First priority of the new house- impeachment, defunding Ukraine or abortion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make peace in Ukraine

Lol what a funny way of spelling “appease Putin”

I’m an anti-war flaming liberal. Don’t need to make peace with him. What you call appeasement, I call strategic decisions. I was also supportive of “appeasing” the Viet Cong and “appeasing” Saddak Hussein’s nuclear weapons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Impeach for what exactly? "They impeached Trump, we'll impeach Biden, har har." That's not how it works. Man you people are dumb.

Impeachment is a political process. You just need to control the House. Man are you stupid.

I know the process idiot. But you need - wait for it, hang on, what's it called again - an impeachable offense. Yeah, that's it. You don't just decide tit for tat impeachment. You really are dumb.

I don't think you understand how the Rs collective brains work. They think Biden is an illegitimate POTUS.

If anyone is an idiot, it is you for not realizing how divisive and vindictive today's Rs are.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/republicans-investigate-possible-impeachment-joe-biden/671859/

You got me there. Every now and then I really do forget how awful and vengeful they are, but couch it as patriotism. Thank you for the virtual, slap-in-the-face "Snap out of it!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Impeach for what exactly? "They impeached Trump, we'll impeach Biden, har har." That's not how it works. Man you people are dumb.

Impeachment is a political process. You just need to control the House. Man are you stupid.

I know the process idiot. But you need - wait for it, hang on, what's it called again - an impeachable offense. Yeah, that's it. You don't just decide tit for tat impeachment. You really are dumb.

I don't think you understand how the Rs collective brains work. They think Biden is an illegitimate POTUS.

If anyone is an idiot, it is you for not realizing how divisive and vindictive today's Rs are.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/republicans-investigate-possible-impeachment-joe-biden/671859/

You got me there. Every now and then I really do forget how awful and vengeful they are, but couch it as patriotism. Thank you for the virtual, slap-in-the-face "Snap out of it!"

It’s hard when you’re a Dem who believes that rules and laws matter. Republicans think rules and laws are only for one party or minorities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make peace in Ukraine

Lol what a funny way of spelling “appease Putin”

I’m an anti-war flaming liberal. Don’t need to make peace with him. What you call appeasement, I call strategic decisions. I was also supportive of “appeasing” the Viet Cong and “appeasing” Saddak Hussein’s nuclear weapons.

Cool. If you’re so anti war, why do you support the aggressor/perpetrator of war crimes in this particular case? Most “flaming liberals” don’t look at the rapes in Bucha and think “yeah we should definitely enable More of this”.

On the other hand, quite a few republicans do.

[Anonymous]

I generally think war is flat out stupid, but I am behind any nation that Putin thinks he can just attack and force submission to mother Russia. We cannot negotiate with him.

I keep hoping his people will eventually rise up and oust him. I know, wishful thinking.

But we cannot just pull our help to Ukraine. That is insane.

And maybe the first time the modern Rs think we SHOULDN’T be swinging our you know whats around

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make peace in Ukraine

Lol what a funny way of spelling “appease Putin”

I’m an anti-war flaming liberal. Don’t need to make peace with him. What you call appeasement, I call strategic decisions. I was also supportive of “appeasing” the Viet Cong and “appeasing” Saddak Hussein’s nuclear weapons.

dp.. would you have wanted to appease "Hitler", too? Just how far does your "appeasement" go?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make peace in Ukraine

Lol what a funny way of spelling “appease Putin”

+1 not funny, though. Corrupt and in bed with Putin. Gawd, Reagan must be turning over in his grave.

Something can appease Putin AND be good for peace. I don't think "piss off Putin" should be a cornerstone of foreign policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make peace in Ukraine

Lol what a funny way of spelling “appease Putin”

I’m an anti-war flaming liberal. Don’t need to make peace with him. What you call appeasement, I call strategic decisions. I was also supportive of “appeasing” the Viet Cong and “appeasing” Saddak Hussein’s nuclear weapons.

Cool. If you’re so anti war, why do you support the aggressor/perpetrator of war crimes in this particular case? Most “flaming liberals” don’t look at the rapes in Bucha and think “yeah we should definitely enable More of this”.

On the other hand, quite a few republicans do.

Iraqis got over the invasion and Ukrainians will get over Bucha, too. There's enough war crimes to go around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make peace in Ukraine

Lol what a funny way of spelling “appease Putin”

I’m an anti-war flaming liberal. Don’t need to make peace with him. What you call appeasement, I call strategic decisions. I was also supportive of “appeasing” the Viet Cong and “appeasing” Saddak Hussein’s nuclear weapons.

Cool. If you’re so anti war, why do you support the aggressor/perpetrator of war crimes in this particular case? Most “flaming liberals” don’t look at the rapes in Bucha and think “yeah we should definitely enable More of this”.

On the other hand, quite a few republicans do.

Iraqis got over the invasion and Ukrainians will get over Bucha, too. There's enough war crimes to go around.

What an interesting idea. I mean, irrational, because you don’t get over something that continues (since appeasing Putin means surrendering Ukraine) but it’s always good to see how much the far right values the lives of women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make peace in Ukraine

Lol what a funny way of spelling “appease Putin”

+1 not funny, though. Corrupt and in bed with Putin. Gawd, Reagan must be turning over in his grave.

Something can appease Putin AND be good for peace. I don't think "piss off Putin" should be a cornerstone of foreign policy.

No one says he has to be pissed off by people living peacefully in their own sovereign state. That’s something he’s chosen on his own. It’s also a foundational principle of the UN charter which is something you’d know if you were such a “flaming liberal”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They talked about crime and inflation but we all know that was just talk. Maybe they will defund the FBI and grant amnesty to the terrorist and coup plotters?

The election should have been a loud wakeup call to politiiof both parties that the electorate is sick of the status quo and we want meaningful legislation on right to safe and legal abortion, sound immigration policy, medical care for all, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make peace in Ukraine

Lol what a funny way of spelling “appease Putin”

I’m an anti-war flaming liberal. Don’t need to make peace with him. What you call appeasement, I call strategic decisions. I was also supportive of “appeasing” the Viet Cong and “appeasing” Saddak Hussein’s nuclear weapons.

dp.. would you have wanted to appease "Hitler", too? Just how far does your "appeasement" go?

I believe Chamberlain came back to England after meeting with Hitler and announced "peace for our time.". That time turned out to be very short as a year later Germany invaded Poland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make peace in Ukraine

Lol what a funny way of spelling “appease Putin”

+1 not funny, though. Corrupt and in bed with Putin. Gawd, Reagan must be turning over in his grave.

Something can appease Putin AND be good for peace. I don't think "piss off Putin" should be a cornerstone of foreign policy.

No one says he has to be pissed off by people living peacefully in their own sovereign state. That’s something he’s chosen on his own. It’s also a foundational principle of the UN charter which is something you’d know if you were such a “flaming liberal”.

Israel craps on the UN charter every day and no one gives a damn, including the US (especially the US!) so what's with the hypocrisy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make peace in Ukraine

Lol what a funny way of spelling “appease Putin”

I’m an anti-war flaming liberal. Don’t need to make peace with him. What you call appeasement, I call strategic decisions. I was also supportive of “appeasing” the Viet Cong and “appeasing” Saddak Hussein’s nuclear weapons.

Cool. If you’re so anti war, why do you support the aggressor/perpetrator of war crimes in this particular case? Most “flaming liberals” don’t look at the rapes in Bucha and think “yeah we should definitely enable More of this”.

On the other hand, quite a few republicans do.

Iraqis got over the invasion and Ukrainians will get over Bucha, too. There's enough war crimes to go around.

What an interesting idea. I mean, irrational, because you don’t get over something that continues (since appeasing Putin means surrendering Ukraine) but it’s always good to see how much the far right values the lives of women.

The war in Iraq went on for much longer than the war in Ukraine. Wars end eventually.

Enough with the "value the right of women", it sounds stupid coming from a nation that counts Saudi Arabia among best friends and nurtured the Taliban into existence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make peace in Ukraine

Lol what a funny way of spelling “appease Putin”

+1 not funny, though. Corrupt and in bed with Putin. Gawd, Reagan must be turning over in his grave.

Something can appease Putin AND be good for peace. I don't think "piss off Putin" should be a cornerstone of foreign policy.

No one says he has to be pissed off by people living peacefully in their own sovereign state. That’s something he’s chosen on his own. It’s also a foundational principle of the UN charter which is something you’d know if you were such a “flaming liberal”.

Israel craps on the UN charter every day and no one gives a damn, including the US (especially the US!) so what's with the hypocrisy?

Because this conversation is about support for Ukraine, which has been invaded and subjected to war crimes by a regional bully, who is given significant succor by the American right wing— notice their campaigning on ending support for the people fighting Putin. Whataboutism is also characteristic of the American right wing— or is your next complaint going to be about Hilary Clinton’s emails?