Page 665 of 667 FirstFirst ... 165565615655661662663664665666667 LastLast
Results 9,961 to 9,975 of 10005
  1. #9961
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    3,508

    Default

    Personally I think Tulsi is only there to serve an agenda. That seems to be to take down certain Democrats. That said it is kinda shitty to try and label by my count one of the only two people in the Presidential race to have actually served in the military as a Russian asset. Plenty of better things to criticize her on

  2. #9962

  3. #9963
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    3,508

    Default

    Exactly she endears herself to a rightwing crowd way too much.

  4. #9964
    Guardian Empress of Earth Tami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    22,001

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KNIGHT OF THE LAKE View Post
    Personally I think Tulsi is only there to serve an agenda. That seems to be to take down certain Democrats. That said it is kinda shitty to try and label by my count one of the only two people in the Presidential race to have actually served in the military as a Russian asset. Plenty of better things to criticize her on
    Even Military Veterans are not immune to influence, just ask Michael Flynn. Or how about this one: Navy: Sailor contacted Russians, pleads guilty to espionage. Or this one: U.S. Air Force Intel Vet Monica Witt Is Accused of Being Iran’s Dumbest Spy

    Not saying that any of these is the case with Tulsi Gabbard, only that if she isn't careful her name might end up on this list as well. Hopefully she isn't that dumb.
    Original join date: 11/23/2004
    Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn or imaginatively created.

  5. #9965
    Extraordinary Member Tendrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    8,970

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KNIGHT OF THE LAKE View Post
    Personally I think Tulsi is only there to serve an agenda. That seems to be to take down certain Democrats. That said it is kinda shitty to try and label by my count one of the only two people in the Presidential race to have actually served in the military as a Russian asset. Plenty of better things to criticize her on
    Yes, let's criticize her cheering on of Putin and Assad's murder of civilians but, wait, I forgot. sHe's aNtI-WaR

  6. #9966
    Ultimate Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    17,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KNIGHT OF THE LAKE View Post
    Personally I think Tulsi is only there to serve an agenda. That seems to be to take down certain Democrats. That said it is kinda shitty to try and label by my count one of the only two people in the Presidential race to have actually served in the military as a Russian asset. Plenty of better things to criticize her on
    Let's just set the whole "Russian Asset" jive aside for a minute.

    Let's say that you can jump to conclusions, and decide that Gabbard is anything from "Less Than Ideal Nominee..." all the way to "The Boogey Woman..."

    Are you giving her more or less airtime and name recognition with this garbage?

  7. #9967
    Extraordinary Member Tendrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    8,970

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    Let's just set the whole "Russian Asset" jive aside for a minute.

    Let's say that you can jump to conclusions, and decide that Gabbard is anything from "Less Than Ideal Nominee..." all the way to "The Boogey Woman..."

    Are you giving her more or less airtime and name recognition with this garbage?
    Ignoring her just lets some folks not realize just how problematic she actually is. She's a presidential nominee and was at one point receiving all kinds of accolades and attention as a telegenic 'democratic future'. Let's stop pretending that the lady who's Fox News' favorite Democrat doesn't deserve to have a light shone on the bigotry of her world view and whose interests she appears to be serving when she's apologizing for Putin and Assad.

  8. #9968
    Ultimate Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    17,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tendrin View Post
    Ignoring her just lets some folks not realize just how problematic she actually is. She's a presidential nominee and was at one point receiving all kinds of accolades and attention as a telegenic 'democratic future'. Let's stop pretending that the lady who's Fox News' favorite Democrat doesn't deserve to have a light shone on the bigotry of her world view and whose interests she appears to be serving when she's apologizing for Putin and Assad.
    Who has said "Ignore Her?"

    The best route to not having to potentially deal with her any longer than you have to is for her to get a perfectly fair chance to run in a completely "Above Board" primary.

    It's not "Make Accusation That You Seemingly Have Right Around 'Zero' Proof To Go Along With..."

    All that is going to do is keep her in the equation for longer than she should be.

  9. #9969
    Extraordinary Member Tendrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    8,970

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    Who has said "Ignore Her?"

    The best route to not having to potentially deal with her any longer than you have to is for her to get a perfectly fair chance to run in a completely "Above Board" primary.

    It's not "Make Accusation That You Seemingly Have Right Around 'Zero' Proof To Go Along With..."

    All that is going to do is keep her in the equation for longer than she should be.
    She wasn't going anywhere and she's pretty much made a fool of herself today.

  10. #9970
    Ultimate Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    17,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tendrin View Post
    She wasn't going anywhere and she's pretty much made a fool of herself today.
    Along with a former nominee of the Democratic Party saying she was a "Russian Asset..." with right around "Zero" proof.

    Your talking like the party didn't look like fools right along with Gabbard.

    As for "She Wasn't Going Anywhere...", she shouldn't be. Not until she is out of a perfectly fair nomination process.

    Anything except that is playing right into Gabbards' hands, and takes you in the opposite direction of anywhere you would want to wind up.

  11. #9971
    Extraordinary Member Tendrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    8,970

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    Along with a former nominee of the Democratic Party saying she was a "Russian Asset..." with right around "Zero" proof.

    Your talking like the party didn't look like fools right along with Gabbard.

    As for "She Wasn't Going Anywhere...", she shouldn't be. Not until she is out of a perfectly fair nomination process.

    Anything except that is playing right into Gabbards' hands, and takes you in the opposite direction of anywhere you would want to wind up.
    She said she was being groomed by the Russians for a third party run. That's not saying she's a Russian agent. If you thought Ms. 'Boycott the debates' and 'The DNC is sick and rotting' wouldn't consider that, well... you're being silly and true to your usual form.

    It's unquestionably true by the way that Russian state tv fawns over her and their actual assets are being deployed.

  12. #9972

    Default

    It's really an amazing coincidence that someone who would be on this forum defending Stein and Johnson while others were suggesting Russia might be helping promote the two in 2016 are now defending Tulsi Gabbard.

    It's almost as if they didn't learn a goddamned thing.
    X-Books Forum Mutant Tracker/FAQ- Updated every Tuesday.

  13. #9973
    Ultimate Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    17,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tendrin View Post
    She said she was being groomed by the Russians for a third party run. That's not saying she's a Russian agent. If you thought Ms. 'Boycott the debates' and 'The DNC is sick and rotting' wouldn't consider that, well... you're being silly and true to your usual form.

    It's unquestionably true by the way that Russian state tv fawns over her and their actual assets are being deployed.
    Since I know a lot of folks might not have really read over what she actually said, let's go on ahead and roll tape...

    From this Newsweek article...

    - https://www.newsweek.com/clinton-rus...didate-1466316

    Clinton went on to state that her fellow 2016 candidate Jill Stein was also in the election due to Russian involvement. "That's assuming Jill Stein will give it up, which she might not, because she's also a Russian asset. She's a Russian asset, totally. They know they can't win without a third party candidate, and I don't know who it's going to be, but I will guarantee that they will have a vigorous third party candidate in the key states that they most need it." Stein denied receiving support from the Russian government in 2017.
    If you are saying Stein is "Also..." a Russian asset, you are saying there is more than one asset. Which is calling Gabbard an asset.

    Maybe she meant to say something else, but what she actually said there pretty clearly calls Gabbard an asset.

  14. #9974
    Extraordinary Member Tendrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    8,970

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    Since I know a lot of folks might not have really read over what she actually said, let's go on ahead and roll tape...

    From this Newsweek article...

    - https://www.newsweek.com/clinton-rus...didate-1466316



    If you are saying Stein is "Also..." a Russian asset, you are saying there is more than one asset. Which is calling Gabbard an asset.

    Maybe she meant to say something else, but what she actually said there pretty clearly calls Gabbard an asset.
    That reads to me like she's calling Stein one. Which is accurate. I mean, you can read it like that if you want to, but I think we'll all give your takes on Hillary a full pass because she's been right about most of this and you... well... you haven't.
    Last edited by Tendrin; 10-18-2019 at 10:12 PM.

  15. #9975
    Ultimate Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    17,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tendrin View Post
    That reads to me like she's calling Stein one. Which is accurate. I mean, you can read it like that if you want to, but I think we'll all give your takes on Hillary a full pass because she's been right about most of this and you... well... you haven't.
    Dude...

    It only completely falls apart if that is what is being said.

    Why would you need to groom an asset if you already have an asset in place?

    Don't get me wrong, pretty much everything she said is pretty dumb, but that would be a whole other level of "Dumb".

    "Please Excuse That I Have Laid Out That Russia Already Has An Asset For A Third Party Run In Place While I Try To Spook You Into That They Are Grooming A Democrat For A Third Party Run..."

Posting Permissions

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