"All the times I've been around guys — and believe me when I'm around guys 85 percent of the time you're talking about pussy but I have never been in the room when someone has said 'grab them by the pussy,'” Stern says. "No one's ever advocated going that step where you get a little bit, 'Hey, I'm going to invade someone's space.'"
१७ ऑक्टोबर, २०१६
"I feel Donald Trump did the show in an effort to be entertaining and have fun with us, and I feel like it would be a betrayal..."
"... to any of our guests if I sat there and played them now where people are attacking him," said Howard Stern. Also:
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१०८ टिप्पण्या:
If I had to guess, I'd say stern is voting for trump.
Stern has known Trump for 30 years. And he doesn't need any money from the insider media thugs. So why should he lie about his friend, like the others enjoy doing for some money.
The New World Order Bush Family GOP guys have conspired for a big Benedict Arnold operation, for money of course.
IMHO we've sunk pretty low when the person with the most integrity is Howard Stern.
To take Leeds' airplane allegation absolutely at face value, Stern has never heard of a guy rounding second base with acquiescence if not prior consent and then being denied as he tried to slide into third base?
but I have never been in the room when someone has said 'grab them by the pussy
Says Howard Stern the shock jock, all the while thinking........."Damn!! Why didn't I think of that? It's catchy, and could easily fit on the front of a T-shirt!"
Interestingly, British Major Andre was caught in civilian clothes carrying with him the plans for West Point Fort that controlled the Hudson River, thus stopping the British fleet bringing their Army in behind the Continental Army's lines, along with hand written letters in Benedict Arnold's handwriting planning to have the fort's defenses weakened enough for it to be taken and the Americans killed. Sounds like Obama.
HE DID IT FOR THE MONEY.
Washington next offered to trade Major Andre for Arnold. But the British figured it would hurt their position with future Traitors if they sent him back to save their man's life. So they told Washington to hang Andre. And the kept Arnold.
He's got a point. I've heard a fair amount of "locker room" talk (never in an actual locker room) over the years, and I can't say grabbing them by the pussy is something anyone has bragged about. That does seem pretty lowlife, on the scale of rapper/rock star.
I find it difficult to believe that guys spend 85 percent of their time together talking about pussy. Guys?
87% at a minimum.
Guys don't grab pussies. There's no point. It's feeling-less.
That's why nobody says it.
I'm a nerd but nobody talks about women when guys gather.
The only woman discussed is the odd feminist co-worker, and that's in bemusement.
Okay, so maybe he should have said "grab their pussy"
It's a social liberal thing that women and men eventually outgrow. The reinforcement of weird, depraved, and dysfunctional orientations and behaviors in liberal societies must be difficult to resist.
guys spend 85 percent of their time together talking about pussy
We're not a monolithic class. Perhaps some do, but not in my circle. Most men talk about women, at one time or another, but not often.
That said, social liberalism cannot tolerate rational introspection. Its internally, externally, and mutually inconsistent principles can only be reconciled in the twilight zone under a Pro-Choice Church.
Is everyone pretending that Trump meant it literally?
I haven't talked like Trump or Stern since the 8th grade picnic.
But then again, I haven't stolen White House china, lied to the FBI, BleachBit subpoenaed emails, or intimidated sexual assault victims ... ever.
As I've noted in these threads, I don't get why some folks have been pushing the idea that it's common for men to get together and brag about the sexual assault they've committed.
The interesting thing about Stern is that not only does his show not do that sort of thing. His show actually points out that sexual banter can be lame well before getting to the assault level. I'm thinking of Ronnie's sex tips. Infiltrating Bronie conventions are noteworthy, too.
Even listening to the Stern clips w/ DJT, e.g. when DJT says it's ok to call his daughter a piece of ass, or DJT says he can get away w/ going into gals' dressing rooms, or DJT agreeing he's a sexual predator, along with the joking I hear Stern identifying deviant behavior as deviant behavior, that's why it's supposed to be shocking. Where, so-called shock jock, Stern sees deviance, I think DJT sees real or proverbial notches on his real or figurative bed post. Stern has decency, where DJT doesn't, IMHO.
"Is everyone pretending that Trump meant it literally?"
Everyone who is, is frankly, stupid.
Grab them by the pussy may be a euphemism for turning them on. Nah. We have to look at it in the way that will do more political damage.
I find it difficult to believe that guys spend 85 percent of their time together talking about pussy. Guys?
Nah. 45% about pussy. 55% about cars.
In other, you know actual NEWS Hillary's FBI papers include among the various lies, admission she breached protocol, put agents at risk for photo ops, and is generally lying about her server is the little gem on pages 44-45 that says Hillary and her staff removed lamps and furniture from STATE to furnish her personal residence. She needs the tax dollars of waitresses, plumbers and nurses to furnish her own home? All the millions Bill got for speeches couldn't finance a trip to Ethan Allen?
https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton/hillary-r.-clinton-part-04-of-04/view
Yeah Trump is a pig, but Hillary is a criminal.
"Is everyone pretending that Trump meant it literally?"
No, he meant it figuratively. As in "I figure I can do whatever I want to that hoe."
"If I had to guess, I'd say stern is voting for trump."
Stern voted for Kerry. He said so which was a bit out of character. I haven't listened to him since he went satellite.
The "pussy" he is talking about is almost certainly a slang term for women. Women in general, not a body pert.
My partner, in his single days, used to say "A woman is a life support system for a pussy" but that was an unusual reference to the body part.
"Nah. 45% about pussy. 55% about cars."
Classic quote: "Don't you men every talk about anything but your fucking truck!"
No, there are guns and beer, too.
I have never heard the term 'grab their pussy' in any context, ever.
If commenters want the rest of us to take this as a turn of phrase, it helps when it's something people have said before in any context ever.
One more day spent discussing grabbing of pussies = one more day of the Donald doesn't decide what we talk about.
If somebody told me you have to grab women by the pussy, I would assume they are saying you have to arouse them--turn them on. Something an ad exec would say. But I'm not as sophisticated as you people are.
Mike K.
Are you sure this is how you'd use that word in the way you're describing:
"I'm automatically attracted to beautiful [women]—I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything ... Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything."
"Grab them by the pussy." You say this means "grab the women"
Anywho, unless he's changed very recently, I think Stern is for HRC. He's been pro-HRC going way back, incl the 2008 primary.
I am really amazed how obsessed with this people are. He said something gross.
Many of his accusers seem trumped up, no pun intended, like the woman on the plane, Leeds who also happened to be quoted in a story years ago about her dissatisfaction with his development near her home. Isn't that just a little fishy? Aside from the fact I can't imagine she didn't complain to the flight attendant.
Stern is an asshole. An asshole you had to make nice to in order to look hip at one point. That's why Stern talked shit and Trump said "Yeah."
PBandJ is an asshole. But nobody has to make nice with him.
Trump's overcoming his early evolution in a liberal environment and inside knowledge of democratic politics is a threat to the viability of the Pro-Choice Church, DNC, female chauvinists, class diversitists, and overlapping and convergent interests in the RNC etc.
Although Stern considers himself a friend of Trump, he has strongly endorsed Clinton and has contributed the individual maximum to her. He says this is based upon the job she did as a new York senator, and that he has communicated his position to Trump.
http://nypost.com/2016/10/17/howard-stern-is-doing-trump-a-big-favor/
"Stern is an asshole. An asshole you had to make nice to in order to look hip at one point. That's why Stern talked shit and Trump said "Yeah."
Actually all of the tapes indicate that Trump "talked shit" and Sturn said "yeah."
"I'll go backstage before a show and everyone's getting dressed and ready and everything else," he said. "And you know, no men are anywhere. And I'm allowed to go in because I'm the owner of the pageant. And therefore I'm inspecting it."
Said Stern: "You're like a doctor."
Responded Trump: "Is everyone OK? You know they're standing there with no clothes. And you see these incredible looking women. And so I sort of get away with things like that."
Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article107679507.html#storylink=cpy
OT (but of interest to the host): Nobel Prize committee can not get in contact with Bob Dylan.
"in other, you know actual NEWS Hillary's FBI papers include among the various lies, admission she breached protocol, put agents at risk for photo ops, and is generally lying about her server is the little gem on pages 44-45 that says Hillary and her staff removed lamps and furniture from STATE to furnish her personal residence"
Its not an "admission" genius, it the statement of one person which is not under oath.
Pussy grabbing talk is so last week. This week's topics are: rigged election, corrupt media, and lawsuits.
When Stern was talking about Ivanka being a hot piece of ass, Trump said "Yeah" when he was finished. You are a liar.
You could say 10 years ago Trump wanted to claim he alone had power over all of the available the Trophy women in the beauty pageants. He was bragging to his friends.
Women can hate him for that. Or they can get over it, and save the USA from certain destruction.
Choices, choices.
Oooh, now we get to the part where the GOP candidate realizes that he now has NO liberal friends at all - where he learns that they can't be his friends when he's the GOP candidate.
For McCain it was when the Times ran the Vicky Iseman hit piece.
For Trump it's his old buddy Howard Stern knifing him in the back.
McCain should have expected it. Trump probably has some right to be surprised. Which just shows that McCain is even dumber than Trump.
Trump should just come out and say: Look I did and said some really awful things. I treated some women like objects. I was a terrible person. But you have to remember, back then I was a Democrat! I was just trying to fit in with the crowd - I didn't want Bill to think I was a wuss.
No man says "grab them by the pussy" meaning it literally; it's ungrabbable, men don't say literally impossible things.
What men say is usually far worse - "I'd fuck her brains out", or, "Believe me, I'd wreck that if I got a chance" - neither of which is meant with the psychopathic hyperliteralness the Rain Men enjoy it as.
In fact, it's immensely instructive to imagine this entire Access Hollywood tape fallout from the perspective of Trump instead having said, "You can fuck their brains out". OMG! All these poor, decerebrated brains, spattered about by the animal Trump and now rotting in unknowable loneliness in the corners of this hotel suite and that.
This whole "criminal sexual assault" meme is an Emperor's New Clothes gambit: all deploying it depend on no one breaking ranks like the storied child and calling bullshit on the whole pretense.
Once that breakdown begins, though, it's all over. All bullshit, all knowingly propagated by the complicit townspeople.
"When Stern was talking about Ivanka being a hot piece of ass, Trump said "Yeah" when he was finished. You are a liar."
So, from your POV, this is a good thing? DJT as a total patsy is a good thing?
And, the point seems to be that if DJT wasn't a patsy he wouldn't, on his own, say this sort of thing.
Except on multiple occasions he's said he'd like to date her (which I think means have sex w/ her) more than once.
Of course he's also looked at a ten year old and a fourteen year old and said that down the road he'd like to date (which I think means have sex w/ them) them.
Presumably the apologists in this thread will tell us that this is common locker room talk.
It will require substantial diplomatic effort to overcome Obama and Clinton's legacy of progressive wars, to assure foreign leaders that they will not be sodomized and aborted for political expedience or liberal impulse.
As for social liberalism... Vive la sexual revolucion! Women, men, and babies, too, will be sacrificed for political progress.
"Are you sure this is how you'd use that word in the way you're describing:"
No and I think he was blustering. I don't think that is a realistic thing to say for anybody. It's pretty odd in fact.
#BillyBushMadeMeDoIt
Who made Hillary think invading Libya was a good idea?
#LiberalEnvironmentsCorrupt. Most people, when introduced to a rational space, will overcome their liberal orientation. Better letter than never. Others are either twilighters or irredeemable.
That said, Pro-Choice politics, whether it is a presumption of guilt and capital punishment of wholly innocent human lives for wealth, pleasure, leisure, narcissistic indulgence, or democratic leverage, or political/social abortions because of allegations, hearsay, and innuendo in the 11th hour are not only deplorable but often irredeemable.
Who made Hillary destroy the records of her meetings with multi-million dollar donors to her political slush fund, the Clinton Foundation, as secretary of state? To actually use burn bags to destroy these federal records. Destruction of which was a felony, one of the consequences of which is disqualification to hold any federal office.
You know, the records of meetings that she lied to Obama about. She promised to tell him about taking donations from Putin cronies, but, believe it or not, she lied!
But lets talk about Howard Stern!
this whole thing is driving me nuts. He said women will LET him do anything. If they let him do it, that is permission. If he has permission, how in the Hell is is assault in any way?
Bill Clinton experienced that. Suppose he had stuck his dick in Nina Burleigh's mouth. Would that have been assault? After she said that she would gladly let him do it?
Or Monica, she let Bill sodomize her. Stupid as Hell and Bill abused his position as a celebrity (of sorts) to use her as his semenal sewer. Since it was Bill Clinton, nobody seems to think it was assault.
I really don't see the difference between what Bill Clinton did and what Donald trump said women would have let him do.
JOhn Henry
So Trump was running around grabbing women by their pussies in public without their consent.
Sounds like a felony. Why wasn't he arrested? And why did we have to wait till 3 weeks before the election to hear about it?
I mean even Clinton and Weiner didn't do that. Even the French dude who was raping maids in New York city wasn't "grabbing their pussies" - he was tossing them on the bad and raping them. Hell, even Teddy Kennedy just left them die in car wreck, he never 'grabbed them by the pussy'.
If only Trump had his own private server to store any and all recordings of him and "Bleach Bit". Then Trump could have released all "pertinent recordings" and permanently destroyed everything embarrassing or illegal.
So, from your POV, this is a good thing? DJT as a total patsy is a good thing?
It's too much, PBJ. You can't have it both ways. You become absurd. Well...
I really don't see the difference between what Bill Clinton did and what Donald trump said women would have let him do.
JOhn Henry
I do. Bill did it and Trump talked about it.
"Sounds like a felony. Why wasn't he arrested?"
I know, I've never heard of anything like that before. Oh snap! Bill Cosby.
Stern is full of crap. He's had lap dancers on there, and invading someones space is in their job description.
I think he's ashamed of his sex show. That's all his show is/was, it is a show about sex and the culture of sex, which isn't approved by any religion.
These people make me sick. They should be rounded-up and gassed, and put in the ovens to make electricity.
Contrary to popular opinion, there is no defense of either liberal orientations or behaviors. Only a hope that individuals will eventually overcome their congenital bias, and not pursue advocacy and normalization of this primitive outlook. There is, however, a condemnation of Pro-Choice politics and quasi-religions, most notably presumptions of guilt, and politically expedient abortions. The introduction of allegations, hearsay, and innuendo in the 11th hour by JournoLists of the Fourth Estate, DNC, twilighters, and others, only confirm the character of abortionists, class diversitists, chauvinists, and selective exclusionists.
Anyway I'm not saying he committed a felony, I don't know if he did or not. But I keep seeing this argument that because the women didn't come forward until now it's somehow exculpatory for DJT. I don't think that's a good argument.
JohnH,
1) DJT is bragging about how he gets away with sexual assault. In this context, the victims are said to let DJT get away because they don't take any action against him. In the same way it's easy to imagine that Bill Cosby could have bragged about how much stuff women let him do. Presumably DJT and Bill Cosby are not the only woman assaulters who, in their own minds, recall their actions as having been "let."
2) WJC is a known horn-dog, and an accused sexual predator and, a he's accused of rape (as DJT is (not to mention that they both have ties to Epstein).
Anywho, IMHO, completely unrelated to this stuff (except that it, w/ so much else, shows how small DJT is) DJT if a total F-ing disaster relative to what being POTUS means. You, and many others, think he's the lesser evil. Fine.
Heads I win. Tails I win, but normal folks don't.
I'm more concerned about the not-me-types. BTW, did folks see the Andy McCarthy piece that noted that DJT's (almost) billion dollar loss in 1995 was probably actually money that his bankers lost? Sure that law was changed in 2002. Did folks see that Buffet paid less than two million on his most recent tax returns? Do folks recall Romney's tax rate. How about the headlines re successful companies w/ low/no tax rates. What about W's trickle down unpaid tax cuts w/ the big dollars for rich folks? I have some anecdotal stories, but even w/o that I'd expect that the public may start to think that the Rs saying the key to success is lower taxes for rich folks is BS.
Is it impossible for DJT supporters to question his $5 trillion dollar additional debt that gives the big dough benefits to rich folks? What happens between your ears?
"These people make me sick. They should be rounded-up and gassed, and put in the ovens to make electricity."
Okay. Got you down as another Trump voter.
@PB&J_Ombudsman: I see you complaining that wealthy people are not taxed on their wealth; instead they are taxed on income like every one else is, and pay capital gains when required like everyone else does.
I don't believe there have ever been wealth taxes in this country.
So what % of one's wealth should be taxed away every year? Have you thought about it?
BTW, it's disgusting and very, very infuriating to hear that some of the women I've known and still know have been sexually assaulted but not raped. This includes two women who had passerby-ish men grab their pussies. And, no, they did not report. Legal remedies are not w/o a lot of downsides. So, the un-prosecuted criminals probably did think the were "let."
Gabriel,
It doesn't bother me if Rs want to change the tax code such that the big dollar impacts of the changes benefit rich folks. You can go on and on about how rich folks have it so bad. Go for it.
OTOH, just speaking for myself, I'm more in favor of HRC's budget plans, including higher taxes on rich folks.*
*Of course the Rs in congress would be hellbent on stopping this, but even if they fail, I'm not thinking rich folks are in quite the dire straights that many not rich R voters seem to think they are.
I meant "job creators," not "rich folks"
Luntz says that makes non-job-creators vote the way they're supposed to.
@PB&J: I'm more in favor of HRC's budget plans, including higher taxes on rich folks.*
Ok, so to ask the question, again:
So what % of one's wealth should be taxed away every year? Have you thought about it?
Because people like Buffet have little income or capital gains.
So explain, please, how you want to tax wealth? Because a tax hike on income, or capital gains, won't change the situation you claim offends you.
Gab,
I did answer you. Go to the HRC website for the details.
@PB&J:I did answer you. Go to the HRC website for the details.
Why don't you summarize it for me? How is she planning to tax wealth, as opposed to income or capital gains?
Gab,
BTW, I really don't mind if DJT gets enough folks to vote such that he becomes the POTUS.
There have been DJT supporters expressing how there could be a revolution or pitchforks if DJT is elected to "fix" the country.
My threat is that if DJT wins, I'll be richer.
So, really, do what feels right to you.
Should be: There have been DJT supporters expressing how there could be a revolution or pitchforks if DJT is NOT elected to "fix" the country.
@PB&J:My threat is that if DJT wins, I'll be richer.
Never said a word about Trump. I want to know what you have thought about this. Sounds like you've put no thought into at all and you can't explain it when asked.
I want to know how you are going to get Buffet's money when he does not have income or capital gains. What's the plan?
So explain, please, how you want to tax wealth? Because a tax hike on income, or capital gains, won't change the situation you claim offends you.
He has sounded fairly rational recently but this is just silliness. Mitterand tried this and there were some fantastic bargains in France as rich people fled the country. I had friends that bought Chateaux for distress prices. Of course he had to bak down before the economy collapsed.
"He has sounded fairly rational recently but this is just silliness"
As sure as the sun rising every day, eventually I was going to work off the good will I earned by reading two of your medical studies.
@Michael K:He has sounded fairly rational recently but this is just silliness.
You can confiscate everything from the richest 0.01% and you can just about run the Federal government for a year or two, even if you have them shot before they can escape, and even if you can somehow unload their property in exchange for cash, which you couldn't at market value because everyone just saw what happened to the last set of rich people, so it's all going to your cronies anwyay.
It is silliness.
BTW MikeK, I never said I was for Gabriel's red herring.
@PB&J: I'm waiting to hear this brilliant plan, to tax things that are not income or capital gains.
Is it a Federal property tax? What is it?
@PB&J:, I never said I was for Gabriel's red herring.
Ah, I see. You have no intention of actually taxing wealth.
So rich people without income or capital gains will still pay very low rates, despite all your indignation. I see.
actually stern is sort of a reverse oracle, under his questioning, megyn revealed some interesting personal details, the true accounts of the aftermath of september 11th in jersey also came to light,
If there was ever a bargain for a nice place in Cap Ferrat, I didn't see it.
"He says this is based upon the job she did as a new York senator".
Voting for the Iraq war and getting a courthouse renamed is apparently enough to impress Howard Stern.
Why do we take DJT's comment 'grab them by the pussy' literally. Women are often said to have their man by the balls. In the interest of equality lets assume DJT meant his comment as a power grab...to be the dominate force in the room. After all wasnt it Theodore Roosevelt that said "If you've got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow"
The rationalizations are so unfortunate that it makes it very easy to keep Trump's grabby pussy behaviors (self-alleged) and remarks the topic of the day. And the next day. And the next.
Trump supporters better hope that there's more wikileaks for the gas tank because otherwise it's probably just going to be a blowout.
So Trump was running around grabbing women by their pussies in public without their consent.
Sounds like a felony. Why wasn't he arrested?
It sounds like you must also disbelieve Juanita Broaddrick. Clinton was never arrested, after all. Broaddrick never reported the crime to the police. She even attended a Clinton fundraiser weeks after she says she was attacked.
Personally, I believe Juanita because while there were no witnesses, she told friends and family members about it soon after she says it happened. Several Trump accusers have provided exactly that sort of contemporaneous, corroborating evidence.
You needn't worry, Remorse. There is a press blackout on Wikileaks.
Probably because so much of the press have been implicated.
BTW MikeK, I never said I was for Gabriel's red herring.
OK Reassuring.
I wonder if Politico is going to report on the email that showed them submitting an article to Clinton's campaign manager for editing?
Ha ha ha! No I don't! iT WIll nEVer FUckiNG hAPpeN!
I'm more worried what happens after the election, tim.
"I wonder if Politico is going to report on the email that showed them submitting an article to Clinton's campaign manager for editing?"
I didn't know about that until just now. That's pretty awful.
The Iraq war was sustained under Clinton, and ended under Bush. It relapsed and metastasized under Obama/Clinton in progressive wars, immigration reform (e.g. refugee crises), trials by sodomy and abortion, violent regime changes, and other provocative behavior.
"I wonder if Politico is going to report on the email that showed them submitting an article to Clinton's campaign manager for editing?"
And I just heard a very objective sounding reporter call Trump's rigged claim "baseless". I think I could actually hear his clenched fists at his side and throbbing forehead vein.
But left out was that the politico reporter declared himself "a hack" in that email.
Baseless..
Jane Goodall: Trump debates like a chimp in a dominance ritual
sunsong said...
"Jane Goodall: Trump debates like a chimp in a dominance ritual"
Hillary is a criminal and belongs in jail. She has stood on coffins of dead veterans and lied to the faces of their parents out of political expediency. Her followers have flushed their souls down a toilet.
You are all terrible people.
Remorse said...
"The rationalizations are so unfortunate that it makes it very easy to keep Trump's grabby pussy behaviors (self-alleged) and remarks the topic of the day. And the next day. And the next."
Bill is a known rapist and is an abuser of cigars. Enough people in this country are decent human beings to understand Trump is not even close to the same level as Bill and Hillary.
"Trump supporters better hope that there's more wikileaks for the gas tank because otherwise it's probably just going to be a blowout."
What is already out is devastating enough. It is clear than the left is shitting their pantsuits.
"Enough people in this country are decent human beings to understand Trump is not even close to the same level as Bill and Hillary." One of the many illusions that will be dispelled by Nov. 9. But will it be possible to lead the Trumpites back to sanity? And, after the infatuation with the clown produced utter devastation, who will do it?
PBandJ_Ombudsman said...
Gabriel,
"It doesn't bother me if Rs want to change the tax code such that the big dollar impacts of the changes benefit rich folks. You can go on and on about how rich folks have it so bad. Go for it.
OTOH, just speaking for myself, I'm more in favor of HRC's budget plans, including higher taxes on rich folks.*
*Of course the Rs in congress would be hellbent on stopping this, but even if they fail, I'm not thinking rich folks are in quite the dire straights that many not rich R voters seem to think they are."
This is wrong. Hillary wants to tax RICH people. But we really need to tax WEALTHY people.
RICH people are the 1%. They create new companies and create a lot of jobs in the US. They get the shit taxed and regulated out of them. People who make 250k-1 mill a year are the lifeblood of this economy.
WEALTHY people are the .01%. They are currently paying nothing because they keep it overseas and/or renounce citizenship. There are NGO/non-profits all over the place like the Clinton Foundation where they stash all of their money. They are the companies like GE, Bayer, Monsanto, Goldman Sachs that own the government and the democrat party.
Hillary is owned and serves the WEALTHY people. Higher income taxes just take out competition from RICH people and keep WEALTHY people in place.
Sebastian said...
"One of the many illusions that will be dispelled by Nov. 9. But will it be possible to lead the Trumpites back to sanity? And, after the infatuation with the clown produced utter devastation, who will do it?"
If Trump loses we will not be going back to the GOP. We gave you majorities in 2010 and 2014. In 2012 you fuckwads nominated the guy who passed Obamacare. The GOP will be a dead letter. The republican party will be dead on the national level. We will not work with a bunch of cowardly traitors who just want to lick crumbs off of Hillary's boots.
On November 9th if Hillary is elected the rule of law dies. We will treat any country that elects Her as an enemy. I will pay taxes as if I have a gun pointed at my head, because that is the literal truth. A criminal is merely trying to take my money and give it to her very wealthy cronies.
Expect states to tell the EPA to shove it. Congress is worthless and there will be zero enthusiasm for giving the GOPe majorities in the house and senate when they just give the democrats everything they want anyways.
When I think of Jane Goodall, I don't think of good things at all. I hate that National Geographic went all political so many years ago. They sold out my childhood, bastards.
Ach,
Vote for DJT, if you've reviewed both of their proposals, and you think that DJT's going to make the .01% pay more than HRC would (as if that alone means anything), go for it. And, presumably many more will think like you do.
Or, maybe your real assessment is that the .01% would keep more dough w/ DJT (e.g. because of the death tax), but you like this because you're certain that the job creators will trickle down to normal (i.e. not the 0.01%) folks. OK, you, and many more should get on the T Train and wait for the trickle rain.
You sure are good at thinking of well considered reasons to vote for DJT.
Tails = I win even more.
"They sold out my childhood, bastards."
And, it's a wrap on this thread.
We're back to Howard Stern. Presumably Chick, like Howard has said on his show, used National Geographic for jerking off as a kid.
Could there be other similarities? Maybe Chick's parents (like Howard's) gave him a subscription to Playboy while he was still living at home.
Achilles said...What is already out is devastating enough. It is clear than the left is shitting their pantsuits.
--
No worries..they'll wipe it with a cloth...with a media that calls concerns "baseless".
Hey..comparing a political candidate with a chimp? Tisk, tisk..
Can we get a psychiatrist to discuss Hil's mental state?
Oh..no worries. Jelly seems to be in the mood to psycho-analyze. Reading the subconscious..ascribing childhood Playboy subscriptions. No..not regarding Ann..
PBandJ_Ombudsman said...
"Vote for DJT, if you've reviewed both of their proposals, and you think that DJT's going to make the .01% pay more than HRC would (as if that alone means anything), go for it. And, presumably many more will think like you do."
The level of taxation is really not important. Neither the 1% nor the .01% make enough or pay enough in taxes to matter. It is who you want to have control over capital. Right now the government is hammering the 1% mostly through regulation. The .01% is running unopposed. For example Dodd-Frank has put hundreds of small banks out of business and their assets are being bought up by Goldman Sachs and Citibank. By design.
Or, maybe your real assessment is that the .01% would keep more dough w/ DJT (e.g. because of the death tax), but you like this because you're certain that the job creators will trickle down to normal (i.e. not the 0.01%) folks. OK, you, and many more should get on the T Train and wait for the trickle rain.
If the choice is between trickle down economics or trickle down government I will choose trickle down economics. I trust wealthy people to more efficiently apply capital than government. But the bigger problem right now is the politicized and entrenched bureaucracy.
"You sure are good at thinking of well considered reasons to vote for DJT.
Tails = I win even more."
My primary reason for voting for DJT is that if Hillary Clinton wins, the rule of law dies. She has clearly broken the law and the only reason she is not in jail for multiple life sentences is because she is wealthy and powerful. The FBI has been compromised. The Federal Government will become an evil entity if she is president.
@Jelly: The Nat Geo going political is just like "The Economist" going partisan under Mickelthwait -- Obama apologist par excellance.
No kidding..about time they rename "The Economist"
(I think Gawker is available...)
Oh, gawd, re: Howard Stern
So not surprised: What. A. Coward.
PBandJ_Ombudsman said...
Gabriel,
It doesn't bother me if Rs want to change the tax code such that the big dollar impacts of the changes benefit rich folks. You can go on and on about how rich folks have it so bad. Go for it.
OTOH, just speaking for myself, I'm more in favor of HRC's budget plans, including higher taxes on rich folks.*
*Of course the Rs in congress would be hellbent on stopping this, but even if they fail, I'm not thinking rich folks are in quite the dire straights that many not rich R voters seem to think they are.
Utterly and completely clueless. You have absolutely no concept as to how this works, do you.
I'm enjoying the liberal virtue signaling. Especially after all the vile things that the usual suspects said about Laura Bush and her daughters.
This is an issue the proggs desperately need to keep in the foreground as to do otherwise is to shine light on Hillary's illegal enterprises. It is becoming clear if it hasn't dawned on even the thickest of you that all political activities are a means for the Clintons to enrich themselves. Corruption on such a scale to make a Chicago alderman blush.
But I keep seeing this argument that because the women didn't come forward until now it's somehow exculpatory for DJT. I don't think that's a good argument.
If you're waiting years to make a complaint, it's not ready evidence that something happened.
Especially since it will all be forgotten by 11/10. You won't hear a word about ANY of this on that date.
Its not an "admission" genius, it the statement of one person which is not under oath.
So they lied to an FBI agent about stealing government property?
And Trump is the one who makes stupid comments?
I didn't know about that until just now. That's pretty awful.
Funny how frequently that is happening, isn't it? And ONLY to Democrats' benefit. Odd.
If an outright fascist ran on a campaign of slaughtering all Progressives, I'd likely vote for them.
Point and laugh at Glenn Thrush = Politico Clinton Crime cover-up hack.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा