Kavanaugh Protestors: Unwitting Minionism ramming through the Elite Agenda as usual.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

I said world wars and not wars. And I didn't say it has already ended the existence of super power privileges.

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

There are no Elite Masters. There are just groups with different opinions.

Stop that! You'll spoil the fantasy, and where will that leave them?

Your post reminded me of this classic They Live scene:

originally posted by: angeldoll

This decade is a most fascinating one regarding the "left" in this nation. I swear every time I turn and look their over the top antics are doing the bidding of our Elite Masters.

Really?

Because every time I look I see an alt-right desperately striving to take the country back to 1940.
And a President who wants to yield to Putin and has 'fallen in love' with a murderous dictator.

How 'fascinating' is that?

Separate public restrooms for it's citizens?

Health care and college education for the wealthy only?

I guess I could go on, but what's the point?

lol. Wallow in your regressions and pretend like the rich republicans care about you! Woo hoo!

Wow... You really buy into the BS don't you? "Health care and college education for the wealthy only?" You actually believe that is was conservative people want? So you want the government to take 75% - 92% of our income to make healthcare and college "free" ? That's how much it costs for this "free" stuff in other countries. For a nation our size, it'll closer to the 92%.

And what do you mean by taking "the country back to 1940"? What has happened so far to make you think that to be the case?

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

All legit reasons to be against Kavanaugh.

I have to ask, however, why the media and pols focused on rape and drinking?

It almost seems like the leftist media is colluding with republicans.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

No sorry. And your opinion was clear to me before you linked me to your own thread, not very convincing.
Globalism is supported to end world wars and it worked 70+ years.

Since you're not capable of taring it to pieces, that not one single person has ever even attempted it (meaning it isnt really possible), I'm the one presenting an "opinion" around here eh?

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I haven't tried. Why, to argue with a juvenile confused poster? Meh, maybe later when I'm bored enough.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

All legit reasons to be against Kavanaugh.

I have to ask, however, why the media and pols focused on rape and drinking?

It almost seems like the leftist media is colluding with republicans.

That's the point: the Two Party + MSM System is one in the same. Its the same long con of a reality TV show (these days its become a "procedural drama" at that).

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: CriticalStinker

I said world wars and not wars. And I didn't say it has already ended the existence of super power privileges.

It just changed the rules, it didn't end them.

Iraq and Afghanistan saw soldiers from US, UK, Poland, Canada, Australia, Italy, Germany, Georgia, Jordan, Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Spain, Czech Republic, and Iran.

Syria has been a proxy haven, so I ask, has globalism truly protected the world as a whole from world wars, or just the west?

a reply to: CriticalStinker

World Wars means the whole world at war. Proxy wars in ME are not the same thing.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

As far as I'm concerned the Cold War was WW3, and this War on Terror is WW4. But that doesnt jive with UN propaganda like we've heard already herein, therefore we'll stick our heads in the sand. Millions dead per decade? More weight in bombs dropped per decade than in the 1940's? NOPE! Not a WW!! Now go back to bed and vote Dempublican!

a reply to: Peeple

So then Uruguay was involved in WW1 & WW2?

It was in the "Cold War"

.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: CriticalStinker

World Wars means the whole world at war. Proxy wars in ME are not the same thing.

No it means several large nations are at war in different places in the world.

Lets be honest, most people define it as that when they truly feel the impacts of it and see large amounts of their own on the casualty list.

If you think everything has been hunky dory after WWII, you must have read different books than I have.

The rules changed, that's all. There were alliances that helped cause WWI and WWII, we just consolidated those alliances into NATO and no one can fight back.

Millions have died since then, no question about it.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

True. But it's more like the US at war with the world. What's your point btw?

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

All legit reasons to be against Kavanaugh.

I have to ask, however, why the media and pols focused on rape and drinking?

It almost seems like the leftist media is colluding with republicans.

That's the point: the Two Party + MSM System is one in the same. Its the same long con of a reality TV show (these days its become a "procedural drama" at that).

Well, it's depressing to think how easily I got played.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: CriticalStinker

True. But it's more like the US at war with the world. What's your point btw?

Globalism was consolidation of power, not anything beneficial for the masses.

Furthermore, we have about 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population. This disparity is particularly great as between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security.

link - excerpt from a very interesting and insightful memo by George Kennan in 1948. At the time he wrote it to the state department, and was sought for foreign relation advice and even served as ambassador and diplomat for many years.

If you trust American politics to be the quarterback of Globalism, you're entitled to your opinion.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

That's why there are so many "unfair" trade deals. You pay a little back to those who accept your brand of globalism. Well before Trump now that's over.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: CriticalStinker

That's why there are so many "unfair" trade deals. You pay a little back to those who accept your brand of globalism. Well before Trump now that's over.

The only way we were paying back was by making countries we bought from endorse pseudo slavery to sell the goods cheap enough.

We are better off making our own stuff, paying a bit more, and injecting that cash back into the US.

Trade deals, Globalism, that is all sold so we can consolidate power over the rest of the world. Isolationism would be better for everyone.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

That's true but sounds so depressing. I'd say moderation.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Same ol' illusion of choice, keep the left and the right at each others throats.

As far as the establishment politicians who represent both sides of the isle, they have the same agenda.

Wars haven't stopped, corporate interests are met before voters, and unlimited money from the wealthy go to both competing candidates.

Lately I've noticed people really ramping up the cries about "the left", tell me, who was the last true liberal they ran? Bernie Sanders, and we know what they did to him.

Both parties are infiltrated with impostors, I haven't seen a true conservative or liberal in decades (at least that the parties will endorse).

Bernie Sanders is not and has never been a Liberal.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Lately I've noticed people really ramping up the cries about "the left", tell me, who was the last true liberal they ran? Bernie Sanders, and we know what they did to him.

They won't even acknowledge this.
There were a lot of people that got burned by the dems on that one.
Sanders would have beaten trump.

Unlikely that The Bern beats Trump. No way that limp wristed milquetoast wins. All Trump would have to do to win is 3 things. 1) show the clip of Bernie getting run off his own stage by 2 shrill black women. 2) highlight that Bernie never had a job till he was 40. 3) Publicize the fact that Bernie spent his honeymoon in Russia at a Communist kibbutz. And highlight the fact that Bernie was so lazy that they forced him out.

No way in hell Bernie would've won.

And if he did? America would have been toast at this time in his presidency. Bernie the 3 mansion owning, multi-millionaire fake Socialist is a low life dirtbag that shouldn't even be in government much less running the country.

He is the very definition of a useless government leech.

He would have made Jimmy Carter look like Churchill.