Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News

Drudge Retort

User Info


Subscribe to humtake's blog Subscribe


Special Features


"Socialism is just a scare word they trot out to scare the old white people that make up their core voters."

First off, what is so incredibly hilarious about this article and your quote is that the countries touted in this article as people leaving for a better life are Socialist countries. Yet Dems continue to fight for Socialism. In other words, using the word doesn't require any context, the reality and proof are already within the conversation. If someone murders someone close to you, and then someone decides to ship that murderer to another location, the people in that location should already be concerned regardless if anyone uses the word "murder" in their rhetoric to scare people. You don't have to directly tell people to be scared of something when all evidence already proves that something is dangerous. Figured Libs would have been able to figure out that common sense by now. Unless, of course, you are someone who has to have everything spelled out for you like a 2-year-old learning to potty on a toilet.

"That's the hypocritical thing, is that DeSantis and Abbott and other politicians are constantly beating up on places like Cuba and Venezuela because they claim the leaders are so repressive and make the countries dangerous for the people, and yet when the people try to flee, they treat them like s. And they use them as pawns in these stunts," Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) told The Hill.

I love this. Ignoring the blatant hypocrisy that should already be well known to everyone, giving free passage to a rich location full of resources and entitlements is considered treating them like s to Dems. This is just more proof many Liberals have no idea what a hard life and being treated like s actually means. And that is proof-positive evidence of why so many Liberals accept legislation and policy creation/influence by celebrities, rich elites, etc. And that is a good reason not to vote for them. So don't blame anyone else but yourselves if Dems lose a lot of ground in the next few years. Maybe it won't happen. But if it does, just remember this.

More fake racism. Not surprised DR put this on the site.

"No, I don't have to give no ID because there ain't no crime been committed,"

That's it, anything that happened after is his fault. In fact, the cops were making it much easier on him from experiences I've had. I was put into a cop car once in my life. They only put me in the car while they investigated the property to make sure nothing was done (I was spray painting some chairs outside in a parking lot and someone didn't like it so they called the cops on me, apparently saying I was putting graffiti all over the place...the cop that first came came in hot and fast with his car). It would have been a LOT easier if he had just asked me for an ID and asked what I was doing, which he only did AFTER they spent a lot of time going inside the property and canvassing the outside. Even after he spoke to me he got upset about the call and we ended up laughing about how stupid it was. But the point is a) the cops didn't seem to do anything bad (at least it's not indicated in the article) and b) they have no idea what crimes, if any, had occurred because they didn't canvass first. The guy could have killed the entire family inside but it sounds like Liberals don't care about that and say that someone should just be able to tell them a name and let them leave because...well, not sure why because that makes no sense whatsoever and my brain doesn't allow me to think stupid.

Also, you can't actually claim any racism here because we haven't seen the numbers of incidents like this across the board to see if it is a rarity or it if happens to everyone. Until you can make factual comparisons, jumping to conclusions only makes you look dumb.

"It's unfair to all the people who already died of cancer, if we now start helping people with cancer!

Um, people with cancer didn't sign a contract saying they accept the terms of cancer and promise to repay whatever the terms are. Wow, if this is the kind of logic Libs use to justify this decision, just wow...amazingly insensitive for one, and doesn't hold any logic at all besides.

"Conservatives would rather we spend tax dollars funding the military, increasing police budgets, and subsidizing billionaires.
Rather than using our tax dollars on universal healthcare and education.
Mostly because they hate the educated and don't trust the medical community anymore."

And this country is what is is BECAUSE of those things (we didn't have them when our country hit its golden ages), so what you are saying is that since it worked in the past, let's not do it in the future. If that makes logical sense to you...just wow. There is every reason to improve what isn't working, no doubt. But don't attack something with incredibly bad reasoning and present a solution that doesn't do anything to get rid of the root cause. Your solutions just put a band-aid on the costs, it doesn't fix the sore.

The fact is that there is a reason why forgiveneness is needed. Start arguing over that and finding solutions if you want to think you are on a high road. Right now, this is not a high road approach. This is more of the same from Dems...trying to find ways that people do not have to be responsible for their own actions so they become more dependent on the party that wants to govern everything for them. Is that right or wrong? That's an opinion and will never have a solution, like abortion. Finding ways to make forgiveness unnecessary, that's something that can be solved if both parties work together. One thing I can guarantee though, it won't ever get solved if both parties are too busy whining and crying about everything the other party does, and thinking everything their own party does is gold (because it's not).

This is such a long thread just to argue over whether or not abortion America should be ruled by the federal government or each state should rule themselves.

This is my favorite, "He believes us to be a European Union of nations."

In fact, the US as a Constitutional Republic IS more like the EU Union than the picture Libs have of the US being a federally controlled country. The fact Liberals don't seem to understand this point underscores why they don't understand their arguments are invalid to our laws. Most of the high profile issues Libs have come down directly to the fact that states have their own governments, and that the federal government is only supposed to interfere when it comes to national defense and state conflicts...AS IT SAYS IN THE CONSTITUTION. The point is, your arguments are all summed up to one major root problem. Instead of fighting all of these little battles that get you one step ahead or two steps back, start fighting the root cause and try to change America to a federally-controlled nation because that's what you want. But, just remember, our borders are a form of national defense so if you fight for a federally controlled nation, then you are also fighting to close our borders like those EU nations you love to reference. Also, don't be sad that if you win and we become federally controlled, the pendulum always swings and Reps will be in power sometimes. I could spread hate and say that what Libs really want is a federally controlled nation that only does what Liberals want, but both parties have that same sentiment so it's definitely not just Libs with that kind of communistic tendencies.

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2022 World Readable