Tucker Carlson mocks Mike Pence because Pence wants to fund Azov battalion.
Donald Trump claims he had peace because he kicked Victoria and William Nuland's butts. He literally got impeached for it.
Now Ben Shapiro backs neo con mike Pence.
Note that right wing is weird, for some reason conservatives are big fan of tucker Carlson and Ben Shapiro, even though their policies differ quite a lot. Shapiro is an Israel first America last. Shapiro was a far right Breitbart writer he literally quit when Steve Bannon supported trump. Not sure why conservatives are both trump and Shapiro supporters at the same time.
Anyway, Ben Shapiro is not technically wrong. He says that government printing money can't help American cities.
Unlike other Zionists, who just uses n word in front of Obama, Ben Shapiro is smart and is good at debates. Ben is not wrong at government spending not helping Americans. Not technically. However the issue here is government printing money. If government gives tax cut to the rich, then gives lot of money to Raytheon, then even if the government gives lots of money domestically cities won't be fixed, Alabama suburbs will keep making swamp creatures.
So even though Shapiro is not technically wrong, he is distracting using Raytheon talking points.
So keep on thinking this shit matters and you will keep waiting and waiting as the bullshit keeps going round and round the only reason they are on is to keep you distracted while they keep stealing from the people, you really think that these fucks give two shits about you ?
Turn that shit off and work with your local community as that's what might help make a difference.
"Ukraine is becoming a litmus test for Republican candidates because of the bad-faith argument that if you think we must fund Ukraine in its war against Russia, you don't care about American poverty. This is wrong. The two issues are not connected.
First off, pouring money into poverty-ridden areas does not result in prosperity. That has nothing to do with Ukraine. "Government spending means prosperity" is a lie. Half the people now promoting that lie know it and have spoken out openly against it in the past. You can be skeptical of Ukrainian military aid while STILL being in favor of entitlement reform.
Second off, the notion that America has no interests in Ukraine is untrue. We have an interest in the Russian military being defanged so they do not invade surrounding nations, thus threatening global supply chains and strengthening American opponents. We have an interest in deterring China from invading Taiwan.
But we are now stuck in this weird binary strawman situation in which we are told that either we must fund Ukraine "until they win, as long as it takes," without defining winning or "as long as it takes"; or "we must stop the war in Ukraine" without defining what "stopping" looks like (does it mean withdrawing all aid, thus leading Russia to take Kyiv?).
What about the position that we have interests in Ukraine, that they do not match the Ukrainian interests entirely, and that we should fund Ukraine so as to prevent their takeover while pushing for a peace agreement that cedes certain territory to the Russians while granting security guarantees to the Ukrainians?
All nuance is lost in politics pretty quickly. It's always much easier to malign your opponents as uncaring about their fellow Americans. But demagoguery comes at a pretty high societal cost."
Not that I think anyone is to be trusted, but most people who say stop war in Ukraine do have a plan, which is essentially give Russia most of the Donbas region as well as a guarantee that Ukraine will never be admitted into NATO, and in exchange Russia accepts some kind of "defanging" of its military potential (of which many options have been proposed).
Tucker Carlson mocks Mike Pence because Pence wants to fund Azov battalion.
Donald Trump claims he had peace because he kicked Victoria and William Nuland's butts. He literally got impeached for it.
Now Ben Shapiro backs neo con mike Pence.
Note that right wing is weird, for some reason conservatives are big fan of tucker Carlson and Ben Shapiro, even though their policies differ quite a lot. Shapiro is an Israel first America last. Shapiro was a far right Breitbart writer he literally quit when Steve Bannon supported trump. Not sure why conservatives are both trump and Shapiro supporters at the same time.
Anyway, Ben Shapiro is not technically wrong. He says that government printing money can't help American cities.
Unlike other Zionists, who just uses n word in front of Obama, Ben Shapiro is smart and is good at debates. Ben is not wrong at government spending not helping Americans. Not technically. However the issue here is government printing money. If government gives tax cut to the rich, then gives lot of money to Raytheon, then even if the government gives lots of money domestically cities won't be fixed, Alabama suburbs will keep making swamp creatures.
So even though Shapiro is not technically wrong, he is distracting using Raytheon talking points.
Abolish the federal reserve. Ban AIPAC
So keep on thinking this shit matters and you will keep waiting and waiting as the bullshit keeps going round and round the only reason they are on is to keep you distracted while they keep stealing from the people, you really think that these fucks give two shits about you ? Turn that shit off and work with your local community as that's what might help make a difference.
If the image is hard to read:
"Ukraine is becoming a litmus test for Republican candidates because of the bad-faith argument that if you think we must fund Ukraine in its war against Russia, you don't care about American poverty. This is wrong. The two issues are not connected.
First off, pouring money into poverty-ridden areas does not result in prosperity. That has nothing to do with Ukraine. "Government spending means prosperity" is a lie. Half the people now promoting that lie know it and have spoken out openly against it in the past. You can be skeptical of Ukrainian military aid while STILL being in favor of entitlement reform.
Second off, the notion that America has no interests in Ukraine is untrue. We have an interest in the Russian military being defanged so they do not invade surrounding nations, thus threatening global supply chains and strengthening American opponents. We have an interest in deterring China from invading Taiwan.
But we are now stuck in this weird binary strawman situation in which we are told that either we must fund Ukraine "until they win, as long as it takes," without defining winning or "as long as it takes"; or "we must stop the war in Ukraine" without defining what "stopping" looks like (does it mean withdrawing all aid, thus leading Russia to take Kyiv?).
What about the position that we have interests in Ukraine, that they do not match the Ukrainian interests entirely, and that we should fund Ukraine so as to prevent their takeover while pushing for a peace agreement that cedes certain territory to the Russians while granting security guarantees to the Ukrainians?
All nuance is lost in politics pretty quickly. It's always much easier to malign your opponents as uncaring about their fellow Americans. But demagoguery comes at a pretty high societal cost."
https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1680944638385872897
Regardless, the State of Israel must be destroyed along with NATO and all central bankers
Not that I think anyone is to be trusted, but most people who say stop war in Ukraine do have a plan, which is essentially give Russia most of the Donbas region as well as a guarantee that Ukraine will never be admitted into NATO, and in exchange Russia accepts some kind of "defanging" of its military potential (of which many options have been proposed).