djt absolutely is a fatal flaw. You picked the wrong champion to fight globalism. While Dotard correctly identified the problem, he doesn't know what he's doing. You should have picked Bernie Sanders. Dotard is helping the globalists, in that he's screwing things up so badly that going back to business as usual after he's gone will most likely be what happens. The farmers will still be screwed, as Dotard's stupidity has forever destroyed their markets.
Bernie represents capitalism with Asian values. His is the "new China/USA" of "the 3 represents". A Gov't controlled economy (once the very definition of fascism).
...that's why he calls himself a Democratic Socialist.
from Wiki:
Democratic socialism is a term used to refer to the socialist political philosophy that advocates political democracy alongside a socially owned economy,[1] with an emphasis on workers' self-management and democratic control of economic institutions within a market or some form of a decentralised planned socialist economy.[2] Democratic socialists argue that capitalism is inherently incompatible with the values of freedom, equality and solidarity and that these ideals can be achieved only through the realisation of a socialist society. Democratic socialism can support either revolutionary or reformist politics as a means to establish socialism.[3]
ps - That's the current "more slippery" definition of Democratic Socialism. As time goes by, it'll get even more slippery as the socialists "edit" their history in real time.
Red Herring/Minus: ..that's why he calls himself a Democratic Socialist.
It isn't. Your next comment proves you wrong. Worker owned co-ops versus government owned. QUOTE: "with an emphasis on workers' self-management". Government non-involvement (because the workers are in charge) isn't "government control".
Russia just proves you and Bernie wrong... how? Of course oligarchs don't care about "your" laws. Despite the fact that ALL citizens are subjected to the laws of the nation they are citizens of. Why our justice system needs reforming. Being rich shouldn't grant you access to a separate legal system - one that goes much easier on the lawbreaker. Sounds like you think that's the way it should be, however. Given the "YOUR laws" remark. Are you an oligarch?
HRC was determined to not have broken any laws. That is why there was no prosecution, only a bogus investigation intended to harm her politically. Dotard is following the same template with his bogus "oranges" investigation. His and his toady's intention being to dirty up his opponents politically - but there will be no charges because no member of the "deep state" did anything wrong ("deep state" being code for a government employee who did their job and investigated the obvious collusion between the Dotard campaign and Russia).
James Comey was in charge of the FBI, not the DOJ. And he (even though he is a republican) wasn't a trumper. Although he did bungle the investigation into the HRC email server situation, which helped Dotard a lot. In any case, the bogus investigations intended to harm HRC politically I was referring to were the ones conducted by the Senate republicans. BTW, Barack Obama realized early on that Dotard was colluding and an idiot. There is no way he'd want the asshole who promoted the racist birther conspiracy theory to become president.
There was nothing "bogus" in the Clinton investigation. And the AG was a political appointee of Barrack Obama's choosing, just as Hillary was his choice for State. And yes, that's why when the prosecutions for government misconduct are ultimately concluded... w/o a conviction of Hussein, there will NOT have been any justice.
Saddam Hussein was tried, found guilty, and executed. I have no idea what he has to do with this conversation. Unless you refer to the former president's middle name? In which case I say - w/o a conviction of John, there will NOT have been any justice. John being the most corrupt president in US history.
Also, given the fact that HRC's server was allowable under the law at the time, Comey's investigation was totally bogus.
Democracy cannot be imposed "from the top down." Rather, it comes "from the bottom up."
ReplyDeleteI, for one, am sick and tired of endless wars!
Amen. It's past time to retire the WoT.
ReplyDeleteTl;dr. Commies are upset that they lost the Cold War. Yawn.
ReplyDeletedjt absolutely is a fatal flaw. You picked the wrong champion to fight globalism. While Dotard correctly identified the problem, he doesn't know what he's doing. You should have picked Bernie Sanders. Dotard is helping the globalists, in that he's screwing things up so badly that going back to business as usual after he's gone will most likely be what happens. The farmers will still be screwed, as Dotard's stupidity has forever destroyed their markets.
ReplyDeleteBernie represents capitalism with Asian values. His is the "new China/USA" of "the 3 represents". A Gov't controlled economy (once the very definition of fascism).
ReplyDeleteBernie Sanders opposes a government controlled economy.
ReplyDelete...that's why he calls himself a Democratic Socialist.
ReplyDeletefrom Wiki:
Democratic socialism is a term used to refer to the socialist political philosophy that advocates political democracy alongside a socially owned economy,[1] with an emphasis on workers' self-management and democratic control of economic institutions within a market or some form of a decentralised planned socialist economy.[2] Democratic socialists argue that capitalism is inherently incompatible with the values of freedom, equality and solidarity and that these ideals can be achieved only through the realisation of a socialist society. Democratic socialism can support either revolutionary or reformist politics as a means to establish socialism.[3]
ps - That's the current "more slippery" definition of Democratic Socialism. As time goes by, it'll get even more slippery as the socialists "edit" their history in real time.
ReplyDeleteRed Herring/Minus: ..that's why he calls himself a Democratic Socialist.
ReplyDeleteIt isn't. Your next comment proves you wrong. Worker owned co-ops versus government owned. QUOTE: "with an emphasis on workers' self-management". Government non-involvement (because the workers are in charge) isn't "government control".
So what keeps the coops in the hands of the workers? Only one thing can do that. BIG Government. :)
ReplyDelete"Bernie" Government.
ReplyDeletewtf? What else beside the law should protect property rights? The private armies of oligarchs?
ReplyDeleteThat's how it works in Russia today.
ReplyDeleteYour love of oligarchy is so great you hope Dotard the Putin puppet will make strides toward making America more like Russia?
ReplyDeleteYou're the one that says the Government doesn't have to do it... Russia just proves you and Bernie wrong.
ReplyDeleteOligarch's don't care about your "laws".
ReplyDeleteRussia just proves you and Bernie wrong... how? Of course oligarchs don't care about "your" laws. Despite the fact that ALL citizens are subjected to the laws of the nation they are citizens of. Why our justice system needs reforming. Being rich shouldn't grant you access to a separate legal system - one that goes much easier on the lawbreaker. Sounds like you think that's the way it should be, however. Given the "YOUR laws" remark. Are you an oligarch?
ReplyDeleteAre you an oligarch, or just a useful idiot who loves them?
ReplyDeleteGiven the "YOUR laws" remark.
ReplyDeleteThat sounds pretty funny coming from the guy who thinks that Hillary Clinton did nothing wrong setting up a private server while in Government....
HRC was determined to not have broken any laws. That is why there was no prosecution, only a bogus investigation intended to harm her politically. Dotard is following the same template with his bogus "oranges" investigation. His and his toady's intention being to dirty up his opponents politically - but there will be no charges because no member of the "deep state" did anything wrong ("deep state" being code for a government employee who did their job and investigated the obvious collusion between the Dotard campaign and Russia).
ReplyDeleteWhy would Obama's DoJ want to harm Hillary? Was Barack a closet Trumper?
ReplyDeleteJames Comey was in charge of the FBI, not the DOJ. And he (even though he is a republican) wasn't a trumper. Although he did bungle the investigation into the HRC email server situation, which helped Dotard a lot. In any case, the bogus investigations intended to harm HRC politically I was referring to were the ones conducted by the Senate republicans. BTW, Barack Obama realized early on that Dotard was colluding and an idiot. There is no way he'd want the asshole who promoted the racist birther conspiracy theory to become president.
ReplyDeleteThere was nothing "bogus" in the Clinton investigation. And the AG was a political appointee of Barrack Obama's choosing, just as Hillary was his choice for State. And yes, that's why when the prosecutions for government misconduct are ultimately concluded... w/o a conviction of Hussein, there will NOT have been any justice.
ReplyDeleteSaddam Hussein was tried, found guilty, and executed. I have no idea what he has to do with this conversation. Unless you refer to the former president's middle name? In which case I say - w/o a conviction of John, there will NOT have been any justice. John being the most corrupt president in US history.
ReplyDeleteAlso, given the fact that HRC's server was allowable under the law at the time, Comey's investigation was totally bogus.