Hodad

Eh, you're way beyond reason. Not much else to do with you.

Sure, that's why you can't cite a single damn fact to refute any of it, Hostess Cupcakes. Just blather "but, but, but..." You're helpless and hopeless. ?

A. Supporting a cease fire is NOT supporting Hamas. It simply isn't. That is one of the dumbest, shallowest arguments the conservative infobubble has produced in a long time. B. Are you lying or wildly misinformed about the revised death toll for the hospital explosion? It wasn't revised TO thirty, it was revised BY thirty. Which is reasonable and normal, and a pretty good indicator that the numbers are in good faith. Go look up that factoid. Whether you are man enough to admit you've spamming misinformation will reveal the answer to the first question. C. Tlaib is Palestinian American. She has very vocally called for peace and peaceful coexistence many times, but I don't suppose you can point to her ever supporting terrorism, can you? Just be real for a moment. Her entire life is defined by her parent's escape from what is, at a minimum, an oppressive existence, if not outright apartheid. She has family there still. Her perspective on the situation is never going to be the same as yours. She will never be an Israel cheerleader. But we don't need Israelis and Palestinians to be each other's biggest fans. We just need two peoples willing to peacefully coexist. Oh, and your timeline is bogus. "It was known 12 hours before..." The hospital explosion was on October 17. Tlaib spoke on the 18th. The "high confidence" US intelligence assessment wasn't issued until the 24th. Somebody may have proposed the misfired rocket theory on the 18th but it certainly wasn't "known." Hell, the AP revisited their assessment two days ago and ruled out the video that was the original basis for that theory--though ultimately decided that other evidence was still compelling. You want to make Tlaib out to be a liar, but you have to be lie to do it? That's called irony. Or around here, par.

Trump literally made a formal deal, in writing, "surrendering" to the Taliban. It's there for you and all the world to see and read, and you're going to sit there and pretend he didn't "surrender"? Again, that level of abject, fawning toadyism is just soooo gross. It's pitiable, honestly, to debase yourself so eagerly and willingly. He's never going to love you back. Seek counseling.

You're a depraved liar. You want to pretend a grandfather giving his grandchild a quick peck on the lips during a rally is something sexual? It's either pure projection or you're so morally and intellectually bankrupt that you will sink absolutely as low as possible for pretty politics. Either way--and it's possible the answer is both--you're the gross one here. And this "showering with a teenager daughter" lie you keep repeating is even worse. The diary DID NOT say she was a teenager. You simply made that up. Keep your farked up fantasies to yourself.

Who made the unilateral deal with the Taliban for the US to leave Afghanistan (what you call a "surrender"? Who removed 80% of the troops? Who had already tried to to remove the rest, but didn't get it done? If Trump had won the election and finished the last 2500 troops as he intended would you be snidely calling it a surrender? Of course not. You'd be celebrating it as a great move, because you don't do any thinking. You just shake your pom poms and anything Trump does and wag your finger at anything Democrats do. What you're arguing is incredibly stupid. This was Trump's deal. The "surrender" was done before Biden ever took office. The only thing Biden could have done to undo the Trump "surrender" is pour troops back into the country. Nobody wanted that and you'd be howling twice as loud if he had, you hack.

All of that IS true. You can look it up anywhere. You are such a simpering sub. You'll deny black and white factual history- no matter how stupid it makes you look- just to eat Trump's ass. And he's not even your president, lol. Have some dignity.

That's a lie, as had been pointed out to you many times. The man is a pathological liar. Don't believe a word he says. https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-trump-afghanistan-idUSL2N2X92S8/#:~:text=Trump's claim that no U.S.,The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

No idea about FDR. I waffled on Reagan though. He was definitely charming and charismatic, but because of his age and rapid decline we really didn't get to see much of him after he left office. Usually we meet these people when they are ascendant politicians and it's anybody's guess how much of it is calculated for effect and how much of it is real. But in the presidential afterlife I feel like we kind of get to see who they really are as people. Despite some bitter political fighting in the past, there's not much sweeter or more hopeful than the close friendship between the Bush family and the Obama family--particularly GWB and Michelle. Things have, shall we say, gone a bit downhill from there. That's from the time when political rivals were allowed to be friends outside of the office and occasionally allies inside it (McCain, Feingold, Graham, Biden etc.). Now any Republican who crosses that line will fail the purity test, be labeled a RINO and primaried at the earliest opportunity. Sigh.

Indeed, that is what I meant. They excluded the Afghan government, a betrayal that told the Taliban exactly who would be the power in the country after the US exit. The government literally wasn't given a seat at the table. They simply handed Afghanistan back to the Taliban

You show up in a thread chock full of context and reply to a post with very specific context and expect people to understand that you want to talk about something completely different? Good luck with that. You claim prominent voices saying terrible things and use as examples people we've never heard of, and you expect us to understand that you just chose obscure people for some reason? Were there no prominent examples as your claimed? Wouldn't those have been better examples? What we have is a big communication problem. If you want to talk about a perceived global increase in anti-semitism, great, make that case, but people accusing Israel of genocide is not anti-semitic. It's a (so far) exaggeration, but it's a criticism of the policy of the nation of Israel, not an attack on semitic people. Hamas is not powerful. Regardless of their feelings, they did not attempt--nor could they attempt-- to destroy Israel. They can only antagonize and provoke. The power asymmetry is vast. Of course no one sane thinks Hamas is committing genocide. They just aren't capable. Israel, on the other hand could entirely eliminate the Palestinians without breaking a sweat. They must exercise restraint, and must do so visibly. The world is now telling them it's too much, too casual and too careless. Thousands of dead children, and more bodies piling up every day, no longer looks like justice. It looks like a long, slow path toward extinction. If they continue so wantonly, they will lose our support. They will look to the rest of the world like the villains Hamas accuses them of being.

WTF is wrong with you? That's factual history, not an opinion. Trump (via Pompeo) met with the Taliban and unilaterally made a deal to leave the country to them and do a full withdrawal. There were about 13,000 troops in the country when Trump made the deal--enough to keep the Taliban in check. After his deal with the Taliban, Trump started drawing down troops. He actually publicly announced that they would all be home by Christmas 2020, four months before the May date he agreed to leave, but they couldn't pull it off. Remember, this is a man who thought he would get a second term and would finish the withdrawal himself. By the last months of the Trump administration there were just 2500 troops in country and Taliban violence was ramping up. Biden came into office to find that there really was no plan for that final exit and extended thr final withdrawal date. That pissed off the Talies and there weren't enough troops left to keep them in check. So the Taliban started taking what Trump had given them and the exit turned into a shit show. ^^^Those are all facts. If you want to say that the US withdrawal from Afghanistan was a surrender to the Taliban, it's 100% true that it was Trump who did the surrendering. Biden also planned to exit Afghanistan if Trump hadn't, but Trump negotiated with the Taliban and removed the bulk of the troops. Frankly, it was going to end in some version of shit show regardless of who was in office for the final stage of withdrawal. The Taliban never had any intention of doing anything other than retaking the country. They escalated violence while Trump was still in the white house. The only way to reassert control would have been surging troops back in, and neither Biden nor Trump was going to do that. I'm not sure how you missed all that recent history, but next time you talk about us "surrending" you'll know the guy you're talking about is Trump.

Wildly different scenarios and a false equivalency so absurd it's hard to imagine you're serious.

The accusations in this thread are specifically that American liberals are anti-semitic supporters of Hamas. You come in with examples of "our most prominent voices" that are: A. Not American liberals B. Not prominent voices -- I suspect most people here have never heard of them at all C. They were broadly condemned, even fired So I have to wonder what your point is. What is it? It's it that some people in the world are anti-semitic? Yeah, of course they are. Just like some are islamaphobic, Christophobic and whatever else. That goes without saying. And it is utterly baffling that you are acting like people didn't condemn Hamas. That's lunacy. Condemnation of Hamas and vivid descriptions of the evil atrocities was front page of every media outlet in the Western world for days and days. Wall -to-wall coverage of the murder and terror wrought upon civilians--just people trying to live their lives. Israel had everyone's sympathy and support. Then, as they ramped up their response we saw Israel raining down death and terror upon different civilians who were also just trying to live their lives. For a while support remained strong--collateral damage is part of war. Accidents happen. But as that kept happening and kept happening and kept happening it starts to look like they aren't accidents, or that the retaliation was being prosecuted with a level of carelessness tantamount to intentionality. Many of the same people who were appalled at the actions of Hamas against civilians grew increasingly appalled at Israel for the ongoing operation and the suffering of civilians. Suddenly there are protests not in support of Hamas (that is a perverse accusation) but in support of a cease fire. The message is that what Israel is doing isn't conscionable or effective. This tactic isn't advertising. Find another way forward.

Yeah, just regular old reality. John Bolton and H.R. McMaster, two former Trump national security advisers known for their hawkish views, have lambasted both Trump and Biden for the withdrawal — though both have long been critical of the Taliban agreement. "Our secretary of state [Mike Pompeo] signed a surrender agreement with the Taliban," McMaster said on Bari Weiss' podcast. "This collapse goes back to the capitulation agreement of 2020. The Taliban didn’t defeat us. We defeated ourselves."

^^ This is wildly disingenuous and I think you know it. Hence why you did not link anything. I've never heard of either of these people, so I had to look them up. Turns out neither is of them are Americans, let alone Democrats. The first is a Palestinian journalist who worked for the BBC, WHO POSTED THAT IN 2014 and was promptly fired following an outcry after the old tweet was discovered. The other is a Pakistani actress who is a reality TV star in India. Really. These are our "most prominent voices"? People in other countries that hardly anyone here has even heard of? Okay, consider those statements thoroughly condemned. Now knock it off. There's a thread on this forum right now started by a poster sympathetic to the Palestinian people (not Hamas) condemning Elon Musk for his anti-semitic posts. If you actually care, you're welcome to join in. Let's decry anti-semitism together. (Now that's a prominent voice.) Or you might mention the actual farking Nazis showing up at Trump rallies. Or Trump cozying up to white nationalists--stand back and stand by, boys. Or inviting well known anti-semites to dinner. How do you honestly think American Nazis vote? They used to not be welcome anywhere, but Trump extended the tent so far to the right that they are part of the base now. This tangent you're on is completely absurd. One does not have to be pro-Hamas or anti-semitic to call for Israel to stop blowing up families, to stop dropping bombs on children. One simply has to be human. I fully understand that it's very difficult to prosecute a war against terrorists that mingle among and hide behind civilians. That's a despicable tactic. I understand some collateral damage is inevitable. But if they use similarly indiscriminate tactics--or insufficiently discriminate they any better today than the terrorists? Instead we have a very uncivilized conflict, with both sides committing atrocities. I recognize that things suck for the Palestinians. They have some legit beef. But I have always supported Israel. I married into a Jewish family--some are even Israeli--but my support isn't unconditional. They are going too far. They are surrendering the high road and allowing Hamas to drag them down to that level. The slaughter of Innocents will not make them safer, it will not make them better loved., and it will not bring them peace. For every dead child there are fathers, brothers, sisters cousins and more who will forever believe that Israel is exactly as evil as Hamas claims them to be. Israeli bombs are not seeds of peace. They are sowing seeds of further radicalization. The seeds of escalation and more bloodshed and more death.

You've gone round the bend, dummy. If denying support for Hamas means one supports Hamas then you clearly support Hamas ?

You mention lack of self awareness in the same post where you call someone else dumb? ???

I assume you're referring to Afghanistan, which Trump actually "surrendered" before Biden took office. A ticking shit bomb left for old Joe.

Right. I guess the clarification I'm making is that, in my view, the deficits didn't fuel prosperity. There was no "boom." Almost every indicator continued to progress steadily at the same rates that they had been for the previous 4 years. Stocks actually did grow faster, but the economy didn't. Trump made a lot of noise but didn't change the rate of recovery/growth at all. If he had done nothing at all we'd have had the same result.

I don't have much personal sense of likeability from anyone before Carter, but I think Carter, Obama and Bush II were nice people. GWB was woefully inept, but he wasn't evil ( that was Cheney's job). But it's hard to beat Carter in the "good guy" department.

Exactly. I'm casually in the market and may have already purchased a Model S if Musk hadn't decided that bad politics makes for good business. I simply can't support him.

Is actually disagree with that. The economy continued on nearly the exact same trajectory under Trump as under the Obama recovery. Little to no change. It's possible that the timing coincidentally aligned so that Trump's massive elective deficits supported what might have otherwise been a slowdown, but I think it far more likely that the deficit was pure waste. Kind of like adding more gas to an engine that's already at capacity. You can do it, but it just gets burned off as exhaust. Running rich, as it were. It was tax cuts for the wealthy rather than strategic spending. And tax cuts only bolster the economy if it becomes disposable income that is spent back into the economy--money that wouldn't otherwise have been spent. As we've learned from multiple experiments with "trickle down" economics, it doesn't work. When you cut taxes on the wealthy their net worths will grow a bit, but they don't spend more. They were already buying everything they want.

Lol--on every level. All those pollsters are going to be out of work when they discover that we no longer need polls. We can just save time and ask some Internet jackass called Deluge how everyone feels about issues.?

A. Whether or not they are priority issues had no bearing on whether or not those specific issues identified by Deluge are supported by a majority of Americans. Indeed, they are. B. If you think those issues don't translate at the polls you clearly didn't pay attention to the midterms, where abortion rights were on many ballots and so popular that the turnout even carried some surprising Democrat victories in unlikely areas.