I think Bush I was at least professional, even if I didn't agree with some policy views. And he DIDN'T go into Iraq and get in THAT quagmire which is looking smarter and smarter as time goes on.

I think this thread will evolve into some kind of Hillary meme collection one:



At least she is honest - if Hillary says the Illuminati exist and call themselves that way, then I will take her word for it.







Women are such peaceful creatures openly celebrating the gruesome death of Mr. BungBunga.

Trigger Warning: rage inducing

(04-12-2015 04:56 PM)spokepoker Wrote:  Invest in kitty litter and vaginal lubricant stocks.

Cat Litter A Nearly $2 Billion Market in the U.S.

One of the largest pet supplies categories, cat litter is highly consolidated and ostensibly mature. Valued at $1.8 billion as of 2009 by Packaged Facts estimates, the category represents over two-fifths (43%) of cat supplies retail sales, with litter accessories contributing another 4%.

According to Experian Simmons, approximately one-fifth of U.S. households purchased cat litter in 2004, and by 2009 this number had crept up to 22%, representing over four-fifths (84%) of cat owners. By product type, consumer usage skews heavily toward scoopable (58%), compared with 24% for regular clay and 4% for crystal formulations, and with
natural/alternative products (pine, wheat, corn, paper) accounting for about 5% of sales across all product types. The more sophisticated the litter type, the more likely it is to be sold in the
pet specialty channel, where the bulk of natural/alternative sales occur.

The top four cat litter marketers accounted for 80% of IRI-tracked sales in 2009, with private label kicking in another 15%. Nestlé Purina (Tidy Cats, Tidy Scoop, Yesterday’s News) leads the pack, at 31%, followed by Clorox (Fresh Step, Scoop Away) at 29%, Church & Dwight (Arm & Hammer) at 15%, and Oil-Dri Corp. (Cat’s Pride, Jonny Cat) at 5%

The kitty litter market in 2009:


Nestle Purina 31%

this stock has raised from 25 $ to 78 $ in the present.
anyone with this stock has more than tripled his money
in the last years

Clorox 29%

this stock has raised from 48 $ to 111 $ in the present.
anyone with this stock has more than multiplied 2.3 his money
in the last years


Church & Dwight 15%

this stock has raised from 6 $ to 86 $ in the present.
anyone with this stock has more than multiplied 14 (fourteen!)
his money in the last years


Which are the biggest emergent producers
for kitty litter and vaginal lubricants in 2014/2015 ?

(04-18-2015 05:25 AM)iknowexactly Wrote:  I think Bush I was at least professional, even if I didn't agree with some policy views. And he DIDN'T go into Iraq and get in THAT quagmire which is looking smarter and smarter as time goes on.

He didn't go into Iraq because Suddam was his homie. They had business deals on the back end but Bush overtly was selling him weapons. How soon we forget that it was American nerve gas he used on the Kurds, that stuff didn't fall out of the sky. It was Bush and Rumsfeld who made those deals with him.



Fast forward a few yeats and Kuwait was used as a pawn to start hostilities. Kuwait lended Iraq protection funds to ensure Iran would stay out of its borders, all the Gulf nations did this and Iraq followed through with drawing its own blood to keep its own and the Gulf reigons sovereignty. Kuwauit demand money back she Iraq was near broke after that war, other Gulf nations didn't. Kuwait also was slant drilling and stealing Iraqi oil to the amount of close $3.0 billion dollars worth, plus they were over drilling causing world prices to drop further hurting Iraq.

Iraq felt cheated. Especially cheated by some micro state that was essentially a territory of Iraq for much of history. And especially for a Kuwait it just spent years in a meat grinder for in Iran attempting to protect. Saddam had enough and stormed in to stop the shady Kuwait dealings which turns out were all organized by the CIA. Once Saddam rolled through Bush Sr. started saying the sky was talking and Saddam was killing babies - the Gulf War was born.

The end goal was always the same now which was to seize control of the oil fields as they did not trust Saddam to remain in favor of the USA as he was flirting more and more with more autonomous power whiten the reigon and less relience on USA instrments in trade such as $USD and the requirements to buy US Bonds. Saddam was getting frustrated as he was holding so much USA money but could not get USA goods aside from junky Wheat (After the fact this further lead to his removal when he attempted to make a rival reserve currency for trade with the Euro and as it's backing). Post the Gulf Way Kuwait became a USA property with a heavily miltirized presence. I believe that Bush Sr. would of indeed went back into Iraq in his second term, but did not see it to make it happen so his son finished the job.

(04-18-2015 12:18 PM)Dusty Wrote:  Trigger Warning: rage inducing

(04-18-2015 12:18 PM)Dusty Wrote:  Trigger Warning: rage inducing

(04-15-2015 08:30 AM)rhino Wrote:  In addition to her general unlikeability, and numerous shady deals she accepted or participated in, Hillary is also old and ugly. And has cankles. If she were a civilian she would've been around 30 years past her own visibility. And no amount of her campaign tweets and youthful audience courting will change that.

Make no mistake, Hillary will not be elected because the hipsters who gave Obama the winning margin, will not go out of their way for her. It's a simple biology, because the biggest non-material motive in anything and anywhere is always a sexual one. Even hipsters won't be able to bear the ridiculous thought of a 70-year old sexually invisible granma with cankles leading the "free world".

I am not so sure of that. In the Time thread about Sandra Bullock it was said that Time Magazines average reader is in their 40s. I bet she gets the women's vote and it will be heavy on boomer and gen x women. She will probably get a fair amount of middle of the read republican women too. Republicans talk up the "traditional Christian values" angle a lot but if you look around the flyover states there are a lot of once or twice divorced Christian republican women who can probably be turned Democrat with the right messaging. Also, even if the hipsters don't turn out for her I doubt they will turn out for a republican. Most probably won't vote at all and the few that do may go third party.

To put my conspiracy hat on for a minute, have any of you watched CNN in the last week or two. This last week it has either been white male on black male violence and the protests over cops or about weed. I really wonder, as a former pothead and liberal who would probably have been counted in the male hipster ranks to a degree, if the decriminalization and legalization of weed in some places isn't meant to dull the more middle and upper middle class guys to keep them from thinking too much about all of this feminist nonsense and SJW progressivism. Why research politics when you can take a road trip to Colorado and get stoned?

(04-22-2015 08:53 AM)magicone Wrote:  

(04-12-2015 04:56 PM)spokepoker Wrote:  Invest in kitty litter and vaginal lubricant stocks.

Cat Litter A Nearly $2 Billion Market in the U.S.

One of the largest pet supplies categories, cat litter is highly consolidated and ostensibly mature. Valued at $1.8 billion as of 2009 by Packaged Facts estimates, the category represents over two-fifths (43%) of cat supplies retail sales, with litter accessories contributing another 4%.

According to Experian Simmons, approximately one-fifth of U.S. households purchased cat litter in 2004, and by 2009 this number had crept up to 22%, representing over four-fifths (84%) of cat owners. By product type, consumer usage skews heavily toward scoopable (58%), compared with 24% for regular clay and 4% for crystal formulations, and with
natural/alternative products (pine, wheat, corn, paper) accounting for about 5% of sales across all product types. The more sophisticated the litter type, the more likely it is to be sold in the
pet specialty channel, where the bulk of natural/alternative sales occur.

The top four cat litter marketers accounted for 80% of IRI-tracked sales in 2009, with private label kicking in another 15%. Nestlé Purina (Tidy Cats, Tidy Scoop, Yesterday’s News) leads the pack, at 31%, followed by Clorox (Fresh Step, Scoop Away) at 29%, Church & Dwight (Arm & Hammer) at 15%, and Oil-Dri Corp. (Cat’s Pride, Jonny Cat) at 5%

The kitty litter market in 2009:


Nestle Purina 31%

this stock has raised from 25 $ to 78 $ in the present.
anyone with this stock has more than tripled his money
in the last years

Clorox 29%

this stock has raised from 48 $ to 111 $ in the present.
anyone with this stock has more than multiplied 2.3 his money
in the last years


Church & Dwight 15%

this stock has raised from 6 $ to 86 $ in the present.
anyone with this stock has more than multiplied 14 (fourteen!)
his money in the last years


Which are the biggest emergent producers
for kitty litter and vaginal lubricants in 2014/2015 ?

Hahahaha

+1

(04-18-2015 12:18 PM)Dusty Wrote:  Trigger Warning: rage inducing

What the shit. I could understand this "its a woman's turn to be president" if we didn't JUST have the first black president. This whole school age thing of "everybody gets to have a turn to be fair" bullshit is now in people's minds and being applied to reality.

So, whats after Hilary? every possible minority should get their turn as president? Name your candidates for each

1. The first disabled president - Larry Flynt...man that would piss people off.
2. The first transgender president - The first RVF member that slaps on a wig and says "I identify as a woman for 4 years"
3. The first president with two dicks - That guy
4. The first gay president - Barney whatever, currently an elected rep
5. The first muslim president...
6. The first president with a tattoo on their face...

...and the fairness police will want it to go on and on and on and on before any man, including Herman Cain, is "allowed" to be president again. Everyone needs their turn.

Just came upon this little gem:

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17388372/ns/po...TtpBdKqqko

Turns out the hidden topic of Hillary's thesis was based on a book by Saul Alinsky:



That guy was an extreme marxist totalitarian who advocated for the infiltration of all levels of government and then the taking over said government to create a communist absolute empire.

In addition to that he was what some may call a Luciferian - he literally dedicated the book to LUCIFER (that Hillary's thesis was based on).

_______________

Also funny documentary on all the scams going on with the Clintons:





Haven't watched it so far, but probably the usual stuff about corruption, mysterious death, extortion - the normal black-mail susceptible candidate you want to have in the White House.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/...?referrer=

Hilary and Bill took 2.5 million from Russian oligarchs to help them get a majority share of the world's uranium supply. I hope this sinks her but it probably won't

(04-25-2015 12:10 PM)Tytalus Wrote:  http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/...?referrer=

Hilary and Bill took 2.5 million from Russian oligarchs to help them get a majority share of the world's uranium supply. I hope this sinks her but it probably won't

That's just one item in a long list of her conflicts of interest:

Quote:The New York Times has a report about the State Department’s decision to approve the sale of Uranium mines to a Russian company that donated $2.35 million to the Clinton Global Initiative, and that a Russian investment bank promoting the deal paid Bill $500,000 for a speech in Moscow.

•The Washington Post reports that Bill Clinton has received $26 million in speaking fees from entities that also donated to the Clinton Global Initiative.

•The Washington Examiner reports, “Twenty-two of the 37 corporations nominated for a prestigious State Department award — and six of the eight ultimate winners — while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State were also donors to the Clinton family foundation.”

•And Reuters reports, “Hillary Clinton's family's charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors.”

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/201...dency.html

Note the sources. In most cases, the so-called 'liberal media.' It's not just Rush Limbaugh and Fox News grumbling about Hillary and her shady practices. She has liberals complaining too. Let's see how far the pussy pass can carry her.

^^^

she is so damn corrupt and it's been known for years but the press always glosses over it, due to their left-leaning/progressive ideology but also bc of the way the right attacks her. It actually makes it easier to say it's just "right wing attacks/spin" when yet another scandal appears and Fox and the Repubs go ape-shit.

There are so many of her scandals now I almost think she is untouchable due to the fact that everyone knows she's rotten to the core but she's the Dem's candidate and they will stick by their man (er, woman) now. Whitewater, Benghazi, the email scandal, Vince Foster, etc. didn't sink her so I doubt this will.

I think she'd almost have to run around naked in one of the debates with a big dildo on her head, or pull down her pants and take a dump on live TV for the mainstream press to say "enough" and that she's not qualified.

Let's get real - the powers that be in the government, the mainstream media, academia & many corporations (+most women) want a woman president and they will stop at nothing to get one at this point.

Hillary is still polling slightly higher than the most popular republican (rubio), which confirms my fears that dems have succeeded in creating a permanent democrat voting majority.

Doubling the national debt, flooding the country with cheap labor, benefits to illegals, foreign policy incompetance, harmful regulations, promoting anti-family policies.

Hillary voters simply dont care. They are convinced 'the man' is holding them down and they want daddy government to punish entrepreneurs and white males under their rules. At this point it's not an election anymore, the dem will always win. Women + various gov dependents will win every time. They dont want freedom or econ opportunity, just free shit and lip service to punishing the 'elite' (males).

The "manosphere" and the like ought to back Hillary and help accelerate feminism to a level of self-parody more fitting of our postmodern society. Ask yourself, honestly: what has all the petty, juvenile back-and-forth achieved thus far? Nothing less than to legitimize and validate their quasi-victim status in the eyes of the uncritical masses. Not to mention the favor of keeping them just honest enough that society at large can more comfortably adjust to accommodate their hysterics. Let's get "safe spaces" legally enforced in all workplaces in Hillary's first year. WHO'S WITH ME?

(disclaimer: I am not the first to suggest the merit of backing Hillary for entertainment purposes)

The irony is that Hillary doesn't even represent their feminist ideals or whatever it is they think. She's more or less a neo-con, a Dick Cheney with a wrinkled vagina. Even her intertwining of personal interests and politics with real corporate corruption is similar.

(04-18-2015 12:18 PM)Dusty Wrote:  Trigger Warning: rage inducing

Hold on, is that first 'chick' actually a student? She looks like she's 50 and has a gut bigger than the moon. Is that really what my friends/classmates are going see when they go to study in the U.S. Thank God I'm trying to study in Europe.

(04-25-2015 10:53 PM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  The irony is that Hillary doesn't even represent their feminist ideals or whatever it is they think. She's more or less a neo-con, a Dick Cheney with a wrinkled vagina. Even her intertwining of personal interests and politics with real corporate corruption is similar.

Since Hillary is a woman she will not have to work as hard for the female vote. Combine that with her voting history, and my guess is she will be closer to George Bush politically than Barack Obama. All in all, she will be more of a neocon and less of a hands of feminist that Obama has been.

But she will still be a disaster. And as bad as things are getting, I hope that she will wake up more of the blue pill beta males and the swing back to normalcy will begin.

All the bitching about NeoCons on this thread makes it sound like a Green Day song. Can someone enlighten me on what exactly makes Neocons so unappealing? I'm not American, so I've never truly understood the terminology.

(04-26-2015 11:29 AM)komatiite Wrote:  All the bitching about NeoCons on this thread makes it sound like a Green Day song. Can someone enlighten me on what exactly makes Neocons so unappealing? I'm not American, so I've never truly understood the terminology.

NeoCon is a term used for so called "Conservative" politicians that push mostly liberal agendas but in the frame of conservative values.

George Bush's reign was very neoconservative...

- Increased Medicare (a leftist govt. run healthcare program) to pull in old voters, but then the next day goes out and will give a speech about needing less govt. spending.

- Believes we must always increase military spending, even though it has grown to the point of obscene proportions. Anytime an opposing candidate claims we can cut military spending they wrap themselves in the flag and claim their opponents say this because they hate the soldiers.

- Starts needless wars with this bloated military (Iraq) all just to help their rich friends get richer. The American tax payers pay for it all and get no relief. The rich get richer off oil investments.

Basically in the USA, we are getting to the point where we must choose from a neocon or a feminist socialist.

She'll drop out when that Clinton Cash book is released.

Some of the media elites were trying to defend her conduct by saying there was no evidence of criminal wrongdoing. True, but the pattern of behavior presents at least the appearance of a conflict of interest and even many left wing pundits were saying that.

If this were anyone else but Hillary Clinton, this would not fly. Many on both sides said this.

Delete

(04-25-2015 05:25 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

"The first Whig was the Devil"

(04-26-2015 11:29 AM)komatiite Wrote:  All the bitching about NeoCons on this thread makes it sound like a Green Day song. Can someone enlighten me on what exactly makes Neocons so unappealing? I'm not American, so I've never truly understood the terminology.

American global hegemony, with military interventions wherever and whenever America sees fit. Obama and Bush both fall into this foreign policy paradigm. Main difference between the two seems to be Bush sending actual troops vs. Obama bombing and funding proxy armies. Same effect though, any government who dares to act in a way that is not in line with what America expects is outcast, vilified, and we do our damnedest to take them out.