Will Ron Paul Voters Become Tulsi Gabbard Voters?

[Bush92]

LBJ? Did you fall and hit your head?

Do you stay drunk all the time? Who else's policies would they have been? The Soviets went bankrupt in 1973, mostly over Viet Nam and the ME. Nixon merely continued with Johnson's escalation via the bombing campaign, not possible without Johnson's escalation and defense budgets, and from 1973 on the Soviets were nothing but a western client state, fed and fueled to a soft landing by American wheat and refined fuels. Like I said, fashion victims can't admit the truth, so they make up their own fantasies. It's fun watching left wing loons vie with their right wing partners in trying to take credit for stuff they never did, though.

Nixon did a great thing when he invaded Cambodia.

Yes, and also with the bombing campaign. Didn't do so well re Red China later on. They had respect for Kissinger, but none for Nixon; they pretended he was never even in the room.

Congress abandoning the South in 1975 like they did was one of the sorriest low moments in American history.

It was bullshit for the Democratic Party to do what it did to South Vietnam.

Political parties don't operate outside the country.

What are you, four years old?

House Democrats cut off funding for South Vietnam in 1974. They had the majority and fucked those people over.

 

[Bush92]

Actually it was LBJ's Cold War policies that bankrupted the Soviet Union and ended the Cold War, and everybody else keeps trying to pretend it was all a' defeat n stuff', not wanting all the other fashion victims to make scary faces at them and wag fingers for not being PC re either left or right wing lunatic propaganda. The left wants us all to pretend the Soviets were heroic and wonderful, the Right wants everybody to pretend that clueless Hollywood dumbass Reagan did it, which is even more hilarious than the left wing silliness.

LBJ? Did you fall and hit your head?

Do you stay drunk all the time? Who else's policies would they have been? The Soviets went bankrupt in 1973, mostly over Viet Nam and the ME. Nixon merely continued with Johnson's escalation via the bombing campaign, not possible without Johnson's escalation and defense budgets, and from 1973 on the Soviets were nothing but a western client state, fed and fueled to a soft landing by American wheat and refined fuels. Like I said, fashion victims can't admit the truth, so they make up their own fantasies. It's fun watching left wing loons vie with their right wing partners in trying to take credit for stuff they never did, though.

Nixon did a great thing when he invaded Cambodia.

Nobody did a great thing when they invaded anywhere.

Fixed it for ya.

We were defending South Vietnam from communist aggression. Liberals backstabbed our military.

 

[Pogo]

Do you stay drunk all the time? Who else's policies would they have been? The Soviets went bankrupt in 1973, mostly over Viet Nam and the ME. Nixon merely continued with Johnson's escalation via the bombing campaign, not possible without Johnson's escalation and defense budgets, and from 1973 on the Soviets were nothing but a western client state, fed and fueled to a soft landing by American wheat and refined fuels. Like I said, fashion victims can't admit the truth, so they make up their own fantasies. It's fun watching left wing loons vie with their right wing partners in trying to take credit for stuff they never did, though.

Nixon did a great thing when he invaded Cambodia.

Yes, and also with the bombing campaign. Didn't do so well re Red China later on. They had respect for Kissinger, but none for Nixon; they pretended he was never even in the room.

Congress abandoning the South in 1975 like they did was one of the sorriest low moments in American history.

It was bullshit for the Democratic Party to do what it did to South Vietnam.

Political parties don't operate outside the country.

What are you, four years old?

House Democrats cut off funding for South Vietnam in 1974. They had the majority and fucked those people over.

Case-Church vote was 73-16 in the Senate and 325-86 in the House. Sponsored by Clifford Case and Frank Church, Republican and Democrat respectively.

And I already posed the question, when was South Vietnam part of the United States TO "fuck over".
There is no answer. BECAUSE IT WASN'T.

Don't sit here and lie. You *WILL* be exposed.

 

[Pogo]

Actually it was LBJ's Cold War policies that bankrupted the Soviet Union and ended the Cold War, and everybody else keeps trying to pretend it was all a' defeat n stuff', not wanting all the other fashion victims to make scary faces at them and wag fingers for not being PC re either left or right wing lunatic propaganda. The left wants us all to pretend the Soviets were heroic and wonderful, the Right wants everybody to pretend that clueless Hollywood dumbass Reagan did it, which is even more hilarious than the left wing silliness.

LBJ? Did you fall and hit your head?

Do you stay drunk all the time? Who else's policies would they have been? The Soviets went bankrupt in 1973, mostly over Viet Nam and the ME. Nixon merely continued with Johnson's escalation via the bombing campaign, not possible without Johnson's escalation and defense budgets, and from 1973 on the Soviets were nothing but a western client state, fed and fueled to a soft landing by American wheat and refined fuels. Like I said, fashion victims can't admit the truth, so they make up their own fantasies. It's fun watching left wing loons vie with their right wing partners in trying to take credit for stuff they never did, though.

Nixon did a great thing when he invaded Cambodia.

Nobody did a great thing when they invaded anywhere.

Fixed it for ya.

We were defending South Vietnam from communist aggression. Liberals backstabbed our military.

BULLSHIT. What'd I just tell you boy?

We were prolonging a civil war that had been going on since 1954 when France gave up its imperial fantasies. In the process we suspended the national elections that had been agreed upon for the simple reason that Ho Chi Minh would have won that election easily.

In other words we did the same thing that, say, England and France would have done if during the Civiil War France had jumped in to fight with the North and England with the Confederacy, both in hopes of enriching their own empire at the expense of the other, and leading to many more years and tens of thousands of more casualties on our own soil.

But they didn't, did they.

John Foster Fucking Dulles backstabbed our Republic in pursuit of his own imperial fantasies. THAT is what happened.

 

[buttercup]

No.

Tulsi gets one issue right: global military interventionism....After that, she's a garden variety prog statist.

/ thread.

 

[Bush92]

LBJ? Did you fall and hit your head?

Do you stay drunk all the time? Who else's policies would they have been? The Soviets went bankrupt in 1973, mostly over Viet Nam and the ME. Nixon merely continued with Johnson's escalation via the bombing campaign, not possible without Johnson's escalation and defense budgets, and from 1973 on the Soviets were nothing but a western client state, fed and fueled to a soft landing by American wheat and refined fuels. Like I said, fashion victims can't admit the truth, so they make up their own fantasies. It's fun watching left wing loons vie with their right wing partners in trying to take credit for stuff they never did, though.

Nixon did a great thing when he invaded Cambodia.

Nobody did a great thing when they invaded anywhere.

Fixed it for ya.

We were defending South Vietnam from communist aggression. Liberals backstabbed our military.

BULLSHIT. What'd I just tell you boy?

We were prolonging a civil war that had been going on since 1954 when France gave up its imperial fantasies. In the process we suspended the national elections that had been agreed upon for the simple reason that Ho Chi Minh would have won that election easily.

John Foster Fucking Dulles backstabbed our Republic in pursuit of his own imperial fantasies. THAT is what happened.

LBJ and Democrats wanted to fight the war with one hand tied around their pricks. Should have invaded Cambodia in 1965 and invaded North Vietnam. Should have mined Haiphong Harbor at start of Rolling Thunder and blew up the dykes on Red River Delta. Should have reduced Hanoi to rubble with B52 campaign against civilians.

 

[pknopp]

No, she will not get them but she should be first choice for the Democratic VP slot but alas Harris will get that because she is a anti-gun Constitution hating Democrat that is black..

Harris as VP would be a disaster for the Democrats, though I said this is who I thought Biden would lean on in that slot.

I can't see either Warren or Bernie taking her if they win the nomination, so I guess time will tell.

I see Warren taking her or Beto... Bernie would take Beto or maybe Tulsi...

Beto is a corporatist. No way Bernie would pick him. Warren is too ingrained with the DNC to take Gabbard.

 

[pknopp]

Do you stay drunk all the time? Who else's policies would they have been? The Soviets went bankrupt in 1973, mostly over Viet Nam and the ME. Nixon merely continued with Johnson's escalation via the bombing campaign, not possible without Johnson's escalation and defense budgets, and from 1973 on the Soviets were nothing but a western client state, fed and fueled to a soft landing by American wheat and refined fuels. Like I said, fashion victims can't admit the truth, so they make up their own fantasies. It's fun watching left wing loons vie with their right wing partners in trying to take credit for stuff they never did, though.

Nixon did a great thing when he invaded Cambodia.

Nobody did a great thing when they invaded anywhere.

Fixed it for ya.

We were defending South Vietnam from communist aggression. Liberals backstabbed our military.

BULLSHIT. What'd I just tell you boy?

We were prolonging a civil war that had been going on since 1954 when France gave up its imperial fantasies. In the process we suspended the national elections that had been agreed upon for the simple reason that Ho Chi Minh would have won that election easily.

John Foster Fucking Dulles backstabbed our Republic in pursuit of his own imperial fantasies. THAT is what happened.

LBJ and Democrats wanted to fight the war with one hand tied around their pricks. Should have invaded Cambodia in 1965 and invaded North Vietnam. Should have mined Haiphong Harbor at start of Rolling Thunder and blew up the dykes on Red River Delta. Should have reduced Hanoi to rubble with B52 campaign against civilians.

What would be different today?

 

[Pogo]

Nixon did a great thing when he invaded Cambodia.

Nobody did a great thing when they invaded anywhere.

Fixed it for ya.

We were defending South Vietnam from communist aggression. Liberals backstabbed our military.

BULLSHIT. What'd I just tell you boy?

We were prolonging a civil war that had been going on since 1954 when France gave up its imperial fantasies. In the process we suspended the national elections that had been agreed upon for the simple reason that Ho Chi Minh would have won that election easily.

John Foster Fucking Dulles backstabbed our Republic in pursuit of his own imperial fantasies. THAT is what happened.

LBJ and Democrats wanted to fight the war with one hand tied around their pricks. Should have invaded Cambodia in 1965 and invaded North Vietnam. Should have mined Haiphong Harbor at start of Rolling Thunder and blew up the dykes on Red River Delta. Should have reduced Hanoi to rubble with B52 campaign against civilians.

What would be different today?

Bushy-boi would be creaming his jeans that he could count up more dead bodies in his little GI Joe fantasy while hiding behind a picture of a Wimp, and yet he'd still be here whining about some other shit.

 

[Uncensored2008]

She is the darling of the Russian bots...and totally irrelevant to our election.....just a side show..and a small one at that. It amazes me that anyone gives a shit about the Clintons..either one of them.

Most of you democrats view Mao is the center, and you are FAR left of center....

Gabbard is far left, but the DNC today is so radical that she looks rational compared to the average Stalinist.

***yawn*** not a Dem..and no longer a Republican. When fiscal conservatism makes a comeback..and we get rid of the trash that has infected our party..i might sign up again.
What you Russian apologists see in Tulsi is just her use as a possible distraction..nothing more.

How is the weather over there in Tehran?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Tulsi Gabbard Slams Hillary Clinton in New Video
She has it right...might just turn voters!

Is Hillary running, then?
.

She is in the heads of Trumpsters..They need her to beat up for Trump..

She is a JFK Democrat.

She is the darling of the Russian bots...and totally irrelevant to our election.....just a side show..and a small one at that. It amazes me that anyone gives a shit about the Clintons..either one of them.

Thanks Hillary, you have a real solid grip on sanity..

 

[Uncensored2008]

fuck Tulsi....ok ...there I said it

I don't like her, she wants to get rid of the Second Amendment ....among other things.....not good

wakey wakey all~

Linkie linkie all?

linkie likkie poo? linkie? god

Soooooooooo no linkie linkie, wakey wakey?

Why am I not-not surprised-surprised.

And don't call me "god". Makes the others jealous.

Ohh look everyone, it's Sluggo - zero credibility - zero integrity...

 

[Uncensored2008]

Tulsi Gabbard Slams Hillary Clinton in New Video
She has it right...might just turn voters!

Is Hillary running, then?
.

She is in the heads of Trumpsters..They need her to beat up for Trump..

She is a JFK Democrat.

JFK who took us into Vietnam?

We had people in Vietnam in the Truman administration.

Yes, but it was JFK who sent Combat Troops, and Johnson who made it a full blown war.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Is Hillary running, then?
.

She is in the heads of Trumpsters..They need her to beat up for Trump..

She is a JFK Democrat.

JFK who took us into Vietnam?

We had people in Vietnam in the Truman administration.

Yes, but it was JFK who sent Combat Troops, and Johnson who made it a full blown war.

The only combat troops sent under Kennedy were Special Forces to train and assist. Combat troops did not arrive until March of 1965.

 

[Bush92]

She is in the heads of Trumpsters..They need her to beat up for Trump..

She is a JFK Democrat.

JFK who took us into Vietnam?

We had people in Vietnam in the Truman administration.

Yes, but it was JFK who sent Combat Troops, and Johnson who made it a full blown war.

The only combat troops sent under Kennedy were Special Forces to train and assist. Combat troops did not arrive until March of 1965.

LBJ had promised in 1964 “I will not send American boys two thousand miles to fight a war Asians should fight for themselves.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

She is a JFK Democrat.

JFK who took us into Vietnam?

We had people in Vietnam in the Truman administration.

Yes, but it was JFK who sent Combat Troops, and Johnson who made it a full blown war.

The only combat troops sent under Kennedy were Special Forces to train and assist. Combat troops did not arrive until March of 1965.

LBJ had promised in 1964 “I will not send American boys two thousand miles to fight a war Asians should fight for themselves.

Your point is? He was a lying sack of shit that opposed Kennedy's plans to pull out after the 64 election.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

She is against regime change wars...she does run against the establishment of a major political party.

I see common ground...especially with the “love” thing...

Is this a serious question? You're basically saying Paul supporters are narrow minded one issue voters?

 

[Bush92]

She is against regime change wars...she does run against the establishment of a major political party.

I see common ground...especially with the “love” thing...

Is this a serious question? You're basically saying Paul supporters are narrow minded one issue voters?

I’m saying they are anti-establishment and so is Gabbard. I hope she runs as an independent. Hope she goes after other Democrats every step of the way.

 

[Bush92]

She is against regime change wars...she does run against the establishment of a major political party.

I see common ground...especially with the “love” thing...

Is this a serious question? You're basically saying Paul supporters are narrow minded one issue voters?

Paul supporters are very serious.

 

[Bush92]

She is against regime change wars...she does run against the establishment of a major political party.

I see common ground...especially with the “love” thing...

Is this a serious question? You're basically saying Paul supporters are narrow minded one issue voters?

Perhaps they could crossover and vote for her in the Primaries. They are a mischievous bunch.