Yup, just like how Joe Biden was, financially, the biggest ally to Israel at the time, despite being attacked as anti-Israel, since he pandered to his crowd some of what they wanted and gave minor pushback verbally, while continuing to fund them to historically high levels.
Exactly. It's just pandering. Until people realize that it's the system that's corrupt nothing will change. And that's precisely why democracy is 'the best system we've ever had'.
Can we stop calling these losers "principled"? There's nothing principled about repeatedly throwing elections and letting the other side cheat because it's easier than being accountable for campaign promises.
That's exactly what I've been feeling every time this comes up. The Western world is better because we have principles, not because we disregard them. The problem is hewing to wrong, contradictory, and self-serving morals.
I have been ranting about this debate question since it happened to every zionist I see complain about him.
The post title is right on the money. Whichever party turns on Israel first is going to take over the country. At least some on the right are moving in the right direction, so the odds are at least getting closer to 1:1. Ten years ago, the odds would have been 99:1 against us.
I remember when Epstein's island was an "antisemitic conspiracy theory" and "blood libel" that was supposedly so dangerous, 4chan quietly deleted the threads about it. This was in 2004~2006.
The threads in question were few and far between. I guess the jannies at the time had their standing orders to silence all discussion of it. There were some interesting discussions about epstein's island on usenet and IRC (waaayyyy before 4chan), though.
It's nice to see that level of freedom slowly returning to the 'net. It's gonna piss off the mosquito tribe though hahaha.
There are two parties. All isreal has to do is switch funding from one to the other. Or do you think everyone who supports isreal now does it out of love and has no care for money?
so the odds are at least getting closer to 1:1
Yea but it's netenyahu. You're not in a fair fight. If you're planning for one you're going to get beaten and then raped in the hallmark IDF style.
Where the fuck has this whole notion that city mayors should be going anywhere overseas?!
The Mayors of places like LA and NYC consider themselves on par with the heads of state, because technically the hold domain over something bigger than most countries. Its been a problem for a while, honestly. Cali in particular has Mayors getting involved in International Affairs regularly and undermining the rest of the country to do so.
Its why there was that amusing moment a few days ago when the governor of NY (people always forget that NYC is just a single city in the whole state) said she wouldn't approve a bunch of Mamdani's proposals so they weren't possible, yet he kept talking like he would be the new President with ultimate power.
I'm a gay faggot but the fucking question was: first foreign visit
That is like if someone asks what country would you like to vacation if you can go anywhere in the world
and everyone answers within the parameter of the question and then you have that guy who goes "I would visit New York City because why go overseas when America is so great?!"
And yes many nyc mayors have gone overseas, and many to Israel to kiss the ring. But my gripe still stands. Even if I was a fan of Mandani the response didn't answer the question. But now everyone is gonna say that shit first.
It was a stupid fucking question though. He's mayor. Not a head of state. So he said "I won't, I'm staying here" actually is answering in the form of the question because the question is primed to assume he WILL make a foreign visit.
I only know he's a commie. I haven't heard him talk before this clip. But if this was the only clip I had to go off for the mayoral vote, he'd have got my vote too.
I thought that too until I found out NYC mayors all think they got big dick energy and many did go on foreign visits as mayor.
So if you're running for mayor of NYC understood the context, and I get what you're saying, but to me, my brain is like "what kind of ice cream flavor do you like?" and you have one guy who replies I don't like ice cream after everyone else gave answers in flavors.
And given that everyone of them on that stage are globalist democrats, his answer is literally the least genuine one. Think about it, if they gave him a follow up question where they asks: but say you have to go somewhere where would you go?
It might be common for NYC mayors to do it, but that doesn't mean that the voters consider it normal or worthwhile.
I mean, my follow up answer would be a question "what kind of event could possibly justify the mayor of a city going to a foreign nation on official business?" And pushed back. But that's actually my personality in real life.
It should be a stupid question. If the moderator asks them what their first foreign visit will be, saying you have no intentions to make foreign visits should be the default answer - unless you're visiting another port city to discuss shipping, foreign relations are not your job.
Funny thing: the inquisition lasted 355 years and the number of executions in person is estimated to be around 1,303 for the period 1540–1700, with an additional 778 people sentenced to death in effigy (where a dummy was burned instead of the individual).
The most liberal estimations have the execution rate averaging about 1 to 1.4 executions per month, or roughly 12 to 17 per year. Though the reality of written records suggests only an average of about 5 to 6 executions per year.
The Inquisition is also noted historically for its procedural fairness, limited use of torture, and restraint in applying the death penalty compared to secular courts of the time.
Retard, I'm saying talking shit about Israel is a more electable position than constantly sucking them off in public. Besides the Dems are equally owned by China, too
China is owned by Israel, and no, “talking shit” about Israel ensures you will never be “elected” under any circumstances. By either party. It’s like you’re pretending to know nothing about how the US works.
Make no mistake. They may not be sucking off Israel publicly but they're definitely doing it in private.
Yup, just like how Joe Biden was, financially, the biggest ally to Israel at the time, despite being attacked as anti-Israel, since he pandered to his crowd some of what they wanted and gave minor pushback verbally, while continuing to fund them to historically high levels.
Exactly. It's just pandering. Until people realize that it's the system that's corrupt nothing will change. And that's precisely why democracy is 'the best system we've ever had'.
Yes, it's the difference of they will fuck with a 10 inch dildo to 10.5
But the optics and impression of what he said stays, and counts to the voter.
Can we stop calling these losers "principled"? There's nothing principled about repeatedly throwing elections and letting the other side cheat because it's easier than being accountable for campaign promises.
That's exactly what I've been feeling every time this comes up. The Western world is better because we have principles, not because we disregard them. The problem is hewing to wrong, contradictory, and self-serving morals.
What good are our principles if we fail to do what's necessary to preserve them?
I have been ranting about this debate question since it happened to every zionist I see complain about him.
The post title is right on the money. Whichever party turns on Israel first is going to take over the country. At least some on the right are moving in the right direction, so the odds are at least getting closer to 1:1. Ten years ago, the odds would have been 99:1 against us.
I remember when Epstein's island was an "antisemitic conspiracy theory" and "blood libel" that was supposedly so dangerous, 4chan quietly deleted the threads about it. This was in 2004~2006.
How times change.
Can you elaborate on 4Chan deleting the threads?
The threads in question were few and far between. I guess the jannies at the time had their standing orders to silence all discussion of it. There were some interesting discussions about epstein's island on usenet and IRC (waaayyyy before 4chan), though.
It's nice to see that level of freedom slowly returning to the 'net. It's gonna piss off the mosquito tribe though hahaha.
There are two parties. All isreal has to do is switch funding from one to the other. Or do you think everyone who supports isreal now does it out of love and has no care for money?
Yea but it's netenyahu. You're not in a fair fight. If you're planning for one you're going to get beaten and then raped in the hallmark IDF style.
I hate the man, but that was a good answer.
Where the fuck has this whole notion that city mayors should be going anywhere overseas?!
The Mayors of places like LA and NYC consider themselves on par with the heads of state, because technically the hold domain over something bigger than most countries. Its been a problem for a while, honestly. Cali in particular has Mayors getting involved in International Affairs regularly and undermining the rest of the country to do so.
Its why there was that amusing moment a few days ago when the governor of NY (people always forget that NYC is just a single city in the whole state) said she wouldn't approve a bunch of Mamdani's proposals so they weren't possible, yet he kept talking like he would be the new President with ultimate power.
I'm a gay faggot but the fucking question was: first foreign visit
That is like if someone asks what country would you like to vacation if you can go anywhere in the world
and everyone answers within the parameter of the question and then you have that guy who goes "I would visit New York City because why go overseas when America is so great?!"
And yes many nyc mayors have gone overseas, and many to Israel to kiss the ring. But my gripe still stands. Even if I was a fan of Mandani the response didn't answer the question. But now everyone is gonna say that shit first.
It was a stupid fucking question though. He's mayor. Not a head of state. So he said "I won't, I'm staying here" actually is answering in the form of the question because the question is primed to assume he WILL make a foreign visit.
I only know he's a commie. I haven't heard him talk before this clip. But if this was the only clip I had to go off for the mayoral vote, he'd have got my vote too.
I thought that too until I found out NYC mayors all think they got big dick energy and many did go on foreign visits as mayor.
So if you're running for mayor of NYC understood the context, and I get what you're saying, but to me, my brain is like "what kind of ice cream flavor do you like?" and you have one guy who replies I don't like ice cream after everyone else gave answers in flavors.
And given that everyone of them on that stage are globalist democrats, his answer is literally the least genuine one. Think about it, if they gave him a follow up question where they asks: but say you have to go somewhere where would you go?
what do you suppose his answer would be? 😂
It might be common for NYC mayors to do it, but that doesn't mean that the voters consider it normal or worthwhile.
I mean, my follow up answer would be a question "what kind of event could possibly justify the mayor of a city going to a foreign nation on official business?" And pushed back. But that's actually my personality in real life.
I know it's not a country, but turns out the first of the five boroughs he is visiting is Puerto Rico. 😂
It should be a stupid question. If the moderator asks them what their first foreign visit will be, saying you have no intentions to make foreign visits should be the default answer - unless you're visiting another port city to discuss shipping, foreign relations are not your job.
Correct. The other answers made me cringe. I thought I was watching Republicans for a second. He actually sounded articulate.
People will vote for the sane guy with crazy ideas, over the crazy guy with sane ideas.
That guy right there Inquisitor.
Funny thing: the inquisition lasted 355 years and the number of executions in person is estimated to be around 1,303 for the period 1540–1700, with an additional 778 people sentenced to death in effigy (where a dummy was burned instead of the individual).
The most liberal estimations have the execution rate averaging about 1 to 1.4 executions per month, or roughly 12 to 17 per year. Though the reality of written records suggests only an average of about 5 to 6 executions per year.
The Inquisition is also noted historically for its procedural fairness, limited use of torture, and restraint in applying the death penalty compared to secular courts of the time.
The weird thing is that I know all this but each time it surprises me.
I guess the Inquisitor for the Imperium will have to do.
No more aid to jewland. Deport them all
To Auschwitz for mandatory gassing and cremation
They don't deserve a swimming pool, theater, orchestra, and delousing chamber with a chimney built after the war ended.
Listen to yourself as you write, please.
Retard, I'm saying talking shit about Israel is a more electable position than constantly sucking them off in public. Besides the Dems are equally owned by China, too
China is owned by Israel, and no, “talking shit” about Israel ensures you will never be “elected” under any circumstances. By either party. It’s like you’re pretending to know nothing about how the US works.
Lol democrats are owned by Israel too
I was talking about them. “Jew Party A” and “Jew Party B” are how I generally describe them.
He's a Soros plant. Sucking off a zionist muslim is next level retarded
The ones allowed to criticize Israel are in bed with them.