Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 336 of 352 FirstFirst ... 236286326334335336337338346 ... LastLast
Results 5,026 to 5,040 of 5279
  1. #5026
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Hell on Earth- Missouri
    Posts
    13,007
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Willie Brown liked Kamala, at least enough of what she did in bed to give her political positions back when he was doing her.
    Lol. Fair enough. There was a penis that liked her. Pretty sure she thought she was the one in power though.
    GJO- You will never be forgotten. "MORE THAN MINFINITY"!

  2. #5027
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    47,804
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncsinmo View Post
    The only person that likes Kamala is Kamala. What a stuck up *****!

    Her cockiness makes trump seem somewhat normal in terms of narcissism.

    And honestly, can you blame Tulsi. She wasn't going to win the primary regardless but the queen of the DNC calling her a traitor had it's affect. She's in back peddle mode for no reason other than RUSSIA! She's in defensive mode just like you would be.
    Yeah I’m in agreement with that. But now she’s so caught up in the fight she’s lost her messaging and image. She easily could have fought Hillary and maintained a solid running in the primary but she spoiled herself. I still like her I just think she’s played this all wrong.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #5028
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    72,990
    been trying to get through the debate this morning, and boy oh boy has it been bad. leave it to msnbc to ask the worst questions, be completely unfair about time and only focus on things that most everyone up there agrees about.

    also, i know the impeachment story is the biggest story in politics, but what the hell does it have to do with the election. i don't care one bit what any of them think about it. i care about the things that differentiate them as candidates and what they'll do as president.

    some climate talk, finally...but it still doesn't seem like it's being taken seriously enough. it was brief.

    the foreign policy talk was also brief, but that's where bernie shined the most. i think the party has broadly moved more in line with him on many issues and we're having different arguments than we might have had 10 years ago... but foreign policy seems to be where the biggest differences still exist. it's those things i wish these debates would be focusing on more. oh well.
    Hello there! Welcome to ManRam v8.00.
    Patch notes: This version is nice, funny, cool & good™ now

  4. #5029
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    29,563
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    Yeah I’m in agreement with that. But now she’s so caught up in the fight she’s lost her messaging and image. She easily could have fought Hillary and maintained a solid running in the primary but she spoiled herself. I still like her I just think she’s played this all wrong.
    I think (and I said when she announced) that her history was certain to doom her, and that's what Tulsi's shot was at. Kamala is the anti-Bernie in that she'll clearly say whatever she thinks people want to hear, and she probably doesn't really have a personal philosophy.

  5. #5030
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    29,563
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRam View Post
    been trying to get through the debate this morning, and boy oh boy has it been bad. leave it to msnbc to ask the worst questions, be completely unfair about time and only focus on things that most everyone up there agrees about.

    also, i know the impeachment story is the biggest story in politics, but what the hell does it have to do with the election. i don't care one bit what any of them think about it. i care about the things that differentiate them as candidates and what they'll do as president.

    some climate talk, finally...but it still doesn't seem like it's being taken seriously enough. it was brief.

    the foreign policy talk was also brief, but that's where bernie shined the most. i think the party has broadly moved more in line with him on many issues and we're having different arguments than we might have had 10 years ago... but foreign policy seems to be where the biggest differences still exist. it's those things i wish these debates would be focusing on more. oh well.
    I think they realize that they don't have significant differences in climate so the debate is sort of wasted time.

  6. #5031
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    5,504
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    I think they realize that they don't have significant differences in climate so the debate is sort of wasted time.
    Understatement.

  7. #5032
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Flock of Sheep No.97 near BAAA BAA lane
    Posts
    9,472
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Yep. All that crap is what made me think we need to have all campaigns 100% publicly funded, and allow no outside campaigning or money grubbing at all ... but that is not exactly free speech is it?
    And what we have now is? With big money involvement in our politic, a lot of voices gets silence in flavor of big business bottom line. This something you see in the donor class ownership of the new media as well.

    Not only should we have campaigns 100% publicly funded, but the news media as well. Just a causal digging through the internet news feed, one can easily find stories that are important to understand the effects of climate change, the effects of our government foreign policies on world that are buried under tons of bs that the media calls news.

    Do we really need 24/7 wall to wall coverage of every idiotic thing that Trump does? What about the Hong Kong riots as well as the up rest in Iran, Boliva, the massive flooding of Venice, the future of the west bank now that the US government says it ok for Israel to settle there?

  8. #5033
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Flock of Sheep No.97 near BAAA BAA lane
    Posts
    9,472
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRam View Post
    been trying to get through the debate this morning, and boy oh boy has it been bad. leave it to msnbc to ask the worst questions, be completely unfair about time and only focus on things that most everyone up there agrees about.

    also, i know the impeachment story is the biggest story in politics, but what the hell does it have to do with the election. i don't care one bit what any of them think about it. i care about the things that differentiate them as candidates and what they'll do as president.

    some climate talk, finally...but it still doesn't seem like it's being taken seriously enough. it was brief.

    the foreign policy talk was also brief, but that's where bernie shined the most. i think the party has broadly moved more in line with him on many issues and we're having different arguments than we might have had 10 years ago... but foreign policy seems to be where the biggest differences still exist. it's those things i wish these debates would be focusing on more. oh well.
    It is a gottadamn shame how they continue to either total ignore or downplay climate change. Just this subject along is enough to vote for Bernie, because I don't see the other candidates having the balls to enact radical policies to cope with it. Wrong way Biden, Butigeg, Harris, and the rest of the moderate dems will just put duct tape polices in place and back to business as usual.

    On the foreign policies, I may have left the room if it was mention, but it would have been nice is someone had brought up the recent Ok that Trump's government gave to the Israel to build settlements on the West bank and how this changed our decades old polices in the middle east. We aren't even pretending any more that we are trying to be fair and help the palenstinians any more.

  9. #5034
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    72,990
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    I think they realize that they don't have significant differences in climate so the debate is sort of wasted time.
    i think that's not entirely true. i mean, broadly? yes, they agree that there's a real threat and action is required. but how to do that? well, there's a range of arguments. and the solutions are just about as complex as it gets. some plans would drastically reshape our entire economy. it's all a big deal and should be treated as such. even among the green new deal supporters there's a lot of differences.

    there was a reason so many wanted an entire debate specifically about this one issue.

    i'm interested in figuring out i can most trust about the most important issues. climate change is one of those. i just, in the other thread, talked about how i agree with you that obama didn't do enough (while disagreeing with the overall tone of your post ). i want to make sure we get it more right. the issue of climate change is neither trivial nor "they all kinda think the same thing, so who cares?".

    an hour of them talking about climate change is more worthwhile than an hour of them answering the blandest msnbc-type talking point nonsense like "how can you bring people together?", "how can you get Republicans to stop fighting with Democrats", "would you tweet as president", "should we discourage chants of 'lock him up'.

    the end got a little better, with pointed questions about child care, affordable housing and so on, but man...most of this was a waste. msnbc's bifurcated world view on display.
    Hello there! Welcome to ManRam v8.00.
    Patch notes: This version is nice, funny, cool & good™ now

  10. #5035
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    72,990
    Quote Originally Posted by WES445 View Post
    On the foreign policies, I may have left the room if it was mention, but it would have been nice is someone had brought up the recent Ok that Trump's government gave to the Israel to build settlements on the West bank and how this changed our decades old polices in the middle east. We aren't even pretending any more that we are trying to be fair and help the palenstinians any more.
    Here it is. Not a lot that's terribly interesting or telling.

    That that they had a lot of time and each was really only able to speak on one thing, but Sanders was the only one that chose to mention Israel and Palestine, perhaps unsurprisingly. Though he didn't actually say a whole lot.

    Not in love with how Warren used her time here.

    MITCHELL: President Trump has dramatically changed America's approach to our adversaries by holding summits with Kim Jong Un, getting out of the Iran nuclear deal, and at times embracing Vladimir Putin and other strongmen. So let's talk about what kind of commander-in-chief you would be. Senator Harris, North Korea is now threatening to cancel any future summits if President Trump does not make concessions on nuclear weapons. If you were commander-in-chief, would you make concessions to Kim Jong-un in order to keep those talks going?

    HARRIS: With all due deference to the fact that this is presidential debate, Donald Trump got punked. He was -- he has conducted foreign policy since day one born out of a very fragile ego that fails to understand that one of the most important responsibilities of the commander-in-chief is to concern herself with the security of our nation and homeland. And to do it in a way that understands that part of the strength of who we are as a nation -- and therefore, an extension of our ability to be secure -- is not only that we have a vibrant military, but that when we walk in any room around the globe, we are respected because we keep to our word, we are consistent, we speak truth, and we are loyal. What Donald Trump has done from pulling out of the Paris agreement to pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal to consistently turning a back on people who have stood with us in difficult times, including most recently the Kurds, points out that Donald Trump is the greatest threat to the national security of our nation at this moment.

    MITCHELL: But would you make concessions to North Korea to keep talks...

    HARRIS: Not at this point. There are no concessions to be made. They -- he has traded a photo-op for nothing. He has abandoned the -- by shutting down the operations with South Korea for the last year-and-a-half, so those operations, which should be -- and those exercises, which should be active, because they are in our best national security, the relationship that we have with Japan, he has in every way compromised our ability to have any influence on slowing down or at least having a check and balance on North Korea's nuclear program.

    MITCHELL: Thank you, Senator. Mr. Vice President, President Trump inherited the North Korea problem from past presidents, over decades. What would a President Biden do that President Obama didn't do in eight years?

    BIDEN: Well, first of all, I'd go back in making sure we had the alliances we had before since he became president. He has absolutely ostracized us from South Korea. He has given North Korea everything they wanted, creating the legitimacy by having a meeting with Kim Jong-un, who's a thug -- although he points out that I'm a rabid dog who needs to be beaten with a stick, very recently was his comment.

    SANDERS: But other than that, you like him.

    BIDEN: Other than that, I like him. And in Japan and Australia, and being a Pacific power, and putting pressure on China in order -- for them to make sure that it is a non -- it is a nuclear-free peninsula. And the way we do that is, we make clear to China, which I have done personally with -- with the president of China, and that is we're going to move up our defenses, we're going to continue to make sure we increase our relationship with South Korea, and if they view that as a threat, it's an easy thing to respond to. They, in fact, can, in fact, put pressure on North Korea. But the fact is that we're in a position where he has done this across the world. He's embraced thugs. Look what Putin is doing in Europe. Putin is -- his whole effort is to break up NATO, to increase his power. Look what he's done to -- and so this guy has no idea what he's doing. He has no notion how to go about it. And we need a commander-in-chief who when he stands everybody knows what he or she is talking about.

    MITCHELL: Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Two more U.S. soldiers were killed today in Afghanistan tragically in America's longest war. Senator Sanders, you've long said you wanted to bring the troops back home from Afghanistan. Would you cut a deal with the Taliban to end the war, even if it means the collapse of the Afghan government that America has long supported?

    SANDERS: Well, let me just say this. One of the big differences between the vice president and myself is he supported the terrible war in Iraq and I helped lead the opposition against it. And not only that, I voted against the very first Gulf War, as well.
    And I think we need a foreign policy which understands who our enemies are, that we don't have to spend ten -- more than -- more money on the military than the next 10 nations combined. But to answer your question, yeah, I think it is time after spending many trillions of dollars on these endless wars, which have resulted in more dislocation and mass migrations and pain in that region, it is time to bring our troops home. But unlike Trump, I will not do it through a tweet at 3 o'clock in the morning. I will do it working with the international community. And if it's necessary to negotiate with the Taliban, of course we will do that. But at the end of the day, we have to rethink the entire war on terror, which has caused so much pain and lost so many lives, not only for our own men and women in the armed forces, but for people in that region, as well.

    MITCHELL: Thank you, Senator. Ashley?

    PARKER: Thank you. Mr. Yang, if you win the 2020 election, what would you say in your first call with Russian President Vladimir Putin?

    YANG: Well, first, I'd say I'm sorry I beat your guy.

    WARREN: It's a sorry, not sorry.

    YANG: Or not sorry. And, second, I would say the days of meddling in American elections are over and we will take any undermining of our democratic processes as an act of hostility and aggression. The American people would back me on this. We know that they've found an underbelly and they've been clawing at it, and it's made it so that we can't even trust our own democracy.
    The third thing I would say is that we're going to live up to our international commitments. We're going to recommit to our partnerships and alliances, including NATO. And it was James Mattis that said that the more you invest in diplomats and diplomacy, the less you have to spend on ammunition. That has to be the path forward to help build an international consensus not just against Russia, but also to build a coalition that will help us put pressure on China, in terms of their treatment of their ethnic minorities, and what's going on in Hong Kong. I want to propose a new world data organization, like a WTO for data, because right now, unfortunately, we're living in a world where data is the new oil and we don't have our arms around it. These are the ways that we'll actually get Russia to the table and make it so they have to join the international community and stop resisting appeals to the world order.

    PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Yang. Rachel?

    MADDOW: On the issue of China, Senator Booker, China is now using force against demonstrators in Hong Kong where millions have taken to the streets advocating for democratic reforms. Many of the demonstrators are asking the United States for help. If you were president, would the U.S. help their movement, and how?

    BOOKER: Well, first of all, this is president who seems to want to go up against China in a trade war by pulling away from our allies and, in fact, attacking them, as well. We used a national security waiver to put tariffs on Canada. And so at the very time that China is breaking international rules, is practicing unfair practices, stealing technology, forcing technology transfer, and violating human rights, this nation is pulling away from critical allies we would need to show strength against China.
    There's a larger battle going on, on the planet Earth right now between totalitarian, dictatorial countries and free democracies. And we see the scorecard under this president not looking so good, with China actually shifting more towards an authoritarian government, with its leader now getting rid of even his -- getting rid of term limits. And so I believe we need a much stronger policy, one that's not led, as President Trump seems to want to do, in a transactional way, but one that's led by American values. So, yes, we will call China out for its human rights violations. But not only that, we will stop engaging in things that violate American rights. Because it is a human rights violation when people at our border, children are thrown in cages. It's a human right violations without coming to the United States Congress for an authorization for the use of military force for us to refuel Saudi jets to bomb Yemeni children. It is about time that this country is led by someone who will say the values of freedom and democracy are what we are going to lead with and begin to check China, check Putin, and the other folks that are trying to undermine American values and democratic values around the globe.

    MADDOW: Thank you, Senator. Andrea?

    MITCHELL: Mr. Vice President, the CIA has concluded that the leader of Saudi Arabia directed the murder of U.S.-based journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The State Department also says the Saudi government is responsible for executing nonviolent offenders and for torture. President Trump has not punished senior Saudi leaders. Would you?

    BIDEN: Yes, and I said it at the time. Khashoggi was, in fact, murdered and dismembered, and I believe on the order of the crown prince. And I would make it very clear we were not going to, in fact, sell more weapons to them, we were going to, in fact, make them pay the price and make them, in fact, the pariah that they are. There's very little social redeeming value of the -- in the present government in Saudi Arabia. And I would also, as pointed out, I would end -- end subsidies that we have, end the sale of material to the Saudis where they're going in and murdering children, and they're murdering innocent people. And so they have to be held accountable. And with regard to China, we should -- look, unless we make it clear that we stand for human rights, we should be going to the United Nations seeking condemnation of China, what they're doing with the million Uighurs that are there, essentially in concentration camps in the west. We should be vocally, vocally speaking out about the violation of the commitment they made to Hong Kong. We have to speak out and speak loudly about violations of human rights.

    MITCHELL: Senator Klobuchar, just to follow up, would you go against the Saudis, even though that would potentially help Iran, their adversaries?

    KLOBUCHAR: We need a new foreign policy in this country, and that means renewing our relationships with our allies. It means rejoining international agreements. And it means reasserting our American values.
    And so when the president did not stand up the way he should have to that killing and that dismemberment of a journalist with an American newspaper, that sent a signal to all dictators across the country that -- across the world that that was OK, and that's wrong. And I want to add a few things to what my colleagues have said, first of all, the question about Russia. When we look at international agreements, we must start negotiating back with Russia, which has been a horrible player on the international scene, but the president precipitously got out of the nuclear agreement with Russia and we must start negotiating, even though they were cheating, for the good of this world. And we must also start the negotiations for the New START Treaty.
    And when it comes to China, we need someone that sees the long term, like I do, just like the Chinese do, because we have a president that literally makes decisions based on his next tweet, and they are in it for the long game.

    MITCHELL: Senator Sanders?

    SANDERS: I think I may have been the first person up here to make it clear that Saudi Arabia not only murdered Khashoggi, but this is a brutal dictatorship which does everything it can to crush democracy, treats women as third-class citizens. And when we rethink our American foreign policy, what we have got to know is that Saudi Arabia is not a reliable ally. We have got to bring Iran and Saudi Arabia together in a room under American leadership and say we are sick and tired of us spending huge amounts of money and human resources because of your conflicts. And by the way, the same thing goes with Israel and the Palestinians. It is no longer good enough for us simply to be pro-Israel. I am pro-Israel. But we must treat the Palestinian people as well with the respect and dignity that they deserve. What is going on in Gaza right now, where youth unemployment is 70 percent or 80 percent, is unsustainable. So we need to be rethinking who our allies are around the world, work with the United Nations, and not continue to support brutal dictatorships.

    MITCHELL: Thank you, Senator. Rachel?

    MADDOW: Senator Warren, only about 1 percent of Americans serve in the United States military right now. Should that number be higher?

    WARREN: Yes, I think it should be. You know, all three of my brothers served in the military. One was career military. The other two also served. I think it's an important part of who we are as Americans. And I think the notion of shared service is important.
    It's how we help bring our nation together. It's how people learn to work together from different regions, people who grew up differently. It's also about how families share that sacrifice. I remember what it was like when I was a little girl. My brother, my oldest brother, who served five-and-a-half years off and on in combat in Vietnam, what it was like for my mother every day to check the mailbox, had we heard from Don Reed? How is he doing? And if there was a letter, she was brighter than the day. And if there wasn't, she would say, well, maybe tomorrow. This is about building for our entire nation. And I believe we should do that. I also believe we should have other service opportunities in this country. So, for example, what I want to do is for our federal lands, I want to bring in 10,000 people who want to be able to serve in our federal lands to be able to help rebuild our national forests and national parks as a way to express both their public service and their commitment to fighting back against climate change. We can do this as a nation.

    MADDOW: Thank you, Senator. In President Trump's first two years in office, the Pentagon budget ballooned. Mayor Buttigieg, would you cut military spending? Or would you keep it on the same upward trajectory?

    BUTTIGIEG: We need to re-prioritize our budget as a whole and our military spending in particular. It's not just how much, although we certainly need to look at the runaway growth in military spending. It's also where.
    Right now, we are spending a fraction of the attention and resources on things like the artificial intelligence research that China is doing right now. If we fall behind on artificial intelligence, the most expensive ships that the United States is building just turned into bigger targets. We do not have a 21st century security strategy coming from this president. After all, he's relying on 17th century security technologies, like a moat full of alligators or a big wall. There is no concept of strategic planning for how civilian, diplomatic, and military security work needs to take place for the future.

    BOOKER: Can I respond?

    MADDOW: Mayor Buttigieg, thank you.

    WARREN: Could I respond on this?

    WELKER: Coming up, we will have much more from the candidates. We're going to take a quick break, just a moment. Stay with us.
    (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
    Hello there! Welcome to ManRam v8.00.
    Patch notes: This version is nice, funny, cool & good™ now

  11. #5036
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    West Side
    Posts
    12,209
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRam View Post
    been trying to get through the debate this morning, and boy oh boy has it been bad. leave it to msnbc to ask the worst questions, be completely unfair about time and only focus on things that most everyone up there agrees about.

    also, i know the impeachment story is the biggest story in politics, but what the hell does it have to do with the election. i don't care one bit what any of them think about it. i care about the things that differentiate them as candidates and what they'll do as president.

    some climate talk, finally...but it still doesn't seem like it's being taken seriously enough. it was brief.

    the foreign policy talk was also brief, but that's where bernie shined the most. i think the party has broadly moved more in line with him on many issues and we're having different arguments than we might have had 10 years ago... but foreign policy seems to be where the biggest differences still exist. it's those things i wish these debates would be focusing on more. oh well.

    Yang didn't get to talk for 30 minutes lol


    The Lost Boys of PSD

  12. #5037
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    29,563
    Quote Originally Posted by WES445 View Post
    And what we have now is? With big money involvement in our politic, a lot of voices gets silence in flavor of big business bottom line. This something you see in the donor class ownership of the new media as well.

    Not only should we have campaigns 100% publicly funded, but the news media as well. Just a causal digging through the internet news feed, one can easily find stories that are important to understand the effects of climate change, the effects of our government foreign policies on world that are buried under tons of bs that the media calls news.

    Do we really need 24/7 wall to wall coverage of every idiotic thing that Trump does? What about the Hong Kong riots as well as the up rest in Iran, Boliva, the massive flooding of Venice, the future of the west bank now that the US government says it ok for Israel to settle there?
    The issue is we have no way to get media to not talk about an election, and as long as huge corporations have an opinion they will push that opinion. It's not a US issue, and it's certainly not new, but it's never been as pervasive as it is now because the access to media is far more than ever before. Of course, if we have the old idea of the press as the Fourth Estate we want them talking ... unfortunately we can't legislate that into existence either.

    I'd love to get the media to stop talking about Trump all the time.

  13. #5038
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    44,054
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    I was liking Tulsi for a while but she’s gotten ridiculous and is overshooting and missing the bigger threat now.

    Really not a Kamala fan but she’s right and got her good tonight https://twitter.com/politico/status/...347627008?s=21


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Lol pretty weak "gotcha" moment but okay.

    "there's no scraps in my scrapbook"

  14. #5039
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    72,990
    Quote Originally Posted by statquo View Post
    Yang didn't get to talk for 30 minutes lol
    i'm not #yanggang at all, but that's absolutely indefensible. i really think people deserve equal time, regardless of how they're polling. if they've met the arbitrary standards set up, let 'em flourish.
    Hello there! Welcome to ManRam v8.00.
    Patch notes: This version is nice, funny, cool & good™ now

  15. #5040
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    47,804
    Quote Originally Posted by spliff(TONE) View Post
    Lol pretty weak "gotcha" moment but okay.
    Agreed and it was so ****ing rehearsed.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •