnecessary, the banks learned their lesson! They only want what's best for you!

Yeah, there was no Auto/UAW bailout, the crisis was really caused by Wall St loopholes. LMFAO @ Mr Meth Moral Compass over here. The corrupt unions totally learned their lesson in being partners with industry and no longer will mismanage pension funds and strong arm companies to the brink of bankruptcy. They only want what's best for the working man, they're not at all worried about their millions of dollars or bosses making hundreds of thousands fucking up hard working individual's pensions while expecting others to bail them out when shit goes wrong.

[SebastianLeeDanzig]

So you are seriously comparing banks and unions in terms of accountability for the financial crisis. Okay then.

[Danzig in the Dark]

Yeah, there was no financial crisis, the recession was really caused by unions and teacher bail-outs. LMFAO @ Mr. Rational Common Sense over here. The reforms were completely unnecessary, the banks learned their lesson! They only want what's best for you!

Yeah, there was no Auto/UAW bailout, the crisis was really caused by Wall St loopholes. LMFAO @ Mr Meth Moral Compass over here. The corrupt unions totally learned their lesson in being partners with industry and no longer will mismanage pension funds and strong arm companies to the brink of bankruptcy. They only want what's best for the working man, they're not at all worried about their millions of dollars or bosses making hundreds of thousands fucking up hard working individual's pensions while expecting others to bail them out when shit goes wrong.

The UAW was not bailed out. GM was. The crisis was caused by Wall Street loopholes. Alternate facts don't fly here, radiosped.

[radiobed]

So you are seriously comparing banks and unions in terms of accountability for the financial crisis. Okay then.

No, I'm saying it's completely hypocritical to demonize certain industries yet give a pass to others.

People want free college for everyone (paid by taxes) yet those same "progressives" never seem to question or fight out of control education costs that have created the problem. Wonder why?!?

"Progressive" politicians get to grow government with popular sounding issues (it's free!!), and the university's tuition can continue outpacing inflation by ridiculous amounts because no one will care about costs if it's "free". Oh, and the top 1%, Wall St and big Oil should foot these bills. It's their moral obligation!!

[radiobed]

The UAW was not bailed out. GM was. The crisis was caused by Wall Street loopholes. Alternate facts don't fly here, radiosped.

I was waiting for the tag team crew to join in and help a fellow "progressive" comrade.

The UAW would also be gone if all we had were non union car companies like Toyota and Honda. And what do you think caused the crisis?!? You think it could have been the UAW strong arming car companies to pay $75 per employee vs $45 per employee at Toyota??

For a time shortly after the bailout, the unions worked more as a partner with the car companies because they were all at risk, including their members.

But you're right, it was just GM or Ford's fault. Why can't they pay twice as much and still compete?!?

[SeminiferousButtNoid]

At the same time, they are completely silent on powerful, corrupt unions that essentially forced a taxpayer bailout on the US Auto Industry. Actually, maybe it would be more appropriate to call it a union bailout since they strong armed these companies to pay almost twice as much per employee compared to Toyota or Honda and still expected them to compete.

Dude... the auto workers union had nothing to do with collapse of the US auto industry or the subsequent bailout. The financial crisis, the high price of oil bringing auto sales to a standstill, and the Big 3 years of mismanagement is what caused it to collapse. In fact, the union workers agreed to 40% wage reduction in negotiation when they weren't obligated to. They could have been hard nosed assholes like the public service unions and refused concessions because they knew GM was going to be bailed out whether they made the concessions or not. They did it because, while union workers are protective of their rights and wages, they are also loyal to their companies. You can argue that their pre-crisis wages were too high for them to be competitive with foreign companies, but that wasn't the cause of Detroit's collapse. It takes a hell of a lot more problems than an $80 to $100 an hour union worker wage to bankrupt Chrysler and GM

I know categorical anti-trade unionism is imprinted in the brains on the American Right but it is really a disservice to the working class and is unneeded. And if Trump is going to succeed with his America First economic boasts, then you should welcome more unions and union workers because healthy and happy unions are a sign of booming economy.

[DEATH ROW JOE]

Let's not pretend you or really any of the lefty loonies have any clue what Dodd Frank really encompasses and whether it's appropriate or a crippling over reach. So let's just skip that discussion altogether.

You're a clown. There is nothing complicated about Dodd-Frank. It increased transparency, limited risk taking and provided consumer protection. Banks want to get rid of it so they can rip off consumers and shareholders. Funny to hear you claim the banks have been "crippled" when earlier in this thread you claimed:

We basically have kept the fed rate at zero to keep the economy on life support

How can low interest rates keep the economy on life support when the banks are crippled by Dodd-Frank? Seems like you're parroting contradictory right wing talking points.

[Bludegeon]

What are you going on about? What fucking Trump argument did I use?

You should give this routine another two or three go rounds, making sure to wait a day or two in between. Maybe after that I'll go ahead and EXPLAIN YOUR OWN FUCKING JOKE TO YOU. (Spoiler alert: No I won't)

FUCK. OFF.

Naw, not waiting a day . No need. You got nothing.