Bradley Cooper is a pretty big actor right now. He does the voice of Rocket Racoon in Guardians of the Galaxy, has done a ton of Oscar nominated movies
Shame he can't win one:ninja:
Bradley Cooper is a pretty big actor right now. He does the voice of Rocket Racoon in Guardians of the Galaxy, has done a ton of Oscar nominated movies
Shame he can't win one:ninja:
I might if I knew why they was relevant/important.
(Not being facetious here, I just don't know who Bradley Cooper is)
Rocket Raccoon as well as the star of American Sniper.
For those that missed it.
I'm gonna miss you Obama. You do those speeches so damn well. And that was a good one.
Rocket Raccoon as well as the star of American Sniper.
Bradley Cooper is a pretty big actor right now. He does the voice of Rocket Racoon in Guardians of the Galaxy, has done a ton of Oscar nominated movies and is in one of the funniest movies ever: Wet Hot American Summer.
He played Chris Kyle in the movie American Sniper (AKA the Republican's wet dream movie) and Republicans are pissed that he was at the DNC when he has been kinda open about being a Democrat for most of his life.
Bradley Cooper is an actor who starred in the Clint Eastwood movie American Sniper, which was a tribute to a psychopathic soldier who fought in Iraq, and made an insane amount of money because the GOP base kept going back to see it again.
Remember American Sniper? He was the actor.
I have not seen American Sniper, but did see Guardians. Though I didn't give much attention to who voiced Rocket. That does explain Republican pissiness though.
Bradley Cooper is a pretty big actor right now. He does the voice of Rocket Racoon in Guardians of the Galaxy, has done a ton of Oscar nominated movies and is in one of the funniest movies ever: Wet Hot American Summer. He played Chris Kyle in the movie American Sniper (AKA the Republican's wet dream movie) and Republicans are pissed that he was at the DNC when he has been kinda open about being a Democrat for most of his life.
I don't know. From what I remember that movie was kinda anti-war so I wouldn't classify it so much as a Republican wet dream but as a nice dream with some annoying bouts of skepticism.
I don't know. From what I remember that movie was kinda anti-war so I wouldn't classify it so much as a Republican wet dream but as a nice dream with some annoying bouts of skepticism.
It was a movie about an American military men kicking ass right? They pretty much equals Republican wet dream, subtleties be dammed
Let's be honest here. Nearly every American likes a movie about an American military man kicking ass. Democrats don't differ from Republicans on that.
For the record: https://www.google.com/#q=nepotism
nep·o·tism ˈnepəˌtizəm/ noun noun: nepotism the practice among those with power or influence of favoring relatives or friends, especially by giving them jobs. synonyms: favoritism, preferential treatment, the old boy network, looking after one's own, bias, partiality, partisanship "hiring my daughter was not nepotism—it was just good business"
Huh, so it can apply to friends, too. Something new every day.
It's almost like Hillary's more concerned with loyalty to a long term friend and supporter more than the thoughts of people who can't be pleased no matter what she does.
Bitter much? She hasn't actually lost yet.
So after boasting about how the RNC was fantastic and all compared to the DNC, this happens:
"the Trump campaign … sent out an email to supporters on Thursday morning that specifically asked them to not watch Hillary Clinton’s acceptance speech tonight"
After realizing and freaking out at the fact 3 days of DNC toped RNC ratings by 15% higher.
On the topic of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the other politics board I follow posted this re: her performance as chair
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/dnc-debbie-wasserman-schultz-226352
Let's be honest here. Nearly every American likes a movie about an American military man kicking ass. Democrats don't differ from Republicans on that.
Though they do differ on the type of people they choose to idolize along with reasons for why, along with how they criticize
those who question or criticize those very same idols.
You know you're desperate when you ask your supporters to not watch the acceptance speech from your political rival.
On the topic of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the other politics board I follow posted this re: her performance as chair http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/dnc-debbie-wasserman-schultz-226352
That makes me a bit scared for Clinton's presidency. She hunted Wikileaks' crew for years after they embarrased her, and now they're getting revenge. Will she learn from this and be less vengeful towards powerful journalists?
I don't know. From what I remember that movie was kinda anti-war so I wouldn't classify it so much as a Republican wet dream but as a nice dream with some annoying bouts of skepticism.
I would suggest you look up Chris Kyle and my mention of Republican wet dream is a pretty apt description
She hunted Wikileaks' crew for years after they embarrased her
What the hell are you going on about now.
Throwing thousands of hacked files onto the internet can hardly be called journalism.
Also a person leaking stuff in one's own department to an outside source is also not a journalist.
Doxxing is not journalism.
Being in Vladimir Putin's pocket is not journalism.
Being Putin's proxy in sabotaging the election is maybe journalism, but probably not.
Releasing other peoples private and Classified materials including peoples SSNs and Bank information, then turning around and threatening to sue someone for saying things about you that you don't like is not Journalism.
Real journalists have shows on Russian propaganda channels.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Tomorrow
Neither is raping a woman and running like a pussy considered journalism.
And right on cue here's Smoker-san for the monthly poo.
lol did his post get deleted?
Looks like Wikileaks will be releasing material from the DCCC next.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/fbi-investigating-dccc-cyber-attack
First, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem . Second, journalists do horrible stuff all the damn time.
Second, journalists do horrible stuff all the damn time.
All of them?, intentionally, and out of petty spite/personal bias?
First, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem . Second, journalists do horrible stuff all the damn time.
You never explained what the hell you were talking about in that post with Hillary hunting Wikileaks for years or whatever exactly it was.
First, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem . Second, journalists do horrible stuff all the damn time.
People are pretty clearly targeting donor lists with the intention of leaking them to try and intimidate people into not donating in an attempt to throw the election to a particular candidate. Furthermore, these actions consistently have the trademarks of Russian hackers.
Explain to me how that is less important than people getting pissed off at Bernie because he stayed in a race that he'd already lost and please provide examples of where they specifically acted on that anger rather than talking about it.
Geez guys, Russia co-opting a hacktivist collective for the sake of sabotaging the American democratic process and installing literal fascism is just normal scummy jorurnalist stuff.
Note that even Republicans are lining up on the side that the DNC hacking is an attack on the actual democratic process itself.
I mean, shit, at least the GOP's emails would be a thousand times funnier.
@Cyan:
I mean, shit, at least the GOP's emails would be a thousand times funnier.
I guarantee you that the RNC's comments on Trump would make the DNC's on Bernie look positively quaint.
I guarantee you that the RNC's comments on Trump would make the DNC's on Bernie look positively quaint.
FROM: mitchtheman@republican.comSUBJECT: so. who else wants to drink themselves to death over this
@Cyan:
I mean, shit, at least the GOP's emails would be a thousand times funnier.
Couldn't top Stephen's Colbert wondering about what Donald Trump thinks of Putin's dick being in his mouth.
@Cyan:
FROM: mitchtheman@republican.comSUBJECT: so. who else wants to drink themselves to death over this
I bet Reince's were a real rollercoaster ride from the rising hope with every new potential challenger to Trump stepping forth and then plummeting to despair with them getting torn down by the rest of the Clown Car.
Assange has a personal vendetta against Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration as a whole for the whole being-on-the-run thing.
@Article:
First, citing his “personal perspective,” Mr. Assange accused Mrs. Clinton of having been among those pushing to indict him after WikiLeaks disseminated a quarter of a million diplomatic cables during her tenure as secretary of state. “We do see her as a bit of a problem for freedom of the press more generally,” Mr. Assange said.
Remember, Manning is still serving 35 years for her role in leading to that leak so there is a case to be made for some anger and personal bias here. The article also mentions Assange being against the role of the U.S. military in Libya and Hillary Clinton being a "liberal war hawk". Anyway, he's trying his hardest to pretend a Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton presidency would both be equally bad.
@Useful:
We do see her as a bit of a problem for freedom of the press more generally
Because, hey, it's not like the other guy has actually talked about changing laws to make it easier to sue journalists who says something you don't like or had a featured speaker at his convention who secretly bankrolled multiple lawsuits against a website because he was pissy that they talked about his private life.
Or, you know, has consistently expressed admiration for a guy with an actual track record of imprisoning, if not outright murdering, dissenting journalists.
Honestly the highlight would be the RNC stuck between Trump and Cruz. I imagine many of them would just consist of "welp, we're fucked."
Honestly the highlight would be the RNC stuck between Trump and Cruz. I imagine many of them would just consist of "welp, we're fucked."
Assange has a personal vendetta against Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration as a whole for the whole being-on-the-run thing.
He's on the run from rape charges made in Sweden.
Remember, Manning is still serving 35 years for her role in leading to that leak so there is a case to be made for some anger and personal bias here.
So this man of the people really specifically is out to take out Clinton, leaving the GOP untouched by leaks and hacks, hacks traced to Russian sources by the way. Funny how they then end up on wikileaks?? Bizarre!Whatever credibility as journalism or freedom of information Wikileaks and Assange once had are obsolete and gone. He's at best a naive moron being used, and at worst has legit sold his soul to the devil. I'm going to go with the latter given the extremely specific leaking of ONE half of the US political system is about as transparent as it gets.
The article also mentions Assange being against the role of the U.S. military in Libya
Libya is not, never was, never will be, like the Iraq war. Attempts to describe it as imperialist, warmongering etc are all tone deaf clueless farts from people who don't know what they're talking about, or don't actually give a shit about Libya and want to use it against people when convenient. This in of itself is a red flag.
and Hillary Clinton being a "liberal war hawk".
Using limited strikes to aid rebels in an already started war against a dictator with no sectarian element = apparently a hawk thing now I guess.
Anyway, he's trying his hardest to pretend a Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton presidency would both be equally bad.
Key word here: Trying.
Man the Muslm speakers are out in force tonight and have been tearing Trump a new asshole, with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and the parents of a Muslim soldier who died in 2004 being the highlights
And of course Fox News barely aired Kareem's speech and decided not to air the other speech at all
Man the Muslm speakers are out in force tonight and have been tearing Trump a new asshole, with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and the parents of a Muslim soldier who died in 2004 being the highlights And of course Fox News barely aired Kareem's speech and decided not to air the other speech at all
If it was an attack being carried out by muslims in a major city against whites they'd give as much airtime to it as possible.
Assange on PanamaPapers, because hey he's all about that leakleak.http://www.mintpressnews.com/julian-assange-complete-panama-papers-archive-must-released-public/215707/
Assange also suggested there was a pro-Western bias in the first wave of reporting on the Panama Papers. “There was clearly a conscious effort to go with the Putin bashing, North Korea bashing, sanctions bashing etc.,” he said. “I didn’t think that was necessary for that story.”
Hey, guys. Lay off North Korea a little bit. A little bias there. Now watch as I blow open the American political system! Well the one's with the D next to their name anyway.
@Monkey:
He's on the run from rape charges made in Sweden.
True, but the whole wikileaks controversy didn't exactly endear him to the U.S. government and vice versa. Eric Holder did say the Justice Department was exploring possible charges against him and said charges could be brought to him under the Espionage Act. It's no surprise that the U.S government would "explore" these options for a serious leak like that though. Julian Assange might be paranoid after the whole leak, as anyone would be, but it's no secret he had reason to be scared. Hell, Snowden is scared to come back to the U.S. for fear of indictment.
So this man of the people really specifically is out to take out Clinton, leaving the GOP untouched by leaks and hacks, hacks traced to Russian sources by the way. Funny how they then end up on wikileaks?? Bizarre!Whatever credibility as journalism or freedom of information Wikileaks and Assange once had are obsolete and gone. He's at best a naive moron being used, and at worst has legit sold his soul to the devil. I'm going to go with the latter given the extremely specific leaking of ONE half of the US political system is about as transparent as it gets.Libya is not, never was, never will be, like the Iraq war. Attempts to describe it as imperialist, warmongering etc are all tone deaf clueless farts from people who don't know what they're talking about, or don't actually give a shit about Libya and want to use it against people when convenient. This in of itself is a red flag.Using limited strikes to aid rebels in an already started war against a dictator with no sectarian element = apparently a hawk thing now I guess.Key word here: Trying.
Agreed on all accounts. I don't agree with Manning's imprisonment and treatment but if Assange was truly a 'journalist' exposing the corrupt mechanisms of government and encouraging transparency then he would be doing so from all possible sides. A Trump presidency is a possibility. A Hillary Clinton presidency is a possibility. If he chooses to indiscriminately take sides and pursue purposeful ignorance in order to highlight only Hillary Clinton then he's not solving a 'problem' but rather letting one side get a pass. That is my pet peeve,
@Monkey:
Assange on PanamaPapers, because hey he's all about that leakleak.http://www.mintpressnews.com/julian-assange-complete-panama-papers-archive-must-released-public/215707/Hey, guys. Lay off North Korea a little bit. A little bias there. Now watch as I blow open the American political system! Well the one's with the D next to their name anyway.
There's also this http://nymag.com/selectall/2016/07/why-did-wikileaks-help-dox-most-of-turkeys-adult-female-population.html they're also about that collateral damage and not giving two damns.