PDA

View Full Version : Clinton Veepstakes



Mjölnir
07-19-2016, 01:18 PM
So, who do you think she may pick?

efmbman
07-19-2016, 02:38 PM
From what I've seen the top choices are:
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (may not be wise to have 2 women on the ticket)
Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (his name is too long for some social media platforms like Twitter)
HUD Secretary Julian Castro (possibly gets the hispanic vote)

I would bet on Castro. Yay diversity!

Rusty Jones
07-19-2016, 02:40 PM
LOL, I don't care. I'm voting for Jill Stein.

Rainmaker
07-19-2016, 04:11 PM
Moochele obama. Locks down the Transgender, Women and Black votes.

Rusty Jones
07-19-2016, 04:15 PM
Moochele obama. Locks down the Transgender, Women and Black votes.

She's so good at what she does, Melania Trump tried to duplicate her efforts.

Rainmaker
07-19-2016, 04:27 PM
She's so good at what she does, Melania Trump tried to duplicate her efforts.

I think Melania looked much better repeating her plagiarized lines than the Trans-Wookie looked repeating hers!

Mjölnir
07-19-2016, 04:30 PM
She's so good at what she does, Melania Trump tried to duplicate her efforts.

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/50202350.jpg

Rusty Jones
07-19-2016, 04:39 PM
I think Melania looked much better repeating her plagiarized lines than the Trans-Wookie looked repeating hers!

What Trans-Wookie repeating plagiarized lines are you talking about? I guess comparing Melania to Chewbacca allows her to have something going for her, other than simply being used as a tool for Trump to get as close to fulfilling his incestuous fantasies without actually touching Ivanka.

Rainmaker
07-19-2016, 04:49 PM
What Trans-Wookie repeating plagiarized lines are you talking about? I guess comparing Melania to Chewbacca allows her to have something going for her, other than simply being used as a tool for Trump to get as close to fulfilling his incestuous fantasies without actually touching Ivanka.

Let me guess... you must think Chelly O's white speech writers didn't ever "borrow" lines from anyone else? Besides, no one really cares what the 1st lady thinks (other than the girls on the view) so Rainmaker won't burst your bubble. But, while we're on the subject of plagiarism...... "Doctor" MLK was a Fraud!


Boston U. Panel Finds Plagiarism by Dr. King


A committee of scholars appointed by Boston University concluded today that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. plagiarized passages in his dissertation for a doctoral degree at the university 36 years ago.

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/11/us/boston-u-panel-finds-plagiarism-by-dr-king.html

Rusty Jones
07-19-2016, 04:55 PM
Let me guess... you must think Chelly O's white speech writer's didn't ever "borrow" from anyone else? Other than the girls on the view, No one really cares what the 1st lady thinks.

You mad, bro?


So, Rainmaker won't burst your bubble. But, since we're on the subject of plagiarism...... "Doctor" MLK was a Fraud!


Boston U. Panel Finds Plagiarism by Dr. King


A committee of scholars appointed by Boston University concluded today that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. plagiarized passages in his dissertation for a doctoral degree at the university 36 years ago.

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/11/us/boston-u-panel-finds-plagiarism-by-dr-king.html

I don't particularly care much for MLK. The US was strong armed into ending Jim Crow by the Soviet Union, when the Soviet Union was exposing the US to the world for Jim Crow and lynchings. MLK is simply there so that they can say that he caused a change of heart, instead of having to admit that they got strong armed by the Soviets.

Mjölnir
07-19-2016, 05:00 PM
I don't particularly care much for MLK. The US was strong armed into ending Jim Crow by the Soviet Union, when the Soviet Union was exposing the US to the world for Jim Crow and lynchings. MLK is simply there so that they can say that he caused a change of heart, instead of having to admit that they got strong armed by the Soviets.

I have heard you mention this a couple of times. Do you have any further information on it, would like to research it a bit.

Rainmaker
07-19-2016, 05:33 PM
You mad, bro?

Mad? Nope. Not mad.



I don't particularly care much for MLK. .

Me neither. Mike King was a depraved sexual pervert, a fraud & had Communist Ties. He plagiarized his thesis as well as his famous dream speech. He was compromised by the FBI. & It is highly likely that he was given the choice to cooperate and be used as controlled opposition by the .gov as part of its propaganda war against the Soviet Union and try to bring Blacks into the American tent peacefully, Because, the only other alternative would've been a civil war and It wouldn't have looked very good to the rest of the world if the US would've had to resort to exterminating the Blacks in in order to put down a rebellion at the height of the cold war.

Rusty Jones
07-19-2016, 05:36 PM
I have heard you mention this a couple of times. Do you have any further information on it, would like to research it a bit.

Eisenhower was selling Civil Rights legislation as a national security issue. Furthermore, you can actually find old Soviet propaganda depicting KKK rallies and lynchings; that were meant to draw attention to the US's human rights violations. This is what Eisenhower and other American leaders feared.

There's actually famous fallacy named after how the Soviets would call out the US.

If, for example, you saw me smoking crack and fucking up my life and you decided to call me on it; but I come back with "But you shoot heroine!" That would be a fallacy. It doesn't address my own behavior. I am simply trying to discredit what you're saying by pointing out that you do something similar. Of course, even though you're shooting heroine and doing something wrong yourself... that doesn't mean change the fact that I'm smoking crack and doing something wrong. You'd be right, regardless of what I'm doing.

The name of this fallacy is the "And you are lynching negroes" fallacy. Whenever there was a meeting between world leaders, and American leaders called out the Soviets for their human rights violations; that's what Soviet leaders came back with.

Also, consider the fact that the Soviets were funding, arming, and training the ANC in South Africa to assist with the overthrow of the Apartheid government at the time... the Soviets were heavily involved in this type of stuff around the world.

Consider this... slavery ended 100 years before the Civil Rights Era. But, in honesty... is it really reasonable to think that Martin Luther King was the first person to have ever led effort for civil rights in those 100 years? Of course not - what about Booker T Washington and WEB DuBois; the latter of whom was still alive at the time?

If they couldn't change minds during their day, what was so special about Martin Luther King? And... let's think about this... is there REALLY a difference between Martin Luther King and Al Sharpton? I can say this... Al Sharpton never cheated on his wife, nor has anyone ever seen multiple bruised and beaten prostitutes leave his hotel rooms.

The fact is, no black man was going to change minds. Civil Rights legislation wasn't going to happen until they FELT like making it happen. Martin Luther King was simply the man that was there when they "felt like it."

I really don't intend for you to take what I said as fact if you don't agree with it; that's just the conclusion that I come to when I analyze the big picture.

Mjölnir
07-19-2016, 05:46 PM
Eisenhower was selling Civil Rights legislation as a national security issue. Furthermore, you can actually find old Soviet propaganda depicting KKK rallies and lynchings; that were meant to draw attention to the US's human rights violations. This is what Eisenhower and other American leaders feared.

There's actually famous fallacy named after how the Soviets would call out the US.

If, for example, you saw me smoking crack and fucking up my life and you decided to call me on it; but I come back with "But you shoot heroine!" That would be a fallacy. It doesn't address my own behavior. I am simply trying to discredit what you're saying by pointing out that you do something similar. Of course, even though you're shooting heroine and doing something wrong yourself... that doesn't mean change the fact that I'm smoking crack and doing something wrong. You'd be right, regardless of what I'm doing.

The name of this fallacy is the "And you are lynching negroes" fallacy. Whenever there was a meeting between world leaders, and American leaders called out the Soviets for their human rights violations; that's what Soviet leaders came back with.

Also, consider the fact that the Soviets were funding, arming, and training the ANC in South Africa to assist with the overthrow of the Apartheid government at the time... the Soviets were heavily involved in this type of stuff around the world.

Consider this... slavery ended 100 years before the Civil Rights Era. But, in honesty... is it really reasonable to think that Martin Luther King was the first person to have ever led effort for civil rights in those 100 years? Of course not - what about Booker T Washington and WEB DuBois; the latter of whom was still alive at the time?

If they couldn't change minds during their day, what was so special about Martin Luther King? And... let's think about this... is there REALLY a difference between Martin Luther King and Al Sharpton? I can say this... Al Sharpton never cheated on his wife, nor has anyone ever seen multiple bruised and beaten prostitutes leave his hotel rooms.

The fact is, no black man was going to change minds. Civil Rights legislation wasn't going to happen until they FELT like making it happen. Martin Luther King was simply the man that was there when they "felt like it."

Thanks ... very interesting and provides a place to start looking (I really had not put much thought into it before when you talked about it).


I really don't intend for you to take what I said as fact if you don't agree with it; that's just the conclusion that I come to when I analyze the big picture.

I am not taking it as fact or fiction, I want to look into it ... intellectual curiosity. You do tie into a point that I know was an issue for the US in the early 20th century with our patterns of segregation, Jim Crow etc.

Really, thanks.

Rainmaker
07-19-2016, 06:26 PM
Thanks ... very interesting and provides a place to start looking (I really had not put much thought into it before when you talked about it).

MLK was on the KGB payroll. Google Venona Project


I am not taking it as fact or fiction, I want to look into it ... intellectual curiosity. You do tie into a point that I know was an issue for the US in the early 20th century with our patterns of segregation, Jim Crow etc.

Really, thanks.

Here's the counterpoint to the public narrative that's been taken as the Gospel Truth.
It's a bit cheesy and monotonous. But, does a pretty good job of capturing most all of the alternative conspiracy theories about MLK in one 20 minute video.

The Beast As Saint - The Truth About Martin Luther King Jr
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnOMt1tQFVQ

garhkal
07-19-2016, 07:04 PM
https://cdn.meme.am/instances/50202350.jpg

LOL. Love the Milly reference.

Why doesn't she go for al sharptongue! That will make a pair of criminals on the ticket.

Rainmaker
07-20-2016, 02:01 AM
- what about Booker T Washington and WEB DuBois; the latter of whom was still alive at the time?

If they couldn't change minds during their day, what was so special about Martin Luther King?

Rainmaker's reading of it is that the difference is MLK had the backing of the Jewish elite, Who, back in BTW and WEB Dubois day (prior to WW 2) really hadn't wielded as much influence in American affairs.

Aristotle's concept of natural slavery was widely accepted and virtually all civilizations throughout human history were established on it. The notable exception being the Jewish Essenes sect who, according to Flavious Josephus, "did not keep slaves and detested slavery". - They were the only ones (until the Enlightenment) who ever really rejected it.