• You must be logged in to see or use the Shoutbox. Besides, if you haven't registered, you really should. It's quick and it will make your life a little better. Trust me. So just register and make yourself at home with like-minded individuals who share either your morbid curiousity or sense of gallows humor.
Source pls.
Kennedys 'won't support' Arnie
2003-08-11 18:51

Washington - The Kennedy clan, which spawned a popular Democratic president and numerous other prominent politicians, is fond of Republican in-law Arnold Schwarzenegger, but unlikely to endorse his bid for California governor.

Family patriarch Senator Ted Kennedy last week praised his nephew-in-law's political engagement in California, but denied him support for his upstart bid to oust Governor Gray Davis in a recall election to be held in October.
http://www.news24.com/World/News/Kennedys-wont-support-Arnie-20030811
 
And yet he won.
Hmmmmm.....
Remember, one cannot win a position of power without the blessing of the 1%.
Governor of California certainly qualifies.
Pretending people have choices keeps us under control and divided keeps them in control
They are the puppet masters and have strings attached to every important politician in the world, except Canada (not very Important)
 
Last edited:
And yet he won.
Hmmmmm.....
Trust the media much?

You can't have it both ways, you asked you received, behave now or disprove it with a source;)
I already gave my opinion on the media up a few post
You know I'm on scotch at this hour and trying to take advantage

Arnold Schwarzenegger may have shagged the maid — but wife Maria Shriver is no June Cleaver.

The Kennedy heiress was sleeping with her husband’s lead campaign strategist well before Schwarzenegger’s old affair with their housekeeper came to light, campaign staffers and other sources told The Post

http://pagesix.com/2014/09/01/maria...-lover-before-schwarzenegger-affair-surfaced/
 
which one hic!
The quote below.
And yet he won.
Hmmmmm.....
Remember, one cannot win a position of power without the blessing of the 1%.
Governor of California certainly qualifies.


Doesn't matter who wins, the people lose, the world is run by the 1%, even Canada;)
Pretending people have choices keeps us under control and divided keeps them in control
They are the puppet masters and have strings attached to every important politician in the world, except Canada (not very Important)
 
Last edited:
This one...
That's the answer right there, no matter who wins the election "the people lose", but that doesn't make the winner a 1%er it just means he's the puppet of the hour. Hope you don't think I'm rambling on about democrat vs republican or just about the USA
Hell, there will be few red states left when obama's done, he's dispersing illegals in all the red states and turning them blue, as if it really matters, LOL
The same people are always in power no matter the elected puppet, the Kennedy's are just powerful puppets, the world controllers are faceless people operating in secret expending their world power and wealth, they're looking/planning a hundred years ahead
Now back to the man, the hair and fun with politics
 
Tell me this is a groomed product of the 1%



7 billion × 1% = 70 million

No just the puppet du jour, like almost any other politician anywhere in the world, he has a known normal history, raised by a normal known family. No hidden birth certificate, no hidden grades he didn't magically without supporting grades go to Ivy league school, no bought Noble peace prize, no fake Law degree, no wife with fake 300k plus job, some of you just don't get the Obama thing at all. Besides just because the media told you over and over 2 cell is a genius doesn't mean he is, without a teleprompter he can't remember his own name and is no smarter than this dude. The media will not showcase his mistakes and comedians will not ridicule him for his mistakes or they'd be considered racist, see that the real genius of creating an Obama by the 1% . Politicians are used by the 1% but very few are raised and groomed to the point of an Obama
 
The 1% understand control, divide and conquer, religion alone is no longer enough to do the job of controlling the masses ;) control the media control the world. They tell people what to believe over and over and the truth gets lost in a gray area and forgotten
You don't believe anything I've said so guess the 1% is doing it right:shrug:

Indeed, you're completely correct. Us one-percenters have biweekly Skype conversations (all 1.5 million of us!) in one gigantic conference call at 9PM ET. We spend an hour discussing how we're going to fuck over the 99%. We have a lot of ground to cover, but when you're in power, you have to at least try to maintain it, right?

This Friday we're discussing the ethical issues of adding cocaine to the water supplies to influence substance abuse statistics. We need to push the War on Drugs a bit more to take the heat off the pharmaceutical industry's hyperinflation. Of course we're going to do it, because we're all Machiavellian monsters. Because, really, we have nothing better to do.

You're welcome to join, if you want - just break the 1% bracket and you're in!

(PS: We are using Hillary's e-mail server for the Skype conference.)
 
It's a joke right? The 1% wouldn't be liberal or support a liberal president even if they groomed him from birth. They don't want to give health care to the poor or invite more immigrants, educate everyone equally or pay an actual living wage. That seems completely counterproductive to their agenda unless I am not getting this weird twist on a conspiracy theory?? :writer::writer:
They want to give you everything, it makes you mindless and dependent on them, the whole point is to control you and if your totally dependent on them they own you
 
Indeed, you're completely correct. Us one-percenters have biweekly Skype conversations (all 1.5 million of us!) in one gigantic conference call at 9PM ET. We spend an hour discussing how we're going to fuck over the 99%. We have a lot of ground to cover, but when you're in power, you have to at least try to maintain it, right?

This Friday we're discussing the ethical issues of adding cocaine to the water supplies to influence substance abuse statistics. We need to push the War on Drugs a bit more to take the heat off the pharmaceutical industry's hyperinflation. Of course we're going to do it, because we're all Machiavellian monsters. Because, really, we have nothing better to do.

You're welcome to join, if you want - just break the 1% bracket and you're in!

(PS: We are using Hillary's e-mail server for the Skype conference.)
1st a genius, now a 1%er, you're amazing, do you own a teleprompter?
 
In the way that most other modern countries are dependent mindless automatons with their free healthcare, proper pay and education? Geez, sounds terrible.
The citizens of those countries are doing really well and the people are not totally dependent on the government :dead::facepalm:;)
Most of you have never lived in these countries and have no idea what its like to be government dependent for everything, that's why the term libtard was created
You could move to Greece it's exactly what you're looking to create
 
Last edited:
1st a genius, now a 1%er, you're amazing, do you own a teleprompter?

No, I don't have a teleprompter. I'm also not a genius. But, if you find a specialist who isn't in the 1% (and/or) working charity, please let me know. So, you know, I can direct them toward employment.

Really dear, this whole '1% = Villain' stuff is utter bullshit. The disparity within the top 1% is vast - people making 300k don't have jack shit to do with people making 1b, darling. We are very average people. Take off the tinfoil hat.
 
No, I don't have a teleprompter. I'm also not a genius. But, if you find a specialist who isn't in the 1% (and/or) working charity, please let me know. So, you know, I can direct them toward employment.

Really dear, this whole '1% = Villain' stuff is utter bullshit. The disparity within the top 1% is vast - people making 300k don't have jack shit to do with people making 1b, darling. We are very average people. Take off the tinfoil hat.
300k a year is nothing today, they're not even considered wealthy, sports figures make 15 to 20 million a year and they arn't among the wealthy, I not talking wage earners or the Nouveau rich, I'm talking older than old money, people you never see or hear about
 
Last edited:
most of those counties are right behind greece
Of COURSE you'd pick Greece out of your hat. Not England, Sweden, Ireland, Canada, Australia, a giant chunk of South America, Norway, Italy, Germany, France, China, Israel and so on.

I think the more you fight modernization and, really, common sense, the more it'll hurt. :shrug:
most of those countries are in the same shape as Greece, they're certainly not far behind, you're not into world events are you
 
Most? Alrighty. I think someone is living in their own world.
Many on here are, expecily those that think France, Italy, Spain and South American countries are doing great and not on the brink of failure
Only countries doing well are those that don't accept squatters from other counties, only those that contributed towards benefits receive benefits
 
Last edited:
300k a year is nothing today, they're not even considered wealthy, sports figures make 15 to 20 million a year and they arn't among the wealthy, I not talking wage earners or the Nouveau rich, I'm talking older than old money, people you never see or hear about

I genuinely agree. 300k isn't a lot of money. But it's - at least in my postal code - within the 1%. Ditto with the athletes. My point is, you can't just say "1%", because believing the top 1% is some elitist club is flawed. It doesn't mean anything. You're talking about an astronomically small handful of people. Let's say you have $20m. And Warren Buffet has $80b. You're both in the top 1%. Yet you live on different planets. Moaning about the one-percenters doesn't make sense.

But to spin this back to Trump - there is no difference between Trump, Clinton, Pelosi, Bush. They're the same entity wearing different hats. Trump doesn't give two shits about income inequality. Sure, it's a problem. A huge problem. This also makes it prime real estate as an election platform. The melody changes, but the song remains the same. It's about power. Don't let the whole 'Republican/Democrat' dichotomy fool you. They're equally insidious.

Really? Let's see, France is #6, Brazil is #8, Italy is #9 and Spain is #14. I wouldn't call any of those on the "brink of failure."

I dunno - the EU is a house of cards. It's basically where America was as the Thirteen Colonies. You can't share a currency without fiscal union. But that's another thread.
 
@biteme: You forgot the first rule of Political Fight Club. Never engage Libs in a logical, or semi-logical, political discussion. Things are usually brought down to a war of personalities, and rationality goes out the window as your statements are cherry-picked to death.
 
Sorry to say I'm a libtard, but it's getting so diluted.

Are you over 40? (Not meant as an offensive comment.) Most young people I know offline - again, anecdotal - do not identify as liberal or conservative. I think this ambiguity (or indifference) can be seen on this site as well. We're a fiscally conservative, socially liberal bunch. Which is probably why Three Things isn't nearly heated as it could be. I don't know many of the new folk here, but long-termers I can immediately categorize as such are probably @Countess Olenska, @Athena, @Morbid, @carolinablue, @Mata Hari, @BostonBurns, @ScarlettHarlot.

Some people (@biteme as an example, again, not offensive) deride liberality without registering the scope of what actual 'liberal beliefs' are and can be. Example: economically, I don't support a vast majority of welfare/social assistance, education, or health platforms. Yet, socially, if you're a cisgender-homoflexible-African-Taíno-transsexual, I don't give a shit. Have a bunch of rights! All the power to you!
 
Are you over 40? (Not meant as an offensive comment.) Most young people I know offline - again, anecdotal - do not identify as liberal or conservative. I think this ambiguity (or indifference) can be seen on this site as well. We're a fiscally conservative, socially liberal bunch. Which is probably why Three Things isn't nearly heated as it could be. I don't know many of the new folk here, but long-termers I can immediately categorize as such are probably @Countess Olenska, @Athena, @Morbid, @carolinablue, @Mata Hari, @BostonBurns, @ScarlettHarlot.

Some people (@biteme as an example, again, not offensive) deride liberality without registering the scope of what actual 'liberal beliefs' are and can be. Example: economically, I don't support a vast majority of welfare/social assistance, education, or health platforms. Yet, socially, if you're a cisgender-homoflexible-African-Taíno-transsexual, I don't give a shit. Have a bunch of rights! All the power to you!
we already had the real libtard definition, we don't need the libtard version

A libtard wants to live in a fantasy world (in which life is the way that they WISH IT WAS) as opposed to dealing with life the way it actually is.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Libtard
 

Latest posts

Back
Top