Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, February 19, 2019

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is giving it another go, launching a second campaign for the White House four years after surprising Democrats with a strong bid for the party's 2016 nomination. "We began the political revolution in the 2016 campaign, and now it's time to move that revolution forward," the independent senator told Vermont Public Radio in an interview airing Tuesday morning.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

"Many of the issues he's promoted for years -- most notably a Medicare-for-all national health care plan and a $15 minimum wage -- have shifted from the party's fringe to its mainstream, and are now seen as effective litmus tests for presidential candidates.

Indeed, Sanders' most recent Medicare-for-all bill was cosponsored by fellow presidential candidates Sens. Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand, Cory Booker, and Elizabeth Warren."

Thank you Senator Sanders and you have my vote

#1 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2019-02-19 08:49 AM | Reply

--Sanders has remained a national leader of the Democratic Party, though he still refuses to join.

The Democrats not good enough for him?

#2 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-02-19 09:04 AM | Reply

Sanders/Stein 2020

Make a real 3rd party option.

#3 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-02-19 09:11 AM | Reply

I thought Bernie would have figured out the DNC is corrupt and the Democratic primary is a rigged system. Dems don't actually choose their candidates. They are manipulated into whom to elect by the media and Hollywood. Just wait until Michelle Obama enters the race. Every other democrat will be forgotten.

#4 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-02-19 09:12 AM | Reply

He's a Democrat again? That was fast.

#5 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-02-19 09:21 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Is Sanders leftwing enough for today's democrat party? He's an old, white male, and that's a big strike against him for the Intersectionalist Party. He's outflanked on the left by Beto and Gillibrand, who both want to tear down existing border barriers. His "democratic socialism" isn't even edgy anymore, with the rush to endorse Ocrayzio-Cortez's Green Socialism Deal.

#6 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-02-19 09:23 AM | Reply

I don't think he ever said he would be a Democrat. Did I miss that?

#7 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-02-19 09:24 AM | Reply

Of course Sanders will be running on the Dem ticket

#8 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2019-02-19 10:25 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I don't know how he will get his supporters back after the DNC f*cked him last time

poor Bernie

#9 | Posted by Maverick at 2019-02-19 11:38 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#9 Poor Bernie? He got royally screwed the last time and he has come back begging to be royally screwed again. You know that saying screw me once shame on you, screw me twice shame on me..........

#10 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-02-19 11:54 AM | Reply

Proud resident of a state that chose him over Hillary. I'll be voting for him again and helping any way i can.

#11 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 11:56 AM | Reply

Of course Sanders will be running on the Dem ticket

#8 | POSTED BY PUNCHYPOSSUM AT 2019-02-19 10:25 AM | FLAG:

No, I asked if he would be a Democrat. So far, he has given a strong "maybe"

"poor bernie" comes from him refusing to register dem, so he wasn't able to be part of some primaries. But the refrain is that he wasn't treated fairly.

You have to be some kind of special idiot to think he didn't get more than a fair shake. I don't know any other party that would allow this kind of attitude. What's the point of having a party if anyone just waltzes off the street and takes over?

#12 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-02-19 11:57 AM | Reply

Sanders/Stein 2020

Regarding Stein, I found her policies to be pretty good, and surprised more didn't latch on to her ideas.

I think her time has past though, and Sanders is done ... He woke the sleeping Giant, but he can't control it.

Thats for the young, white, handsome and rich, along with a minority women..... its the only way the Dems can move forward, they will never elect an all White ticket..

BicuspidBeto/HangEmHighHarris 2020

#13 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 12:06 PM | Reply

"Regarding Stein, I found her policies to be pretty good, and surprised more didn't latch on to her ideas."

She tweeted that she ran on the Green New Deal in 2012.

#14 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 12:08 PM | Reply

What's the point of having a party if anyone just waltzes off the street and takes over?

#12 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER

Hillary loaned the DNC money .. she didn't just walk off the street, she bought it.
www.politico.com

Its something she picked up from Obama, starve the party, all fundraising is for your campaign, then loan it money from your campaign.

then the party machine (liberal media included) is on your side, and probably like the DNC with your people....

#15 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 12:09 PM | Reply

She tweeted that she ran on the Green New Deal in 2012.

#14 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

Yeah I saw that, shes more versed/nuanced than AoC on the topics as well.

#16 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 12:10 PM | Reply

And here we go again...

#17 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2019-02-19 12:10 PM | Reply

"Hillary loaned the DNC money .. she didn't just walk off the street, she bought it."

That's a funny way to talk about raising money for a campaign.

#18 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-02-19 12:11 PM | Reply

Now Stein is wanting to help other (but not Dems) people run on it:

Dr. Jill Stein 🌻 Retweeted

Green Party US 🌻 @GreenPartyUS

Join us for the next installment of our Campaign Training Series: How to Run on the #GreenNewDeal, Thursday, February 28 at 9 PM ET. Led by: @HowieHawkins & @DrJillStein Register here: www.gp.org ... #WeAreGreen #DemExit

#19 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 12:13 PM | Reply

That's a funny way to talk about raising money for a campaign.
#18 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER

It is LOL :)

But its what the Democrat leadership has done to the party, its starving it so they can control it.

If Sanders runs as a Democrat he didn't learn any thing as stated above by Gal.

#20 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 12:14 PM | Reply

Twice the tears in this thread. From the cons and the clintonites.

#21 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 12:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#19 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

She was this way in 2016 as well, but I think she's taking advantage of the AoC bringing it to the front and center, and AoC being unable to run.

But imagine if Stein could pull in AoC into the GreenParty?

The problem with this is Stein would rather be a big fish in a little pond..... as most leaders won't support growth through replacement.

#22 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 12:16 PM | Reply

"If Sanders runs as a Democrat he didn't learn any thing as stated above by Gal."

That was Gracie who said that, not me.

#23 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 12:18 PM | Reply

He [Sanders] stressed that the chief priority for Democrats is to thwart President Trump's reelection bid next year. "It is absolutely imperative that Donald Trump be defeated, because I think it is unacceptable and un-American, to be frank with you, that we have a president who is a pathological liar," Sanders said during a wide-ranging interview in his home in Vermont.

"We have a president who is a racist, who is a sexist, who is a xenophobe, who is doing what no president in our lifetimes has come close to do doing, and that is trying to divide us up," he added.

www.msn.com

#24 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 12:26 PM | Reply

That was Gracie who said that, not me.
#23 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

My apologies, Gracie and you ;)

#25 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 12:28 PM | Reply

Bernie knows he didn't lose that primary because it was "rigged" against him, he knows he lost it because he didn't get more votes than the other candidate, even with undemocratic caucuses in his favor, because the primary electorate didn't think he could win the general election as a socialist/democrat and they were prolly right.

But that was then and this is now.

Hopefully the Dems will again let him run in their primary, as a third party candidacy would be self-defeating for his policies.

And whether he is the flag-bearer or not (I wanted to go with Ring Bearer there and invoke Bernie as the Hobbit against Mordor, but...) his policies, which are only Hillary's FDR-ish policies in bold print; Bernie was like Trump in that he never really expected to win according to his campaign managers.... his policies are more popular after two years of Trump's America, and there may be younger leaders who could win.

Bernie/Beto 2020 might be a thing.

#26 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-19 12:31 PM | Reply

--Bernie/Beto 2020 might be a thing.

White Guys 2020!

#27 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-02-19 12:34 PM | Reply | Funny: 4

Bernie/Beto 2020 might be a thing.
#26 | POSTED BY CORKY

A losing thing ... but still a thing ...

#28 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 12:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#28

Speaking of Trumpish losers..... how anyone still supports that clown is beyond rationality.

#29 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-19 12:40 PM | Reply

But its what the Democrat leadership has done to the party, its starving it so they can control it.
If Sanders runs as a Democrat he didn't learn any thing as stated above by Gal.

#20 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS AT 2019-02-19 12:14 PM | FLAG:

I have an honest question for you.

Both Sanders and Clinton were going around and raising money.

The Dem party was broke.

Sanders didn't want to share any of his money with the Dem party (understandably, since he didn't want to support that party, he was trying to destroy it).

Clinton did want to give money to the party.

What would you do if you were her? Raise and give money to the party just to see it support your opponent? Or ask that you have a veto on what can be done with the money? Or another option?

#30 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-02-19 01:06 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

At least the Klown Kar now has a driver that can never be accused of cultural appropriation.

#31 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 01:37 PM | Reply

Is Sanders leftwing enough for today's democrat party? He's an old, white male, and that's a big strike against him for the Intersectionalist Party. He's outflanked on the left by Beto and Gillibrand, who both want to tear down existing border barriers. His "democratic socialism" isn't even edgy anymore, with the rush to endorse Ocrayzio-Cortez's Green Socialism Deal.

#6 | Posted by nullifidian

Beto takes money from AT&T and exxon. Are AT&T and exxon to the left of bernie sanders, idiot?

#32 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 01:40 PM | Reply

Sanders didn't want to share any of his money with the Dem party (understandably, since he didn't want to support that party, he was trying to destroy it).

#30 | Posted by BruceBanner

"Wahhh he was trying to DESTROY the democratic party!*"

*if you define "democratic party" to mean elite plutocrat control of the democratic party.

#33 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 01:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

- the Klown Kar

Was famously originated for the Republican primary class that ended up giving us the Orange Clown.... who some people obviously still prefer to any Dem alternative no matter how much they lament him in public.

#34 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-19 01:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) adopted a new rule on Friday aimed at keeping outsider candidates like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) from trying to clinch the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020.

The new rule, adopted by the DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee, requires all Democratic presidential candidates to be a member of the Democratic Party, Yahoo News reported.

A presidential candidate running for the Democratic nomination must be a member of the party, accept the Democratic nomination and "run and serve" as a member.


6-8-18
Source

#35 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-02-19 01:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Bernie knows he didn't lose that primary because it was "rigged" against him, he knows he lost it because he didn't get more votes than the other candidate, even with undemocratic caucuses in his favor, because the primary electorate didn't think he could win the general election as a socialist/democrat and they were prolly right.
#26 | Posted by Corky

You've been pushing this narrative for years. People have blown it up in your face over and over. Then the next day you come right back with it as if yesterdays debate never happened.

Either you are incapable of absorbing new information or you have no problem with spreading falacies that you know aren't true.

#36 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 01:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

- Ocrayzio-Cortez's Green Socialism Deal.

lmao... the former liberal, now alt-right maven has to get a derogatory "Socialism!" in there. Of course, he wants you to think Stalin and Mao, as if, not democratic socialist capitalist nations as in N Europe.

It's just more of the rwing Red Scare tactics we'll hear for the next two years... at least.

In the meantime, he'll be supporting Trump's War President invasion of Venezuela.

#37 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-19 01:48 PM | Reply

#36

You've been pushing this narrative for years. People have blown it up in your face over and over. Then the next day you come right back with it as if yesterdays debate never happened.

Either you are incapable of absorbing new information or you have no problem with spreading fallacies that you know aren't true.

I, however, do not intend to re-fight that primary to the detriment of this one they way you obviously do. Your guy lost, my gal won. The voters decided, by a 4 million vote landslide that put to lie the "rigged" meme. Get over it already.

#38 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-19 01:51 PM | Reply

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) adopted a new rule on Friday aimed at keeping outsider candidates like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) from trying to clinch the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020.
The new rule, adopted by the DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee, requires all Democratic presidential candidates to be a member of the Democratic Party, Yahoo News reported.
A presidential candidate running for the Democratic nomination must be a member of the party, accept the Democratic nomination and "run and serve" as a member.

6-8-18
Source
#35 | POSTED BY AVIGDORE

This is something they should do. The GOP should have had a rule in place like this for Trump.

#39 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 01:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The GOP should have had a rule in place like this for Trump.

Only because Republican voters could not be counted on to reject a racist POS game show host who brags about sexually assaulting women.

#40 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 01:55 PM | Reply

I, however, do not intend to re-fight that primary to the detriment of this one they way you obviously do.

#38 | Posted by Corky

Bernie knows he didn't lose that primary because it was "rigged" against him, he knows he lost it because he didn't get more votes than the other candidate, even with undemocratic caucuses in his favor, because the primary electorate didn't think he could win the general election as a socialist/democrat and they were prolly right.

#26 | Posted by Corky

hahahahahahaha

#41 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 01:56 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#41

I was prefacing my statement on this topic, obviously. But I do enjoy hearing your girlish giggle.

#42 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-19 01:59 PM | Reply

Only because Republican voters could not be counted on to reject a racist POS game show host who brags about sexually assaulting women.
#40 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 01:55 PM

Damn democracy and people voting for who they think is the better choice.

#43 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-02-19 02:02 PM | Reply

"People have blown it up in your face over and over. Then the next day you come right back with it as if yesterdays debate never happened.
Either you are incapable of absorbing new information or you have no problem with spreading fallacies that you know aren't true."

you just described him accurately on every topic...not just this one.

#44 | Posted by eberly at 2019-02-19 02:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Was famously originated for the Republican primary class that ended up giving us the Orange Clown

Wrong, as usual. It actually originated in 1976 in a political cartoon titled "Who has the keys" by Tony Auth, showing all 18 Democratic candidates running against Ford all crammed into a Pinto, then was resurrected by another cartoonist in 2012 showing Romney, Santorum, Gingrich and Paul in a very similar cartoon.

Awesome cartoon, Tony Auth was nominated for two Pulitzer's in 76 and 77, he won for "O beautiful for spacious skies, For amber waves of grain" in 76 and lost to Paul Szep in 1977 when he was nominated for "Who has the keys?"

#45 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 02:10 PM | Reply

#45

Obfuscating the main point, as usual.

"... the Republican primary class that ended up giving us the Orange Clown.... who some people obviously still prefer to any Dem alternative no matter how much they lament him in public."

Which describes your 31.

#46 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-19 02:22 PM | Reply

Bernie vs. Beto

Bernie: "Open borders is a Koch brothers idea"

Beto: Tear down the existing walls.

Yep, a real clown car.

#47 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-02-19 02:23 PM | Reply

LOL, Corky cries that me correcting him is "obfuscating the point".

Classic.

#48 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 02:30 PM | Reply

#48

Still didn't address the point.

Typical.

#49 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-19 02:35 PM | Reply

" "We have got to look at candidates, you know, not by the color of their skin, not by their sexual orientation or their gender and not by their age," Sanders said.

"I mean, I think we have got to try to move us toward a non-discriminatory society which looks at people based on their abilities, based on what they stand for."

Don't think Wokamala, Intersectional Gillibrand, Spartacus, Castro agree with that.

#50 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-02-19 02:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Yep, a real clown car.

#47 | Posted by nullifidian

The clowns are the ones obsessing about a pointless wall while the president is a foreign agent handing out budget-destroying tax cuts to billionaires.

#51 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 02:47 PM | Reply

Still didn't address the point.
Typical.
#49 | POSTED BY CORKY AT 2019-02-19 02:35 PM

Waaaaah.

When your "points" are a completely incorrect statement of "fact" about the origin of clown car and a deflection to Trump on a Sanders thread, you, as always, got nothing.

#52 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 02:51 PM | Reply

Damn democracy and people voting for who they think is the better choice.

Jeff's the one who said there should have been a rule that kept Trump out of the primary. I merely pointed out that Republican voters are scum who voted for scum. I still love democracy, just not many of those currently participating in it.

#53 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 03:11 PM | Reply

#53 | POSTED BY JOE

If I am understanding you correctly - anybody who doesn't vote the way you vote is scum?

#54 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 03:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If I am understanding you correctly - anybody who doesn't vote the way you vote is scum?

#54 | Posted by JeffJ

I dont think he was saying that. Trump is not just anybody.

Voting for john kasich doesn't mean you're scum because john kasich didn't campaign on a platform if hatred, racism, and ignorance. Anyone running on that platform is scum as is anyone who votes for it.

#55 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 03:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#54 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

When you vote based on educated beliefs instead of party affiliation, you can make that claim validly.

#56 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 03:21 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#54 No, I'm saying that anyone who voted for Donald Trump is scum.

#57 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 03:23 PM | Reply

-When you vote based on educated beliefs instead of party affiliation, you can make that claim validly.

No one thinks you're educated, you partisan hack.

#58 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-02-19 03:24 PM | Reply

Speaks,

How about my wife? She went in to the polls planning on voting Johnson. As she thought about the fact that he had no chance of winning she considered Trump and Clinton, and to her, Clinton was worse so she voted Trump. She changed her mind at the last moment.

I know that by the metric you and Joe are establishing that makes her scum, but the fact is neither of you know her or anything about her.

#59 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 03:25 PM | Reply

I know she voted for a racist POS game show host who brags about grabbing women by their vaginas without consent. I think i know enough.

#60 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 03:33 PM | Reply

"Wahhh he was trying to DESTROY the democratic party!*"
*if you define "democratic party" to mean elite plutocrat control of the democratic party.

#33 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2019-02-19 01:41 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Ha ha! Let the Bros come back to life!

It's great to see you agree with me but turn it into an insult.

This is Bernie. This is what he does. He spoils things.

#61 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-02-19 03:37 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Jonathan Martin @jmartNYT

.@jdickerson gets @BernieSanders to talk process !

On a big field >

"In some In some ways it makes it easier. When you're running against one person you know you gotta have 51% of the votes. Now who knows what you need, 30, 35%"

#62 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 03:57 PM | Reply

Speaks,

How about my wife? She went in to the polls planning on voting Johnson. As she thought about the fact that he had no chance of winning she considered Trump and Clinton, and to her, Clinton was worse so she voted Trump. She changed her mind at the last moment.

I know that by the metric you and Joe are establishing that makes her scum, but the fact is neither of you know her or anything about her.

#59 | Posted by JeffJ

Trump supporters fall into a few limited categories:

1. Sociopathic Billionaires who value tax cuts about all else and dont care what damage trump causes as long as they get richer
2. Angry hateful people - this includes the bigots and white supremacists who want trump to fight for their racist cause
3. Ignorant people - This includes gullible suckers who somehow became adults without learning the ability to spot extremely obvious con men and crooks, and people so uneducated and misinformed about the issues facing our country that they thought hillary was worse than trump.

I'll let you decide which of these applies to your wife.

#63 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 03:58 PM | Reply

Ha ha! Let the Bros come back to life!

It's great to see you agree with me but turn it into an insult.

This is Bernie. This is what he does. He spoils things.

#61 | Posted by BruceBanner

The bernie bros were russians. Did you fall for that?

Don't blame bernie for the fact that hillary couldnt beat donald friggin trump, blame her decades of poor judgement, failure, and corruption.

#64 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 04:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I hope whoever wins the Democratic nomination does so with more than 30 to 35% of the vote. If they don't, then I hope whoever the nominee is takes the next highest vote getter as VP. If they don't, I fear that Trump will win re-election. Not because Democrats and Independents will vote for Trump in large numbers, but because enough of them may well vote for 3rd party candidates again and in so doing deprive the Democratic nominee of much needed votes to beat him.

#65 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 04:10 PM | Reply

#63 She doesn't fall into any of those categories.

Like I said, you don't know her and the only thing you know about her is that she married down.

#66 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:12 PM | Reply

I think i know enough.

#60 | POSTED BY JOE

Of course you do.

62,984,828

That is how many US citizens you believe are scum.

#67 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Jeff, how does your wife feel about her vote now? What does she think of President Trump?

#68 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 04:20 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Yep.

62,984,828 people voted for a demented sociopath who grabs women by their vaginas without permission and brags about doing so.

Pretty sad, eh?

#69 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 04:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Like I said, you don't know her and the only thing you know about her is that she married down.

#66 | Posted by JeffJ

No, I also know that she weighed trump vs hillary and picked trump. That tells me A LOT about her.

Same as if someone had to pick between jumping off a house or a skyscraper and they picked skyscraper would tell me a lot about them.

#70 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 04:22 PM | Reply

"62,984,828
That is how many US citizens you believe are scum.
#67 | POSTED BY JEFFJ"

So what's your number?

#71 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 04:23 PM | Reply

Jeff, how does your wife feel about her vote now?

On policy she feels OK about it.

What does she think of President Trump?

#68 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

The same thing she thought about him before voting for him - that he's a vile POS but in her mind Hillary was worse but for completely different reasons.

#72 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:24 PM | Reply

So what's your number?

#71 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

It's certainly not 1 out of 5 citizens.

#73 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:25 PM | Reply

Sorry about the runaway italics in #72.

#74 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:25 PM | Reply

Is she able to articulate what's worse about Hillary Clinton?

#75 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 04:26 PM | Reply

That tells me A LOT about her.

Hillary Clinton was a horrible candidate.

So horrible that she pushed a lot of decent people who were otherwise repulsed by Trump into voting for him.

It's something you really need to come to grips with.

#76 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:27 PM | Reply

"So what's your number?
#71 | POSTED BY SNOOFY
It's certainly not 1 out of 5 citizens.
#73 | POSTED BY JEFFJ"

So what's your number?

#77 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 04:27 PM | Reply

Is she able to articulate what's worse about Hillary Clinton?

#75 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Yes. Although she doesn't follow national politics she pays enough attention during the campaign and asks me enough intelligent questions to formulate an informed opinion.

#78 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:28 PM | Reply

"Hillary Clinton was a horrible candidate."

Do you mean she wasn't as good a campaigner as Trump, or she was a worse match for the job than Trump?

At least you didn't troll us with "objectively horrible" this time.

#79 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 04:30 PM | Reply

I don't get why Jeff thinks the number of scumbags who voted for a sociopathic racist vagina-grabber somehow makes them less scummy. I'm sure it's a logical fallacy but i'm too lazy to look it up.

#80 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 04:31 PM | Reply

So what's your number?

#77 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

I don't really have one.

I can only go by my own personal encounters and hopefully assume its a microcosm.

In doing that my number would be roughly 30,000 - 60,000 people. Reality is probably a bit higher than that. Say 100,000 - 200,000.

Do you have a number?

#81 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:31 PM | Reply

"Is she able to articulate what's worse about Hillary Clinton?

Yes."

What does she say makes Hillary worse than Donald?

#82 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 04:31 PM | Reply

At least you didn't troll us with "objectively horrible" this time.

#79 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

That's a phrase Sully coined (whatever happened to him?).

I don't get why Jeff thinks the number of scumbags who voted for a sociopathic racist vagina-grabber somehow makes them less scummy. I'm sure it's a logical fallacy but i'm too lazy to look it up.

#80 | POSTED BY JOE

It's called bigotry, Joe. That's what you are peddling at the moment.

#83 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:33 PM | Reply

"Reality is probably a bit higher than that. Say 100,000 - 200,000."

So, not even ten percent of the prison population.

#84 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 04:33 PM | Reply

How is it bigotry to judge people based on their actions, JeffJ?

???

#85 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 04:35 PM | Reply

My math is really bad.

I was thinking 1-2% of our population. My math came out at .1 - .2%

#86 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:35 PM | Reply

How is it bigotry to judge people based on their actions, JeffJ?

???

#85 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Because voting for someone who you think deserved zero votes doesn't automatically make that person a scumbag.

#87 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:36 PM | Reply

It's called bigotry, Joe.

No, it's not. Holding contempt for one opinion in particular is not the same thing as maligning all opinions that are not your own.

I don't think people who voted for Jeb! are scum.
I don't think people who voted for Rubio are scum.
I don't think people who voted for Johnson are scum.

I do, however, think people who voted for a sociopathic racist sexual assailant are scum. Apparently that includes your wife, which triggers you.

#88 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 04:37 PM | Reply

Really, 1-2% of the population is scum.

What sort of methodology did you use to arrive at that number?

Is Hillary among them? How about Donald?

#89 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 04:37 PM | Reply

"Because voting for someone who youthink deserved zero votes doesn't automatically make that person a scumbag."

You're assigning Joe a false position, as he detailed in #88.

#90 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 04:38 PM | Reply

Triggers me?

Hardly.

Only a bigot thinks that 20% of the US population is comprised of scumbags based on the sole act of how they voted in a single election.

#91 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:41 PM | Reply

"Because voting for someone who youthink deserved zero votes"

That's not it.

It's voting for someone who did the things Trump did.

Things like forcibly sexually penetrating his wife against her will and without her consent, which has since been rightfully legally construed as rape in the State of New Jersey, where Trump did it.

Nothing to do with Trump deserving votes or not, since that's a comparison between Trump and whoever else is running.

This is just judging Trump on his own merits alone.

#92 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 04:43 PM | Reply

"Only a bigot thinks that 20% of the US population is comprised of scumbags based on the sole act of how they voted in a single election."

At least he can articulate the criteria.

More than you can do for uyour 1-2% claim.

And again, it's not bigotry to judge people by the content of their character.

#93 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 04:44 PM | Reply

This is Bernie. This is what he does. He spoils things.

#61 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER

Awwww is the Hillary Hulk pissed the popular politicians are getting all the attention?

Don't you have a speech to sell to Wall St or something?

#94 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 04:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Judging Trump on his merits alone is fine. Conferring his actions onto each and every person who voted for him is dishonest.

#95 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:46 PM | Reply

And again, it's not bigotry to judge people by the content of their character.

#93 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

If you are defining a person's character solely on who they voted for in a single election, yes, that's bigotry.

#96 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:47 PM | Reply

"Judging Trump on his merits alone is fine. Conferring his actions onto each and every person who voted for him is dishonest."

Nobody's doing that.
Nobody is saying all Trump voters are rapists and racists.
Just that Trump being a rapist and a racist wasn't a deal breaker for them.

#97 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 04:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"If you are defining a person's character solely on who they voted for in a single election, yes, that's bigotry.
#96 | POSTED BY JEFFJ"

No, JeffJ.
That is judging them by the content of their character.

#98 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 04:49 PM | Reply

Only a bigot thinks that 20% of the US population is comprised of scumbags based on the sole act of how they voted in a single election.

Ok. I'm a bigot then, because i think people who chose a racist game show host (who brags about grabbing womens' vaginas without their consent) for their president are scum. Whatever you say, Jeffy.

#99 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 04:51 PM | Reply

Conferring his actions onto each and every person who voted for him is dishonest.

Nobody is "conferring" his actions onto anyone. He is a proud sexual assailant and sociopath. Your wife selected him to lead the country. There can be more than one bad person in that situation, Jeff.

#100 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 04:53 PM | Reply

In a 2-party system there is nothing immoral or unethical about choosing who you believe to be the lesser of 2 evils.

#99

So, all of the good someone has done in their life is completely negated based upon how they voted in 1 election. That's what you are saying.

#101 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:54 PM | Reply

That is judging them by the content of their character.

#98 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

No, it isn't. How somebody votes has little if anything to do with their character.

#102 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 04:55 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

If you are defining a person's character solely on who they voted for in a single election, yes, that's bigotry.

#96 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Bigotry is not wrong when the opinion you oppose is morally repugnant.

Nothing wrong with bigotry against modern republicans. Their character, actions, and beliefs warrant intolerance from society.

#103 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 04:56 PM | Reply

How somebody votes has little if anything to do with their character.

#102 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Here, we disagree massively.

#104 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 04:56 PM | Reply

all of the good someone has done in their life is completely negated based upon how they voted in 1 election

Good things someone has done in their life can be undone by all sorts of things. Supporting the election of a proud sexual assailant to the highest position of leadership in the world is one of them.

#105 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 05:00 PM | Reply

Dr Jones,

Let me put it differently.

With Hillary we had a repugnant person. With Trump we had a repugnant person.

For Republicans (and some Obama Democrats) it came down to policy, the courts, etc as the deciding factor.

#106 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 05:00 PM | Reply

"In a 2-party system there is nothing immoral or unethical about choosing who you believe to be the lesser of 2 evils."

I don't think you realize it, but what you're doing here is finding ways to allow people's ethics to be situationally dependent. Also known as moral relativism.

Also, you voted third party, so it sounds like you found a (presumably ethical) path which isn't even on your little two party system ethics excuse paradigm.

#107 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 05:01 PM | Reply

"How somebody votes has little if anything to do with their character.
#102 | POSTED BY JEFFJ"

Front-runner for the dimnest, most self-serving thing you've ever said on the DR, JeffJ.

#108 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 05:04 PM | Reply

Here's the thing. Hillary happens to be a repugnant person. It's not like voters were choosing between Trump and Carter.

#109 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 05:05 PM | Reply

Bigotry is not wrong when the opinion you oppose is morally repugnant.
Nothing wrong with bigotry against modern republicans. Their character, actions, and beliefs warrant intolerance from society.

#103 | POSTED BY INDIANAJONES AT 2019-02-19 04:56 PM

Way to go Mr. ------...now do Jews!

#110 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 05:05 PM | Reply

With Hillary we had a repugnant person. With Trump we had a repugnant person.

And your apparent willingness to place their "repugnancy" on the same plane is comical.

#111 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 05:08 PM | Reply

"So, all of the good someone has done in their life is completely negated based upon how they voted in 1 election. That's what you are saying.
#101 | POSTED BY JEFFJ"

Wow dude.

You know what this sounds exactly like?

"While many have expressed outrage over the lenient sentencing of a former Stanford University swimmer convicted of sexual assault, his father wrote a letter saying his son is "paying a steep price for 20 minutes of action.""

#112 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 05:09 PM | Reply

I don't judge people based on their personal politics. My mother-in-law and her best friend are polar opposites politically, yet they remain friends.

Matlin and Carville never would have married if they judged each other based upon politics.

Good people see the world differently. Good people oftentimes agree on goals but disagree about how to get there.

#113 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 05:12 PM | Reply

"Good people see the world differently."

So do bad people.

You're saying nothing.

#114 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 05:14 PM | Reply

"Matlin and Carville never would have married if they judged each other based upon politics."

That this is so far off the mark, and that you think it's on point, is really your problem, not ours.

"Good people oftentimes agree on goals but disagree about how to get there."

Lee Atwater, famous for his "N-----, n-----" quote, describing the GOP goals, and one way the GOP tries to get there. Is that what a good person looks like to you, JeffJ?

#115 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 05:19 PM | Reply

"Good people see the world differently."
--JeffJ

"There were good people on both sides."
--Donald Trump

#116 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 05:21 PM | Reply

So horrible that she pushed a lot of decent people who were otherwise repulsed by Trump into voting for him.

It's something you really need to come to grips with.

#76 | Posted by JeffJ

I've said hillary was horrible from the beginning. You know that.

However trump has always been clearly 10x worse. People who can't see that either aren't very bright, or were voting without making sure they were informed about what they were voting for.

#117 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 05:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I don't judge people based on their personal politics.

#113 | Posted by JeffJ

Joining the KKK is personal politics. You wouldn't judge someone who joined the klan?

#118 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 05:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Bill Clinton is every bit the sexual predator that Trump is.

Somehow I don't think any of you think that each and every person who voted for him is scum.

It's called situational ethics.

That this is so far off the mark, and that you think it's on point, is really your problem, not ours.

It's actually on point. You just don't like it.

#119 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 05:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Speaks,

Joining the Klan is not even remotely synonymous with voting for Trump.

However trump has always been clearly 10x worse.

Than Hillary? I don't think you have followed the Clintons very closely if you are seeing a 10X difference between the 2 of them.

#120 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 05:39 PM | Reply

Bill Clinton is every bit the sexual predator that Trump is.

I have yet to hear Bill Clinton bragging about how he grabs pusspuss.

But. Typical of you to need to whataboutism and deflect. Couldn't use Obama. Let's go to Bill Clinton.

#121 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-02-19 05:39 PM | Reply

People who can't see that either aren't very bright,

Yep.

#122 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-02-19 05:40 PM | Reply

I have yet to hear Bill Clinton bragging about how he grabs pusspuss.

Juanita Broadrick
Kathleen Willey
Paula Jones

He didn't brag about it but he sure as heck assaulted or harassed these women, if they are to be believed.

Throw in Lewinski, which while consensual was with a subordinate.

Typical of you to need to whataboutism and deflect. Couldn't use Obama. Let's go to Bill Clinton.

I brought up Clinton to see if Joe and the others apply the same standard to people who voted for Clinton with the standard they are applying to Trump voters.

#123 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 05:44 PM | Reply

The bernie bros were russians. Did you fall for that?
Don't blame bernie for the fact that hillary couldnt beat donald friggin trump, blame her decades of poor judgement, failure, and corruption.

#64 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2019-02-19 04:00 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Are you under the influence of the Russians?

Well, Bernie couldn't beat her and he will go down again this year.

Look at this thread and tell me how this will go for old Bern.

#124 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-02-19 05:46 PM | Reply

most trump voters are either racist, too stupid to know he is racist, or too callous not to care.

spin that with your false equivalencies, jeff.

#125 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2019-02-19 05:46 PM | Reply

That's quite the broad-brushing there, Alex.

I wasn't aware that you personally knew 63 million people who voted for Trump.

#126 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 05:51 PM | Reply

As for the bernie article:

he was spared by the media in 2016, because few took him seriously.

expect a lot of alt right media to paint him as, simultaneously, an atheist, a jew, and a communist.

bernie is going to get torched this time around.

#127 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2019-02-19 05:53 PM | Reply

...now do Jews!

#110 | POSTED BY CRYING' ANTI_SEMITE TED CRUZ!!

For example Jeff, Ted here is demonstrating how the modern American Republican is explicitly evil and should be stopped; not tolerated.

#128 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 05:53 PM | Reply

Than Hillary? I don't think you have followed the Clintons very closely if you are seeing a 10X difference between the 2 of them.

#120 | Posted by JeffJ

You mean have I followed the clintons past, or have I followed the exaggerated fictional version of the clintons past that fox news has pushed for 20 years?

Dont tell me you're on the bengazi train.

#129 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 05:53 PM | Reply

Are you under the influence of the Russians?

Well, Bernie couldn't beat her and he will go down again this year.

Look at this thread and tell me how this will go for old Bern.

#124 | Posted by BruceBanner

Bernie has a much worse chance this year because he's no longer the only one with the balls to fight the elites. In 2016, he was. Now you can choose another anti plutocrat candidate. And you can thank bernie for that. Too bad dems had to suffer terrible tragedy to learn their lesson.

#130 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 05:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Bernie will get torched because he's
A. Straight white male, and
B. Because the Socialism he's extolling is now commonplace in the party
C. He's not a Democrat
D. His comment about open borders

#131 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 05:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

That's quite the broad-brushing there, Alex.

I wasn't aware that you personally knew 63 million people who voted for Trump.

#126 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2019-02-19 05:51 PM | FLAG:

i said most.

i know its an anecdote, but ive personally talked to a lot of trump voters in michigan, and some of thm admitted he was a racist, they just loathed hillary more than they care about racism.

some of them were clearly racist af and had no idea of this.

the other republicans i know voted johnson or hillary.

#132 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2019-02-19 05:56 PM | Reply

Speaks,

Joining the Klan is not even remotely synonymous with voting for Trump.

#120 | Posted by JeffJ

You said you dont judge people by personal politics. So that means you wouldn't judge someone for joining the klan.

And the MAGA hat is the modern day klan hood, without the brains to cover your racist face.

#133 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 05:57 PM | Reply

Speaks,

I'm not talking about Benghazi.

#134 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 05:57 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

The red hat is no klan hood no matter how much you need to believe otherwise.

You trivialize the atrocities of the klan when you say things like that.

#135 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 05:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Bug off, Bernie.

#136 | Posted by cbob at 2019-02-19 06:04 PM | Reply

-I have yet to hear Bill Clinton bragging about how he grabs pusspuss.

you don't know him. He doesn't know you.

and that's such a pathetic deflection.

#137 | Posted by eberly at 2019-02-19 06:08 PM | Reply

the red hat is an semi socially acceptable klan hood.

it is the symbol of a super racist candidate that became a super racist president.

#138 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2019-02-19 06:09 PM | Reply

"....they just loathed hillary more than they care about racism."

I really believe all the dems have to do is nominate someone with less baggage than hillary.

#139 | Posted by eberly at 2019-02-19 06:09 PM | Reply

The red hat is no klan hood no matter how much you need to believe otherwise.
#135 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

If people like you have it your way then it will become exactly like a klan hood.

"First they came for the socialists." We have to stop such hatred early on. We point out that maga die-hards are on track to become a klan or nazi-like movement and apathetic people say that criticism is too harsh to be warranted until its too late.

Would you let an infection spread across your entire body before you address it?

"You trivialize the atrocities of the klan when you say things like that."

Statements like that are said in an attempt to make mythology out of klan, as if they were too evil to be real. Again, very dangerous, Jeff. Open your eyes and truly think about whether race relations have gotten worse since the introduction of the maga hat.

#140 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 06:10 PM | Reply

The red hat is no klan hood no matter how much you need to believe otherwise.

You trivialize the atrocities of the klan when you say things like that.

#135 | Posted by JeffJ

The klan hood was the headgear of white supremacy.

Now white supremacists wear the maga hat.

Many of trump's cult would perform the same atrocities as the klan if left to their own devices. It's not like horrible violent racism was bred out of the human species. We've simply constrained it. Remove the constraints and hateful racist people will revert to doing what historical hateful racists did.

#141 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 06:12 PM | Reply

you don't know him. He doesn't know you.
and that's such a pathetic deflection.
#137 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Based on everything publicly known about Clinton. He's a model citizen compared to Trump.

Also, Jeff brought up Bill Clinton. So take it up with him.

Typical Eberly. Foot in mouth syndrome.

#142 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-02-19 06:14 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Speaks,

I'm not talking about Benghazi.

#134 | Posted by JeffJ

So what are you talking about? What NON CONSPIRACY THEORY items in hillary's past make her worse than trump - a man who brags about sexual assault, defrauded the government of hundreds of millions in dodged taxes, ran business after business into the ground, launched the racist birther movement, and lies more times per day than any president we've ever had?

#143 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 06:15 PM | Reply

The problem, Jeff, is none of the arguments you are making in this thread explain why Trump won the GOP primary. Why didn't Bush, Rubio, Kasich, someone saner and less obnoxious get the nomination? The fact that they didn't says a lot about the majority of GOP voters.

#144 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 06:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

-- Why didn't Bush, Rubio, Kasich, someone saner and less obnoxious get the nomination? The fact that they didn't says a lot about the majority of GOP voters.

Yeah it says they were as sick of the good-old-boy RNC establishment as Sanders voters were of the corrupt, primary-rigging DNC establishment.

#145 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-02-19 06:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

-He's a model citizen compared to Trump.

Fine. That's not what I addressed. Stop embarrassing yourself

And I'm into feet.....

#146 | Posted by eberly at 2019-02-19 06:37 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Why didn't Bush, Rubio, Kasich, someone saner and less obnoxious get the nomination?

IF they won ... it wouldn't have mattered ..

The GOP would be Nazi's; This is based on wins by Bush, Bush, Reagan ....

Seriously doesn't matter who the GOP wins with, according to the bigots we are all Nazi's and should be condemned to death.

#147 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 06:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

hillary's past make her worse than trump -

Yes it does, from

The hell hole in Honduras (migrant caravans), to Syria, Lybia. ...

The number of refugees from her debacles is incredible, war crime worthy ...

She is an order of magnitude worse.

#148 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 06:39 PM | Reply

"Yeah it says they were as sick of the good-old-boy RNC establishment as Sanders voters were of the corrupt, primary-rigging DNC establishment."

So they ended up voting for a -------------, con artist who Russian trolls and bots supported instead? Good move. (People tend to forget that the Kremlin backed Trump in the primaries.)

#149 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 06:41 PM | Reply

Many of trump's cult would perform the same atrocities as the klan if left to their own devices.

This is horrible logic ... incredibly a 5 yo mentality...

#150 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 06:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#149 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

Beats voting for a accessory to rape, murder and breaking up of families of millions.

#151 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 06:42 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

"Many of trump's cult would perform the same atrocities as the klan if left to their own devices."

Many is an overstatement. Some.

#152 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 06:44 PM | Reply

Beats voting for a accessory to rape, murder and breaking up of families of millions.

#151 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS AT 2019-02-19 06:42 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

I want to see these families of millions. Can you imagine the holiday parties? Yeah, we're gonna need 162 semis of potato salad...

#153 | Posted by cbob at 2019-02-19 06:46 PM | Reply

"Beats voting for a accessory to rape, murder and breaking up of families of millions."

There have been allegations against Trump as you know. Trump is breaking up families at the border. If he could do it to millions of folks, I'm pretty sure he would.

#154 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 06:46 PM | Reply

*There have been rape allegations against Trump as you know.

#155 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 06:47 PM | Reply

"Beats voting for a accessory to rape, murder and breaking up of families of millions."

Rubio, Kasich and Bush et all did all those things? Wow. Who knew?

#156 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 06:49 PM | Reply

"Seriously doesn't matter who the GOP wins with, according to the bigots we are all Nazi's and should be condemned to death."

Fake news. You better watch out as your victim mentality is getting the best of you.

#157 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 06:51 PM | Reply

I'm not saying everyone that supports trump is a nazi, but I am saying the most nazi-like comment in the thread so far was #110 posted by Ted Cruz. And he sure isn't on our side.

#158 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 06:55 PM | Reply

Rubio, Kasich and Bush et all did all those things? Wow. Who knew?

#156 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

Hillary did ... how do you not know this?

Fake news. You better watch out as your victim mentality is getting the best of you.
#157 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

I like how you took out the evidence ... I don't care what people think .. the truth is out there regardless of your protestations.

#159 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 06:59 PM | Reply

*There have been rape allegations against Trump as you know.
#155 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

He's not an accessory to rape of millions of women ...

which is worse in your opinion, someone that possibly commits rape once, or enables rapists world wide?

#160 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 07:00 PM | Reply

The hell hole in Honduras (migrant caravans), to Syria, Lybia. ...

The number of refugees from her debacles is incredible, war crime worthy ...

She is an order of magnitude worse.

#148 | Posted by AndreaMackris

Syria and libya are the result of bush and cheney. They blew up the entire region and your party whines that dems weren't magically able to fix the unfixable.

#161 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 07:11 PM | Reply

The GOP would be Nazi's; This is based on wins by Bush, Bush, Reagan ....

Seriously doesn't matter who the GOP wins with, according to the bigots we are all Nazi's and should be condemned to death.

#147 | Posted by AndreaMackris

You don't get to complain about being associated with nazis when nazis are literally marching in the street wearing MAGA hats, being defended by your cult leader.

#162 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 07:12 PM | Reply

You people are way too bogged down in personality disputes.

On topic, Bernie has had some great ideas, but he will not get my support in the primaries. He and his supporters were extremely divisive in 2016, which played a significant role in Donald Trump's victory over Hillary Clinton. I see exactly the same kind of rhetoric and resulting risk already for the next election.

#163 | Posted by cbob at 2019-02-19 07:17 PM | Reply

--when nazis are literally marching in the street wearing MAGA hats,

You don't even know the definition of "literally."

#PoorlyEducatedLeftists

#164 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-02-19 07:22 PM | Reply

"I really believe all the dems have to do is nominate someone with less baggage than hillary.
#139 | POSTED BY EBERLY"

God, I hope you are right. Watching Nulli, Sniper, and the other Trumpettes around here gloat about him for another 4 years will be intolerable.

#165 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2019-02-19 07:31 PM | Reply

Uh oh, it looks like Vizzindy is still smarting from the thrashing he took on the Munich thread.

Here's a hint, genius: Your post in #103 was probably the most bigoted post the Retort has ever seen...bar none.

Sorry that I had to rub it in your racist, intolerant face.

Are you going to beg RCade to shut down this thead as well?

#166 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 07:33 PM | Reply

--when nazis are literally marching in the street wearing MAGA hats,

You don't even know the definition of "literally."

#PoorlyEducatedLeftists

#164 | Posted by nullifidian

How do you define literally?

www.gq.com

I define it the same was as the rest of humanity, as in - WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED.

Nulli - from pot smoking hippie to fascist cult member in a few short years. You prove that anything is possible.

#167 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 07:37 PM | Reply

which is worse in your opinion, someone that possibly commits rape once, or enables rapists world wide?

#160 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

Surely we all agree that serial rapist and global rape enabler donald trump is worse than someone that possibly commits rape once.

#168 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 07:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

On topic, Bernie has had some great ideas, but he will not get my support in the primaries. He and his supporters were extremely divisive in 2016, which played a significant role in Donald Trump's victory over Hillary Clinton. I see exactly the same kind of rhetoric and resulting risk already for the next election.

#163 | Posted by cbob

Bernie went incredibly easy on clinton, even saying in the debate that people needed to stop stressing over her emails. Not sure what election you were watching. I guess he should have just rolled over and let her win and never pointed out any of her glaring faults.

#169 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 07:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Bigotry is not wrong when the opinion you oppose is morally repugnant.
Nothing wrong with bigotry against modern republicans. Their character, actions, and beliefs warrant intolerance from society."

Bigotry is the wrong word. Steve Schmidt used repudiation, which I think is better:

29 years and nine months ago I registered to vote and became a member of The Republican Party which was founded in 1854 to oppose slavery and stand for the dignity of human life. Today I renounce my membership in the Republican Party. It is fully the party of Trump.

It is corrupt, indecent and immoral. With the exception of a few Governors like Baker, Hogan and Kasich it is filled with feckless cowards who disgrace and dishonor the legacies of the party's greatest leaders. This child separation policy is connected to the worst abuses of

Humanity in our history. It is connected by the same evil that separated families during slavery and dislocated tribes and broke up Native American families. It is immoral and must be repudiated. Our country is in trouble. Our politics are badly broken. The first step to a

Season of renewal in our land is the absolute and utter repudiation of Trump and his vile enablers in the 2018 election by electing Democratic majorities. I do not say this as an advocate of a progressive agenda. I say it as someone who retains belief in DEMOCRACY and decency.

You can read the rest here:

twitter.com

#170 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 07:43 PM | Reply

So, something more like this:

"Repudiation is not wrong when the opinion you oppose is morally repugnant.

Nothing wrong with repudiation against modern republicans. Their character, actions, and beliefs warrant intolerance from society."

#171 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 07:46 PM | Reply

Bigotry is the wrong word. Steve Schmidt used repudiation, which I think is better:

I agree that it is more fitting for that type of sentiment, but Vizzindy shows his true colors when he says that there is "nothing wrong with bigotry", which is why I threw out Snoofy's tried and true "do....next" snark.

Of course, it went right over his encephalitic little head, but I expected nothing less.

#172 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 07:47 PM | Reply

Well, I would also say, it is not wrong to not tolerate the intolerant.

#173 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 07:49 PM | Reply

#171

Where I disagree is that differing political views between Democrats and Republicans never "warrant intolerance in society", which is just a further window into the raging imbecile who stands on the street corner yelling at passing cars with Trump stickers on them.

#174 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 07:49 PM | Reply

it is not wrong to not tolerate the intolerant.

Name a poster on the DR Right that is less tolerant than Indy.

#175 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 07:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Where I disagree is that differing political views between Democrats and Republicans never "warrant intolerance in society", which is just a further window into the raging imbecile who stands on the street corner yelling at passing cars with Trump stickers on them."

If the differing political views involve tolerance vs intolerance for something like white supremacy or Antisemitism, then, yeah, intolerance by society is warranted.

#176 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 07:58 PM | Reply

--Well, I would also say, it is not wrong to not tolerate the intolerant.

Another Marxist.

"Back in 1965, the Frankfurt School Marxist Herbert Marcuse wrote an essay called "Repressive Tolerance." It is a totalitarian classic. Marcuse distinguished between two kinds of tolerance. First, there is what he called "bad" or "false" tolerance. This is the sort of tolerance that most of us would call "true" tolerance, the sort of thing your parents taught you and that undergirds liberal democracy. Second, there is what Marcuse calls "liberating tolerance," which he defined as "intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left."

So here we are. The old idea of tolerance was summed up in such chestnuts as, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." The new dispensation is: "I disapprove of what you say, therefore you may not say it."

imprimis.hillsdale.edu

#177 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-02-19 07:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"Repressive Tolerance."

Is that the one where we have to tolerate everyone, including Nazis, or we're no better than Nazis?

#178 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 08:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"If the differing political views involve tolerance vs intolerance for something like white supremacy or Antisemitism, then, yeah, intolerance by society is warranted."

Legitimate white supremacy and antisemitism, yes.

But we see so many examples of reckless accusations of such when folks are losing an argument so they can hide behind the baseless accusation. I'm talking about folks who lack the maturity to debate without the need to do that.

They can only be intolerant to any differing view. Any one. Not just extreme positions based in racism white supremacy.

It's hilarious they think it goes unnoticed

#179 | Posted by eberly at 2019-02-19 08:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#176

Of course stampeding to the extremes will cross the line to intolerant behavior, but just claiming that someone who supports tax cuts or hikes that you personally disagree with "warrant[s] intolerance in society" is just insane.

"What, don't you understand hyperbole" excuse incoming in 3...2...1

#180 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 08:10 PM | Reply

"Name a poster on the DR Right that is less tolerant than Indy."

I don't know who earns the gold medal but danni and speakstupid belong on the platform with him.

#181 | Posted by eberly at 2019-02-19 08:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"differing political views between Democrats and Republicans never "warrant intolerance in society""

If Republicans get their way, abortion will warrant intolerance in society.

#182 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 08:14 PM | Reply

#177

Now you have done it...the sheer mention of Marcuse is like a dog whistle for Fortune Cookie Lenin.

#183 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 08:15 PM | Reply

I don't know who earns the gold medal but danni and speakstupid belong on the platform with him.

#181 | Posted by eberly

If you're giving out medals for intolerance of bigotry or idiocy I'll gladly join the competition.

The problem with america today is we are TOO tolerant of morons and bigots. If society is a bus, do the mentally challenged deserve a chance behind the wheel?

#184 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 08:16 PM | Reply

If society is a bus, do the mentally challenged deserve a chance behind the wheel?

#184 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2019-02-19 08:16 PM

Maybe not, but they certainly deserve a seat on the bus.

I'm thinking Eberly is right regarding you...

#185 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 08:25 PM | Reply

Professor Donald Harris, Kamala Harris' Jamaican father, has vigorously dissociated himself from statements made on the New York Breakfast Club radio show earlier this week attributing her support for smoking marijuana to her Jamaican heritage. Professor Harris has issued a statement to jamaicaglobalonline.com in which he declares:

"My dear departed grandmothers(whose extraordinary legacy I described in a recent essay on this website), as well as my deceased parents , must be turning in their grave right now to see their family's name, reputation and proud Jamaican identity being connected, in any way, jokingly or not with the fraudulent stereotype of a pot-smoking joy seeker and in the pursuit of identity politics. Speaking for myself and my immediate Jamaican family, we wish to categorically dissociate ourselves from this travesty."

#186 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-02-19 09:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"If you're giving out medals for intolerance of bigotry or idiocy I'll gladly join the competition."

I tolerate you. Look at yourself. I mean .....look at yourself.

We can all look down on redneck racists equally.

But I live in the real world. I'm not insulated from folks I disagree with. Live, work, play, etc....with all sorts of folks.

My kids, their friends, parents....

What kind of life do you lead that makes you feel you can be outwardly intolerant of anyone of a different political stripe?

#187 | Posted by eberly at 2019-02-19 09:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I'm thinking Eberly is right regarding you...

#185 | Posted by Rightocenter

Then I challenge you to find me ever displaying intolerance of anyone who wasn't already spouting hatred, destructive ignorance, or bigotry.

#188 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 09:13 PM | Reply

What kind of life do you lead that makes you feel you can be outwardly intolerant of anyone of a different political stripe?

#187 | Posted by eberly

You're arguing against a cartoon fantasy in your mind. You'll never find me saying anything mean to a republican like john kacich. I'll say some of his policies are proven failures, but I wont call him a bigot or monster. I save those words for where they are deserved - trump and his cult.

#189 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 09:15 PM | Reply

Seriously doesn't matter who the GOP wins with, according to the bigots we are all Nazi's and should be condemned to death.

#147 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

Can you even imagine what it might have been like had it been Ted Cruz winning the election?

#190 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 09:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Then I challenge you to find me ever displaying intolerance of anyone who wasn't already spouting hatred, destructive ignorance, or bigotry.

#188 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2019-02-19 09:13 PM

Sure:

If society is a bus, do the mentally challenged deserve a chance behind the wheel?

#184 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2019-02-19 08:16 PM

#191 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 09:34 PM | Reply

#191 | Posted by Rightocenter

And?

Try again.

#192 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 09:37 PM | Reply

#192

Don't need to, you just proved my and Eberly's point.

#193 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 09:40 PM | Reply

Don't need to, you just proved my and Eberly's point.

#193 | Posted by Rightocenter

I thought you were trying to prove my alleged intolerance of innocent parties. I'm still waiting for some evidence.

#194 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 09:42 PM | Reply

doesn't matter who the GOP wins with, according to the bigots we are all Nazi's

Trump encourages and sides with actual Nazis so he invites the comparison more than anyone else.

#195 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 09:42 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

ShreikLoudly or Vizzindy?

pjmedia.com

#196 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-02-19 09:43 PM | Reply

It was indoors, so my guess is Shreek.

#197 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 09:46 PM | Reply

If society is a bus, do the mentally challenged deserve a chance behind the wheel?
#184 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2019-02-19 08:16 PM
#191 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER AT 2019-02-19 09:34 PM | REPLY

And?
#192 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2019-02-19 09:37 PM | REPLY

RoC is happy with Trump as our President.

#198 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-02-19 09:53 PM | Reply

It was indoors, so my guess is Shreek.

#197 | Posted by Rightocenter

How interesting that you're the one making personal attacks, only a few posts after accusing me of intolerance.

#199 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-19 09:54 PM | Reply

#59 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Curious. Does she regret that vote now?

#200 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2019-02-19 09:54 PM | Reply

Does she regret that vote now?

#200 | POSTED BY WHATSLEFT

Not really. She knew what he was and it was a vote for the lesser of two evils for her. Like I said, she changed her mind at the last minute - she was going to vote third party up until the very end.

#201 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 10:01 PM | Reply

How interesting that you're the one making personal attacks,

RoC loves creative nicknames for people who regularly hand him his hind side.

#202 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-02-19 10:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Stated another way, Trump's presidency has been about what she expected.

For me, his presidency hasn't been quite as bad as I feared, at least not yet. I am royally pissed that he's circumventing congress to fund his stupid wall though.

#203 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 10:02 PM | Reply

How interesting that you're the one making personal attacks, only a few posts after accusing me of intolerance.

Lighten up Francis, I'm not the one who is saying that the mentally challenged don't deserve a seat on "society's bus."

#204 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 10:14 PM | Reply

Does she regret that vote now?
#200 | POSTED BY WHATSLEFT

Whats to regret?

#205 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 10:45 PM | Reply

Can you even imagine what it might have been like had it been Ted Cruz winning the election?
#190 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Exactly, the intensity of the hatred hasn't died down since I was in College with Reagan....

They think its about Trump ... but really its about losing ....

#206 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 10:46 PM | Reply

"I'm not the one who is saying that the mentally challenged don't deserve a seat on "society's bus."
#204 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER"

He said they shouldn't drive, not be kicked off the bus.
But of course you know that, and decided to lie.
Can you tell us why?

#207 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 10:53 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

I'm not the one who is saying that the mentally challenged don't deserve a seat on "society's bus."

#204 | POSTED BY CRYIN' TED CRUZ

Nah, you're just one of the mentally challenged trying to destroy "society's bus".

#208 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 11:04 PM | Reply

--Well, I would also say, it is not wrong to not tolerate the intolerant.
Another Marxist.
"Back in 1965, the Frankfurt School Marxist Herbert Marcuse wrote an essay called "Repressive Tolerance." It is a totalitarian classic. Marcuse distinguished between two kinds of tolerance. First, there is what he called "bad" or "false" tolerance. This is the sort of tolerance that most of us would call "true" tolerance, the sort of thing your parents taught you and that undergirds liberal democracy. Second, there is what Marcuse calls "liberating tolerance," which he defined as "intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left."
So here we are. The old idea of tolerance was summed up in such chestnuts as, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." The new dispensation is: "I disapprove of what you say, therefore you may not say it."
imprimis.hillsdale.edu
#177 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-02-19 07:59 PM |

That racist newspaper editor in AL has the right to say "Bring back the KKK" and "go lynch Democrats in DC". He doesn't have the right to go do it. Most of the WW II vets would support the idea of free speech in this country, but they would not tolerate the rise of another Hitler. The neo-Nazis were free to march through the streets of Charleston spewing their "blood and soil/Jews will not replace us" hate speech, but they aren't free to go out and kill people because of it.

#209 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 11:08 PM | Reply

The new dispensation is: "I disapprove of what you say, therefore you may not say it."

By all means if you are a Proud Boy, e.g., speak your truth, but don't be surprised and play the victim when others use their own freedom of speech to call you a bigot.

#210 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 11:13 PM | Reply

Hey, Vizzindy is back for more...

We are all waiting for you to tell us more about your theory that there is "nothing wrong with bigotry."

#211 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 11:17 PM | Reply

#207

That's funny coming from you.

#212 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 11:17 PM | Reply

#211 | POSTED BY CRYIN' TED CRUZ

If you learn someone is a pedophile, convicted of raping dozens of children, are you wrong to judge their "opinion" that pedophilia is okay?

If someone says white people are the dominant race and no one else deserves human rights, are you wrong to judge their "opinion" that race is indicative of superiority?

If someone says innocent Mexican children should be tortured in cages because they're dumb enough to believe the outright lies perpetuated by FOX News and donald trump, are you wrong to judge their "opinion" that defying the constitution and incarcerating asylum seekers is okay?

I think your oft-proven illiteracy has you confusing bigotry and prejudice.

#213 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 11:22 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

but they would not tolerate the rise of another Hitler.

Hyperbole Gal you are better than that....

That being said, the only people being anti-semitic are Democrats.

#214 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-19 11:23 PM | Reply

😭 That's funny coming from you.

#212 | POSTED BY CRYIN' TED CRUZ

So much salt from you ever since the midterms. What changed?

#215 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 11:24 PM | Reply

I think your oft-proven illiteracy has you confusing bigotry and prejudice.

#213 | POSTED BY INDIANAJONES AT 2019-02-19 11:22 PM

Let me remind you of YOUR WORDS:

"Nothing wrong with bigotry".

Looks like you are the one who is confused. Gal even tried to throw you a lifeline but you are too imbecilic to even grab that.

#216 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 11:30 PM | Reply

"but they would not tolerate the rise of another Hitler.
Hyperbole Gal you are better than that...."

Hyperbole? What exactly do you think Neo-Nazi would support more than the coming of a 2nd Hitler?

"That being said, the only people being anti-semitic are Democrats."

Oh, that's right, those Neo-Nazis marching in C-ville, some of whom were good people, were all Democrats.

"That being said, the only people being anti-semitic are Democrats."

Lies, Mackris, and I'm sorry to say you aren't better than that.

#217 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 11:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#217

Your statement about "the rise of another Hitler" was uncharacteristically hysterical for you Gal, which I think was Andrea's point.

#218 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 11:38 PM | Reply

Lies, Mackris, and I'm sorry to say you aren't better than that.

Most of the anti-Semitic comments here on the DR come from the Left, so I can't say I disagree with Andrea on that one TBH.

#219 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 11:40 PM | Reply

#216 | POSTED BY CRYIN' TED CRUZ

Gal spoke of disenfranchised republicans that reject modern republicanism. I have no bigotry against them. I commend them. I find those types of former republicans to be among the most respectable people in the country today.

Having to correct for your illiteracy is tiresome but comical.

#220 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 11:41 PM | Reply

In this context, no, it wasn't. Sorry:

Part of nulli's comment:

So here we are. The old idea of tolerance was summed up in such chestnuts as, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." The new dispensation is: "I disapprove of what you say, therefore you may not say it."

Part of my comment in response to it:

"Most of the WW II vets would support the idea of free speech in this country, but they would not tolerate the rise of another Hitler."

#221 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 11:42 PM | Reply

"Most of the anti-Semitic comments here on the DR come from the Left, so I can't say I disagree with Andrea on that one TBH."

That's debatable, and it also isn't what Mackris said:

"That being said, the only people being anti-semitic are Democrats."

#222 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 11:44 PM | Reply

#220

Uh, no, that isn't what you said. Keep twisting, pretzel boy, it worked so "well" for you on the Munich thread that you pleaded with RCade to shut it down to avoid further embarrassment.

#221

You are talking past Nulli's comment. He was talking about censorship, you are talking about actions.

IMO, completely different things, but I'm just trying to put things into perspective.

#223 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 11:46 PM | Reply

RoC agrees with AndreaMattress?

How surprising.

And they're blaming the left for antisemitism while ignoring Trump's blatant racism, his encouragement of violence, and the white supremacists chanting "Jews will not replace us".

Typical.

#224 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-02-19 11:46 PM | Reply

#222

I wasn't defending Andrea's all encompassing comment about "the only people", which clearly isn't true, I was just pointing out that in my perception most of said comments are coming from the DR Left.

#225 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 11:48 PM | Reply

Lies, Mackris, and I'm sorry to say you aren't better than that.

Andrea is a habitual liar.

Not sure why you'd expect more.

#226 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-02-19 11:49 PM | Reply

Hey you know what?

I'm going to say I was wrong. Its wrong to be a bigot.

And I'm happy to explain why I was wrong. I was wrong for using solely the google definition of bigotry;

"intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself."

Seems reasonable, if the person's belief is abhorrent and inhumane.

But I've looked into more reputable dictionaries and I see other definitions akin to Merriam Webster's:

"a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance"

Regardless, I stand by the notion that it is perfectly okay to judge someone based on their chosen affiliations, such as republicanism. I don't, however, believe it is okay to reject empirical refuting evidence of your opinion in order to maintain it; which I now understand is an aspect of bigotry.

In short, cryin' Ted is still a morally bankrupt GOP hack and its okay to judge him accordingly.

#227 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 11:52 PM | Reply

"You are talking past Nulli's comment. He was talking about censorship, you are talking about actions.
IMO, completely different things, but I'm just trying to put things into perspective."

Yeah, I'm so glad Nulli is defending the Indy's right to call Trump voters bigots! LOL

#228 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-19 11:54 PM | Reply

LOL

"I now know I was wrong...but I am still right."

Baby steps are still progress towards being less of a POS, so at least you still have that going for you...which is nice.

#229 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 11:56 PM | Reply

Yeah, I'm so glad Nulli is defending the Indy's right to call Trump voters bigots! LOL

I defend Vizzindy's right to do that as well...where he crosses the line is by defending his own bigotry as somehow okay because he disagrees with someone.

#230 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-19 11:58 PM | Reply

RoC ... blaming the left for antisemitism ...

#224 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK

...now do Jews!

#110 | POSTED BY RIGHTOHITLER

Weren't you posting about irony earlier, Ted?

#231 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 11:58 PM | Reply

Baby steps are still progress towards being less of a POS, so at least you still have that going for you...which is nice.

#229 | POSTED BY CRYIN' TED CRUUUUZ!

Ted's stumped! He's never admitted he's wrong so he doesn't know how to respond when someone else does.

And he's still a republican piece of ---- that thinks Washington was a nationalist!

#232 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-20 12:00 AM | Reply

Kamala's first 24 hours: $1.5 million
Klobuchar's first 48 hours $1 million
Warren's first 24 hours: $300K

Bernie's first 12 hours: $3.3 million

#233 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-20 01:16 AM | Reply

I still think Bernie is the real frontrunner, but apparently Dems are excited:

Karen Tumulty @ktumulty

Heading home from NH. Went to events for 5 Dem candidates in three days. What's most striking were the big crowd sizes. For all of them. Normally, at this early stage, NH folks ask why the media and pols want to get things going so early. This time, they seem ready to rumble.

Raymond Buckley, the NH Dem chair, said Tuesday morning that the enthusiasm he's seen and the size of the crowds showing up to hear the candidates these past few days made it seem as if the primary was only days away, rather than almost a year away.

#234 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-20 01:33 AM | Reply

"#207
That's funny coming from you."

Deflection noted.

#235 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-20 02:49 AM | Reply

#233 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS AT 2019-02-20 01:16 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

There's great money in "socialism".

#236 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-02-20 07:21 AM | Reply

Oh please elect Bernie as your candidate. I would love to see him in a debate with Trump. I don't like the Damn New York Yankee nor do I like that New England Yankee. One has never earned or was given or earned a check that did not come from the government. Never cut a pay check, hired anyone beyond a campaign, even Honeymooned in the Soviet Union. (How romantic). The other had thousands of employees, ran numerous businesses, some into the ground, but most were profitable. One thing is certain, they are both very wealthy. Sanders has four homes. "If anyone gets rich while in office,they are crooks". Truman.

#237 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-02-20 08:32 AM | Reply

I love it!

You complain about Russian collusion and then Bernie is running.

#238 | Posted by JordyPete at 2019-02-20 09:28 AM | Reply

Bernie Sanders/Tulsi Gabbard seems like a good team. Both support Medicare for all, $15.00 minimum wage and the transition into a green economy.

#239 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2019-02-20 10:20 AM | Reply

The Washington [Com]Post has it coming.

#240 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-02-20 10:48 AM | Reply

This seals it.

The Dems will lose in 2020, I guarantee it.

#241 | Posted by jpw at 2019-02-20 10:53 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Money for nothing, that's the way to do it, get your chicks for free"

#242 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-02-20 11:15 AM | Reply

You complain about Russian collusion and then Bernie is running.

#238 | POSTED BY JORDYPETE

Wow, the lobster finally says something not blatantly false. The question is, what was his point? Electing a true patriot is a natural response to four years of a gopnik's obese puppet.

#243 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-20 12:43 PM | Reply

For me, his presidency hasn't been quite as bad as I feared, at least not yet. I am royally pissed that he's circumventing congress to fund his stupid wall though.

#203 | Posted by JeffJ

If firing law enforcement leadership to stop investigations isn't as bad as you feared, what did you fear? This is exactly what most intelligent adults knew he would do.

#244 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-20 01:00 PM | Reply

One thing is certain, they are both very wealthy. Sanders has four homes. "If anyone gets rich while in office,they are crooks". Truman.

#237 | Posted by docnjo

Hahah i knew the repub machine ran on false equivilancies, but this is the best one yet.

BERNIE AND TRUMP ARE BOTH VERY WEALTHY! WHATS THE DIFFERENCE?

PS - STOP CALLING TRUMP SUPPORTERS STUPID!

#245 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-20 01:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Exactly, the intensity of the hatred hasn't died down since I was in College with Reagan....

They think its about Trump ... but really its about losing ....

#206 | Posted by AndreaMackris

Yeah that must be it. They dont care that the country has been taken over by elites and bankers and criminal traitors, they're just sore losers. And YOU dont care that the country has been taken over by elites and bankers and criminal traitors because you foolishly think those people will help you.

#246 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-20 01:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Sanders has four homes.
#237 | Posted by docnjo

Sanders has 2 homes. One in DC and one in Vermont. And he shares a third home with his four adult children and their families. For vacation.

#247 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-20 01:25 PM | Reply

May God bless Bernie Sanders and grant him the wisdom to drop out of the race before it ever really begins. The time has passed.

#248 | Posted by moder8 at 2019-02-20 02:38 PM | Reply

#248 | POSTED BY MODER8

Nah the DNC isn't going to cheat this time, so he should stay in the race. It won't be an undemocratic waste of time this next election.

#249 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-20 02:44 PM | Reply

#248 | POSTED BY MODER8
Nah the DNC isn't going to cheat this time, so he should stay in the race. It won't be an undemocratic waste of time this next election.
#249 | POSTED BY INDIANAJONES AT 2019-02-20 02:44 PM

I know. I wish he wasn't going to run as Democrat. I disagree with Cenk that it's a ghost ship worth taking. It's a plague barge.

#250 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2019-02-20 11:01 PM | Reply

#250 | POSTED BY REDLIGHTROBOT

Are you saying you think 2020 is ripe for an independent run?

#251 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-20 11:11 PM | Reply

#250 | POSTED BY REDLIGHTROBOT
Are you saying you think 2020 is ripe for an independent run?
#251 | POSTED BY INDIANAJONES AT 2019-02-20 11:11 PM

My thoughts are irrelevant. Bernie is running as Democrat and so I will apparently be sustaining that rotting corpse a little while longer on his behalf only. Tulsi seems like an incredible find imo and makes the team that would dismantle the corporate stranglehold, so we'll see.

You are right, of course. The party will subvert his campaign again, regardless.

At least I don't have to put up with another well-meaning Ralph Nader lifting chardonnay to "Take heart, friends. Take heart!" as SCOTUS stopped the recount and installed BushCo.

#252 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2019-02-20 11:45 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort