I've been collecting these Hillary gifs from twitter.

MikeCF put this video out a few days ago:

Look at this stud. How can you say no to a man who wears a tie which touches the floor and billowing dress shirt like that.

Azn dude looks pretty startled

(08-13-2016 03:28 PM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  


Look at this stud. How can you say no to a man who wears a tie which touches the floor and billowing dress shirt like that.

If I were to caption that photo it would be

"Tim Kaine, after 7 fruity daquiris, showed the restaurant how he "motorboats big titties""

It always seemed to me that Obama was a clueless agent of destruction but meant well (kind of like Bernie Sanders). Hillary is evil incarnate.

(08-14-2016 06:35 PM)Enoch Wrote:  It always seemed to me that Obama was a clueless agent of destruction but meant well (kind of like Bernie Sanders). Hillary is evil incarnate.

Hillary is Mao, Kim Jong Il, Stalin etc. It is a moral imperative that she NOT get in. We will be so fucked if she gets in that you could look up our asses and see daylight.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/hillar...le/2599321

Hilary is trying to use illegal immigrants "dreamers" to influence legal immigrants to vote. A dreamer is

Quote:The DACA program created so-called "Dreamers," the children of illegal immigrants who the president has offered renewable two-year work visas and deportation deferral. The goal for many in the program is amnesty

(08-14-2016 06:44 PM)rpg Wrote:  

(08-14-2016 06:35 PM)Enoch Wrote:  It always seemed to me that Obama was a clueless agent of destruction but meant well (kind of like Bernie Sanders). Hillary is evil incarnate.

Hillary is Mao, Kim Jong Il, Stalin etc. It is a moral imperative that she NOT get in. We will be so fucked if she gets in that you could look up our asses and see daylight.

Mao is a bit different. If you talk to Chinese people who were alive during Mao's era, some of them speak of him positively. But you can say the same of people alive in Uganda for Idi Amin's reign, and he had some pretty unspeakable atrocities as far as slaughtering his citizens, so many that they didn't even bother to dig mass graves, just piled them by the side of the road.

Hillary is in a category of her own, I would compare her more to Merkel who completely destroyed her country within a couple of years through bad decisions that were manipulated by zionist billionaire George Soros. That is the comparison we should be making: Hillary would do to the usa what Merkel did to Germany.

(08-15-2016 07:23 AM)eradicator Wrote:  

(08-14-2016 06:44 PM)rpg Wrote:  

(08-14-2016 06:35 PM)Enoch Wrote:  It always seemed to me that Obama was a clueless agent of destruction but meant well (kind of like Bernie Sanders). Hillary is evil incarnate.

Hillary is Mao, Kim Jong Il, Stalin etc. It is a moral imperative that she NOT get in. We will be so fucked if she gets in that you could look up our asses and see daylight.

Mao is a bit different. If you talk to Chinese people who were alive during Mao's era, some of them speak of him positively. But you can say the same of people alive in Uganda for Idi Amin's reign, and he had some pretty unspeakable atrocities as far as slaughtering his citizens, so many that they didn't even bother to dig mass graves, just piled them by the side of the road.

Hillary is in a category of her own, I would compare her more to Merkel who completely destroyed her country within a couple of years through bad decisions that were manipulated by zionist billionaire George Soros. That is the comparison we should be making: Hillary would do to the usa what Merkel did to Germany.

Mao also did not understand certain things such as basic food logistics and unintentionally starved millions of his own people. What he was getting at, is if you do not know what you are doing and will refuse to listen to wise advisors (or kill the ones you may have had), you may adversely make horrific mistakes.

Mao is still loved by many, because they knew he still had a big heart and loved his people, regardless of his mistakes. There was no malice in any of those mistakes he made.

Hillary is ignorant enough to do the same thing as well as evil enough to do stuff other dictators did as well.

(08-15-2016 07:38 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

(08-15-2016 07:23 AM)eradicator Wrote:  

(08-14-2016 06:44 PM)rpg Wrote:  

(08-14-2016 06:35 PM)Enoch Wrote:  It always seemed to me that Obama was a clueless agent of destruction but meant well (kind of like Bernie Sanders). Hillary is evil incarnate.

Hillary is Mao, Kim Jong Il, Stalin etc. It is a moral imperative that she NOT get in. We will be so fucked if she gets in that you could look up our asses and see daylight.

Mao is a bit different. If you talk to Chinese people who were alive during Mao's era, some of them speak of him positively. But you can say the same of people alive in Uganda for Idi Amin's reign, and he had some pretty unspeakable atrocities as far as slaughtering his citizens, so many that they didn't even bother to dig mass graves, just piled them by the side of the road.

Hillary is in a category of her own, I would compare her more to Merkel who completely destroyed her country within a couple of years through bad decisions that were manipulated by zionist billionaire George Soros. That is the comparison we should be making: Hillary would do to the usa what Merkel did to Germany.

Mao also did not understand certain things such as basic food logistics and unintentionally starved millions of his own people. What he was getting at, is if you do not know what you are doing and will refuse to listen to wise advisors (or kill the ones you may have had), you may adversely make horrific mistakes.

Mao is still loved by many, because they knew he still had a big heart and loved his people, regardless of his mistakes. There was no malice in any of those mistakes he made.

There's plenty of information on record that suggests that this may not be true. I'm not going to make the argument that Mao intentionally starved millions to death, but based on the reading I've done, I find it much easier to believe that he was a conniving, selfish asshole who survived where other potential leaders died by always putting himself first.

The only claims I've run into about him having a big heart have been part of the propaganda issued by the PRC on their various CCTV channels.

Not sure how you reached this conclusion.

Mao could have easily put an end at anytime to the horror that was the Cultural Revolution, but he didn't. Power was far more important to him than doing the right thing for his country.

This guy didn't have a big heart. He was 110% asshole.

I think you may have drunk too much tainted Chinese Cool-aid.

Mao is an interesting character. There are a couple good biographies of him that make for excellent reading. One major thing that differentiates Mao from many other elites in the time is that he was a relatively successful war time leader. He also had some major tensions with the Russians, who dogmatically believed that any true communist revolution would from "the workers" meaning industrial city laborers.....nevermind that China at the time was largely agricultural.

(08-15-2016 07:52 AM)Suits Wrote:  

(08-15-2016 07:38 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

(08-15-2016 07:23 AM)eradicator Wrote:  

(08-14-2016 06:44 PM)rpg Wrote:  

(08-14-2016 06:35 PM)Enoch Wrote:  It always seemed to me that Obama was a clueless agent of destruction but meant well (kind of like Bernie Sanders). Hillary is evil incarnate.

Hillary is Mao, Kim Jong Il, Stalin etc. It is a moral imperative that she NOT get in. We will be so fucked if she gets in that you could look up our asses and see daylight.

Mao is a bit different. If you talk to Chinese people who were alive during Mao's era, some of them speak of him positively. But you can say the same of people alive in Uganda for Idi Amin's reign, and he had some pretty unspeakable atrocities as far as slaughtering his citizens, so many that they didn't even bother to dig mass graves, just piled them by the side of the road.

Hillary is in a category of her own, I would compare her more to Merkel who completely destroyed her country within a couple of years through bad decisions that were manipulated by zionist billionaire George Soros. That is the comparison we should be making: Hillary would do to the usa what Merkel did to Germany.

Mao also did not understand certain things such as basic food logistics and unintentionally starved millions of his own people. What he was getting at, is if you do not know what you are doing and will refuse to listen to wise advisors (or kill the ones you may have had), you may adversely make horrific mistakes.

Mao is still loved by many, because they knew he still had a big heart and loved his people, regardless of his mistakes. There was no malice in any of those mistakes he made.

There's plenty of information on record that suggests that this may not be true. I'm not going to make the argument that Mao intentionally starved millions to death, but based on the reading I've done, I find it much easier to believe that he was a conniving, selfish asshole who survived where other potential leaders died by always putting himself first.

The only claims I've run into about him having a big heart have been part of the propaganda issued by the PRC on their various CCTV channels.

Not sure how you reached this conclusion.

Mao could have easily put an end at anytime to the horror that was the Cultural Revolution, but he didn't. Power was far more important to him than doing the right thing for his country.

This guy didn't have a big heart. He was 110% asshole.

I think you may have drunk too much tainted Chinese Cool-aid.

He was selfish and a dictator. Dictators by definition are all of those things you mentioned. I still called him a dictator above. You cannot compare people like Idi Amin or Pol Pot to Mao because they wantonly slaughtered their people or took to genocide. Mao had his own fan clubs and a cult of personality. Just because he was a dictator did not mean he was not capable of being nice to some people.

I have not drank any Chinese koolaid. I have studied the history from more than just a Western university's classroom and have spoken to people inside China and too many elderly Chinese to count. Ever go inside a house in China and see a shrine of Mao above the pictures of dead relatives? Part of being a historian is to go out and conduct interviews and find out the various perspectives from folks that lived through it. Farmers have different views of Mao than city people do. Same goes for educated vs non-educated. Reading books and collecting facts is just part of the job. I know for a fact I have done far more than you have on this front, so save the snark for someone else. You are barking up the wrong tree again, so back off. That last sentence of yours was 100% unnecessary.

Suits and Kai...is this still the Hillary Clinton Thread?

Quote:Mao also did not understand certain things such as basic food logistics and unintentionally starved millions of his own people.

Yes, and this happened because anyone who dared to report the failures of collectivization were imprisoned, fired, or punished in some other way. I find it hard to believe the starvation was not intentional. Willful ignorance is still malicious intent in my book.

(08-15-2016 11:12 AM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  Suits and Kai...is this still the Hillary Clinton Thread?

Hillary actually had this email: [email protected]

http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/05/hacker...-accounts/

(08-15-2016 11:14 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:Mao also did not understand certain things such as basic food logistics and unintentionally starved millions of his own people.

Yes, and this happened because anyone who dared to report the failures of collectivization were imprisoned, fired, or punished in some other way. I find it hard to believe the starvation was not intentional. Willful ignorance is still malicious intent in my book.

Well said. This is a very valid point. It fits perfectly with Hillary as well because of her gross incompetence of maintaining her own private server in some piddly attempt to circumvent FOIA and others, she actually allowed the enemy to exploit her and the entire country.

We can certainly look at Mao the same way and that is a valid criticism of his rule. He was a military general from the countryside. He certainly knew how to fight and squish competitors in a way no other ever managed to do in China and live to tell the tale. Did he know how to run a country that large? Heck no. He probably did not know how to run a country half the size of China. The amount of people in history that have ever ran a country the size of China is a very small club. There is some weight to arguments in either area.

That is what makes Mao and his rule very interesting to study. You really cannot come in with a predetermined bias of things like Autocracy is always evil, Democracy is always good, or things like that, because it can cloud other areas that have legitimate value. Comparative Politics as a sub-study of Political Science requires that you give looks at things your society conditioning would describe as evil, as much as a unbiased view as possible to understand the differences. Otherwise it really looks the whole world is black/white or good guys/bad guys. Human beings the world over, all want the same things most want. Some methods succeed and some fail.

This reminds me of a couple good books:





One book is politics and the other is more psychology, but the topic we are discussing is the same for both.

Some EE citizens I've met will speak positively of communism if you make them comfortable enough, and I know some Serbs who really like Tito.

No dictator kills everyone. Their boldness inspires love in a lot of the citizenry. Also some people were just in the right place at the right time to profit, and once the dictator/regime went, their golden egg went too and they are sour grapes now.

Hell, if you just read basic high school history books you come off with the impression that Napoleon was some sort of interesting hero, rather than a megalomaniac butcher.

People who put pictures of dictators above their loved ones on the wall are pretty much dumb cunts, regardless of how kind, hardworking, dependable they are in other cases. So... whatever, it's fine, some of my family and friends are dumb cunts too... but let's call a spade a spade.

To bring things back to topic, no matter what Hillary does, she will be loved by some sycophants til the day they die. And it might even be because they got something positive from her rule. But fuck them. Right in the ear.

You guys see this? She almost slipped and fell down at a rally today. Didn't look like much on the video, but she looks really old and frail.

On my phone so can't embed the video, but here is a link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7amj23ny7o

SECRET SERVICE WHISTLEBLOWER: HILLARY HAS MAJOR NEUROLOGICAL PROBLEMS

According to the Secret Service, Hilary Clinton has a severe neurological disorder.





Hillary has a very serious neurological degeneration which could be Parkinson’s disease:

It's starting to seem more and more that Hillary is just an empty shell that is going to be elected and the dark powers are going to run everything behind the scenes and she'll have no control.

And I'm sure at some point she'll stroke out and they'll hide it, becoming a real-life version of "Dave" except way scarier and no Kevin Kline.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_(film)

EDIT: "going to be elected" I don't really mean that, Trump is going to roll right over her ass, even if she manages to make it all the way to November. I've seen predictions that the future leaks are going to destroy the campaign and she'll just have to quit.

   

Old crazy joe getting frisky with the hag.

(08-15-2016 03:23 PM)Dusty Wrote:  Old crazy joe getting frisky with the hag.

She was thiiiiis close to eating shit stepping off the podium.