- 27,785
- 12,449
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2011
dude is such a **** speaker.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
childish and stupid insults? like 90% of what Trump says?
we're not doing this because we're stupid and childish. we do it to mock trump and the way he manages his problems.
he doesn't have a monopoly on stupid nicknames like lying Ted. **** Drumpf.
^ fair enough. we should at least try to be more grown up and creative than Trump, which isn't hard to do. i mean, the best nickname this year has been Jeborah, which SNL came up with, not Trump.
trump will befriend the north Koreans.
he walked right into the Khan trap. they need to set more. one each week until November.
I'm sure that for 95% people who are going to or considering voting for Drumpf, he can literally say anything and they'll defend him or stand by him. Drumpf said it himself: He could go out on the street and shoot a guy and his followers wouldn't abandon him.
And not only do his insults not hurt him, they somehow end up working to his advantage. I mean, this "Fortunate Son" Vietnam dodger insulted John McCain for being tortured by the Vietnamese yet McCain was endorsing him some months later. Not sure how that works.
Drumpf supporters be like "We need a change from those corrupt Washington politicians. We no longer need leaders who don't make fun of disabled people. We need leaders who openly make fun of disabled people!"
I know you gonna stick by ya man ninja.
Donald could blame Dominicans for why NYC has a rat problem and you'd still stand by his side.
any citizen who believe in this country. same criteria as those who fought in the American revolutionary war.trump will befriend the north Koreans.
he walked right into the Khan trap. they need to set more. one each week until November.
TPTB?
but did the robots learn how to fake injury?Terrible goalkeeping
Hopefully never, we can't let them get too smart...
Question: if you're cutting taxes on businesses, someones losing out right? I assume local and federal govt so isn't that just more funds the general public is missing out on diverted to business owners, with no guarantee of benefits to workers or consumers?
With supply-side economics accomplishes to two things. First it is a huge benefit to corporations and the rich. The official motto of supply side economics should be a rising tide lifts all yachts
Since tax breaks aren't free, and tax rates are already relatively low, these tax cuts will only expand our deficit.
Then the bait and switch begins, the public are told that since we are running deficits we must cut spending. Instead of rolling back the tax cuts, or cutting military spending, welfare programs will be put on the cutting board. Food stamps, section 8, Medicaid, etc. Or a pesky regulator agency, like the EPA or Department of Labor (another sneak way of lowering regulations without having to pass a bill)
So the rich get richer, corporations get less regulated, the government gets less revenue that it otherwise would have has, so in return that leads to less services for the poor and middle class
but did the robots learn how to fake injury?Terrible goalkeeping
Hopefully never, we can't let them get too smart...
Question: if you're cutting taxes on businesses, someones losing out right? I assume local and federal govt so isn't that just more funds the general public is missing out on diverted to business owners, with no guarantee of benefits to workers or consumers?
With supply-side economics accomplishes to two things. First it is a huge benefit to corporations and the rich. The official motto of supply side economics should be a rising tide lifts all yachts
Since tax breaks aren't free, and tax rates are already relatively low, these tax cuts will only expand our deficit.
Then the bait and switch begins, the public are told that since we are running deficits we must cut spending. Instead of rolling back the tax cuts, or cutting military spending, welfare programs will be put on the cutting board. Food stamps, section 8, Medicaid, etc. Or a pesky regulator agency, like the EPA or Department of Labor (another sneak way of lowering regulations without having to pass a bill)
So the rich get richer, corporations get less regulated, the government gets less revenue that it otherwise would have has, so in return that leads to less services for the poor and middle class
This further translates to crumbling infrastructure, rising crime, less well-paying job opportunities, less access to higher education and eventually mass emigration and its corollary, brain drain (something that Americans should be extremely wary of, as it eats at the core of Development and Progress)
That's like an instruction manual on how to turn a prosperous country into a developing one in a couple of generations.
You think there aren't places in the US where if you held a referendum, they wouldn't want to be a part of Mexico?
Does that mean that it should be done?
I was asking because amel is implying sentiment in Crimea is different than what is being reported in many places.
To your question:
1. Not today (as far as whole states go I doubt it?) but probably eventually.
2. No. In all honesty, nobody wants to hand anything over. If a southern region wanted to leave, and Mexico knew they could take it, they probably would if the conditions were right.
As for a Texas/Crimea parallel, let's look at it for fun.
We flooded into Texas (Mexico actually had to ban us at one point), later revolted, and eventually made it part of the US.
Crimea was Russian for a long time, got transferred to Ukraine during Soviet era, and after the USSR collapse it remained in Ukraine. Correct?
So ethnic Russians found themselves living in Ukraine post-collapse.. the countries have good relations though so nobody really cares... a revolution takes place in 2014... in comes a new gov that Russia says they do not recognize, and we know the rest.
Seems like a complicated conflict. Kind of like much of our relationship with Russia, which would probably be better served if it were discussed and debated on a national level, rather than settled through neo-McCarthyite charges our media has been engaging in the past week.
What are y'all opinions on gun control?
last time i checked Mexico didn't give Texas or California away, they lost it in a war..Crimea was given from one part of da former USSR to another part of da former USSR. moving da goal posts huh
bingo.
Yeah, someone sure is moving the goal posts with his lame *** technicalities. You might as well have written:
"Last time I checked Mexico starts with an "M", Crimea starts with a "C". It couldn't be more different of a situation. "
You posted a map that shows different ethnicities in Crimea and pointed out that they voted to leave Ukraine to justify it's annexation by Russia. I did the same for the Latino population in the US. But since that points out the hollowness of your argument way too much and doesn't suit your agenda, apparently what's most important is how the territory was obtained many years ago.
Crimea was Ukrainian territory, regardless of the origins of how it became Ukrainian territory. If it's that simple to retake territory, then I guess Russia could just take Alaska back if they pay back what they originally gave for it. It was theirs first. The same goes for Louisiana and France. A much bigger version of Louisiana, that is.
And speaking of France and staying with your "won in a war" justification, does France also have dibs on various US territories where they won the battles in the American War of Independence?
It doesn't work that way. Crimea was Ukranian land, recognized by the U.N. And Russia just took it while giving zero dambs about U.N. conventions.
His supporters don't care, the only thing that could stop him now would be an endorsement from Obama.
Same difference. Hill couldbe investigatedby the IRSby the FBIshoot at police and nothing would happen.
nah b, those 5 women wanted the D
/sarcasm
yeah... being investigated for a crime, a non-violent one at that, vs saying you'd murder someone is a GREAT comparison
lol....who's mans are these