Our new president - President Emmanuel Macron!

Post Reply New Topic

This is completely true, but I deny it on the internet because of all the money ((($oros))) gives me to promote (((globalism))) and (((bankers))). The Koch money is a nice bonus.

Never mind, she says. France has surrendered again. Bon, C'est la vie.

Could you provide the link? That would be helpful. I want to look into this myself, because I am no longer willing (actually, I never was willing) to just take the word of those who clearly have unstated agendas to promote.

Is this sarcasm... or are you actually confessing? Yes, I think the latter.

So, how is old Georgie doing these days? His health - the last time I heard about it - wasn't so good. Who will be his replacement within the New World Order hierarchy?

This may be a trivial point to raise for some, but usage of the expression "would of" when you really mean't to say, "would have", is just UNBELIEVABLY ANNOYING!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !

PLEASE! DO NOT DO THIS! For people who are supposedly precise, fussy and logical, the number of grammatical (and other) errors I notice here at W.P. is simply astounding.

P.S. I am not a hypocrite. If someone notices a mistake of mine (not that that will happen, of course) I insist they point it out. After all, how are we to improve ourselves if no one ever castigates anyone for making mistakes? Screw political correctness, not causing "offense", and constantly having to walk on egg-shells. We all need to be far more judgemental.

Okay, rant over

Oh, one other thing. The correct expression is, "couldn't (or could not) care less". Why oh why do so many these days say, "could care less"? If you COULD care less, then that automatically means that you care, even if just a little, because there is an amount of caring that is below the level you currently have for... whatever. How can so many people not understand so basic a point?!

Maybe caring is, for them, an open set? In that case, no matter how little they care, there's always some lower level of caring that is still in the set. It seems unnecessarily complex, but I suppose we do refer to caring as strictly greater than zero caring, so it does fit.

If by globalism you mean someone who support global free market, then I'm not, if by globalist you mean someone that don't let nationalism lead him toward intolerance and hate to immigrants and muslims, then I am; if it mean that I'm some kind of traitor toward my nation(s), whatever it mean in the nationality jigsaw of a french québecois, then so be it! I don't want to betray my humanitarian values simply because a carrot and a manipulative woman said I should; I can think for myself and I simply despise their values and their way to see things.

Don't expect Trump to give back economic prosperity to poor workers either, his economic policies will only make their situation worst. Your best bet would be to vote for the left of the democratic party, but the elites you so quick to denounce have been very good in convincing poor workers to not listen to those who could have helped them by blaming immigrants, liberal profession and government workers. Now you have poor workers that are convinced that their problems come, somehow, from immigrants, college professors, scientists and the government and that billionaires would save them if only the government and liberal elites would get out of the way, the immigrants would be ruthlessly deported, and everyone that is weird and don't fall in line throw in overcrowded prisons: a bunch of citizens voting for their extortioners.

Also, I don't think of white peoples as evil, I'm myself white.

she lost heavily, you really need to find a way of accepting it and getting over it.

The best known Reichschancellor was not the first (Bismarck) but the last (Hitler). When you give Merkel that title, you believe that people will think you refer to Bismarck? Sounds more like an insult with plausible deniability. Or else, you don't know how to insult people properly. I mean, of German authoritarians, Bismarck is one of the more respected, and seeing that you did seem to intend an insult, comparing Merkel to Bismarck isn't very effective.

I am reminded of a local AfD leader calling Merkel the worst German chancellor ever: https://www.indy100.com/article/angela-merkel-has-been-called-the-worst-chancellor-in-history-which-is-quite-awkward--b17bt_8d1Z. And the Daily Mirror went along with it. As someone commented, that bar is high.

Last edited by Gromit on 16 May 2017, 5:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Brits still say couldn't. I don't know about Canadians, Australians or New Zealanders, so I can't tell you whether this is a uniquely US thing.

Let’s see.
- Walrus thinks the dominant ideology of neoliberalism has made everything better, but at the same time he thinks the West has been dominated by a fascist elite who have been causing people to suffer.
- He pretends to care about national interests when it’s clear he thinks the whole concept of a nation is irrational.
- He makes out he supports international co-operation, but he doesn’t want France to be friends with America and Russia, two of the largest, most powerful countries on earth.
- He thinks that wealthy Western nations have their economies improved by letting in hundreds of thousands of illiterate Third Worlders.
- He thinks ISIS are going to be scared by a globalist shill like Macron when all Macron is going to do is let a load more potential ISIS-inspired terrorists into his country.
- He implies that open-borders globalism has made rich countries rich while ignoring the fact that they mainly became rich while practising protectionism and old-fashioned imperialism, ie- before they embraced the sort of globalism he favours.
- He talks about evidence based policies when there’s no way of knowing how much better off Western countries might be if they hadn’t been opening their borders for decades.
- Like a parody of a neoliberal he praises multiculturalism before admitting that he thinks all non-Western cultures have to offer the West is ‘foreign food’ (oh, and festivals – right), but he doesn’t explain why Westerners couldn’t just learn the recipes without opening their borders to masses of foreigners.
- And he calls jihadists losers, which kind of reminds me of that buffoon Boris Johnson trying to sound tough talking about a problem he wouldn’t have the balls to do anything about even if he had the opportunity.

It’s all gibberish.



Here's the thing – ultimately people like Walrus parrot neoliberal propaganda because it makes them feel elite in some way. It’s a bit like those nobodies on the internet who quote Neil Degrasse Tyson and go on about how they "f@@@ing love science!" but at least they're relatively harmless.

All that glitters,..must be Gold!

I have accepted it.. but its not me who has to endure anther backlash of antisocial regimes.. hope France's citizens can recover.

You worry too much! Wait.. is it the wine of Revolution that has gone straight to your head?

Last edited by Empathy on 16 May 2017, 6:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

big if true!

I love effing science!

Wait, what? How on earth did you "read" all of this into my simple request for the provision of evidence? If "you had the capacity to understand the evidence". What makes you think I wouldn't be able to? Do you think you know me that well?

When someone makes a claim here in print, and fails to back up that claim with something more substantial than rumour, then YES, I DO "impute bad motives" to the person concerned. It's easy enough to shout something inane like "the Russians did it", and I have had enough of that particular nonsense to last me the next ten years, but whenever one of these people are asked to actually back up their wild assertion(s) - with something they are usually completely unfamiliar with (i.e. reason, evidence - that sort of thing) - they then usually try to change the subject in the hope and expectation that they will be believed the next time they lie to us. Apparently they believe that all of us have the same short memories that they possess. Well, no, some of us actually have quite long memories, and simply don't trust those who seem to believe that the promotion of patent nonsense is justified if it furthers a warped political agenda.

It's like in the novel '1984' where there is a special department for the rewriting of history, and everyone seems to play along, conveniently forgetting what was believed to be true just five minutes ago. I well recall how everything was always "the fault of the Russians" back in the 1980's. It's the same old BS once again.