To be or not to be?

11.6K posts

To be or not to be? banner
To be or not to be?

To be or not to be?

@2B_ON_2B

Katılım Kasım 2011
233 Takip Edilen111 Takipçiler
To be or not to be?
To be or not to be?@2B_ON_2B·
@Tinted_Templar @Real_RobN No he isn't a "Democratic operative", simply a liberal voter that works at an NGO. "This is Democrat Joel Caldwell of the “Coalition for the People’s Agenda,” a Fulton County ballot-harvesting NGO chief". If you read the article, they really don't fact check his claims at all.
English
2
0
1
17
To be or not to be? retweetledi
🇺🇸RealRobert🇺🇸
Here it is: A hidden-camera 🔥🔥 bombshell: This is Democrat Joel Caldwell of the “Coalition for the People’s Agenda,” a Fulton County ballot-harvesting NGO chief—caught on tape admitting it all. Democrats are stuffing ballot drop boxes with fraudulent votes, and it’s all caught on videotape. He also admits this is how they rigged the 2020 election and why Democrats fight to the death against voter ID. • They pay people to illegally ballot-harvest. • They bribe ballot counters and election officials. • They forge and falsify ballots. And the Atlanta mayor straight-up stole the election. He says it all himself—on tape. Joel Caldwell: “That’s what happened in 2020, ’cause that’s when the ballots—they started stuffing them ballots and people stuffing them ballots, and they got videotape of them, but nobody talks about it. That’s why Trump was making that big deal about it, because you see it on videotape. It’s like, come on. We see the man pull up and put a hundred ballots in this box. You know? You can’t do that sh*t. So groups were paying people to do just that—drop off ballots.” He continues: That’s why Democrats fight to the death against voter ID laws. Joel Caldwell: “That’s why the Republicans are always trying to fight the ballot—you know, that’s the whole argument, because Republicans are the ones who put out that kind of stuff, so they want voter IDs and stuff. Democrats are fighting voter ID laws. It’s a two-sided thing. That’s what they’re fighting over. Republicans are trying to say, ‘Hey, look, we got proof of this sh*t.’ And the Democrats are like, well, we don’t want voter ID laws, and we want to make it where you can just drop your ballot off—online voting and different things they try to come up with.” 📝 Pass the SAVE America Act.
English
371
12.4K
18.6K
185.3K
To be or not to be? retweetledi
Sean Davis
Sean Davis@seanmdav·
BREAKING: Notice has just been given to Democrats in the Tennessee House that all members of the Democrat Caucus are being removed from all standing committees and subcommittees as a result of their behavior in the statehouse during the redistricting debates last week, which included setting fires inside the Capitol and attacking law enforcement. In the state of Tennessee, political terrorism will not be tolerated. National Republicans take note that this is how you exercise power.
Sean Davis tweet media
English
3.5K
23.4K
90K
2.1M
To be or not to be? retweetledi
Taya Bass
Taya Bass@travelingflying·
Christopher Hitchens: ”In 1786, when the United States was barely a country, it was having its sailors taken as slaves by the Barbary states, the states of the Ottoman Empire and North Africa. Tripoli, shores of Tripoli. Ships stopped, its crews carried off into slavery. We estimate 1.5 million European and American slaves taken between 1750 and 1815. Jefferson and Adams went to their ambassador in London and said, why do you do this to us? The United States has never had a quarrel with the Muslim world of any kind. We weren't in the crusades. We weren't at war with Spain. Why do you do this to our people and our ships? Why do you plunder and enslave our people? The ambassador said very plainly, Mr. Abdul Rahman said, because the Quran gives us permission to do so, because you are infidels, and that's our answer. Jefferson said, well, in that case, I will send a navy which will crush your state, which he did. Islamic fundamentalism is not created by American democracy. It's a lie to say so. It's a masochistic lie, and it excuses those who are the real criminals, and blames us for the attacks made upon us.”
English
647
16.3K
50.3K
1.1M
To be or not to be? retweetledi
Cynical Publius
Cynical Publius@CynicalPublius·
So the current line from the Democrat/Media Complex goes something like this: “Oh, so the Straits of Hormuz are open again. Big deal. So we spent all that money and killed all those people just to achieve something that was already in place before we started this.” They are acting like opening the Straits of Hormuz was our singular military objective. In reality, our objectives were to destroy Iran’s military and nuclear capabilities, eradicate the class of mullahs who were murdering their own citizens by the bushel, and eliminate the mullahs’ ability to export terror throughout the world. All objectives were achieved with only a few U.S. casualties, the world is now a vastly safer place, and as an added bonus Israel and Lebanon seem poised to finally achieve peace. This is one of the greatest military victories in world history, and the usual suspects are trying to obscure that fact by pretending our objective was something tertiary to the entire effort. Don’t fall for it. It’s a journalistic lie.
English
519
3.5K
12.7K
166.7K
To be or not to be? retweetledi
Joe Redden | The Older Millennial
Trans has no business in public high schools. But it’s there. Porn has no business in public high schools. But it’s there. Liberal ideology has no business in public high schools. But it’s there. A Drag Queen has no business in public high schools. But it’s there. But yeah, let’s worry about God.
English
30
259
4.1K
28.8K
Bjorn
Bjorn@SnPosca·
@kmh @monsterhunter45 I think Americans missed the part where would rather die fighting than let anyone have European territory. They probably didn’t get the memo on why world wars started, when we set the world ablaze for Alsace and Lorraine
English
26
0
2
6.2K
Larry Correia
Larry Correia@monsterhunter45·
Seriously, it's actually interesting just how profoundly delusional or dishonest these dorks are. They are either super gullible and believe any dumbfuck narrative they get spoon fed, or they know better and they just keep lying anyway.
English
14
19
340
9.9K
Joe Plom
Joe Plom@Turt62·
@reallouiehuey @catturd2 @BrendaFurqueron @johnrich Thank God I am a Boomer. The generations after us are weaklings. If God came down today and said I will make you 30 again I would say no Fri’gn way. Happy where I am at 64 and where I was. Proud to be at the tail end of the baby boomer generation 😎
English
3
0
7
292
To be or not to be? retweetledi
Camus
Camus@newstart_2024·
The guy just landed a spacecraft on a comet — one of the most impressive scientific achievements in years. His reward? A public struggle session because his bowling shirt had scantily clad women on it. Helen Andrews points out the quiet cost of institutional feminization: HR departments now hunt down any maverick personality and stamp it out. We’re losing innovators we’ll never even know about, all because someone focused on the shirt instead of the comet. This is how wokeness actually works. Have you seen real excellence get punished for something trivial like this?
English
1.7K
12.9K
79K
37.5M
To be or not to be?
To be or not to be?@2B_ON_2B·
@MichelleJo42492 @NJBeisner Oh I get it. You are obsessed like Candace. Laying out innuendos and half truths to make a case that doesn't exist. Got it. I'll leave this for a few minutes so you get the notification, and then I'll block you. I don't waste time on ignorant people.
English
0
0
0
5
To be or not to be? retweetledi
Natalie Jean Beisner
Natalie Jean Beisner@NJBeisner·
In the immediate aftermath of Charlie’s murder—when the leftists were celebrating it and taking his quotes out of context, painting him as a racist, a misogynist, and more—I made it my mission to dispel the lies about and misrepresentations of him. I spent all day watching Charlie videos, clipping the most prescient parts, and posting them online, in an effort to prove he wasn’t racist or sexist but was actually a great man. I devoted all of my free time to it. I became…obsessive. You can go back to my accounts during that time and see. It bothered me to no end to see people lying about him. And I knew some of them weren’t lying but were simply ignorant and misinformed. I wanted to correct the record immediately by sharing the truth. Then, as Candace’s pseudo investigation (which I’ve been following since literally day one) started picking up steam, and I started seeing her saying and doing ever worse and more outrageous things, I slowly transitioned away from calling out leftist lies about Charlie towards calling out Candace’s lies about Charlie (and everyone else in his orbit). So when you ask me why I’m “so obsessed” with Candace…I’m not. It’s not about her. If it were, I would’ve never been a fan of hers, wouldn’t have defended her when she was ousted from the Daily Wire or when she suggested Harvey Weinstein might be innocent. I would’ve been attacking her this whole time. But I wasn’t. Because again, it’s not about her. And the fact that her sycophants always rush to make it about her is further evidence of not only the type of audience she’s cultivated but how she herself has primed them by making this whole thing about her the entire time. Her fans can’t think of any other rationale other than it must be about Candace—because it’s always about Candace. But it’s actually not. It’s about Charlie. Ever since I watched him be murdered, I feel this indescribable urge to defend his legacy. And I know I’m not the only one. I can’t tell you why it means so much to me, but I can tell you that it really really does. I’ve been doing it nonstop since September 10th. I’ve devoted countless hours to it. It’s just that—sadly—the people I’ve had to defend him from changed, or at least expanded. Now we have to defend him not from people maligning him as racist and sexist but rather from people pretending to be his friends. And I’ll keep doing it for as long as I have to, which is at least as long as they continue their assault on truth.
English
32
39
358
4.7K
To be or not to be?
To be or not to be?@2B_ON_2B·
@MichelleJo42492 @NJBeisner The only one acting like a jealous ex-girlfriend is the obsessed Candace Owens. You would think that Erika stole Charlie from her the way she's acting. And all in the name of "being Charlie's best friend".
English
0
0
0
16
To be or not to be?
To be or not to be?@2B_ON_2B·
@sofialindbergfn Islam is wholly incompatible with Christianity and Western values. They don't assimilate, but instead feel it's their god's will for them to takeover and make everything sharia law.
English
0
0
0
4
Caitlin E. Ritas (she/her)
Caitlin E. Ritas (she/her)@CaitlinERitas·
The reason that Communism hasn't worked well in Cuba yet is because of the imperialistic US blockades cutting off capitalistic countries from dealing in trade with Cuba.
English
156
10
112
16.1K
Pro balla
Pro balla@proballa149510·
@KatieKCTV5 @KCTV5 Has an actual game been played on this? What happens when players sweat? Does it give like hardwood? I feel like this is an extremely bad idea
English
4
0
7
2.4K
Jim
Jim@jimkaldem·
@RepRitchie God, do we have to listen to this again? Representative Torres, the LAST TIME the US Declared War was December 8, 1941. Blame Truman, he is the first President to go to War without a Declaration, then Kennedy followed along with Vietnam. Sit this one out!
English
1
0
12
463
Rep. Ritchie Torres
Rep. Ritchie Torres@RepRitchie·
Under the Constitution, the separation of powers is clear: Congress has the power to declare war. The President, as Commander in Chief, has the power to command the military in a war that Congress has authorized. With respect to the war in Iran, authorization has neither been sought by the President nor granted by Congress. The President cannot constitutionally wage war without congressional authorization unless the nation has been attacked, is under attack, or faces an imminent attack. None of those conditions is present here. For too long, we have operated under a theory of presidential war powers so open-ended that it lacks anything resembling a limiting principle. The issue before us is not Democrat versus Republican, nor progressive versus conservative. It is Congress versus the President. It is Article I versus Article II. The Founders did not declare independence 250 years ago to replace one king with another. Nor did the Framers intend for the Commander in Chief to wield the unilateral war-making authority of an 18th-century English monarch. The notion that a President can plunge the United States into a regional war in one of the most volatile places on earth—without even briefing Congress, much less securing its authorization—is irreconcilable with the text, structure, and history of the Constitution. Instead of playing second fiddle to an imperial presidency, Congress must reclaim its rightful place as the first branch of government—exactly as the Founders intended. We are Article I for a reason. It is time we start acting like it.
English
371
80
427
176.4K
To be or not to be?
To be or not to be?@2B_ON_2B·
@RepRitchie War Powers Act, 1973. You do realize that Congress hasn't declared war since 1942? Try learning some history.
English
0
0
0
13