New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Credit where due.

Arkady

President
I have couple quick positive things to say about Republicans, today.

(1) First, I've been pretty tough on the national Republicans and on conservatives in the Deep South. I saw them both as hypocrites who'd align themselves with any evil if it helped them push their political power. So, I fully expected that after all the mealy-mouthed criticism of Moore from the right, the national GOP would give him their support, just as they did to Donald Trump. I also expected nearly all the Republicans and conservatives in Alabama would vote for him. In essence, I thought that even a serial child molester could count on support from those groups if he had the "Magic R."

I ended up being mostly right when it came to the national GOP. When it came right down to it, they threw him their support -- Trump endorsed him and used his pulpit to try to help him win, and the RNC gave him their financial support. But Alabama proved me wrong -- at least a little bit wrong. Although 91% of Republicans voted for Moore, that still means 9% of them voted for Jones or a write-in, which is slightly better than I would have expected. About 17% of self-identifying "conservatives" did so, which is even better. And a tiny portion of white evangelicals appear to have been discouraged enough by their apparent child-molester candidate that the turnout of the group declined. So, although the story of Jones's win is mostly about strong African American turnout and disgusted independents flocking to Jones, it turns out that not all the conservatives and Republicans in the state are evil. It also turns out, according to exit polls, that Alabama is on the right track. Although the election was a nail-biter overall, it was a massive landslide for Jones with voters under 45. He got 60% of the votes of people under 30, and 61% from age 30-44. So, there's hope that as the old segregation-era voters die off, Alabama will improve dramatically.

(2) Rex Tillerson just announced that he'd be willing to meet with North Korean negotiators without pre-conditions. That's a great move, not just relative to the administration's prior position, but even relative to the Obama administration's position, which was always to require North Korea to give up its nuclear ambitions before we'd even deign to talk to them directly. That prior policy was idiotic, and made real progress pretty much impossible. Now there's some hope. Off the top of my head I can't think of a single other Trump administration policy that's an improvement over what we had with Obama, so this really sticks out and needs to be praised.
 
I think trump endorsing Moore at the last moment was regrettable, but almost inevitable. It's similar to Obama backing #blacklivesmatter or the thugs who prevented voters from reaching the polls in Philadelphia during the 2008 election. The politics of race and extremism.

I'm not sure what "preconditions" were on the table for North Korean negotiations before Tillerson held his press conference. If the preconditions were along the lines of "endgame is stop testing nukes and ICBMs", that's probably a valid precondition. I don't think we want to wander into another Iranian treaty situation - where an enemy committed to "death to America" is given an economic windfall and uses that continue advancing its military threats toward the civilized world.
 
I think trump endorsing Moore at the last moment was regrettable, but almost inevitable. It's similar to Obama backing #blacklivesmatter or the thugs who prevented voters from reaching the polls in Philadelphia during the 2008 election. The politics of race and extremism.

I don't see the comparison between Obama supporting civil rights activists and Trump coming out in favor of a racist, law-breaking serial child molester.

I'm not sure what "preconditions" were on the table for North Korean negotiations before Tillerson held his press conference. If the preconditions were along the lines of "endgame is stop testing nukes and ICBMs", that's probably a valid precondition.

We don't have any moral standing to demand they stop testing missiles, since we continue to do so. And we're on shaky ground insisting they not test nukes, since we did so for so many decades. But, either way, I see no problem with talking to them without preconditions. It doesn't mean you need to give up anything. It just means you hear them out and they hear you out. That's a start. It'll give us a chance to figure out what they really care about, which may suggest a way forward.

I don't think we want to wander into another Iranian treaty situation

I hope we're as successful as we were with Iran. Wouldn't it be amazing if we could get North Korea to completely abandon nuclear weapons in exchange for nothing but freeing up some money that legally belongs to them anyway?
 
I don't see the comparison between Obama supporting civil rights activists and Trump coming out in favor of a racist, law-breaking serial child molester.



We don't have any moral standing to demand they stop testing missiles, since we continue to do so. And we're on shaky ground insisting they not test nukes, since we did so for so many decades. But, either way, I see no problem with talking to them without preconditions. It doesn't mean you need to give up anything. It just means you hear them out and they hear you out. That's a start. It'll give us a chance to figure out what they really care about, which may suggest a way forward.



I hope we're as successful as we were with Iran. Wouldn't it be amazing if we could get North Korea to completely abandon nuclear weapons in exchange for nothing but freeing up some money that legally belongs to them anyway?
only an extremist partisan would attempt to portray #blacklivesmatter as a civil rights group. they are a street mob.

untitled_30.jpg


gty_baltimore_protest_tl_150428_16x9_992.jpg
 
only an extremist partisan would attempt to portray #blacklivesmatter as a civil rights group.

They are a civil rights group. That doesn't mean that none of their members ever do anything wrong. Of course they do. You could say the same about any large civil rights movement in history. The same knock was made by the racists against the black civil rights movements of the 1960s.

4a08bf2eb11f2e1504f50415291d2504f600629b557c


If we were having this same discussion in 1859, you'd be writing off the abolitionist movement with accounts of horrors perpetrated by slaves freed by Nat Turner's uprising, or you'd be pointing to violence committed by John Brown.
 
only an extremist partisan would attempt to portray #blacklivesmatter as a civil rights group. they are a street mob.

untitled_30.jpg


gty_baltimore_protest_tl_150428_16x9_992.jpg
He's a subsidized liar. Didja catch the dutiful, sloppy servicing of Obama in his declaration that Iran has given up all aspirations of nukes?!?

It is time to ignore these compensated hacktards. They could scarcely be more unserious.
 
They are a civil rights group. That doesn't mean that none of their members ever do anything wrong. Of course they do. You could say the same about any large civil rights movement in history. The same knock was made by the racists against the black civil rights movements of the 1960s.

4a08bf2eb11f2e1504f50415291d2504f600629b557c


If we were having this same discussion in 1859, you'd be writing off the abolitionist movement with accounts of horrors perpetrated by slaves freed by Nat Turner's uprising, or you'd be pointing to violence committed by John Brown.

MLK never called for the assassination of police.
 
MLK never called for the assassination of police.
Yes, and the same is true for the leadership of the BLM movement. There were extremist individuals during the 1960s and 1970s, too, but they didn't define the civil rights movement at the time, and in the same way a handful of nutters today don't define BLM.
 
I don't see the comparison between Obama supporting civil rights activists and Trump coming out in favor of a racist, law-breaking serial child molester.



We don't have any moral standing to demand they stop testing missiles, since we continue to do so. And we're on shaky ground insisting they not test nukes, since we did so for so many decades. But, either way, I see no problem with talking to them without preconditions. It doesn't mean you need to give up anything. It just means you hear them out and they hear you out. That's a start. It'll give us a chance to figure out what they really care about, which may suggest a way forward.



I hope we're as successful as we were with Iran. Wouldn't it be amazing if we could get North Korea to completely abandon nuclear weapons in exchange for nothing but freeing up some money that legally belongs to them anyway?

I don't see the comparison between Obama supporting civil rights activists and Trump coming out in favor of a racist, law-breaking serial child molester.

The better analogy is Obama's support of ISIS and hiring a woman as Secretary of State, whose husband beats, bloodies and rapes women with the evidence of that fact witnessed by a trained professional, in Hillary Clinton.


We don't have any moral standing to demand they stop testing missiles, since we continue to do so.

Democrats have no moral ground on anything...They just sit around with their finger up there butt saying..."What's a democratic?"

I hope we're as successful as we were with Iran. Wouldn't it be amazing if we could get North Korea to completely abandon nuclear weapons in exchange for nothing but freeing up some money that legally belongs to them anyway?

That right you libbies support the terrorsist so no wonder Iran seems like a success..Would it be amazing if we could do like Bill clinton did between his alleged rapes and pay off N. Korea so they could build more nukes? NOooooooooooooooo!.

Your assessments are either:

A: All Liberal.

B: All Wrong.

C: All reasons why Trump was elected.

D: All of the above.

The correct answer is "D"
 
Yes, and the same is true for the leadership of the BLM movement. There were extremist individuals during the 1960s and 1970s, too, but they didn't define the civil rights movement at the time, and in the same way a handful of nutters today don't define BLM.

So how is it that the leadership is so different from the actions of the people? Why is that message lost?

 
The better analogy is Obama's support of ISIS and hiring a woman as Secretary of State, whose husband beats, bloodies and rapes women with the evidence of that fact witnessed by a trained professional, in Hillary Clinton.




Democrats have no moral ground on anything...They just sit around with their finger up there butt saying..."What's a democratic?"



That right you libbies support the terrorsist so no wonder Iran seems like a success..Would it be amazing if we could do like Bill clinton did between his alleged rapes and pay off N. Korea so they could build more nukes? NOooooooooooooooo!.

Your assessments are either:

A: All Liberal.

B: All Wrong.

C: All reasons why Trump was elected.

D: All of the above.

The correct answer is "D"
in defense of bill Clinton . . .

a - he only beats his victims if they resist his advances

b - he's probably remorseful afterwards, when he gazes on daughter Chelsea, and realizes how horrified he'd be if someone did the same to her.
 
Yes, and the same is true for the leadership of the BLM movement. There were extremist individuals during the 1960s and 1970s, too, but they didn't define the civil rights movement at the time, and in the same way a handful of nutters today don't define BLM.
here's a two-fer (see link at bottom) -

BLM leaders attacked police who were trying to protect/rescue gay pride marchers. The BLM movement wanted to quash/disrupt the gay demonstration

http://narrative-collapse.com/2017/...-trying-to-disrupt-columbus-gay-pride-parade/
 
in defense of bill Clinton . . .

a - he only beats his victims if they resist his advances

b - he's probably remorseful afterwards, when he gazes on daughter Chelsea, and realizes how horrified he'd be if someone did the same to her.

In his mind and the mind of the P.J. liberal that still denies after the NYT said they were wrong about Bill, He probably isn't remorseful and would have to sit in his shame, keep quiet while it happens to his daughter because:

A: He might have to admit his sins

B: Easier to get Hillary to silence her daughter in the name of the CGI.

C: Goes against the code of the democratic...which is to keep silent(See Democrats Trump and Moore, it has been alleged.)
 
2) Rex Tillerson just announced that he'd be willing to meet with North Korean negotiators without pre-conditions. That's a great move, not just relative to the administration's prior position, but even relative to the Obama administration's position, which was always to require North Korea to give up its nuclear ambitions before we'd even deign to talk to them directly. That prior policy was idiotic, and made real progress pretty much impossible. Now there's some hope. Off the top of my head I can't think of a single other Trump administration policy that's an improvement over what we had with Obama, so this really sticks out and needs to be praised.

Greato_O.

More likely a first step in giving into Nuclear Blackmail. I wonder how many billions this will cost us to once again kick this can down the road only to end up exactly where we are now? Not to mention the absolute horrendous example it will provide the Iranians.

Trump would just be falling in line behind every President since LBJ since every single one of them did exactly that.
 
here's a two-fer (see link at bottom) -

BLM leaders attacked police who were trying to protect/rescue gay pride marchers. The BLM movement wanted to quash/disrupt the gay demonstration

http://narrative-collapse.com/2017/...-trying-to-disrupt-columbus-gay-pride-parade/

This is not a hoax. This is a thing that really happened.

Black Lives Matter leader Bruce Wilson was arrested yesterday and charged with kidnapping, domestic violence, and child neglect. Today he was released on a $50k bond. Derrick Lamar Quarles, another leader of the Black Lives Matter movement, attended Wilson’s bond hearing. After the hearing, Wilson was arrested on an outstanding warrant.

http://narrative-collapse.com/2017/06/07/second-blm-leader-from-greenville-sc-arrested-in-two-days/

So much for the BLM leadership. Actions speak louder than the mission statement.
 
in defense of bill Clinton . . .

a - he only beats his victims if they resist his advances

What evidence do you see that he's ever beaten anyone? In the case of Trump, we have the sworn testimony of three different women that he committed rape. With Clinton, I'm only aware of two women who have offered sworn testimony regarding him. One was Juanita Broaddrick, who provided a sworn affidavit saying that Clinton never made any unwelcome sexual advances towards her. The other was Paula Jones, who claimed he exposed himself to her, but never suggested any physical contact. Was there some other woman who testified against him, that you're basing your claim on?
 
Greato_O.

More likely a first step in giving into Nuclear Blackmail. I wonder how many billions this will cost us to once again kick this can down the road only to end up exactly where we are now? Not to mention the absolute horrendous example it will provide the Iranians.

Trump would just be falling in line behind every President since LBJ since every single one of them did exactly that.
If he doesn't meet with them, we're kicking the can down the road yet again. If he does meet with them, it's a step that could theoretically move us towards resolving the issue.
 
They are a civil rights group. That doesn't mean that none of their members ever do anything wrong. Of course they do. You could say the same about any large civil rights movement in history. The same knock was made by the racists against the black civil rights movements of the 1960s.

4a08bf2eb11f2e1504f50415291d2504f600629b557c


If we were having this same discussion in 1859, you'd be writing off the abolitionist movement with accounts of horrors perpetrated by slaves freed by Nat Turner's uprising, or you'd be pointing to violence committed by John Brown.

They are a civil rights group

What rights would that be...that were not covered in the 13th,14th and 15th amendments?


If we were having this same discussion in 1859, you'd be writing off the abolitionist movement

NO that is completely wrong...The Republican party was formed to end slavery.

Republican Party Platform of 1856
June 18, 1856
spacer.gif


Their Territory has been invaded by an armed force;

Spurious and pretended legislative, judicial, and executive officers have been set over them, by whose usurped authority, sustained by the military power of the government, tyrannical and unconstitutional laws have been enacted and enforced;

The right of the people to keep and bear arms has been infringed.

Test oaths of an extraordinary and entangling nature have been imposed as a condition of exercising the right of suffrage and holding office.

The right of an accused person to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury has been denied;

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, has been violated;

They have been deprived of life, liberty, and property without due process of law;

That the freedom of speech and of the press has been abridged;

The right to choose their representatives has been made of no effect;

Murders, robberies, and arsons have been instigated and encouraged, and the offenders have been allowed to go unpunished;

That all these things have been done with the knowledge, sanction, and procurement of the present National Administration; and that for this high crime against the Constitution, the Union, and humanity, we arraign that Administration, the President, his advisers, agents, supporters, apologists, and accessories, either before or after the fact, before the country and before the world; and that it is our fixed purpose to bring the actual perpetrators of these atrocious outrages and their accomplices to a sure and condign punishment thereafter.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29619

In fact it sounds like the Republicans of 1856 were fighting the Clinton's and the liberals.
 
Back
Top