Trump

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

The story of Putin is a little more complicated than this

Former National Security Advisor John Bolton says 'Putin was waiting' for Trump to withdraw the United States from NATO in his second term
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Putin was thrilled Trump was President. Why upset the way Trump was taking things.

"Putin wanted to undermine the NATO alliance, and Trump undermined the NATO alliance. Putin wanted to weaken the E.U., and Trump made little effort to express his disdain for the E.U. Putin wanted to help authoritarians, and Trump cozied up to authoritarians. Putin wanted to hurt Ukraine, and Trump launched an extortion scheme that threatened to hurt Ukraine. Putin wanted to weaken the U.S. political system, and Trump was unnervingly aggressive in trying to weaken the U.S. political system."

[wdmso]

Trump: Barr 'Went to the Other Side' on 2020, Fearing Impeachment

Omg will it ever end?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Trump: Barr 'Went to the Other Side' on 2020, Fearing Impeachment

Omg will it ever end?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

it will end, when you stop
obsessing 24/7. let’s not pretend you don’t love it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

it will end, when you stop
obsessing 24/7. let’s not pretend you don’t love it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Ok Iam obsessing , I didn’t say this Trump did you know the guy you’re willing to vote for LOL
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Ok Iam obsessing , I didn’t say this Trump did you know the guy you’re willing to vote for LOL

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Ok Iam obsessing , I didn’t say this Trump did you know the guy you’re willing to vote for LOL
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

how many posts do you make a week, about the former president? answer that, then tell me if you’re obsessive about him.

that’s also some quality gibberish there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

how many posts do you make a week, about the former president? answer that, then tell me if you’re obsessive about him.

that’s also some quality gibberish there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Wonder how many times Trump's greatest defender has posted about him in this thread alone?

http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripert...archid=8245218

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Wonder how many times Trump's greatest defender has posted about him in this thread alone?

http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripert...archid=8245218

I’m his most honest critic. My disdain for him is genuine,not based purely on politics.

I cannot stand him and hope he goes away forever.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I’m his most honest critic. My disdain for him is genuine,not based purely on politics.

I cannot stand him and hope he goes away forever.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sure Jan
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Sure Jan
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you’ve never criticized a democrat or complimented a conservative. not once.

if you think i’m a rabid
trump fan, that’s your problem.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

you’ve never criticized a democrat or complimented a conservative. not once.

if you think i’m a rabid
trump fan, that’s your problem.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Silly boy, that’s not my objective
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

you’ve never criticized a democrat or complimented a conservative. not once.

Jim, Pete is a Neo-Marxist Critical Theorist. He has openly stated that conservatism always leads to oppression and liberalism always leads to liberation.

When you point out that he never criticized a Democrat or complimented a Conservative, he admits "that’s not my objective."

He is on a Neo-Marxian mission. That's why he supports Critical Race Theory. Or Critical Theory in general.

If you have the slightest expectation that he will have a rational conversation with you in which he can recognize what you consider some tolerance or approval of any Conservative opinion whatsoever, you don't understand what he is about.

For him, THERE CAN BE NO TOLERANCE for any Conservative opinion. Any such opinion to him would by like garlic or a cross to a vampire.

His objective is the total eradication of "Conservatism." By any means necessary.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Jim, Pete is a Neo-Marxist Critical Theorist. He has openly stated that conservatism always leads to oppression and liberalism always leads to liberation.

When you point out that he never criticized a Democrat or complimented a Conservative, he admits "that’s not my objective."

He is on a Neo-Marxian mission. That's why he supports Critical Race Theory. Or Critical Theory in general.

If you have the slightest expectation that he will have a rational conversation with you in which he can recognize what you consider some tolerance or approval of any Conservative opinion whatsoever, you don't understand what he is about.

For him, THERE CAN BE NO TOLERANCE for any Conservative opinion. Any such opinion to him would by like garlic or a cross to a vampire.

His objective is the total eradication of "Conservatism." By any means necessary.

i agree with you 100%. i’m not sure anything them are capable of criticizing their own side, or complimenting the other side. difficult to have a worthwhile conversation. probably not worth trying.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Jim, Pete is a Neo-Marxist Critical Theorist. He has openly stated that conservatism always leads to oppression and liberalism always leads to liberation.

When you point out that he never criticized a Democrat or complimented a Conservative, he admits "that’s not my objective."

He is on a Neo-Marxian mission. That's why he supports Critical Race Theory. Or Critical Theory in general.

If you have the slightest expectation that he will have a rational conversation with you in which he can recognize what you consider some tolerance or approval of any Conservative opinion whatsoever, you don't understand what he is about.

For him, THERE CAN BE NO TOLERANCE for any Conservative opinion. Any such opinion to him would by like garlic or a cross to a vampire.

His objective is the total eradication of "Conservatism." By any means necessary.

Neo-Marxism
Never as horrific as the right-wing propagandists claim,

And calling you a right-wing propagandists fits you like a glove

[Pete F.]

Both the rabid Trump fans have yet to realize they are actually his victims
Senate Republicans, including Ron Johnson and Marco Rubio, are now praising Rick Scott’s 2022 GOP platform that calls for raising taxes on “over half of Americans,” including seniors.

This all makes sense when you recognize that the supposedly conservative GOP believes that if you're rich you deserve to be rich, and if you're poor, you deserve to be poor.

To tax the rich is to deprive them of what they deserve, and to tax the poor is to give them what they deserve.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

GOP believes that if you're rich you deserve to be rich, and if you're poor, you deserve to be poor.

To tax the rich is to deprive them of what they deserve, and to tax the poor is to give them what they deserve.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"GOP believes that if you're rich you deserve to be rich"

True enough, I guess.

"if you're poor, you deserve to be poor."

Said no influential conservative, ever. I think policy results make it pretty clear that liberals are the ones who want a permanent underclass.

"To tax the rich is to deprive them of what they deserve, and to tax the poor is to give them what they deserve."

Again, no one thinks that.

Why did Trump double the standard deduction, which INCREASES the number of poor people who pay no federal income tax? Please explain why anyone would do that, if their goal was to stick it to the poor?

Just keep making up nonsense.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Neo-Marxism
Never as horrific as the right-wing propagandists claim,

Look what it did to you guys. I'd say pretty horrific.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Neo-Marxism
Never as horrific as the right-wing propagandists claim,

Where in my post to which you responded did I say it was horrific? Do you know that the notion that "conservatism" always leads to oppression and "liberalism" leads to liberation, and so expression from the "right" ("conservative) should be suppressed, not tolerated, is a tenet found in one of one of Marcuse's most important works, "Repressive Tolerance." Marcuse is recognized as a prominent Neo-Marxist, as in the Wikepedia subject entry Neo-Marxism: "Many prominent neo-Marxists, such as Herbert Marcuse and other members of the Frankfurt School".

Marcuse's tenet is practiced by current leftist or left leaning groups such as ANTIFA, cancel culturalists, social media orgs, major internet opinion and communication outlets, even to some degree by print or TV media.

Censorship of the right and support of leftist expression (including even the support of leftist riots, but censures of the riots by the right this past year) that is occurring now is "horrific" to many, but not to Pete F, nor, it seems, to you and some others on the forum. That's up to you. I'm merely pointing it out. Pete's own words on this forum have specifically supported Marcuse's tenet. And his refusal to give any credit or support of "conservative" expression is demonstrable "praxis" (practice) of Marcuse's Repressive Tolerance, as well as a praxis of Critical Race Theory.

And calling you a right-wing propagandists fits you like a glove

I've told the truth. If you consider that to be right-wing propaganda, then you may inadvertently be practicing Repressive Tolerance.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

I've told the truth. If you consider that to be right-wing propaganda, then you may inadvertently be practicing Repressive Tolerance.

He is on a Neo-Marxian mission. That's why he supports Critical Race Theory. Or Critical Theory in general.

I've told the truth.

And calling you right-wing propagandists

Guess what I've told the truth

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

He is on a Neo-Marxian mission. That's why he supports Critical Race Theory. Or Critical Theory in general.

I've told the truth.

And calling you right-wing propagandists

Guess what I've told the truth

Are you saying that Pete doesn't vigorously defend and support Critical Race Theory and doesn't try to persuade us to see and agree with its view of America being a racist system designed by white supremacists for the sole purpose of granting privilege to whites at the expense of those who are not white? And that the system cannot be incrementally improved, that the legal equality created by all the civil rights initiatives have actually further entrenched white privilege rather than liberating non-whites, and so must be torn down at its roots and replaced by an equitable system created by critically race conscious theorists and governed by the same sort? Are you saying CRT is not a neo-Marxian theory derived from neo-Marxist Critical Theory?

Are you saying that Pete F does not believe that "conservatism" inevitably leads to oppression and its ideas must be suppressed, not tolerated or even granted space in political and social discourse in public, political, and media spaces?

Are you saying that Pete is not on a mission to rid us of the classical liberal idea of individual sovereignty that we were founded on and replace it with the Progressive notion of universal equity created and enforced by authoritarian government that has unlimited power to give us what we need and that notions like individual liberty are outdated and are an obstacle to the Good that powerful centralized government can do for us?

[Pete F.]

I see the poor victims are crying again.
Interesting how the victims consistently defend the man who numerous times tried to subvert the American electoral system and didn’t care where he got aid in doing so from.
He was just kidding
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I see the poor victims are crying again.
Interesting how the victims consistently defend the man who numerous times tried to subvert the American electoral system and didn’t care where he got aid in doing so from.
He was just kidding
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Poor baby! You see! (Through a glass darkly). . . And you spout! Yet your wonderful distortions are not able to prevail on so many of the poor that they are truly victims of your marvelously crafted nightmare . . . but you valiantly continue to preach! Oh! . . . will they not listen!

How tragic . . .

[Pete F.]

Trumplicans always project

"Mark Meadows, who as chief of staff to President Donald Trump promoted his lies of mass voter fraud, is facing scrutiny about his own voter registration status. Public records show he is registered to vote in two states."

January 2017: “I will be asking for a major investigation into VOTER FRAUD, including those registered to vote in two states…”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I see the poor victims are crying again.
Interesting how the victims consistently defend the man who numerous times tried to subvert the American electoral system and didn’t care where he got aid in doing so from.
He was just kidding
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

how is that different from 2016, when democrats also tried to subvert the electoral
system, by (1) asking electors not to cast their ballots for the winning candidate, and the.n (2) congress challenging the certification of election results in some states with zero evidence of wrongdoing, and (3) undermining confidence in our elections by saying “the russians did it”?

Answer - it’s always ok when democrats do it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

The Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday released the final report on its investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, finding numerous contacts between the Trump campaign and Moscow posed a "grave" counterintelligence threat.

"We found irrefutable evidence of Russian meddling," Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., acting chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in a statement, directly refuting President Donald Trump's repeated assertions that Russian interference was a "hoax" perpetrated by Democrats.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

The Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday released the final report on its investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, finding numerous contacts between the Trump campaign and Moscow posed a "grave" counterintelligence threat.

"We found irrefutable evidence of Russian meddling," Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., acting chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in a statement, directly refuting President Donald Trump's repeated assertions that Russian interference was a "hoax" perpetrated by Democrats.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete, how about we be clear? are you saying trump didn’t win fairly?

And i know how much that question boxes you into a corner.

I have no doubt there was meddling. just like i have no doubt dead people voted in chicago. the question is, did it effect the outcome?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Pete, how about we be clear? are you saying trump didn’t win fairly?

And i know how much that question boxes you into a corner.

I have no doubt there was meddling. just like i have no doubt dead people voted in chicago. the question is, did it effect the outcome?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I have no problem with that question
Trump had and encouraged aid from his Russian good friends.

What did Manafort do?
Why was he pardoned?
What are Manaforts connections to Russia and Ukraine?
Why did the Trump campaign push and succeed in removing Ukraine from the 2016 Republican platform?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I have no problem with that question
Trump had and encouraged aid from his Russian good friends.

What did Manafort do?
Why was he pardoned?
What are Manaforts connections to Russia and Ukraine?
Why did the Trump campaign push and succeed in removing Ukraine from the 2016 Republican platform?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

if you have no problem with that question, why didn’t you answer it?

I’ll ask again…

Did Trump win fairly?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

if you have no problem with that question, why didn’t you answer it?

I’ll ask again…

Did Trump win fairly?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trump had and encouraged aid from his Russian good friends.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Trump had and encouraged aid from his Russian good friends.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Can't answer! Shocker!