It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Thank you. That must be the caring, compassionate liberal in you coming through.
Its really f*cling despicable how the left panders to people, pretends like they're fighting a common cause, and then they discard them like a used condom once they can no longer be used for political leverage.
I'm reminded of an incident that just happened a few weeks ago, after Orlando. Owen Jones, leftie f#cknut and confirmed Jeremy Corbyn supporter, stormed off a television studio because they were discussing the tragic events without including any LGBT voices (forgetting that he himself is gay). Then he was booked in on another show, but pulled out when he learned that a certain right winger would be on the show as well. Well, it turns out that that right winger was also gay.
So Owen Jones wanted a platform for more LGBT voices, but only the LGBT voices that agree with him ideologically. This is a prime example of how the left pidgeon holes people. It treats people not as individuals, but common stock. It treats human adults as if they are nothing more than their base identifiers: race, gender, age etc.
Such a sadness.
I'm not a liberal. But thank you, that must be the 'acting on a limited supply of knowledge' in you coming through. =))
Whereas you are unlimited. Such is the hubris of the left.
That may depend on whether or not the following is true:
John Kasich turned down 'most powerful' VP slot from Trump
It could be that Mike Pence is the one that will be making the important decisions with regards to foreign policy.
If, however, the above is true, then I'm disappointed a bit in Kasich. Kasich basically, again if this is true, turned down an offer to be the de facto POTUS.
You're wrong about the Owen Jones incident. His beef was that the other commentators refused to acknowledge that the Orlando attack was an attack specifically against gay people (a homophobic attack). Look, I'm no fan of Jones myself, but he had a point.
As much as I've railed against Trump, had this actually happened, and it was known in advance of election day, I could have held my nose and pulled the lever for Trump since I'd essentially be voting for my top choice of the 17 Republicans to be the POTUS.
I'm sure there was more to it than that, but Kasich possibly turned down a chance to, if everything fell right, have a shot at a 16-year tenure in the White House.
This is why I try not to waste my time with long logical arguments with folk that display so little ability at logical thinking.
:P
It's funny, though, that the party of strict Constitutionalism would even identify the 2nd Amendment as being a right for all citizens to bear arms in the first place. If they were strict Constitutionalists, they'd have a different reading of that amendment.
The fringes of both parties do this, demonize the other side so that nothing gets done. If both sides stopped calling names, demonizing, and whatnot, and actually listened and tried to find common ground, things could actually get done.
Uhm.....if Donald Trump really had it his way, he would have chosen either Newt Gingrich or Chris Christie. Trump's family members and his campaign-manager really had to urge Trump to pick Pence.
So it is not true that Trump was looking for a s called 'big picture thinker'.
I trust Chrisisall has put you in your place. Sit down Mendes and take notes. Liberalism believes in govt. involvement on issues like abortion, gay marriage, govt. healthcare, women's rights, immigration, social security, welfare, drug enforcement, business regulations, labor laws and the military(how are you going to fund it without taxation?). Libertarians believe in none of those things. But we get the picture.
Kasich was exactly the kind of Republican he needed on board, somebody who could counter the things that the majority of the Republican field can't stand about him.
:)) yes, he destroyed me with his ad hominems.
He asks, rhetorically, who better than Trump to fix the multi-trillion dollar national debt? I don't know, maybe someone who hasn't filed for bankruptcy four times. That would be a good start, I think.
But that stated... @FLeiter: ewwwwww. Inappropriate. Not helpful. I'm as willing to laugh at the insanity of this election as anybody else, but your last contribution was simply not funny, nor was it in any way pertinent. Please don't do that again.
On the issue of the proposed "powerful" vice-president: it seems that Trump doesn't really want the job of being president after all. He just wants to put his brand on the office, then franchise it out to...whoever. Pence? Kasich? Doesn't really matter, does it? It's all about the Trump(TM) Presidency, the Trump(TM) White House, and in another decade or so, the Trump Prince In Waiting(TM). I expect Donald Jr. to be running for the next Senatorship or Governorship available, no more than 2 years down the road. Count on it!
Kind of goes without saying, but yes, that would be nice as well. ;)
If the Trump campaign ends up ultimately blowing up the Republican party as we currently know it and finds someway to get the potty-trained Republicans joined up with perhaps a good chunk of the Libertarians, then it might have been worth it.
Sadly, though, the GOP will probably limp on for several more cycles, and the sane people in the party will continue to have to deal with the crazies of the party that gets the specter of racism placed over the entire party, because they can't keep their hatred to themselves.
Trump was absolutely out of line when he did the things he did to Cruz during the primary. I think you'll find that I said that back at that time, and if I didn't actually post it here, I can assure you that was my thinking. Cruz, on the other hand, was out of line tonight. Regardless of what he feels about Trump, this week is supposed to be about trying to unite the party. That's the primary purpose of this, especially this convention in particular. He should have had the tact to stay home as John Kasich, Jeb Bush, and countless others have done. It would have still accomplished the same thing without the political fallout. Even some of his supporters are saying that they're done with him, according to CNN.
Cruz himself has been very inflammatory over his career. I doubt, as much as he rightfully hates Trump, that he'd appreciate someone that he's pissed off (and there are countless numbers of them) pulling that same stunt in 2020 or 2024 if he were standing up there as the nominee.
What I was trying to get at was that Cruz likes to hold himself up as this morally superior individual, that he's better because he's a conservative. The kind of conservative values that he likes to claim to have are rooted in that old southern tradition where manners were extremely important. It would seem to me that someone who holds himself up in that kind of regard would have some manners and conduct himself accordingly.
He just showed himself to be the hypocrite that he's always been. He claims to be in this for altruistic reasons, but all he did was try to set himself up, selfishly, for 2020 or 2024, and thankfully it backfired. There's only one force in the GOP right now that is worse than Trump, and that's Ted Cruz, and he finally stepped in it tonight.
It's the GOP on "Cruz Contol" here, and we haven't seen such an historic anti-endorsement speech since Ted Kennedy completely ignored Jimmy Carter during the 1980 DNC Convention :-P.
Now with today's carefully scripted PR shows that conventions are these days, we should perhaps have known better from the Trump campaign. Because Trump doesn't want to carefully script his road to the White House.
So then you get this mess. Both the GOP and the DNC are very divided parties. And it's very similar to what's happening to other western democracies (Spain, the UK, Germany, Netherlands). But there always needs to be one establishment party who does worse than the other establishment party in bringing unity. And as of today that's definetely the Republican Party.
In many ways Ted Cruz' anti-climatic speech does everything you don't want to see at a convention: Destruction of unity. Add to that the aftermatch of Cruz' speech -Ted Cruz mockingly saying "I appreciate the enthusiasm of the New York delegation", Donald Trump interrupting Cruz in panic mode, Ted's wife Heidi leaving the stadium with a security escorte, the LED-screen starting to fail, and off course the deafening booing- and you can conclude that Trump himself should be agitated about all this. Therefore Cruz' speech is already as historic as Ted Kennedy's speech from 1980. But in many ways it also reminds us of the madness surrounding the 1976 GOP convention and the 1968 DNC convention. Compare away I say :-D!:
A short documentary about the RNC 1976 (Watch Vice-President Nelson Rockefeller destroying the voting phone):
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-reagan-lost-the-nomination-but-won-the-republican-party/
A short documentary about Kennedy's bid for the 1980 presidency (and the actual speech that wasn't an endorsement for Carter. And look out for the Tennyson bit at 34min20sec. Now we know where 'Skyfall' drew its inspiration from ;-)):
A short documentary about the 1968 Democratic National Convention (the convention in which eventually Hubert Humphrey accepted the nomination for president):