why do the repubs hate so much

[Bernie Sanders]

why do the repubs support so many hate groups,is it cuz they lost the popular vote by three million votes to a woman that cant be bought ? the right can never do anything wrong,even ball less Trump supported hate groups and urged more from them,all he did in 6 months was to preach hate and now look where we are at now

[mrswdk]

a woman that cant be bought

In lucrative paid speeches that Hillary Clinton delivered to elite financial firms but refused to disclose to the public, she displayed an easy comfort with titans of business, embraced unfettered international trade and praised a budget-balancing plan that would have required cuts to Social Security, according to documents posted online Friday by WikiLeaks.

In the excerpts from her paid speeches to financial institutions and corporate audiences, Mrs. Clinton said she dreamed of “open trade and open borders” throughout the Western Hemisphere. Citing the back-room deal-making and arm-twisting used by Abraham Lincoln, she mused on the necessity of having “both a public and a private position” on politically contentious issues.

The Clintons have made more than $120 million in speeches to Wall Street and special interests since Bill Clinton left the White House in 2001. Mrs. Clinton typically earned $225,000 for speeches.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/08/us/p ... ml?mcubz=1

[Bernie Sanders]

a woman that cant be bought

to

In lucrative paid speeches that Hillary Clinton delivered to elite financial firms but refused to disclose to the public, she displayed an easy comfort with titans of business, embraced unfettered international trade and praised a budget-balancing plan that would have required cuts to Social Security, according to documents posted online Friday by WikiLeaks.

In the excerpts from her paid speeches to financial institutions and corporate audiences, Mrs. Clinton said she dreamed of “open trade and open borders” throughout the Western Hemisphere. Citing the back-room deal-making and arm-twisting used by Abraham Lincoln, she mused on the necessity of having “both a public and a private position” on politically contentious issues.

The Clintons have made more than $120 million in speeches to Wall Street and special interests since Bill Clinton left the White House in 2001. Mrs. Clinton typically earned $225,000 for speeches.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/08/us/p ... ml?mcubz=1

Of course most women can be bought. When I drop by London via Amsterdam, I'm sure dinner and a few drinks and mrs will let me in, her holiest of all holes.

[mrswdk]

As Hillary said to the Wall Street banks: 'if you want the good stuff, you'll have to pony up a little more than that'.

[Bernie Sanders]

As Hillary said to the Wall Street banks: 'if you want the good stuff, you'll have to pony up a little more than that'.

Oh baby! Call me big spender.

[GoranZ]

a woman that cant be bought

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10... Medic please pick up Bernie Sanders

[tzor]

Republicans hate ... that's why so many republicans are calling for the death or physical harm to the president as well as the entire first family .. wait a second.

Republicans hate ... that's why they are violently protesting opposition speech in colleges and in public forums ... wait a second.

Republicans hate ... that's why they are all leading boycotts of opposition opinion TV and Radio hosts ... wait a second.

Democrats are the best example of transference Freud could ever hope for. It really is a textbook example of psychological projection because deep down inside they really are really horrid vile disgusting monsters that make even the worse Nazi tame by comparison, the pseudo Bernie Sanders being a prime example of such a species; so vile that even half blessed holy water would burn through his skin swifter than the strongest acid.

No, what the Republicans have is LOVE ...

ALL TOGETHER NOW

[Bernie Sanders]

Republicans hate ... that's why so many republicans are calling for the death or physical harm to the president as well as the entire first family .. wait a second.

Republicans hate ... that's why they are violently protesting opposition speech in colleges and in public forums ... wait a second.

Republicans hate ... that's why they are all leading boycotts of opposition opinion TV and Radio hosts ... wait a second.

Democrats are the best example of transference Freud could ever hope for. It really is a textbook example of psychological projection because deep down inside they really are really horrid vile disgusting monsters that make even the worse Nazi tame by comparison, the pseudo Bernie Sanders being a prime example of such a species; so vile that even half blessed holy water would burn through his skin swifter than the strongest acid.

No, what the Republicans have is LOVE ...

ALL TOGETHER NOW

Let's forget about the record amount of death threats to President Obama. You are so silly.

[tzor]

Let's forget about the record amount of death threats to President Obama. You are so silly.

It's only a record in the retarded liberal mind. I'll be nice and quote from Wikiepedia

In 2009 journalist Ronald Kessler reported that Obama received 400 percent more death threats than his predecessor.[10] Later that year, the Secret Service stated that the volume of threats against Obama was "comparable to that under George W. Bush and Bill Clinton."[11]

[10] "Barack Obama faces 30 death threats a day, stretching US Secret Service". The Telegraph, August 3rd, 2009. Accessed 20 December 2016.
[11] "Secret Service: No more threats against Obama than Bush, Clinton", CNN, December 4th, 2009"; Glenn Thrush, "Secret Service: Threat level against Obama no greater than under Bush, Clinton", Politico, December 3, 2009. Accessed November 26, 2012.

[Dukasaur]

I met a handful of Trump supporters who had been apolitical previously, and most expressed their reasoning simply as "he's going to kick the towelheads in the teeth" or some variation thereof. So, with the new breed of Republicans who only joined with the advent of Trump, I think it is mostly racist hate.

With the more mainstream Republicans, I don't think that's the case. I know quite a few of those also, and none are particularly hateful. What they are is simply greedy, and the mainstream pre-Trump Republican agenda reflects that. Tax cuts for the rich, wage cuts for the poor.

It's really not hate related, it's just the amazing human ability at self deception. One guy busts his ass, works 100-hour weeks, his product takes off, and he becomes a multimillionaire. Ten other guys will bust their ass, work 100-hour weeks, but their products don't capture the public imagination and they end up broke and broken. The guy who made it will walk around for the rest of his life patting himself on the back and saying "hard work got me to where I am" and completely ignoring the fact that ten others worked just as hard as he did and are now on skid row. Getting rich is 10% hard work and 90% pure luck and happenstance, but the guy who made it will never admit that, and he doesn't want those "lazy" poor dudes to have even a tiny fraction of his success.

On very rare occasions some rich guy like Warren Buffet will be honest about these issues, but he's ostracized by the rest who don't want their self-delusion of moral superiority to be attacked.

[armati]

Eleven years ago Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez resonated with many peoples when he said in his UN speech: “Yesterday at this very podium stood Satan himself [Bush], speaking as if he owned the world; you can still smell the sulphur.”

[Bernie Sanders]

Eleven years ago Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez resonated with many peoples when he said in his UN speech: “Yesterday at this very podium stood Satan himself [Bush], speaking as if he owned the world; you can still smell the sulphur.”

Was he wrong?

Personally I think Trump is the Anti-Christ......smell the sulphur?

[mrswdk]

Many people worship Satan for trying to provide humans with knowledge and independence, despite brutal opposition from a brutal God who wanted to keep them ignorant and subordinate.

[Bernie Sanders]

Many people worship Satan for trying to provide humans with knowledge and independence, despite brutal opposition from a brutal God who wanted to keep them ignorant and subordinate.

That's why we have people like Karel, Tabasco, Confederate SS and yourself to keep us informed and enlightened to the real threats to society.

I liked to thank all of you and I'm sure I left out a few such as GoranZ and Saxi. It's so nice to receive REAL NEWS from all of you, instead of that FAKE NEWS.

[ConfederateSS]

Many people worship Satan for trying to provide humans with knowledge and independence, despite brutal opposition from a brutal God who wanted to keep them ignorant and subordinate.

That's why we have people like Karel, Tabasco, Confederate SS and yourself to keep us informed and enlightened to the real threats to society.

I liked to thank all of you and I'm sure I left out a few such as GoranZ and Saxi. It's so nice to receive REAL NEWS from all of you, instead of that FAKE NEWS.

----Hey, Commie Pinko sell out...Who switches parties every five seconds...
----There isn't a space between the e and the 1st letter in each of my 2 daughter's names...Selena/Sofia...eSS... ...
---Why do Repubs?...Because, they freed the Blacks from slavery...What do the Blacks do...Sell out like you Commie...And vote and support the Party that wanted to keep them slaves! ,funny how that fact doesn't offend those offended by everything else connected with slavery ... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

[Bernie Sanders]

Blacks are supporting the new improved Democratic Party, since we are supporting their civil rights.

[tzor]

I met a handful of Trump supporters who had been apolitical previously, and most expressed their reasoning simply as "he's going to kick the towelheads in the teeth" or some variation thereof. So, with the new breed of Republicans who only joined with the advent of Trump, I think it is mostly racist hate.

Well, there's a lot in that section right there, so let's break it down.

In the first place we are talking about "Trump supporters who had been apolitical previously" ... where the topic title is about "Republicans" which I have to assume is in general, conservative ones, neoconsercative ones, establishment ones, log cabin ones, and so forth. Not about people who voted once for a guy who ran on the Republican ticket. Whether they have actually become "Republicans" remains to be seen.

In the second place, you went from "towelhead" to racist in basically a leap void of logic. Now it is important to understand that I despise the term immensely as a horrible insult and slander (but to whom, because that is the question that cuts to the problem). Having spent a lot of time in New York City, if you were to ask me who wore turbans, I would quickly state "Sikhs" who come from India and are definitely not Islamic. But even if we consider the insult to people of the religion of Islam, that is not in and of itself a race. That would be the same as calling the hatred of all Christians "racist." There are those from Asia, from Africa, and from the Middle East, a vast number of different races and ethnic backgrounds.

Let's be clear here; it's not the Native North American populations that are waging a wold wide terrorist war of aggression and assimilation. While certain Democrats of note have complained about the influx of immigrants from India, that's not a common Republican cry. The cause of the hatred of these hypothetical people is not known, but terrorism and the imposition of law which causes the restriction of their own freedoms might be a significant driving force here.

Finally, please do not leap from the specific to the general. I hold you in too high esteem and I expect a better argument. You know, I've spoken to a number of Democrats and they are dumber than a sack of rocks, therefore I think that Democrats in general are filled with stupid reasoning. No, that's just plain wrong.

[tzor]

Blacks are supporting the new improved Democratic Party, since we are supporting their civil rights.

And which right is that, by the way. Because I don't see the Democratic Party supporting any "civil" right whatsoever.

"Civil rights include the ensuring of peoples' physical and mental integrity, life, and safety." Violence in urban minority communities, controlled by Democrats, are at an all time high. The education system is a dismal failure (assuming that the purpose of the education system in Democratic Party controlled urban areas is education; if it is indoctrination and dependency they all score high grades) promoting a demographic who are unable to compete in a totally collapsed urban economy and thus are completely dependent voting block. No wonder why they vote Democratic; they are as dependent on Democrats as a hooker is to her pimp.

Civil rights also include, "individual rights such as privacy and the freedoms of thought, speech, religion, press, assembly, and movement." Try having a conservative thought in the African American community and you will see the Democratic Party come at you like a plethora of Acme Anvils. I don't think you tended to support the "civil rights" of J.C. Watts, or Ben Carson, or David Webb, or (and so on and so on).

Anytime a "Socialist" starts talking about "civil rights" I start checking my irony meter. This ain't 1984 and words mean what they mean not the opposite of what they mean. Classical LIberalism is all about "rights." Socialism (for the people, not he socialists) is for the equalization of the "classes."

[Bernie Sanders]

.....and that's why in Republican controlled States their way of denying votes to those who normally vote Democratic are found to be UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Texas being the latest in violating the rights of citizens to use their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO VOTE.

TZOR is blinded by partisan views. Party before Country!

[tzor]

.....and that's why in Republican controlled States their way of denying votes to those who normally vote Democratic are found to be UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Oh you mean those people who are bused from other districts to vote under assumed aliases?

The Republican Party in general supports the right of all properly registered living citizens to vote and if you chose not to vote, the right to not have someone else use your name to stuff the ballot. Why you be taking away people's right not to vote?

[jay_a2j]

Republicans hate ... that's why so many republicans are calling for the death or physical harm to the president as well as the entire first family .. wait a second.

Republicans hate ... that's why they are violently protesting opposition speech in colleges and in public forums ... wait a second.

Republicans hate ... that's why they are all leading boycotts of opposition opinion TV and Radio hosts ... wait a second.

Democrats are the best example of transference Freud could ever hope for. It really is a textbook example of psychological projection because deep down inside they really are really horrid vile disgusting monsters that make even the worse Nazi tame by comparison, the pseudo Bernie Sanders being a prime example of such a species; so vile that even half blessed holy water would burn through his skin swifter than the strongest acid.

No, what the Republicans have is LOVE ...

ALL TOGETHER NOW

[jay_a2j]

Let's forget about the record amount of death threats to President Obama. You are so silly.

Name 1.

[jay_a2j]

Personally I think Trump is the Anti-Christ......smell the sulphur?

That's because you don't know the Bible....

[armati]

In America Propaganda Has Vanquished Truth

In Durham, North Carolina, the seat of Duke University, a gang of largely white males destroyed public property by pulling down a statue of a Confederate soldier. Perhaps they took their cue from the neo-Nazis installed in Ukraine by Obama and Hillary following the US-engineered coup that overthrew the elected democratic government. The first thing the new Obama-installed neo-Nazi regime did was to pull down all the Soviet war memorials of the liberation of Ukraine from Nazi Germany. The neo-Nazis who pulled down the war memorials were the descendants of the Ukrainians who fought for Nazi Germany. These neo-Nazis comprise the government of the “democracy” that Obama and Hillary brought to the Ukraine and is the government that the US government and its European vassals support.

What did the destruction of public property in Durham achieve, and where were the police?

What the films of the event reveal is a collection of crazed white people, mainly white men, kicking and spitting at a bronze statue and jumping back as if the statue were going to strike back. It was a display of ignorant psychopathic hatred.

Where did this hatred come from and why was it directed at a statue? To the ignorant gangsters, most likely Duke University students, the destroyed statue is a symbol of slavery.

This ignorant association between a Confederale soldier and slavery contradicts all known history. Slavery in the Southern states was confined to large argicultural tracts known as plantations. Slaves were the agricultural workforce. This institution long predated the Confederacy and the United States itself. It was an inherited institution from the time that the New World was colonized by European economic interests. Slaves were not a Southern invention. They were brought in long prior to the Declaration of Independence, because there were resources to be exploited but no work force.

The first slaves were white slaves, but they died like flies from malaria and yellow fevor. Next indigenious Americans (“Indians”) were used as slaves, but they would not work. Then it was discovered that some Africans had immunity to malaria and resistance to yellow fever, and finally a work force was located. The slaves were purchased from the African tribes that annually conducted warfare between themselves, the booty of which was slaves. Socialist historians, such as Karl Polanyi, the Jewish brother of my Jewish Oxford professor, the distinguished physical chemist and philosopher Michael Polanyi, to whom my first book is dedicated, wrote detailed and exacting histories of the African slave trade conducted by black Africans.

Confederate soldiers did not own slaves, and as every honest historian knows, they were not fighting for slavery. They were fighting, because their country had been invaded.

The Confederacy was not their country any more than the United States had been. Their country was their state. In those days people’s loyalty was to their state. They thought of their state as their country. To their minds, the United States was something like the EU is to the French, Italians, Dutch, British, etc. The French still think of themselves as French, not as EU.

Remember, when Robert E. Lee was offered command of the Union Army, he declined on the grounds that he could not bring war to his own country, by which he meant Virginia.

Lee’s army was the Army of Northern Virginia.

As President Lincoln said over and over, the war is not about slavery. It is about “preserving the union,” that is, the empire. If the South were permitted to separate, it would mean that there would be two countries competing for the vast lands to the west of the Mississippi River. The budding empire in Washington did not want any such competition.

If the South were permitted to seperate, the North would lose its market for its relatively high priced manufactured goods that it hoped to sell to the South by placing a tariff against the cheaper British goods.

The South figured, correctly, that it would be doubly hit. Higher prices from the North and retaliatory tariffs from the British on its cotton exports.

This economic conflict between the North and South went on for a long time before it provoked secession. The left-wing American Historian, Charles Beard, explains the so-called “Civil War” in the economic terms that provoked it. It had nothing whatsoever to do with slavery.

The very designation, “Civil War,” is a lie. A civil war is when two sides fight for control of the government. The South was not fighting for control of the US government. It was fighting, because the North had invaded.

Lincoln did not free the slaves. Moreover, had Lincoln not been assassinated, his plan was to send the blacks, whom he regarded as inferior to whites, back to Africa. This is not a “conspiracy theory.” It is the documented fact. It is totally impossible to refute this documented fact.

The Emancipation Proclamation was propaganda. It had two purposes: one was to shut up the abolitionists. The other was to promote a slave rebellion in the Southern states that would draw Confederate troops out of the front lines to protect the women and children at home. As Lincoln’s own Secretary of State, William H. Seward, said, we have freed the slaves where we have no jurisdiction and left them in slavery where we have jurisdiction. Seward’s exact words: “We show our sympathy with slavery by emancipating slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free.”

The left-wing historian Richard Hofstadter ridiculed Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation for freeing only the slaves over which Lincoln had no power.

Lincoln’s purpose was not to free slaves but to provoke the slave rape of Southern women and murder of Southern children that would pull the Southern troops his generals could not defeat off the front lines and impel them home to protect their families from Lincoln’s slave revolt.

But the slaves did not revolt even though there was no one there to conrol them but women and children. So what kind of oppression was this?

Lincoln issued the proclamation intended to produce a slave rebellion because he had run through countless generals, and although the Union army in its engagements with Robert E. Lee always outnumbered the Southerns by two or three to one, and sometimes more, the Army of Northern Virginia did not lose a battle for the first two years of the War. If the South had had more people, a number of Southern battle victories would have ended in the capture of Washington and the end of the war. But the South never had the number of soldiers sufficient to have a reserve to capitalize on its military victories. In contrast, the North had an endless supply of immigrants from Ireland, most of whom died for the American Empire.

Oppositon to the war in the North was high. Lincoln had to arrest and imprison 300 northern newspaper owners and editors and exile a US Congressman.

Slavery was an inherited institution, not a Southern construct. Slavery would have gradually disappeared as immigrants into the South begin forming a work force and the over-cultivated plantation lands begin losing their fertility. Slavery existed as long as it did because new immigrants, instead of becoming a local work force, moved west, occupied Indian land and became independent farmers.

Of course, the abolitionist created all the hatred of the South that they possibly could. Indeed, during my entire life, lived almost exclusively outside the South, I have observed the liberals foment racial hatred of blacks toward whites, and I have watched feminists foment gender hatred of women toward men. Hatred is the great cause of the liberals. It is what defines them.

The stupid liberals have sowed social enmity between races and genders. The destruction of America will be the result.

Perhaps we will fall apart, occupied in racial and gender warfare, before the Russians and Chinese have to blow us off the face of the earth.

PCRoberts