Being an attorney myself, Kamala is an absolute fucking moron. I have seen some dumb people and I am no rocket scientist.
But… holy shit do we have a winner with her. And it just had to be the first female VP too.
Sigh.
2 Likes
It will always astound me that Kamala was picked over Tulsi Gabbard.
2 Likes
At first glance it does, but someone dumber than a box of rocks is easy to control.
They just also got a box of a rocks that is also a raging self-important cunt.
5 Likes
Daily Beast requires a large grain of salt.
Im confused also. You think the Russians want to take nuclear fuel from the melt down site?
Why? Tulsi Gabbard is a smart, strong and beautiful woman who demonstrates leadership, competence and love for America.
That would have been a major slap in the face to Democrat voters.
3 Likes
I’ve changed my mind about the Ukraine situation. Put a NATO peace keeping force into Ukraine and drive the Russians out. Cut all trade with Russia, cut all trade with China. Bring back hair metal and Burt Reynolds, and make America great again.
Seriously though, why is it that we can either have:
a) A tangled mess of oligarchs and bureaucrats stealing all our shit and ignoring what’s best for the people.
b) The “people’s champion” that gets elected to cut through the knot of deceit and corruption, but ultimately turns into a brutal dictator.
How about
c) Healthy democracy where the law applies the same to everyone.
It’s so crazy it just might work.
2 Likes
She should have been publicly and embarrassingly fired after completely shitting her pants in the press conference with the PM of Poland, then followed it up with “A friend in need…”.
1 Like
Are you in Russia?
I’m on planet earth. Which country doesn’t have either option a) or b) to a higher or lesser degree?
1 Like
That will never work.
Stop making so much sense that doesn’t just benefit the select few.
You racis’ bigot.
1 Like
This was the biggest issue for Democrats. There was fear that having a non-troll-looking female would confuse their voters as to the ticket for which they were supposed to vote.
1 Like
I wonder why she constantly repeats Kremlin’s talking points word-for-word. Now, this isn’t something that one comes up by himself/herself, some homegrown isolationist viewpoints.
These are Russian Foreign Ministry official talking points. Word-for-word. And every other public utterance about the war in Ukraine is the same.
https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1491713163133276164
Aren’t the first two true?
Isn’t the third one an opinion held outside of Russia?
I don’t buy into the notion of pure Russian malevolence any more than I buy into the idea of Ukrainian purity.
I certainly don’t buy into the idea that the only reasonably sane candidate in the last Democratic primary is a Russian asset.
No, the first one is false, and can be only heard by the Kremlin spokespeople. The exact same wording.
The second one is false as well. Again, the same wording.
By Russian apologists. Biden offered this option to Putin during their meeting, which the latter ignored. Again, it’s about Putin refusing to accept the existence of Ukrainians as a concept.
The first one is irrelevant.
Where is the evidence that these biolabs were making bio weapons?
I’ll take your word for the first one. It was probably almost as clean as the cleanest election of all time, recently held here in the USA to elect Joe Biden.
All that seems up for debate are the semantics of what these labs are doing and how the US relationship with them may have changed after the invasion. There are labs that date back to the cold war, supposedly being decommissioned, which apparently takes decades to do and constant funding from the USA. While not busy decommissioning themselves, they are doing research of some kind on pathogens. It is supposedly peaceful, but it was also funded by the United States Military, which understandably tends to deal with weaponry.
Forgive me, but I’m not counting on transparency and clarity from the same administration that’s been the enemy of transparency and clarity since assuming power.
And no one else, you say?
Actually it was. The incumbent Poroshenko who ran on a center-right nationalist platform was defeated by a 2:1 margin in the second round by Zelensky. The pro-Russian candidate got 4,15% (Nader numbers) and “ultranationalists” who are allegedly running the country got 1,62%.
What bothers me is that exact Kremlin wording by Tulsi - how Ukraine is not actually a democracy, how Zelensky banned 3 TV stations to “hold onto power”, how he “imprisoned the head of an opposition party”. She didn’t come up with these talking points by herself.
Who else? Mearsheimer who is quoted by Kremlin? And that’s a moot point - the deal was offered to Putin a year ago and he refused it. Hence, it is empirically proven it was never about NATO.
Like I said, I know jack squat about Ukrainian politics, nor do I consider anyone to be infallible, so I’ll take your word on that.
What I do know quite a decent bit about is American internal politics and media tactics, and we’re essentially seeing a repeat of COVID propaganda, but substitute “Ukraine” for “The Science”.
Everything about the Ukraine is just the best, we stand with Ukraine, etc. etc. Not unlike what we were told to think about lockdowns, business closures and any other measure no matter how short-sighted with COVID.
Buying into the narrative makes you good. You should signal this and judge people who disagree. Get them fired, etc. Questioning anything about the narrative makes you an evil monster.
It’s simplistic, ridiculous and not a good way of looking at the world.
I’m not holding her up as the ultimate stateswoman just because I want to take her on an odyssey of ecstasy.
2 Likes
And the same people love it. I’m sure they’re right this time.
2 Likes