Maddow Performs Poetry Reading Of GOP Anti-Trump Anguish

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

@FATCAT

By the way, note how I haven't actually attacked Bernie at all in this thread.

How about we put you on the defensive to see how you hold up?

Please explain Sanders' credibility and "trustworthiness" despite having lied 50% of the time?

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/bernie-s/

Or ...

How about you explain how he can cover up these:

1) Sanders was one of 14 congressmen to vote against the law establishing the Amber Alert system and one of 15 to vote against an amendment criminalizing computer-generated child ****ography  

2) Support for Sanders’ positions tends to fall apart when people hear the details—particularly if they learn their own taxes would go up. As the nominee, Sanders would have to address his former opposition to public schools and praise for parents who believe that it is “better for their children not to go to school at all than for them to attend a normal type of establishment.”

3) he Clinton campaign has also ignored Sanders’ youthful sex writings (  ). Republicans are unlikely to be so decorous. Imagine an ad drawing from the old Sanders essay “The Revolution Is Life Versus Death.” First it might quote the candidate mocking taboos on child nudity: “Now, if children go around naked, they are liable to see each others [sic] sexual organs, and maybe even touch them. Terrible thing!” Then it would quote him celebrating girls who defy their mothers and have sex with their boyfriends: “The revolution comes … when a girl pushes aside all that her mother has ‘taught’ her and accepts her boyfriends

4) There’s been little cable news chatter about Sanders’ 1985 trip to Nicaragua, where he reportedly joined a Sandinista rally with a crowd chanting, “Here, there, everywhere/ The Yankee will die.” It would be nice if this were due to a national consensus on the criminal nature of America’s support for the Contras. More likely, the media’s attention has simply been elsewhere.

5)He has never been asked to account for his relationship with the Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party, for which he served as a presidential elector in 1980. At the time, the party’s platform called for abolishing the U.S. military budget and proclaimed “solidarity” with revolutionary Iran. (This was in the middle of the Iranian hostage crisis.)

---

Waiting for your eloquent defense of Bernard. I know it's easier to just use random talking points to attack Hillary without credible evidence, but I'd like to know if you can justify defending these points without resorting to generalization.

It should be a fun exercise yes?

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

4 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

I don't want her to release her phone records, why do you keep insisting that people want more and more from her? She was paid over $21,000,000 for speeches that she made up until March 2015. That was only A FU*KING MONTH before she announced her candidacy. Those transcripts hold her views up until she wanted to run again, and that's important. Bernie would release his speeches if he had any, he's already releasing his transcripts. 

Who the hell does HILLARY think she is?

Yeah...she was unemployed. She got paid. Does the timing matter? The amount is irrelevant. She's a very public figure having been a First Lady, a Senator, and an SoS. She's worth a lot of money. Athletes receive millions for ads. Why is millions for her speeches in attendance such a big issue for you?  

And the entire point is that you DON'T want her to release her records but are very persistent on the speeches, because that would only affect HER as opposed to Bernie as well.

Anyway please do as I said above and defend Bernie for once. I'd like to see how well you know your own candidate.

If you don't reply, I'll take it as proof of ignorance.

[brendablethyn 536]

2 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

I don't want her to release her phone records, why do you keep insisting that people want more and more from her? She was paid over $21,000,000 for speeches that she made up until March 2015. That was only A FU*KING MONTH before she announced her candidacy. Those transcripts hold her views up until she wanted to run again, and that's important. Bernie would release his speeches if he had any, he's already releasing his transcripts. 

Who the hell does HILLARY think she is?

She is entitled. She thinks the rules don't apply to her. I guess the same could be said for her husband. There's one rule for the Clinton's and one for everyone else. 

[Morphine Prince 109,655]

Now that you guys are on the transcript issue, I also think it's the first thing Trump will say during a debate to make her look dishonest, kind of how Bernie has during debates. 

She isn't being transparent by not releasing them. Many people are interested in knowing what she said. If she has nothing to hide there shouldn't be an issue.

 The fact that she won't release them makes me not trust here even more. 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

1 minute ago, brendablethyn said:

She is entitled. She thinks the rules don't apply to her. I guess the same could be said for her husband. There's one rule for the Clinton's and one for everyone else. 

There aren't any rules. There is no rule that says you must release private records as a private citizen.

These are made-up rules by Bernie to try to justify something that isn't there when he can't, just like when he couldn't bring up a single example of her being "bought" when questioned about it.

How pathetic.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

2 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

Now that you guys are on the transcript issue, I also think it's the first thing Trump will say during a debate to make her look dishonest, kind of how Bernie has during debates. 

She isn't being transparent by not releasing them. Many people are interested in knowing what she said. If she has nothing to hide there shouldn't be an issue.

 The fact that she won't release them makes me not trust here even more. 

I've already told you why she won't.

Speeches are inherently excessively congratulatory and positive towards the host. It's courtesy.

They'll just use it against her. Better not release them at all.

Don't trust her. Although I wonder why you don't hold Sanders to the same bar when it comes to his dubious activities. The funny part is that it's all assumptions on your parts. There is no proof that she's bought and not even Sanders could bring up a single instance.

Pardon her for getting paid. This is just as disgusting as the other thread where Gaga said Hillary paid her off with 21000 as if that isn't chump change for Gaga and was just getting paid for her services at a party.

How insulting.

[FATCAT 60,888]

1 minute ago, LebaneseDude said:

@FATCAT

By the way, note how I haven't actually attacked Bernie at all in this thread.

How about we put you on the defensive to see how you hold up?

Please explain Sanders' credibility and "trustworthiness" despite having lied 50% of the time?

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/bernie-s/

Or ...

How about you explain how he can cover up these:

1) Sanders was one of 14 congressmen to vote against the law establishing the Amber Alert system and one of 15 to vote against an amendment criminalizing computer-generated child ****ography  

2) Support for Sanders’ positions tends to fall apart when people hear the details—particularly if they learn their own taxes would go up. As the nominee, Sanders would have to address his former opposition to public schools and praise for parents who believe that it is “better for their children not to go to school at all than for them to attend a normal type of establishment.”

3) he Clinton campaign has also ignored Sanders’ youthful sex writings (  ). Republicans are unlikely to be so decorous. Imagine an ad drawing from the old Sanders essay “The Revolution Is Life Versus Death.” First it might quote the candidate mocking taboos on child nudity: “Now, if children go around naked, they are liable to see each others [sic] sexual organs, and maybe even touch them. Terrible thing!” Then it would quote him celebrating girls who defy their mothers and have sex with their boyfriends: “The revolution comes … when a girl pushes aside all that her mother has ‘taught’ her and accepts her boyfriends

4) There’s been little cable news chatter about Sanders’ 1985 trip to Nicaragua, where he reportedly joined a Sandinista rally with a crowd chanting, “Here, there, everywhere/ The Yankee will die.” It would be nice if this were due to a national consensus on the criminal nature of America’s support for the Contras. More likely, the media’s attention has simply been elsewhere.

5)He has never been asked to account for his relationship with the Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party, for which he served as a presidential elector in 1980. At the time, the party’s platform called for abolishing the U.S. military budget and proclaimed “solidarity” with revolutionary Iran. (This was in the middle of the Iranian hostage crisis.)

---

Waiting for your eloquent defense of Bernard.

Lied 50% of the time? Are you ****ing kidding me. Selected Politico comments are hardly a basis for how much someone lies.

1) I'm sure just like the other bills he voted against, they contain much more than just those topics. 

2) Taxes go up, but you end up paying much less. Another empty concern.

3) I don't even see what the hell you're trying to say here. 

4) Because he's responsible for a bigoted comment made by people at a rally. That makes sense.

5) I don't hold the exact same views as a majority of the Democratic party. Does that mean he has to when it applies to the workers party?

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

What's even more disturbing is that I've given you countless reasons TO trust her yet you hang up on the transcripts.

Continue to prove how selective you are in your judgement.

Frankly I'm glad the lot of you are the insignificant minority who will be made up by dissenting Republicans voting for Hillary.

Keep hating her. I have no ****s anymore about convincing people who are put up walls of ignorance.

[Morphine Prince 109,655]

2 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

I've already told you why she won't.

Speeches are inherently excessively congratulatory and positive towards the host. It's courtesy.

They'll just use it against her. Better not release them at all.

Don't trust her. Although I wonder why you don't hold Sanders to the same bar when it comes to his dubious activities. The funny part is that it's all assumptions on your parts. There is no proof that she's bought and not even Sanders could bring up a single instance.

Pardon her for getting paid. This is just as disgusting as the other thread where Gaga said Hillary paid her off with 21000 as if that isn't chump change for Gaga and was just getting paid for her services at a party.

How insulting.

We want to see them. She is not being transparent. PERIOD. I don't care what anyone says.

Leave Sanders out of it, he is DONE. You don't know what I think about him. You can only assume based on my posts on here. I'm not 100% on his side as I've said before. No candidate is perfect.

$225,000 per speech is not "chump change," not even comparable to Gaga, please. 

[FATCAT 60,888]

8 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

If you don't reply, I'll take it as proof of ignorance.

You insult me, you insult my friends and family. You insult my generation. You insult other GGD users. You insult the american people. Have I insulted you? No.

[FATCAT 60,888]

5 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

What's even more disturbing is that I've given you countless reasons TO trust her yet you hang up on the transcripts.

Continue to prove how selective you are in your judgement.

Frankly I'm glad the lot of you are the insignificant minority who will be made up by dissenting Republicans voting for Hillary.

Keep hating her. I have no ****s anymore about convincing people who are put up walls of ignorance.

Walls of ignorance? You say that Bernie supporters are somehow terribly ignorant for not seeing Bernie as another politician. In reality, it's Hillary supporters that support when no support should be due. If Bernie did half of the things Hillary has done, or in the case of the transcripts, hasn't done, I wouldn't support him.

It is you, who is defining yourself.

[mcoop 628]

Trump can use the transcript issue all he wants, and he will. But she will definitely be using the fact that he refuses to release his tax returns from years past. For every 1 thing Trump has on Hillary, she has 20.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

12 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

Lied 50% of the time? Are you ****ing kidding me. Selected Politico comments are hardly a basis for how much someone lies.

1) I'm sure just like the other bills he voted against, they contain much more than just those topics. 

2) Taxes go up, but you end up paying much less. Another empty concern.

3) I don't even see what the hell you're trying to say here. 

4) Because he's responsible for a bigoted comment made by people at a rally. That makes sense.

5) I don't hold the exact same views as a majority of the Democratic party. Does that mean he has to when it applies to the workers party?

It's politifact...not politico. Please don't call politifact biased  

Demonizing something marking your hero as imperfect once again.

....

These are what you call defenses? One-liners without any actual justification?

1) There is nothing to say here. Sanders refuses to compromise for the common good. Tell me how Amber Alert has any negative implications? It's literally support for missing children. The truth is that Bernie's stance on the Amber Alert was simply the latest in a political career filled with "principled" stances that did nothing but serve his own agenda.

He has consistently voted against the Brady Bill because he felt the five-day federally mandated waiting period would be too long for Vermont residents.

He voted against Ted Kennedy's comprehensive immigration billbecause he didn't approve of the guest worker program which he felt would drive down wages for low-income workers.

He voted against the second portion of the TARP funding which was used to help bail out the American automotive industry.

He voted against President Bill Clinton's health care bill because it would cover 95% of the population rather than 100% through a single-payer system that Sanders was supporting. 

And he was even one of just 19 members of the House who voted against a bill that required rapists to identify their HIV status to their victims because he was concerned it might potentially force innocent people to undergo testing. 

These are your lovely unbending principles. Keep defending him when you don't even know him. Those are all justifiable reasons right? Not dubious at all?

Not to mention his cold-hearted attitude towards same-sex marriage, voting against it because he wanted it to be left to the states. At least Hillary had some moral introspection to do.

2) What is this justification? Taxes are NOT a concern? Perhaps your parents still cover you, but even a 5% increase in taxes can cripple a household. Also nice of you to ignore the education bit. He's so principled that he'd promote ignorance.

3) Did you not read them? He literally talks about child nudity and glorifies girlfriends pushing their mothers away as an act of revolution to be with their man. I don't personally give a ****, but if you can't see how that can be twisted to make him look like a perv...then lol

4) He joined the crowd that was chanting this. It's clear his loyalties do not lie with the USA. That's what the GOP will say.

5) "At the time, the party’s platform called for abolishing the U.S. military budget and proclaimed “solidarity” with revolutionary Iran. (This was in the middle of the Iranian hostage crisis.)"... he was part of a group that wants to defund the USA's military when it's a world superpower, ignoring its inherent responsibility by enforcing isolationism. This isn't a matter of disagreeing with him. It's a matter of him shutting off all contact with the world which is so reliant on the USA, not to mention giving Russia and China leeway to do whatever they want as the only powerful liberal superpower withdraws. Oh and the bit about the solidarity with Iran when USA soldiers were held as hostages can be presented as him being ruthless in how he deals with situations.

So.... you basically could neither provide good arguments or you did not even defend how the GOP could not potentially twist them to make him look bad.

Yet Hillary, the one whose GOP smears you and Bernie have so readily abused for your own agenda, is the one with the bad reputation that Sanders can beat.

*sigh* 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

11 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

We want to see them. She is not being transparent. PERIOD. I don't care what anyone says.

Leave Sanders out of it, he is DONE. You don't know what I think about him. You can only assume based on my posts on here. I'm not 100% on his side as I've said before. No candidate is perfect.

$225,000 per speech is not "chump change," not even comparable to Gaga, please. 

It's what she's worth. Athletes get paid millions for endorsements. 225000 per speech is fitting given her career. 

Stop putting your bias in analytic judgement on full display.

I've already told you why she won't be transparent about this case. It would do more damage to release them. Stop ignoring the realities to justify your own position. 

[FATCAT 60,888]

1 minute ago, LebaneseDude said:

It's politifact...not politico. Please don't call politifact biased  Demonizing something against your hero once again.

....

These are what you call defenses? One-liners without any actual justification?

1) There is nothing to say here. Sanders refuses to compromise for the common good. Tell me how Amber Alert has any negative implications? It's literally support for missing children. The truth is that Bernie's stance on the Amber Alert was simply the latest in a political career filled with "principled" stances that did nothing but serve his own agenda.

He has consistently voted against the Brady Bill because he felt the five-day federally mandated waiting period would be too long for Vermont residents.

He voted against Ted Kennedy's comprehensive immigration billbecause he didn't approve of the guest worker program which he felt would drive down wages for low-income workers.

He voted against the second portion of the TARP funding which was used to help bail out the American automotive industry.

He voted against President Bill Clinton's health care bill because it would cover 95% of the population rather than 100% through a single-payer system that Sanders was supporting. 

And he was even one of just 19 members of the House who voted against a bill that required rapists to identify their HIV status to their victims because he was concerned it might potentially force innocent people to undergo testing. 

These are your lovely unbending principles. Keep defending him when you don't even know him.

2) What is this justification? Taxes are NOT a concern? Perhaps your parents still cover you, but even a 5% increase in taxes can cripple a household. Also nice of you to ignore the education bit. He's so principled that he'd promote ignorance.

3) Did you not read them? He literally talks about child nudity and glorifies girlfriends pushing their mothers away as an act of revolution to be with their man. I don't personally give a ****, but if you can't see how that can be twisted to make him look like a perv...then lol

4) He joined the crowd that was chanting this. It's clear his loyalties do not lie with the USA. That's what the GOP will say.

5) "At the time, the party’s platform called for abolishing the U.S. military budget and proclaimed “solidarity” with revolutionary Iran. (This was in the middle of the Iranian hostage crisis.)"... he was part of a group that wants to defund the USA's military when it's a world superpower, ignoring its inherent responsibility by enforcing isolationism. This isn't a matter of disagreeing with him. It's a matter of him shutting off all contact with the world which is so reliant on the USA, not to mention giving Russia and China leeway to do whatever they want as the only powerful liberal superpower withdraws. Oh and the bit about the solidarity with Iran when USA soldiers were held as hostages can be presented as him being ruthless in how he deals with situations.

So.... you basically could neither provide good arguments or you did not even defend how the GOP could not potentially twist them to make him look bad.

Yet Hillary, the one whose GOP smears you and Bernie have so readily abused for your own agenda, is the one with the bad reputation that Sanders can beat.

*sigh* 

I don't have time like you do to write essays to the opposition. If I did, I'd consider using my time as a political columnist. My lack of time isn't ignorance, it's the fact that actually defending him to you is useless. If someone said to me "Hey, I don't know whether I should vote for Bernie or Trump, because.." I'd have a bit more concern than you just trying to take up my time.