Time to get on the TRUMP train

[rum dick]

Before we give obama a pat on the back for saving the nation from the horrors of frac'ing, we should let the people of West Virginia chime and their thoughts (we'll just have to pretend that they have Internet and that we could even understand what they wrote).

[DRK Star]

https://www.facebook.com/batshitbernie/

[4Dragons]

[LarryLaffer]

Just to clarify:

the comparison of trump to hitler was lately popularized by louis ck, and he clearly qualifies that he meant hitler not as "der fuhrer" in the throes of WWII, but as he was rising to power in the mid-1930s. which incidentally -- and this was not in the email louis ck sent out -- was BEFORE Time magazine shortsightedly honored Hitler as "Man of the Year" in 1938 (basically, after sending out a massive, first-ever politically-charged email -- see below for link -- lambasting trump not as evil per se but as a sad and spoiled little boy who desperately needs our approval, he qualified what he meant on 60 minutes or one of those interview shows (i'm pretty sure i got the show wrong; just find it on youtube, i'm not your servant). though he also talks about what he means by this comparison in the email, but in less depth). others have made the comparison of trump to hitler, but louis ck seemed to have the most thoughtful one (and in fewer words, not overstating the scope of things, or trying to awkwardly match details of 1930s germany to america in the year 2016) that not only made sense, but also didn't have that sensationalist tenor of some nonlogical emotional "argument" whose hysteria was masked by some thinly-veiled attempt to lend a reason to it's blubbering validity, and 'splain us a thingertwo as to why it's SUCH an accurate comparison.

i say this because i've read several comparisons since that try to take the high road and sound logical ( ), and to me it seems the longer they are in content, the more said self-ordained expert-of-knowledges seems to be overcompensating for not really having much of a strong point, and instead thinking whoever is reading will assume length equals thoughtfulness.

but anytime that happens, let's just remember that in 1957, US senator strom thurmond spoke for over 24 hours in OPPOSITION to the Civil Rights Act of 1957 (he felt very stongly that 'white is right' and 'black is whack,' evidently), and in this longest-ever filibuster in US political history, thurmond regaled his rapt audience by reading passages from many things, among them the farewell address of george washington. oooooooh!

other famous filibusters have read things like their favorite recipes, entire novels, and large passages from the phonebook (i'm not sure the exact phonebook, but it's probably an important detail).

but i dye grass.

this sort of lorem ipsum-ing ad nausem may be, uh, riveting and effective in proving a point (as well as pissing literally everyone, supporters and non alike, off; my guess is that had thurmond read dale carnegie's "how to win friends and influence people," someone would have shot him on the spot), but aside from all the engaging rhetoric here, more isn't ALWAYS better, and, at least content-wise, it still is not above being anything more than, yknow, long-winded bullshit.

oh, and in case you have just over a day to kill, here is the full transcript of thurmond's eloquent and, uh, knee-slappingly hilarious, stunt: http://www.senate.gov/.../pdf/Thurmo...uster_1957.pdf

louis ck's email: http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/loui...us-1201723679/

fine, i am your servant. and it was cbs with charlie rose:

[4Dragons]

Just to clarify:

the comparison of trump to hitler was lately popularized by louis ck, and he clearly qualifies that he meant hitler not as "der fuhrer" in the throes of WWII, but as he was rising to power in the mid-1930s. which incidentally -- and this was not in the email louis ck sent out -- was BEFORE Time magazine shortsightedly honored Hitler as "Man of the Year" in 1938 (basically, after sending out a massive, first-ever politically-charged email -- see below for link -- lambasting trump not as evil per se but as a sad and spoiled little boy who desperately needs our approval, he qualified what he meant on 60 minutes or one of those interview shows (i'm pretty sure i got the show wrong; just find it on youtube, i'm not your servant). though he also talks about what he means by this comparison in the email, but in less depth). others have made the comparison of trump to hitler, but louis ck seemed to have the most thoughtful one (and in fewer words, not overstating the scope of things, or trying to awkwardly match details of 1930s germany to america in the year 2016) that not only made sense, but also didn't have that sensationalist tenor of some nonlogical emotional "argument" whose hysteria was masked by some thinly-veiled attempt to lend a reason to it's blubbering validity, and 'splain us a thingertwo as to why it's SUCH an accurate comparison.

i say this because i've read several comparisons since that try to take the high road and sound logical ( ), and to me it seems the longer they are in content, the more said self-ordained expert-of-knowledges seems to be overcompensating for not really having much of a strong point, and instead thinking whoever is reading will assume length equals thoughtfulness.

but anytime that happens, let's just remember that in 1957, US senator strom thurmond spoke for over 24 hours in OPPOSITION to the Civil Rights Act of 1957 (he felt very stongly that 'white is right' and 'black is whack,' evidently), and in this longest-ever filibuster in US political history, thurmond regaled his rapt audience by reading passages from many things, among them the farewell address of george washington. oooooooh!

other famous filibusters have read things like their favorite recipes, entire novels, and large passages from the phonebook (i'm not sure the exact phonebook, but it's probably an important detail).

but i dye grass.

this sort of lorem ipsum-ing ad nausem may be, uh, riveting and effective in proving a point (as well as pissing literally everyone, supporters and non alike, off; my guess is that had thurmond read dale carnegie's "how to win friends and influence people," someone would have shot him on the spot), but aside from all the engaging rhetoric here, more isn't ALWAYS better, and, at least content-wise, it still is not above being anything more than, yknow, long-winded bullshit.

oh, and in case you have just over a day to kill, here is the full transcript of thurmond's eloquent and, uh, knee-slappingly hilarious, stunt: http://www.senate.gov/.../pdf/Thurmo...uster_1957.pdf

louis ck's email: http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/loui...us-1201723679/

fine, i am your servant. and it was cbs with charlie rose:

Actually I did it way before they did it:

Yeah but Hitler was a nationalist expansionist. You know, a guy who wanted to make Germany great again? A guy who wanted to build a wall and make France pay for it. A guy that looked west and called Poland a bunch of losers, Russians irrelevant and the Brits needed to be taught a lesson. Something, something, kick out all the Jews. Germans ate it the fuck up.

http://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/sho...l=1#post514492

[Hockey Guy]

It's been pretty common lately for 1 political camp & supporters to compare the other candidate to Hitler.

Pretty sad actually.

[sah_24]

Thank you commiefornia for showing the country that your state is made up of mostly illegal trash from south of the border, San Jose just helped Trump more and more . . . God liberals are fucking dumb lol

[DRK Star]

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presid...-by-jail-time/


EXCLUSIVE: General Jerry Boykin on Hillary Exposing Intelligence Sources: ‘Lives Have Been Endangered…Punishable By Jail Time’

[thesparten]

Just to clarify:

the comparison of trump to hitler was lately popularized by louis ck, and he clearly qualifies that he meant hitler not as "der fuhrer" in the throes of WWII, but as he was rising to power in the mid-1930s. which incidentally -- and this was not in the email louis ck sent out -- was BEFORE Time magazine shortsightedly honored Hitler as "Man of the Year" in 1938 (basically, after sending out a massive, first-ever politically-charged email -- see below for link -- lambasting trump not as evil per se but as a sad and spoiled little boy who desperately needs our approval, he qualified what he meant on 60 minutes or one of those interview shows (i'm pretty sure i got the show wrong; just find it on youtube, i'm not your servant). though he also talks about what he means by this comparison in the email, but in less depth). others have made the comparison of trump to hitler, but louis ck seemed to have the most thoughtful one (and in fewer words, not overstating the scope of things, or trying to awkwardly match details of 1930s germany to america in the year 2016) that not only made sense, but also didn't have that sensationalist tenor of some nonlogical emotional "argument" whose hysteria was masked by some thinly-veiled attempt to lend a reason to it's blubbering validity, and 'splain us a thingertwo as to why it's SUCH an accurate comparison.

i say this because i've read several comparisons since that try to take the high road and sound logical ( ), and to me it seems the longer they are in content, the more said self-ordained expert-of-knowledges seems to be overcompensating for not really having much of a strong point, and instead thinking whoever is reading will assume length equals thoughtfulness.

but anytime that happens, let's just remember that in 1957, US senator strom thurmond spoke for over 24 hours in OPPOSITION to the Civil Rights Act of 1957 (he felt very stongly that 'white is right' and 'black is whack,' evidently), and in this longest-ever filibuster in US political history, thurmond regaled his rapt audience by reading passages from many things, among them the farewell address of george washington. oooooooh!

other famous filibusters have read things like their favorite recipes, entire novels, and large passages from the phonebook (i'm not sure the exact phonebook, but it's probably an important detail).

but i dye grass.

this sort of lorem ipsum-ing ad nausem may be, uh, riveting and effective in proving a point (as well as pissing literally everyone, supporters and non alike, off; my guess is that had thurmond read dale carnegie's "how to win friends and influence people," someone would have shot him on the spot), but aside from all the engaging rhetoric here, more isn't ALWAYS better, and, at least content-wise, it still is not above being anything more than, yknow, long-winded bullshit.

oh, and in case you have just over a day to kill, here is the full transcript of thurmond's eloquent and, uh, knee-slappingly hilarious, stunt: http://www.senate.gov/.../pdf/Thurmo...uster_1957.pdf

louis ck's email: http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/loui...us-1201723679/

fine, i am your servant. and it was cbs with charlie rose:

This guy has got to be a mumbles dupe..

Did he need a couple of more paragraphs to rationalize the progressive spewing hatred mentality..

Complicating the simple is a sign of ignorance.

Simplifying the "complicated" is a sign of intelligence.

[sonatine]

APES ARE APES AND PEOPLE ARE PEOPLE WHATS THE CONFUSION DUMBOCRATS

[GambleBotsSatire]

[DRK Star]

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/05/swiss...oney-plan.html


Swiss voters reject 'money for nothing' income plan

[TheXFactor]

[4Dragons]

This'll be fun:


Tales from the Trump University legal vault


Playbook PDF: http://static.politico.com/25/88/783...y-playbook.pdf

[4Dragons]

Found a rip copy online if you want to try it out: http://www.rlslog.net/surgeon-simula...trump-tinyiso/

[Mintjewlips]

This'll be fun:


Tales from the Trump University legal vault


Playbook PDF: http://static.politico.com/25/88/783...y-playbook.pdf

This looks bad but the more Hillary talks about trumps minor bullshit the more he brings out her major bullshit. You would think the media would just give up already, the man is going to be president no matter what. The only thing stopping trump from being president is a bullet to the head aka arkanside.

[4Dragons]

This'll be fun:


Tales from the Trump University legal vault




Playbook PDF: http://static.politico.com/25/88/783...y-playbook.pdf

This looks bad but the more Hillary talks about trumps minor bullshit the more he brings out her major bullshit. You would think the media would just give up already, the man is going to be president no matter what. The only thing stopping trump from being president is a bullet to the head aka arkanside.

To me it says more about the danger of being a celebrity and endorsing something that you didn't really have anything to do with, didn't create the materials for or anything else, you just signed off on it figuring you'd just collect a royalty check from it every month. I mean I can, right now, go have Kim Kardashian tweet some crazy shit on her twitter feed for a few grand and she'd be on the hook for it, even though she most likely didn't even see the tweet going out to all of her fans.

[MumblesBadly]

This looks bad but the more Hillary talks about trumps minor bullshit the more he brings out her major bullshit. You would think the media would just give up already, the man is going to be president no matter what. The only thing stopping trump from being president is a bullet to the head aka arkanside.

To me it says more about the danger of being a celebrity and endorsing something that you didn't really have anything to do with, didn't create the materials for or anything else, you just signed off on it figuring you'd just collect a royalty check from it every month. I mean I can, right now, go have Kim Kardashian tweet some crazy shit on her twitter feed for a few grand and she'd be on the hook for it, even though she most likely didn't even see the tweet going out to all of her fans.

Nice try. Trump lent his NAME to the project, as well as his reputation, and endorsement. That is a *bit* more than retweeting something. The equivalent would be Druff putting his name on a scam poker site, and using his voice and image, etc, to vouch for its fairness and financial soundness, versus merely having a banner ad on PFA.

P.S. Oh, and then defending the integrity of that scam poker site after others called it out for scamming people.

[Mintjewlips]

To me it says more about the danger of being a celebrity and endorsing something that you didn't really have anything to do with, didn't create the materials for or anything else, you just signed off on it figuring you'd just collect a royalty check from it every month. I mean I can, right now, go have Kim Kardashian tweet some crazy shit on her twitter feed for a few grand and she'd be on the hook for it, even though she most likely didn't even see the tweet going out to all of her fans.

Nice try. Trump lent his NAME to the project, as well as his reputation, and endorsement. That is a *bit* more than retweeting something. The equivalent would be Druff putting his name on a scam poker site, and using his voice and image, etc, to vouch for its fairness and financial soundness, versus merely having a banner ad on PFA.

Still waiting on those $250k worth speech transcripts, i can't wait to read them, i want to learn how to make speeches worth 250k

[Mintjewlips]

And its has begun....

http://pagesix.com/2016/06/05/tell-a...e-white-house/