Random Politics & Religion #00 |
||
|
Random Politics & Religion #00
gives me a place to play vidya games.
Jetackuu said: » Bismarck.Bloodrose said: » Jetackuu said: » Bismarck.Bloodrose said: » Just vote Seth Rogan for President. But... if we're looking only at the bad apples for presidency, all the people are going to get is one funky smelling apple pie, no matter what the people mix into the filling. Crusty old, out of touch senators and congresspersons that leave your mouth dry (from going "WTF" all the time) to the mushy distasteful inner circles, no matter how cinnamon sugary their words are. I could go on.... I'll agree with the rest as terrible, but
Quote: bowing, as head of state, to England's queen. Being a gentleman isn't a weakness. Garuda.Chanti said: » Jetackuu said: » Bismarck.Bloodrose said: » Jetackuu said: » Bismarck.Bloodrose said: » Just vote Seth Rogan for President. But... if we're looking only at the bad apples for presidency, all the people are going to get is one funky smelling apple pie, no matter what the people mix into the filling. Crusty old, out of touch senators and congresspersons that leave your mouth dry (from going "WTF" all the time) to the mushy distasteful inner circles, no matter how cinnamon sugary their words are. I could go on.... Was talking about Arnold, try to keep up. Also: the class warfare has been going on for a very long time, way before any administration in either of our lifetimes. Jetackuu said: » Garuda.Chanti said: » Jetackuu said: » Bismarck.Bloodrose said: » Jetackuu said: » Bismarck.Bloodrose said: » Just vote Seth Rogan for President. But... if we're looking only at the bad apples for presidency, all the people are going to get is one funky smelling apple pie, no matter what the people mix into the filling. Crusty old, out of touch senators and congresspersons that leave your mouth dry (from going "WTF" all the time) to the mushy distasteful inner circles, no matter how cinnamon sugary their words are. I could go on.... Was talking about Arnold, try to keep up. Also: the class warfare has been going on for a very long time, way before any administration in either of our lifetimes. so was chanti!!! lol Jetackuu said: » Garuda.Chanti said: » Jetackuu said: » Bismarck.Bloodrose said: » Well, the world apparently takes him more seriously than Obama, Bush, or Clinton... But... if we're looking only at the bad apples for presidency, all the people are going to get is one funky smelling apple pie, no matter what the people mix into the filling. Crusty old, out of touch senators and congresspersons that leave your mouth dry (from going "WTF" all the time) to the mushy distasteful inner circles, no matter how cinnamon sugary their words are. And she was talking about the first actor bad president you referenced. Jetackuu said: » I'd take him over Reagan too. Unless you are 50+ years old. Even then I have my doubts. Asura.Kingnobody said: » Jetackuu said: » I'd take him over Reagan too. Hindsight being what it is, I would vote for Santorum before okaying Reagan again. His treatment of mental health alone caused ripples that are still effecting us, which I left out of my post earlier hoping to avoid the Reagnite Defensive Onslaught. The guy was *** awful. You guys clearly overlooked one the best options for president out there.
Times Square's Naked Cowboy wants to run for president; and guess what? He's a conservative Bismarck.Ramyrez said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Jetackuu said: » I'd take him over Reagan too. Hindsight being what it is, I would vote for Santorum before okaying Reagan again. His treatment of mental health alone caused ripples that are still effecting us, which I left out of my post earlier hoping to avoid the Reagnite Defensive Onslaught. The guy was *** awful. Not today, not tomorrow, but in 1980. Unless you are 52 years old, neither you nor I can make that choice because we either did not exist (in my case) or were too young to understand the importance of that vote. Asura.Kingnobody said: » Bismarck.Ramyrez said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Jetackuu said: » I'd take him over Reagan too. Hindsight being what it is, I would vote for Santorum before okaying Reagan again. His treatment of mental health alone caused ripples that are still effecting us, which I left out of my post earlier hoping to avoid the Reagnite Defensive Onslaught. The guy was *** awful. Not today, not tomorrow, but in 1980. What the hell is Jimmy Carter up to nowadays?
Oh yeah he just came out with another book. 'Redeemer: The Life of Jimmy Carter' makes religion central to Carter's 1980 defeat Asura.Kingnobody said: » Bismarck.Ramyrez said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Jetackuu said: » I'd take him over Reagan too. Hindsight being what it is, I would vote for Santorum before okaying Reagan again. His treatment of mental health alone caused ripples that are still effecting us, which I left out of my post earlier hoping to avoid the Reagnite Defensive Onslaught. The guy was *** awful. Not today, not tomorrow, but in 1980. Unless you are 52 years old, neither you nor I can make that choice because we either did not exist (in my case) or were too young to understand the importance of that vote. Asura.Kingnobody said: » Jetackuu said: » I'd take him over Reagan too. Unless you are 50+ years old. Even then I have my doubts. Well Reagan couldn't get elected today, with the push to the far-right of the GOP. It doesn't distract from the fact that it was a horrible idea, and he was a horrible President. Bismarck.Ramyrez said: » Jetackuu said: » Garuda.Chanti said: » Jetackuu said: » Bismarck.Bloodrose said: » Well, the world apparently takes him more seriously than Obama, Bush, or Clinton... But... if we're looking only at the bad apples for presidency, all the people are going to get is one funky smelling apple pie, no matter what the people mix into the filling. Crusty old, out of touch senators and congresspersons that leave your mouth dry (from going "WTF" all the time) to the mushy distasteful inner circles, no matter how cinnamon sugary their words are. And she was talking about the first actor bad president you referenced. I'm aware. Bismarck.Bloodrose said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Bismarck.Ramyrez said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Jetackuu said: » I'd take him over Reagan too. Hindsight being what it is, I would vote for Santorum before okaying Reagan again. His treatment of mental health alone caused ripples that are still effecting us, which I left out of my post earlier hoping to avoid the Reagnite Defensive Onslaught. The guy was *** awful. Not today, not tomorrow, but in 1980. Unless you are 52 years old, neither you nor I can make that choice because we either did not exist (in my case) or were too young to understand the importance of that vote. Hence ![]() X2 Bismarck.Bloodrose said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Bismarck.Ramyrez said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Jetackuu said: » I'd take him over Reagan too. Hindsight being what it is, I would vote for Santorum before okaying Reagan again. His treatment of mental health alone caused ripples that are still effecting us, which I left out of my post earlier hoping to avoid the Reagnite Defensive Onslaught. The guy was *** awful. Not today, not tomorrow, but in 1980. Unless you are 52 years old, neither you nor I can make that choice because we either did not exist (in my case) or were too young to understand the importance of that vote. in the united states some peoples vote does not really matter much especially in presidential elections due to electoral college and where you live. I live in maryland, since 1980 maryland has voted democrat in 7/9 elections(the republican years being the regan elections). Congressional elections are even worse due to gerrymandering. Only vote you can really have some sort of impact on is senator and local elections. Asura.Kingnobody said: » Bismarck.Ramyrez said: » Hindsight being what it is, I would vote for Santorum before okaying Reagan again. His treatment of mental health alone caused ripples that are still effecting us, which I left out of my post earlier hoping to avoid the Reagnite Defensive Onslaught. The guy was *** awful. Hence why I said, "in hindsight". In hindsight, I'd still vote for Obama -- both times -- again because Mitt Romney was a giant *** and his running mate was even worse. Given my household does not bring in seven+ figures, he was the worse of two choices. McCain...maybe if his running mate wasn't a batshit crazy housewife* who is the walking dream quote machine for standup comedians, I would have given him a harder look. But as Teddy Roosevelt's opposition learned, you don't put someone you don't want having power as one death away from the presidency. Edit:*I'm still not clear how she ever got elected into any public office in the first place. The good people of Alaska may just not know when they've taken a joke too far. Leviathan.Chaosx said: » What the hell is Jimmy Carter up to nowadays? Oh yeah he just came out with another book. 'Redeemer: The Life of Jimmy Carter' makes religion central to Carter's 1980 defeat Picking peanuts ? fonewear said: » Leviathan.Chaosx said: » What the hell is Jimmy Carter up to nowadays? Oh yeah he just came out with another book. 'Redeemer: The Life of Jimmy Carter' makes religion central to Carter's 1980 defeat Picking peanuts ? Altimaomega said: » ![]() Obama Seeks $500 Million to Train and Equip Syrian Opposition Quote: WASHINGTON — President Obama on Thursday requested $500 million from Congress to train and equip what the White House is calling “appropriately vetted” members of the Syrian opposition. The request comes as the administration is trying to put some form to the president’s surprise announcement last month of plans for a $5 billion counterterrorism fund to provide training for operations in vulnerable countries in the Middle East. The training program would be the most significant action yet by the United States in the conflict in Syria, which has spilled over the border now to Iraq, where a Qaeda-inspired insurgency is threatening the American-backed government. “While we continue to believe that there is no military solution to this crisis and that the United States should not put American troops into combat in Syria, this request marks another step toward helping the Syrian people defend themselves against regime attacks, push back against the growing number of extremists like ISIL who find safe haven in the chaos, and take their future into their own hands,” Caitlin Hayden, the national security spokeswoman, said in a statement. She was referring to the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, known as ISIS, or sometimes ISIL. Mr. Obama’s request comes as part of the military policy bill authorizing the Pentagon to “train and equip vetted elements of the Syrian armed opposition to help defend the Syrian people, stabilize areas under opposition control, facilitate the provision of essential services, counter terrorist threats and promote conditions for a negotiated settlement.” Altogether, the White House is asking for $4 billion to go to the Pentagon and $1 billion to the State Department for other counterterrorism operations, including training and equipping partner countries to counter terrorism threats. Some of the money, administration officials said, would cover increased costs of Special Operations forces who have deployed around the world. Some $1.5 billion would go toward counterterrorism efforts in countries around Syria — Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey and Iraq. The president also wants to set aside $500 million to “address unforeseen contingencies” in counterterrorism, namely in Iraq, administration officials said. After withdrawing American combat troops from Iraq in 2011, Mr. Obama is now finding himself back in Iraq, as the Qaeda-inspired insurgents of ISIS have overrun several major cities, including Mosul. Last week, Mr. Obama announced that he was sending 300 American military advisers to Iraq to set up joint operations centers, one in Baghdad and one probably in Kurdistan. The advisers, who began arriving earlier this week, are to *** whether the Iraqi Army is able to stand up to the insurgency, and will also try to get a better fix on the capabilities — and potential vulnerabilities — of ISIS. Mr. Obama has not ruled out airstrikes. Bismarck.Ramyrez said: » I'll agree with the rest as terrible, but Quote: bowing, as head of state, to England's queen. This concept goes back to when diplomacy was overseen by heralds. You bow to your superiors. No head of state is superior to any other. Asura.Kingnobody said: » Bismarck.Ramyrez said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Jetackuu said: » I'd take him over Reagan too. Hindsight being what it is, I would vote for Santorum before okaying Reagan again. His treatment of mental health alone caused ripples that are still effecting us, which I left out of my post earlier hoping to avoid the Reagnite Defensive Onslaught. The guy was *** awful. Not today, not tomorrow, but in 1980. Unless you are 52 years old, neither you nor I can make that choice because we either did not exist (in my case) or were too young to understand the importance of that vote. /walks off muttering ....hindsight.... Garuda.Chanti said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Bismarck.Ramyrez said: » Hindsight being what it is, I would vote for Santorum before okaying Reagan again. His treatment of mental health alone caused ripples that are still effecting us, which I left out of my post earlier hoping to avoid the Reagnite Defensive Onslaught. The guy was *** awful. Yes, but realize you're in the minority (extreme minority?) here of people to whom that being current would apply. :p Most of us have no choice but to view it in hindsight or ignore it entirely, and the later seems inappropriate. Quote: Former Vice President *** Cheney says the Obama administration is cutting defense to spend money on food stamps. He made the remark Thursday night at an energy industry trade show in Billings, Montana, as part of a critique of President Barack Obama’s plans to withdraw American forces from Afghanistan in 2016. Source So he's now attacked the loss of a region where he owns oil interests, and now he's attacking a policy of cutting defense spending...where his former company (in which he or his close associates probably still owns stock) makes significant money on war time expenditures. Even if he's 100% earnest in this and it's not money-driven (which I'll believe...never), does he really think anyone with even a milligram of reason isn't going to connect these dots and at least suspect he's not being up front about his motivations for these diatribes? Edit: Also, if nothing else, you've got to respect the balls on this guy. He's flat-out PRO war. No bones about it. Has admitted it point blank. And he's so pro-war he wants to see aid to those in need cut to keep funding war. Despite the fact that food stamps are a drop in the ocean compared to military spending. Bismarck.Ramyrez said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Bismarck.Ramyrez said: » Hindsight being what it is, I would vote for Santorum before okaying Reagan again. His treatment of mental health alone caused ripples that are still effecting us, which I left out of my post earlier hoping to avoid the Reagnite Defensive Onslaught. The guy was *** awful. Hence why I said, "in hindsight". In hindsight, I'd still vote for Obama -- both times -- again because Mitt Romney was a giant *** and his running mate was even worse. Given my household does not bring in seven+ figures, he was the worse of two choices. McCain...maybe if his running mate wasn't a batshit crazy housewife* who is the walking dream quote machine for standup comedians, I would have given him a harder look. But as Teddy Roosevelt's opposition learned, you don't put someone you don't want having power as one death away from the presidency. Edit:*I'm still not clear how she ever got elected into any public office in the first place. The good people of Alaska may just not know when they've taken a joke too far. Romney couldnt keep it straight with anything he pitched as a campaign platform...he had this awesome idea for tax and healthcare reform: but didnt tell us anything other than that. His very passionate speech about calling China out kinda was a red flag too. Then after getting called out by the mediator flipping the "Well Benghazi!" card was just where i lost any sense of a ***. Bismarck.Ramyrez said: » Carter may be one of the few people to ever hold the office of POTUS who you could even think about calling a "good person". I'm calling *** on that one Ramy Carter is a certified egomaniac, jew hating jesus freak with the midas touch in reverse (everything he touches turns into molten feces) I wouldn't walk across the street to piss on him if he was on fire... Or maybe I would... if I had to go bad enough... but not enough to extinguish the flames which will surely consume his filthy soul until he is reborn as a bad corn kernel that is continuously re-fed to pigs for the rest of eternity.... if there is any real justice in the universe, amen. |
||
|
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2025 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.
|
||