Political memes, Posters, Funny Pics, Etc.

[BDKJMU]

Typical MAGAt, focusing (ie nitpicking) on a single element to try and avoid debating the more serious elements of my post.

The ramifications of a successful takeover of Ukraine by putin are significant and should not be flippantly dismissed. Stopping russia here likely reduces the risk of future conflicts and saves lives.

trump’s dominatrix is the warmonger.

Poland wasn’t worth fighting for.

Another 1939 WWII comparison..

[kalm]

Context?

TDS so bad he's made a fool of himself.

So Jefferson and Madison tried to overthrow the government so they could “remain in power.“ ?

[UNI88]

Poland wasn’t worth fighting for.

Another 1939 WWII comparison..

You’re right, the Baltic States would be ahead of Poland on putin’s target list.

And they’re NATO members so it’s either actual US involvement in a war or we pretend to have bone spurs and take the cowards way out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UNI88]

Typical MAGAt, focusing (ie nitpicking) on a single element to try and avoid debating the more serious elements of my post.

The ramifications of a successful takeover of Ukraine by putin are significant and should not be flippantly dismissed. Stopping russia here likely reduces the risk of future conflicts and saves lives.

trump’s dominatrix is the warmonger.

Ok, so using that same logic anytime there’s a future conflict around the world that could spread to additional conflicts, the US should become involved, you know because it could save lives.. Sounds like you want us to be the world’s policeman..

That isn’t what I posted. You continue to try and simplify and narrow the debate either intentionally or because of limited reading comprehension. The key word is “significant”.

Allowing master putin to take Ukraine will embolden him and lead to more than just minor regional conflicts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDKJMU]

Another 1939 WWII comparison..

You’re right, the Baltic States would be ahead of Poland on putin’s target list.

And they’re NATO members so it’s either actual US involvement in a war or we pretend to have bone spurs and take the cowards way out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unfortunately

[kalm]

You’re right, the Baltic States would be ahead of Poland on putin’s target list.

And they’re NATO members so it’s either actual US involvement in a war or we pretend to have bone spurs and take the cowards way out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unfortunately

Why unfortunately?

[BDKJMU]

Ok, so using that same logic anytime there’s a future conflict around the world that could spread to additional conflicts, the US should become involved, you know because it could save lives.. Sounds like you want us to be the world’s policeman..

That isn’t what I posted. You continue to try and simplify and narrow the debate either intentionally or because of limited reading comprehension. The key word is “significant”.

Allowing master putin to take Ukraine will embolden him and lead to more than just minor regional conflicts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well then we disagree on what is significant to the US.

-If its not significant to our economic interests (ie controlling 1/2 the world’s oil reserves or most of the top computer chips, etc)
-Or if they’re not likely to attack the US
-Or if they’re not aiding and/or harboring terrorists who are attacking the US
then I din’t think we should be involved. Spending 100 billion (and counting) on Ukraine is insane when we have all kinds of issues in the US, including we have an invasion on our southern border we can’t control, we have a close to 33 trillion and rapidly increasing national debt, etc.

Plus if the rest of NATO thought it was that big a deal they would be spending far more in military aid to back Ukraine, militarily per capita as much as the US. They’re not even remotely close.

[kalm]

Poland wasn’t worth fighting for.

Another 1939 WWII comparison..

[houndawg]

Typical MAGAt, focusing (ie nitpicking) on a single element to try and avoid debating the more serious elements of my post.

The ramifications of a successful takeover of Ukraine by putin are significant and should not be flippantly dismissed. Stopping russia here likely reduces the risk of future conflicts and saves lives.

trump’s dominatrix is the warmonger.

Ok, so using that same logic anytime there’s a future conflict around the world that could spread to additional conflicts, the US should become involved, you know because it could save lives.. Sounds like you want us to be the world’s policeman..

We spend vast sums of money on our military precisely so we can have things our way. You have a problem with that?

[houndawg]

That isn’t what I posted. You continue to try and simplify and narrow the debate either intentionally or because of limited reading comprehension. The key word is “significant”.

Allowing master putin to take Ukraine will embolden him and lead to more than just minor regional conflicts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well then we disagree on what is significant to the US.

-If its not significant to our economic interests (ie controlling 1/2 the world’s oil reserves or most of the top computer chips, etc)
-Or if they’re not likely to attack the US
-Or if they’re not aiding and/or harboring terrorists who are attacking the US
then I din’t think we should be involved. Spending 100 billion (and counting) on Ukraine is insane when we have all kinds of issues in the US, including we have an invasion on our southern border we can’t control, we have a close to 33 trillion and rapidly increasing national debt, etc.

Plus if the rest of NATO thought it was that big a deal they would be spending far more in military aid to back Ukraine, militarily per capita as much as the US. They’re not even remotely close.

``

Why, BD, you sound just like them COMSYMPs that were protesting the War in Vietnam...

[kalm]

This is quite true. Had an opportunity to be truly transformative but mostly maintained the status quo.

[GannonFan]

This is quite true. Had an opportunity to be truly transformative but mostly maintained the status quo.

In the end Obama was just another politician. He wasn't a bad guy, but he wasn't anywhere near the transformative leader he could've been and who people voted for in droves in '08. I agree, a missed opportunity.

[BDKJMU]

Ok, so using that same logic anytime there’s a future conflict around the world that could spread to additional conflicts, the US should become involved, you know because it could save lives.. Sounds like you want us to be the world’s policeman..

We spend vast sums of money on our military precisely so we can have things our way. You have a problem with that?

I didn't know you were a fan of the MIC..

[BDKJMU]

This is quite true. Had an opportunity to be truly transformative but mostly maintained the status quo.

Lol thats FAKE NEWS. Fossil fuel production increased under Obama 77%, not 88%. And that was IN SPITE of Obama. Fracking production exploded, almost all on private and (red) state land. Even left leaning Politifact acknowledges that.
https://www.factcheck.org/2018/11/obama ... oil-boast/
Obama couldn't do anything to stop it..

[kalm]

This is quite true. Had an opportunity to be truly transformative but mostly maintained the status quo.

Lol thats FAKE NEWS. Fossil fuel production increased under Obama 77%, not 88%. And that was IN SPITE of Obama. Fracking production exploded, almost all on private and (red) state land. Even left leaning Politifact acknowledges that.
https://www.factcheck.org/2018/11/obama ... oil-boast/
Obama couldn't do anything to stop it..

So you’re saying Obama was better than portrayed here?

[UNI88]

Lol thats FAKE NEWS. Fossil fuel production increased under Obama 77%, not 88%. And that was IN SPITE of Obama. Fracking production exploded, almost all on private and (red) state land. Even left leaning Politifact acknowledges that.
https://www.factcheck.org/2018/11/obama ... oil-boast/
Obama couldn't do anything to stop it..

So you’re saying Obama was better than portrayed here?

Obama was a Chicago machine politician with a pretty face, beautiful voice and suave demeanor that helped him seduce illiberals and moderates alike.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

So you’re saying Obama was better than portrayed here?

Obama was a Chicago machine politician with a pretty face, beautiful voice and suave demeanor that helped him seduce illiberals and moderates alike.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know. I just didn’t figure I’d see BDK go to bat for him.

[GannonFan]

So you’re saying Obama was better than portrayed here?

Obama was a Chicago machine politician with a pretty face, beautiful voice and suave demeanor that helped him seduce illiberals and moderates alike.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Someone did say this once upon a time...

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man."

[UNI88]

Obama was a Chicago machine politician with a pretty face, beautiful voice and suave demeanor that helped him seduce illiberals and moderates alike.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Someone did say this once upon a time...

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man."

I get it. I knew who he was and still almost voted for him in 08 because of the promise of what might be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UNI88]

Obama was a Chicago machine politician with a pretty face, beautiful voice and suave demeanor that helped him seduce illiberals and moderates alike.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know. I just didn’t figure I’d see BDK go to bat for him.

Increasing fossil fuel production is a positive to BDKKKaren so he was upset you were giving Obama credit for it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[houndawg]

We spend vast sums of money on our military precisely so we can have things our way. You have a problem with that?

I didn't know you were a fan of the MIC..

never said I was - just saying that since we have the capability and our friend needs help against an enemy of both of us....

[SeattleGriz]

So you’re saying Obama was better than portrayed here?

Obama was a Chicago machine politician with a pretty face, beautiful voice and suave demeanor that helped him seduce illiberals and moderates alike.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly. He was king of the straw man argument and responsible for the weaponization of our own intelligence services.

[UNI88]

Look at that dork in the background.

During the press conference announcing the move, DeSantis was joined by two local sheriffs, who CNN points out don’t serve any county that overlaps with Worrell’s jurisdiction.

[UNI88]

[BDKJMU]