This is the propaganda you need to stem the tide of a red wave in midterms? Wow such Bull shit.

The red wave is coming to wash away the Biden stain. You can't stop it. Biden and the party fucked up America too much.

Newtboy : The Tool of the party.. I truly feel you pain. Capitalist America not turning communist fast enough.

Sometimes I get the feeling you may have suicidal tendencies in your future.

Do you own any slingshots?

How are all your predictions these days?

Dont worry, I got told by a fellow american that when this happens to someone like you i should say


FUCK YOUR FEELINGS YOU FUCKING SNOWFLAKE GO CRY

Have I said any such things? I certainly don't recall saying any of that.
You must note, however, that the overreaction you get from some people likely stems from attempts to shame them using exaggeration, hyperbole, and even outright lies, which tend to make enemies to your cause rather than converts. I've never met a vegan that didn't operate that way to some degree. Perhaps those people are just giving back the same level of honest discussion and discourse they received. There's apparently something about veganism that makes it's practitioners think their movement is more important that fact and truth, like the "Dr." (and his followers) who claimed eating any amount of any red meat is just as carcinogenic as smoking a pack a day of cigarettes, citing WHO studies that said nothing of the sort. Many have said "If you agree with my goal, stopping animal suffering, why would you contradict my claims, even though I privately agree they're exaggeration and fantasy?". Ends don't justify means imo, and nothing justifies lying.

I don't need a degree in nutrition or to be a dietitian to understand the basics covered in multiple health classes I've passed and multiple scientific studies I've read. Is meat healthy? Yes....if it's raised and prepared properly and eaten in moderation. Is meat unhealthy? Yes...when eaten excessively or prepared unsafely.
Is veganism healthy? Yes....when practiced properly with a balanced diet that has all the nutrients humans need. Is veganism unhealthy? Yes...it is the way it's practiced by most vegans who don't have a grasp on what proper nutrition is. It's definitely harder to have a balanced healthy diet without any animal products, but isn't impossible.

Once again, I feel you are being fast and loose with fact by implying any of those statements have come from me. The only people I expect to die 6 times in a row are the ones in my dungeon that I'm keeping alive to prolong their torture....and they know what they did to deserve it. ;-)

Eh, I agree in theory but think that in practice it's a rather pointless endeavor. The type of person who is self-centered and entitled enough to make the "it's someone else's job to clean up my shit" argument is not the type of person who, in my experience, is remotely likely to change. Narcissism precludes negative judgments on one's self. Plus most of the time calmly explaining anything to a person who already feels you've wronged them is not going to result in the outcome you'd like. You might say that some of the time it'll have a positive impact, but I think on balance the amount of strife I'd put myself through for that rare "win" isn't nearly worth it.

I do feel this approach might work if there's a friend or family member with the offender, but even then at best it's a dice roll. Maybe the other party will point out that the asshat was in fact in the wrong, and that may alter their behavior in the future just to avoid an argument. However, if the 3rd party spends a lot of time around the entitled asshole in question then there's a good chance they either behave similarly themselves, or are well aware of the asshattery and know it's pointless to fight them on it. So... yeah. Maybe a semi-public shaming? Don't think filming would ever help things stay cool though.

I was wrong once.

1) You only need to be correct about ONE thing 100% of the time.

2) When you lose the one you love and suffer their loss, you will feel you did the wrong thing. Feeling tricked. You will feel VERY ALONE. This is not where love was supposed to take you. You will be left with one decision. Do you continue to love knowing you will be sending the people you've loved and who love you, into the same hell you are stuck in or do you take the chance that those you love can band together with all those who chose to love you and them?

3) You will only need to make one decision to get beyond the hell and grief that love delivered you into.

The bleeding hearts and artists are waiting for you.

Love is all you need. -Beatles

The blacksmith and the artist
Reflect it in their art
They forge their creativity
Closer to the heart
Yeah, it's closer to the heart -Rush

--------

Thank you for breaking my heart
Thank you for tearing me apart
Now I've a strong, strong heart
Thank you for breaking my heart -John Charles Reynolds / Sinead O'connor



As far as the guy with the poop, yeah, I think you're right.

Just walk away.
There is no delete account. It hurts the site to poke holes in it's fabric. Please don't try to erase your presence, it's considered an attack and rude.
You can set your profile to stop all email notifications and you won't hear from the sift again.....or just leave it and you probably won't hear from the sift again.
Sorry you feel you have to go. If nothing else, you sparked a few interesting threads.

@bobknight33 --

I'm interested in what your thoughts on McCain were in 2008, when he was the Republican candidate for president. If I looked back at your comment history from that era, would you have criticized him in the same ways back then? Were you OK with him being the Republican nominee?

Opinions can legitimately shift over time. But, that's usually a gradual process. If your opinions on McCain shifted radically in a short span of time (since, say, 2016 -- a date I've completely randomly selected for no particular reason), you might want to consider that perhaps some external actor is more responsible for that shift than your own internal feelings.

You are, of course, welcome to your own opinions. However, it seems possible that this one is not precisely "your own". McCain's willingness to break away from groupthink and be a "maverick" was one of the things that people on both side of the aisle respected the most about him.

Hmm, I partly agree.

Surely, what goes around comes around. Kids are people, too.

You do some shit to poke your kids in the feels, you'll have to live with the consequences.

However, I don't see the debt (owe).
People are free to make their own choices regarding their own affairs, and their personal part of any relationship with others.
People are free to dislike other people's choices.

Happiness/contentment is not a requirement, and no one else has to go out of their way to make whoever else happy.

-scheherazade

I feel you dawg.

Yes. Profiting off of racism and racists of a specific race is also racist.

Some history, not how it works today. The guy in your link wasn't fired for saying something about whites he was fired for making political statements (that were intentionally misidentified as anti military, anti flag, anti America) at a work sponsored function, and not what happened to Kapernick either, he may be hired again next year and wasn't fired for a minor private joke about white people. I won't bother with lynching...please. Don't be a bobknight, dragging up red herrings and claiming they're blue fin tuna.

Funny, you bemoan the historical mistreatment of certain people while advocating mistreating others in the same or more harsh way, all based on race, and you probably think you aren't racist....in fact I would bet you feel you are fighting against racism....by sounding racist.
*facepalm

I'm sorry hear that buddy. My mother has been wheelchair bound since I was a toddler, so I feel you.
All the best.

so i have been watching this argument over the "ban" all over my facebook.people really like their little "memes" that offer no real criticism,nor any context,they simply display that persons particular bias.the discussion over this "ban" was not my issue.my issue was with the utter lack of depth of understanding.the evident laziness of those who got up on their little soapbox and sanctimoniously,and self-righteously moralized over a situation that they maybe..maaaybe..spent a total of five minutes on.

until finally my head exploded,and i went into hulk-mode.this was my rant,that i now share with you all:

jesus fucking christ...am i reading these comments correctly?

ok,lets put a little clarity into the mix,shall we?

first of all its not actually a "ban" but an extension to vette refugees further.

sounds reasonable right?

but what is NOT mentioned is that the majority of these refugees have already BEEN vetted,and the process has taken up to two years already.

so stop wetting your pants over brown people who happen to be muslim.

secondly,
let us take a look at the countries whose refugees are being "banned".

notice anything?

each and every one of those countries the american military is deployed in.the CIA has been fighting a proxy war in syria for five fucking YEARS.obama expanded operations into:sudan,somolia,yemen,syria and jordan (another proxy war executed by our radical saudi arabia buddies,who just happen to hate america and promote the most radical of muslim interpretations:wahhabism.they spend BILLIONS of their oil money to open madrasas across the region to light the match of radical islam)

so we,along with russia,turkey and other nations,are bombing the SHIT out of these countries,therefore creating the refugee crisis in the first place,and then we turn around an slap a "ban" on them.

oh,i'm sorry,not really a ban,just an extension to vette them further,because god knows we need more than two years to find out if someone is radicalized.

hypocrisy much america?

thirdly,
and this should make us all VERY nervous,but corporate media has YET to address this little turd nugget.a federal court slapped an injunction on this "ban",because it was not done through the proper channels,but rather through executive order.

and DHS ignored the injunction.
IGNORED it,because who needs "checks and balances" right?
who needs an institution,which was put in place to uphold the law and to restrict a sitting president from over-stepping his authority?
right?

and the fact that the DHS,which is under the DoD,outright ignored a direct order from a federal judge to cease and desist,because trump had overstepped his authority by attempting to use executive orders to circumvent the law.,and this was just an injunction,which really just means "stop!until we further review"...the DHS ignored the injunction.

lets ignore the fact that trump gutted the very agency that would have been the first to challenge his executive order "banning" these refugees.trump literally gutted all the high ranking officials at the state dept.

his press secretary said,and this is fucking laughable..they resigned..ALL of them?
all of them just stood up and resigned?

so it came down to a judge to hold trump accountable,which he did by injunction and an entire dept ignored that federal judges ruling.

now let us look at the countries left off that list.

notice anything?

well well well...would you look at that.
not only do they all purchase large amounts of weapons and military apparatus from us.not only do have they have large reserves of oil that our american companies make a shit ton of money from,but lookie here..trump has business in every singly one of those countries.

coincidence?

oh,and lets not overlook the fact that by executive order trump opened the door to have steve bannon on the national security council!
an unqualified,and with zero experience white nationalist is now on the national security council.

this is unprecedented!

but who cares right?
who needs those protocols,or checks and balances right?

trump is slowly creating his own tiny cabal of extreme loyalists and you people are wetting your pants over some brown people who lost everything,and have spent TWO FUCKING YEARS to find refuge?

this isnt the behavior of a president.
this is the behavior of a king.

yes,other presidents have implemented bans.
this is not a new thing.
what IS new,and some of you nimrods are either willingly,or unwittingly ignoring,is that THOSE bans were in direct response to the US being threatened by a particular group,and THOSE bans had the approval of congress..not a fucking piece of paper that king trump signed.

does america need to reform it's immigration policies?
yes,most certainly.

do we need to have an system in place to help assimilate refugees from syria beyond vetting?

of course,all we have to do is look at germany and see what happens when you allow refugees into your country without proper preparation and a system in place to see just how horrible it can get.

does this mean that every muslim refugee is somehow a terrorist?

well,just look at dearborn michigan.the largest muslim community in america and tell me how many terrorist came from that city? how many muslims were radicalized in dearborn?

is radicalized islam a problem?
yes,of course,who would deny this?

but the causes of radicalization are well understood,and have been well documented,and it is NOT only muslims who engage in terrorism.

really folks,before you start making declarations of certitude without having even the most basic knowledge how our government functions,you need to shut the fuck up.

and for FUCK sakes pick up a book once in awhile,and stop being a gaggle of fucking bed wetters.
jesus...you little fags piss yourselves every time a muslim is even mentioned in conversation.

oh,and before one of you tough guys even think about talking shit to me.
1.i am ex military.so go fuck yourself.
2.my JOB is to debunk bullshit stories and research politics and offer analysis.

so you better think twice before you go off half cocked,because my comment hurt your wittle feewings.your comments are ignorant and they are so lacking in the basic understanding of how this government operates that the only feeling you should having right now is:SHAME.

*edit:this is not directed towards anyone in particular here,but this single focus on trumps ill-thought "ban",and how he did so in such a broad,and general wave of a pen stroke that affected even those HAD gone through the process to get their green cards,visas etc etc is simply buying into the corporate narrative.

and then NOT consider the implications of a gutted state department,the loss of the attorney general and the defiant,disobedience of the DHS in regards to a federal judges injunction.

is unforgivable in it's ignorance.

the implications ALONE should make us all worried.
very very worried.
because it appears trump is reshaping our government into his own little fiefdom of loyalists,willing to defy the everyday governmental operations of checks and balances.

trump is consolidating and concentrating his power by creating his own little cabal of loyalists.that motherfucker has ALREADY put his candidacy on the ballot for 2020.now accepting donations to the highest bidder! feel free to purchase your own piece of the american presidency!

on sale NOW! so act fast! positions are limited!
*prices may vary according to your status and where you reside on the class scale.poor people can simply fuck off.

i realize this speculation on my part,
and i could be wrong.
god..please let me be wrong.

I wish your comment weren't downvoted on this, because I feel you're right. Trumps message was hopeful to a lot of disenfranchised Americans in the same way Obama's was to a different portion of them. Its just a shitty situation that it comes down to that, and redrawing lines where they're been lain for centuries.
Ultimately, we're all being manipulated by some shitty powers, but I wanted to voice support for your perspective in this.

No prob, I was just wondering.
Oh...I'm sorry you took it that way. I gave her a pass on this story alone, and only on the specific detail that she didn't say what the commentator claimed she did, but she did IMPLY what he said, and to those that don't listen closely, that's likely what they heard. I did not "buy it", I do hear what she came close to saying, and I call her out for being completely biased in her assessments and implications about what this means. You are correct, however, that while I APEAR to give her a pass for qualifying, I would likely not give those on the right the same....but that's only an appearance. Her IMPLICATION that this would "prove" they have something on Trump is just biased, conjecture, and wrong, and is a reason I don't watch her, even though I agree mostly with her takes on things.....mostly.
Kyle was lying when he reported what she said....and that's what I took issue with. I also took issue with his take on the issue that Russia militarizing it's borders isn't something to guard against...history proves him wrong.

The 'proof' of Russian involvement in the hacking is classified, you won't get to see it. That's an issue with Trump decrying the intelligence community (who didn't really get Iraq wrong, btw, they were clear in their uncertainty in their reports, but the administration erased any hint of uncertainty and claimed the redacted reports were fact publicly.)...but as a whole, I still have some trust in them...perhaps it's misplaced but I have a hard time believing so many intelligence organizations came to the same specific conclusions based on pure bias.

Um...Russia expanded into 2 countries recently, and are eyeing the other Slavic states. To me, that's a renewal of a hot war if we ever react like we're obligated to by treaty, until we do, it's a renewal of the cold war (and a violation of numerous treaties, including https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances) ...one that the pentagon is probably quite happy about, granted.

Again, don't feel you have to defend your viewpoint from me, or your admiration for a reporter....but allow me to have my own viewpoint, and to state and explain it if I choose. I am also quite biased, but not to the point of exclusion of fact.


EDIT: As to the troop placement in the Eastern NATO countries, I would like to see minutes of the 1990 summit where this agreement/guarantee was either made or not, not just reports of what Putin says today VS what Gorbachev says today...I want to see what was ACTUALLY said in the meeting, and more important, what was SIGNED by the parties. That the Russians haven't produced a signed treaty guaranteeing NATO wouldn't deploy farther in the East EVER is a pretty good indicator to me that it was not agreed on, so claims about what may have been SAID during negotiations are moot and have no bearing at all on what was agreed on. It's possible there was that agreement, if they just point us to it, I'll be on their side on this topic (unless it included a clause like "unless Russia begins expansion back into it's now independent satellites")