Definition of MAGA.

[Guest]

34 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

(and stormy says it wasn't very 'mega' at all)

She would be like throwing a cocktail sausage or baby carrot into a hallway for most men. Only that the hallway is an aircraft hangar.

If she's a beacon of hope for the US, the country might as well pack it in, and let China and Russia take over.

Probably why Trump wasn't bothered by her mockery.

He paid for it, got it, so she isn't in a position to make fun of him. She had unprotected sex with him. 

If he was as disgusting as she claims, she would have triple bagged him.

She made herself sound like she felt trapped. But concedes it was concetual. 

But they kept in touch, but she didn't like him.

I couldn't make this up.

Sounds like she wanted to leverage all along, but the non disclosure agreement forced her to amplify to maximize her return.

She tried to make him look cheap, or humiliate him for money, but you f***ed him for money.

Shes cut from the same cloth. Only Trump uses laws, leveraging and his wealth. She uses her broke down p***y.

[CdnFox]

34 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Too bad he never acted for what ^he said, but didn't really want, by calling out the National Guard like PENCE DID. 

 

Too bad that doesn't matter in the slightest  

Quote

You've been CONNED.

Nope - you failed to con anyone  

[Hodad]

3 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Once again...for the local contingent who insist on lying...

I don't give a rat's ass about who controls Ukraine. The place is about the most corrupt in the world. It is not a democracy. It is not worth the cost. NATO needs to stop meddling in this ASAP. If it would make you feel better, take Cuba. I'm sure the Cubans would thank you...at first. At least that can be justified. 

As for Russia...I don't like or dislike them. The cold war should be over. Yet NATO keeps it alive. Why? Do they fear Russia? Well...all NATO nations had been fine with doing business with them. So not really eh? So why?

MONEY!

Without the Russian Boogieman...NATO has no enemy. No reason for being. Anyone who doesn't see this by now, is a plank.

And anyone who thinks the Ukraine is gonna win Jack in this little war...is a fool. Anyone who thinks Ukraine is worth the cost and potential for disaster...

Is just plain old evil.

Sure, Mr. Chamberlain. Just let him have Czechoslovakia. That'll be the end of it...

 

And just to recap, your theory of geopolitics is that the member countries of NATO, which fund NATO, are courting conflict to justify keeping NATO alive, because they are greedy and want to keep getting the money they contributed? 🤪 

And to top it off, the total budget for NATO is a paltry $3 billion per year. Which doesn't even register as a drop in the bucket.🤣

 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

She would be like throwing a cocktail sausage or baby carrot into a hallway for most men. Only that the hallway is an aircraft hangar.

If she's a beacon of hope for the US, the country might as well pack it in, and let China and Russia take over.

Probably why Trump wasn't bothered by her mockery.

He paid for it, got it, so she isn't in a position to make fun of him. She had unprotected sex with him. 

If he was as disgusting as she claims, she would have triple bagged him.

She made herself sound like she felt trapped. But concedes it was concetual. 

But they kept in touch, but she didn't like him.

I couldn't make this up.

Sounds like she wanted to leverage all along, but the non disclosure agreement forced her to amplify to maximize her return.

She tried to make him look cheap, or humiliate him for money, but you f***ed him for money.

Shes cut from the same cloth. Only Trump uses laws, leveraging and his wealth. She uses her broke down p***y.

So.  NOT a fan then?   LOLOL

well all of that is true of course. but it's mostly just more of the dem/supporter agenda to parade her out trying to find ANYTHING that'll stick to teflon trump.  I mean they put her on saturday night live for heaven's sake - don't remember lewinsky doing that

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

Sure, Mr. Chamberlain. Just let him have Czechoslovakia. That'll be the end of it...

 

And just to recap, your theory of geopolitics is that the member countries of NATO, which fund NATO, are courting conflict to justify keeping NATO alive, because they are greedy and want to keep getting the money they contributed? 🤪 

And to top it off, the total budget for NATO is a paltry $3 billion per year. Which doesn't even register as a drop in the bucket.🤣

 

Their populations contributed. It's not NATO's money, you twit.

[ironstone]

4 hours ago, robosmith said:

Too bad he never acted for what ^he said, but didn't really want, by calling out the National Guard like PENCE DID. 

You've been CONNED.

Are we reading minds now too?

I merely wrote down what Trump actually said prior to the Jan 6 riot.

[CdnFox]

Just now, ironstone said:

 

I merely wrote down what Trump actually said prior to the Jan 6 riot.

Well there's your problem.  You KNOW facts and truth gets him all worked up, this is entirely your fault.

[robosmith]

6 hours ago, ironstone said:

Are we reading minds now too?

I merely wrote down what Trump actually said prior to the Jan 6 riot.

And I merely said you've been conned because you quoted what he said as if Trump was sincere, when it was demonstrably NOT what he wanted, cause his neither his ACTIONS, nor other testimony, were consistent with that quote.

Mark Meadow has been quoted as saying Trump would not do anything to save Pence from being hung, because "he deserved it." Just like: 

"Trump told McCarthy that rioters ‘more upset about the election than you are’: report"

when McCarthy told Trump to call off his goons.

 

Edited January 4, 2024 by robosmith

[robosmith]

8 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Their populations contributed. It's not NATO's money, you twit.

It's certainly NATO's money AFTER it was contributed, you lDIOT.

[OftenWrong]

4 hours ago, robosmith said:

It's certainly NATO's money AFTER it was contributed, you lDIOT.

NATO has been strengthened by a large injection of cash from countries who were forced to pony up, live up to their legal agreements thanks to TRUMP. And that is PROVEN FACT. CNN and Dem lies cannot cover it.

Trump did this on his OWN INITIATIVE. Do you think Putin was very happy about that?

I guess that shoots your whole theory that Trump is a puppet for PUTIN right out of the water.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_170796.htm

Oh dear, a little fly in your cornflakes this fine mornin!

 

Edited January 4, 2024 by OftenWrong

[Nationalist]

5 hours ago, robosmith said:

It's certainly NATO's money AFTER it was contributed, you lDIOT.

Where did the funds come from? Who worked to earn it all?

Thanks to @OftenWrong you just stepped into 2 horse chips at once dopey.

[Hodad]

14 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Their populations contributed. It's not NATO's money, you twit.

You really don't seem to have even the slightest clue of what NATO is or how it operates. It's an alliance of nations, not a third-party for-profit entity. There is no money-making scheme. If NATO ceased to exist tomorrow there would be zero reduction in our budget or tax rates. We'd actually have to spend more money to achieve the same level of security outside of an alliance. 

And, again, $3 billion is less than trivial for any of the member countries, let alone all of them together. It's not moving world events.

What you proposed is just incredibly stupid. Don't defend it. Don't double down. Just call it a "momentary lapse" and move on.

 

Edited January 4, 2024 by Hodad

[Nationalist]

2 minutes ago, Hodad said:

You really don't seem to have even the slightest clue of what NATO is or how it operates. It's an alliance of nations, not a third-party for-profit entity. If NATO ceased to exist tomorrow there would be zero reduction on our budget or tax rates. We'd actually have to spend more money to achieve the same level of security outside of an alliance. 

And, again, $3 billion is less than trivial for any of the member countries, let alone all of them together. 

What you proposed is incredibly stupid. Don't defend it. Don't double down. Just call it a "momentary lapse" and move on.

 

Gee...you really are a bonified twit...aren't ya. Just like a typical Libbie, you think government funds just appear...poof. you Tweenkies howl about democracy, yet warp it to unrecognizable forms daily.

NATO exists at the acceptance and funding of the public. And it can be torn down by that same public.

Now go play with your Barbie. This political stuff is obviously over your head.

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

NATO has been strengthened by a large injection of cash from countries who were forced to pony up, live up to their legal agreements thanks to TRUMP. And that is PROVEN FACT. CNN and Dem lies cannot cover it.

Trump did this on his OWN INITIATIVE. Do you think Putin was very happy about that?

I guess that shoots your whole theory that Trump is a puppet for PUTIN right out of the water.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_170796.htm

Oh dear, a little fly in your cornflakes this fine mornin!

 

Apparently you don't know what NATO is or how it works either. It's not a third party. There is no "injection of cash" into NATO.

Those "investments" are the member nations investing in themselves, in their own defense readiness. 

Fur example, the commitment to 2% of GDP doesn't mean taking 2% and putting it in an envelope and shipping it off to NATO. It's not a protection racket. It's a commitment to our own defense spending and readiness. It's funding our military. 

 

[Hodad]

6 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Gee...you really are a bonified twit...aren't ya. Just like a typical Libbie, you think government funds just appear...poof. you Tweenkies howl about democracy, yet warp it to unrecognizable forms daily.

NATO exists at the acceptance and funding of the public. And it can be torn down by that same public.

Now go play with your Barbie. This political stuff is obviously over your head.

Okay, I guess DO double down on on the stupid. 🙄

I guess you think if we weren't NATO members we wouldn't have to fund our individual national defense. Taxes would magically go down! 🤪 Which is absurd. We'd all actually have to pay more for defense without the benefit of a joint security alliance.

In fact, that is what the beef has been with countries meeting or not meeting their NATO obligations. Some countries, cloaked in the benefit of joint security, were slacking off on their defense spending. They were spending less on defense, confident that if Putin got aggressive their allies would pick up the slack.

Think of it as an HOA, where every member in the neighborhood agrees to spend 2% of home value annually on upkeep and maintenance of their own property as well as a shared access road.

There is no money-making element of NATO. Nobody is opposing Putin to justify the existence of NATO for ongoing financial gain. That's just bog stupid. 

 

[Nationalist]

1 minute ago, Hodad said:

Okay, I guess DO double down on on the stupid. 🙄

I guess you think if we weren't NATO members we wouldn't have to fund our individual national defense. Taxes would magically go down! 🤪 Which is absurd. We'd all actually have to pay more for defense without the benefit of a joint security alliance.

In fact, that is what the beef has been with countries meeting or not meeting their NATO obligations. Some countries, cloaked in the benefit of joint security, were slacking off on their defense spending. They were spending less on defense, confident that if Putin got aggressive their allies would pick up the slack.

Think of it as an HOA, where every member in the neighborhood agrees to spend 2% of home value annually on upkeep and maintenance of their own property as well as a shared access road.

There is no money-making element of NATO. Nobody is opposing Putin to justify the existence of NATO for ongoing financial gain. That's just bog stupid. 

 

Where do the funds come from? The tax payer.

You should stop before more people read this and know your stupidity.

[Hodad]

36 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Where do the funds come from? The tax payer.

You should stop before more people read this and know your stupidity.

Jeebus. The posts you are quoting (and apparently not reading) explicitly mention taxes. The original source of funds has absolutely zero relevance to your insanely stupid conspiracy theory. 

Let's recap. You proposed that NATO is actively courting conflict with Putin to justify the continued existence of NATO, in order to continue securing funding. "MONEY!" you said. 

This is incredibly stupid because:

1. NATO is not a third party, but an alliance of nations. There is no "they" in NATO to be collecting money. There is no "they" with a profit motive.

2. NATO itself cost almost nothing to run. There is an utterly inconsequential amount of operational overhead, like offices and some civilian administrative staff, but $3 billion is nothing. Even if NATO were an independent third-party decision maker--which again, it's not--nobody is courting war for loose change.

3. Member nations are already funding their own defense, within their own nations. They are not shipping money to a third party. Their NATO commitments are simply commitments to funding levels. 

4.. The existence of NATO actually saves money. Member nations have to invest less in individual defense because of a commitment to joint defense. 

5.. And in all of this, it's completely irrelevant where the funds come from. 

 

There is nothing even remotely complex about any of this. If you can't understand it at this point, there is little hope that you are capable of understanding it ever. Just carry on being an unhinged conspiracy kook.

 

Edited January 4, 2024 by Hodad

[OftenWrong]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

Apparently you don't know what NATO is or how it works either. It's not a third party. There is no "injection of cash" into NATO.

Those "investments" are the member nations investing in themselves, in their own defense readiness. 

Fur example, the commitment to 2% of GDP doesn't mean taking 2% and putting it in an envelope and shipping it off to NATO. It's not a protection racket. It's a commitment to our own defense spending and readiness. It's funding our military. 

 

Apparently you don't know what I don't know, as well as what I know. Don Trump used his clout to force those deadbeat nations to live up to their committment. Canada is included in that list. Of course after Trump is gone they're happy to become lax in their NATO investment. Then they prance around in their tutu's saying that bad ol Trump is a Putin supporter!  

But hey, always happy to give you people an edumacation.

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

Jeebus. The posts you are quoting (and apparently not reading) explicitly mention taxes. The original source of funds has absolutely zero relevance to your insanely stupid conspiracy theory. 

Let's recap. You proposed that NATO is actively courting conflict with Putin to justify the continued existence of NATO, in order to continue securing funding. "MONEY!" you said. 

This is incredibly stupid because:

1. NATO is not a third party, but an alliance of nations. There is no "they" in NATO to be collecting money. There is no "they" with a profit motive.

2. NATO itself cost almost nothing to run. There is an utterly inconsequential amount of operational overhead, like offices and some civilian administrative staff, but $3 billion is nothing. Even if NATO were an independent third-party decision maker--which again, it's not--nobody is courting war for loose change.

3. Member nations are already funding their own defense, within their own nations. They are not shipping money to a third party. Their NATO commitments are simply commitments to funding levels. 

4.. The existence of NATO actually saves money. Member nations have to invest less in individual defense because of a commitment to joint defense. 

5.. And in all of this, it's completely irrelevant where the funds come from. 

 

There is nothing even remotely complex about any of this. If you can't understand it at this point, there is little hope that you are capable of understanding it ever. Just carry on being an unhinged conspiracy kook.

 

Ok...so you really are a goofy lyin' fool.

[impartialobserver]

Modern politics is more about emotions therefore hate than ever before. So the OP's very subjective and hate-filled definition is simply par for the course. 

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

Apparently you don't know what I don't know, as well as what I know. Don Trump used his clout to force those deadbeat nations to live up to their committment. Canada is included in that list. Of course after Trump is gone they're happy to become lax in their NATO investment. Then they prance around in their tutu's saying that bad ol Trump is a Putin supporter!  

But hey, always happy to give you people an edumacation.

lol sure. 

Why don't you tell the class where this "injection of cash" came from and where it went? Tell us how much money moved from member countries to a NATO account? Tell us how NATO, as an organization, "profits" from conflict?

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Ok...so you really are a goofy lyin' fool.

Hey, dipshit. Your posts don't vanish into the ether just because they were on an earlier page. We can all see what you said.  Here it is again:

On 1/3/2024 at 12:23 PM, Nationalist said:

The cold war should be over. Yet NATO keeps it alive. Why? Do they fear Russia? Well...all NATO nations had been fine with doing business with them. So not really eh? So why?

MONEY!

Without the Russian Boogieman...NATO has no enemy. No reason for being.

Being dumb isn't a crime or a moral failing. Just your misfortune in the genetic lottery. Lying about what you said, however, is totally within your control. That's 100% your fault.

You absolutely said that NATO is courting conflict to keep NATO relevant so that NATO can keep collecting money. When the truth is that NATO is an alliance, not an independent entity, it collects almost no money, and it represents a net savings to the member states--and to the taxpayers of those states since you incorrectly seem to think that figures in this conversation. 

Grow up, own up, and move on, you deluded toolbag.

 

[robosmith]

5 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

NATO has been strengthened by a large injection of cash from countries who were forced to pony up, live up to their legal agreements thanks to TRUMP. And that is PROVEN FACT. CNN and Dem lies cannot cover it.

Trump did this on his OWN INITIATIVE. Do you think Putin was very happy about that?

I guess that shoots your whole theory that Trump is a puppet for PUTIN right out of the water.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_170796.htm

Oh dear, a little fly in your cornflakes this fine mornin!

 

In REALITY, Obama was pushing NATO members to contribute more, long BEFORE Trump so you've mistakenly given the wrong POTUS full credit.

Obama urges NATO members to pull their weight

No flies here, you must have mistaken your own cornflakes' flies.

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Where did the funds come from? Who worked to earn it all?

Who made your job even possible? It was YOUR government which produced the stable environment and defended your FREEDOMS. Duh

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Thanks to @OftenWrong you just stepped into 2 horse chips at once dopey.

OW only lived up to his name by mistaking Obama for Trump.

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Gee...you really are a bonified twit...aren't ya. Just like a typical Libbie, you think government funds just appear...poof. you Tweenkies howl about democracy, yet warp it to unrecognizable forms daily.

NATO exists at the acceptance and funding of the public. And it can be torn down by that same public.

Now go play with your Barbie. This political stuff is obviously over your head.

Gee...you really are a bonafide twit... cause you believe the government which provides all the services necessary for your employment does not exist.