bass4funk's past comments

  • -6


    The difference is that the GOP candidates are all completely out to lunch, while Sanders is awesome.

    Awesome at what? Bloviating and regurgitating the typical mantra of robbing Paul to give to Peter?

    It's going to be nice to watch him take the nomination and the White House to follow.

    It's Feb. 10th, please wait until April 1st. to make that hilarious joke again, love it. ROFL,

    (...uh...realist...The Repubs are being throat-punched by a lifelong "independent" that became a Republican like 5 minutes ago,

    Republican? Who?

    one who has never had a political career, and has been relative political nobody--other than being casino developer and TV host--his entire life.

    We had a peanut farmer, an actor and a constitutional lawyer that was in the Senate and only voted president, so what's the problem?

    I think it would be a mistake to nominate Sanders. The guy talks sense I'll grant, but he could put a Republican in the WH. Clinton can win the general election against all comers from the Republican crazy Asylum, I'm just not sure Sanders can.

    I most definetly hope and agree with that.

    Posted in: Sanders, Trump win in New Hampshire

  • -4


    Bernie or Hillary - will have easy going with whatever charred wreckage emerges from this Republican debacle.

    Hillary just got served and clobbered and you talk about the GOP being a charred wreckage? I'm surprised that the presidency is once again eluding her,

    Posted in: Sanders, Trump win in New Hampshire

  • -4


    Watch the DNC fire Debbie Schultz, throw Bernie under the bus and push Joe Biden into the nomination. Bernie will then run as an independent bleeding millions of democratic votes; thus ensuring the GOP will win the White House.

    That would be the best dream scenario for the GOP. As for Schultz, she has got the be the biggest joke the DNC EVER elected as head leader.

    Doesn't matter who wins on the GOP side because the democrats are on a pathway to that special place that Madeline Albright assured us exists. . .

    You beat me to it. Albright really can't say anything. If you see Biden suddenly jump into the race, you know for sure the Dems have hit the ceiling.

    Posted in: Sanders, Trump win in New Hampshire

  • -8


    As I a liberal progressive socialist atheist income redistributist, I think you misunderestimate us.

    Really, I doubt it.

    We are not changing the euphemisms of the word; we simply want to make the pie higher, because we know how hard it is to put food on your family.

    Difficult to do when trying to take other peoples money or you try to punish success.

    Progressivism and liberalism have gone hand in hand now for about 100 years now, so long the lines between them have blurred.

    One main reason is, when the word socialism hits the palette of most Americans it leaves a metallic taste in their mouths.

    Socialism used to be more openly associated with them too until it became a dirty word. How do you work in media and not know this?

    Hey, I'm from California. That's like asking me if I know who Mickey Mouse is. Come on now.....

    Try looking up what each mean yourself sometime.

    That's the problem with libs, they depend on Google too much.

    Sanders is a liberal, a progressive, and yes, a democratic socialist.

    And I applaud him for his honesty, that doesn't mean the country overwhelmingly would vote for a socialist knowing that it would virtually further bankrupt the nation, California is already a mess and the libs are still not done with it?

    And most polls show he'd win in a Trump vs Sanders match up, and if Clinton wins, it'll be her that beats Trump. Maybe you're the one that should be alarmed.

    Lol, Alarmed? No, not even close. I know libs will put out anything to make it seem in the most impossible situation they are winning and it makes sense to have hope, but this is going to not only be fun to watch when the Dems lose, but the fact that this might once and for all humble them. I would bet $600 that Sanders would lose, not only lose, but it wouldn't even come close and even if he did, he'd serve one term becaus the damage that would make the country implode would be irrevocable.

    A bit surprising a seasoned journalist like you would use this person as a source.

    Why, because he's one of the more famous journalists in L.A. On TV and is a liberal??

    I hope when you were on assignment in Iraq you were a little more selective about where you got your info.

    You don't know the first thing about reporting in a war zone, with all due respect.

    One thing it doesn't mean is regressing, going back to the 1950's like the Koch brothers and other right wingers want.

    No, we just want you libs to relocate to overseas.

    Progressive might mean that it's 2016 and for the US to face the future it needs to be more inclusive, do a better job of providing opportunities for all its population.

    You guys had almost 8 years and believe me, more income redistribution, punishing people for success and higher taxation won't do it. How are you guys going to tackle the debt? How are you guys going to deal with radical Islam instead of just turning the cheek and making peace with a radical group that would cut off your head in a blink of an eye. How are you going to get 47 million people off of welfare, create high paying jobs over $8 without destroying small businesses? How are you guys going to rebuild race relations since Obama has completely.....that up? How are you guys going to bring the corporate tax rate of 40% down, the cost of living in the metropolitan cities? How are you going to fix our infrastructures that are in urgent need of a serious overhaul, especially in the East Coast. What about the 1% that have the power to relocate? What will you guys do when many of them will start to hide their money from the greedy socialists or just move away then what? The middle class has been for the most part wiped out over the past 7 years, so how will you libs deal with all these problems? Flowers, paisley and unicorns ain't gonna cut it.

    It might mean finding ways to improve the economy such as keeping more jobs onshore. It might mean relying less on perpetual war,

    So that means, in lib language, we just have to deal with living with the occasional terrorists killing and bombing people, but that's just life.

    constantly feeding the military-industrial-academic complex.

    I like a strong and powerful military, in fact, it helps me sleep better at night.

    It might mean cutting back on the size of the military and bringing most troops back to the US to protect its borders.

    If we had a wall, we wouldn't need the military to do the job a wall or electric fence could do.

    It might mean finding ways to rely less on petroleum, and then developing alternatives to burning it.

    We're doing that already and in the meantime and until that time comes where we can throw algae in our gas tanks, we should drill for more oil at home, that way, we are less dependent on Mideast oil.

    It might mean reducing the control of those running the Republican and Democratic parties and not marginalizing political parties that can offer alternatives to them. It might mean more term limits for elected officials at all levels.

    Well, on that part, you won't get an argument from me.

    It might mean meaningful restrictions on campaign contributions. It might mean many things: it's up to US citizens to decide. Unless of course the majority want to go back to the 1950's

    In the 1950s if you even uttered the word socialist you were an outcast. Good times.

    Posted in: Sanders, Trump win in New Hampshire

  • -11


    Actually, we're hoping for a Sanders vs. Trump

    And Trump will do to Sanders like that song from funk master Bootsy Collins "Body Slam"

    CONFIDENCE OF LEAD The probability that Sanders leads Trump is 98%.

    ....and then the Dems woke up to the harsh reality and found themselves hugging boxes of Kleenex tissues after Sanders gives his speech and concedes to Trump.

    The Democratic party establishment might be panicking,

    Might? Might? Bit of a gross understatement there....

    but progressive voters aren't.

    That's because No one really cares about them and they're not big enough to influence the overall elections. So there is no reason for them to be alarmed. And what the hell does Progressive mean? When did liberals start using the term progressive as if it takes away from what liberals are: socialists, pure and simple. At least Sanders can admit what he is, unlike most of these people that think changing the euphemism of the word will make it seem they are less for income redistribution.

    Posted in: Sanders, Trump win in New Hampshire

  • -12


    The Dems are in a panic mode now, regardless of what they want the public to think, there is a very real concern that Trump can pull this off and especially if Sanders is the nominee, then it's lights out! One of my good friends who works for KTLA in Los Angeles has a friend that is a liberal and an insider, the Dems are really concerned now that they have a deeply flawed candidate and that they are looking at other possible contingency plans should Hillary drops out or is pushed out for some benign reason.....

    Posted in: Sanders, Trump win in New Hampshire

  • -11


    If Sanders is the nominee, it's the final countdown for the Dems! Ahhh, just conjures up memories of the Wizard of Oz when the munchkins were dancing around singing "ding, dong the witch is dead..."

    Posted in: Sanders, Trump win in New Hampshire

  • -5


    When your party is racist I suppose Trump just seems like a regular guy.

    This coming from the party that voted twice for a president that has been the biggest racial divider since the 60's!

    People can't take Trump's brand of racism.

    But taking Obama's is perfectly Ok?

    People can't take Trump's brand of prejudice.

    But taking Obama's is perfectly Ok?

    Those people!

    They are always crying about Trump's dishing out racism and prejudice. What is wrong with those people?

    I ask myself the same thing.

    Alls Trump is asking for is torture and prejudice.

    More like wanting to do serious damage, protect the country and use every necessary tool to do that, sounds good to me.

    Little things Americans should embrace because Trump says they should. Is that circular logic?

    I don't think Trump's logic is different from Obama's logic or lack of......

    I'll give the rightists this, they're optimistic.

    Compared to the Lefts pessimism.

    Unfortunately, the stacks of corpses are a heavy price to pay.

    as Opposed to the lies, scandals and distrust that chips away at the left.

    Posted in: Donald Trump looks for a win in New Hampshire primary

  • -6


    Really? Then why does Canada do so well?

    1) That depends on who you ask. I have a lot of friends in Canada and yes, mostly conservative and they would disagree that Canada is anything is far from doing well.

    2) Again, who cares? Canada (thankfully is not the US) we don't want to be anything like them and if Canada is so great (been there more times than I could count) then why so many of them come to the US?

    I like Canada, but they can keep it.

    The older generation may remember 70% tax rates on the rich under that infamous screaming Trotskite Richard Nixon.

    Who said that Nixon was a true fiscal conservative?

    They may even remember the Maoist proponent of gun control Ronald Reagan. They may even recall the lesser known Fidel Castro clone Bob Dole and his ideas about healthcare.

    But he never meant to have it nationalized and the government to overtake it the way Obama has been doing it. The good thing is once Obama is gone and we can finally get rid of it or gut it and take all unnecessary provisions out of it.

    It's the rightist crackpots with no sense of historical perspective who are ignorant.

    No, that would be the left, because if they did, they would know that the US became a great nation because people had dreams and desires to live in a country with limited government, less taxation and the mindset, ability and fortitude to choose your own destiny. No, we have a society of leeches that think the government is there to feed and put clothes on your back from cradle to grave. Again, go to California and see what a financial mess the once great state with one of the largest economies in the world has become the brunt of jokes and slowly turning into a 3rd world state.

    An impulsive, 13-year-old brat inhabiting the body of a paunchy, greedy, 69-year-old who promises to torture...and this is the person who is headed for a win in NH. Thanks, GOP! We can tell you really love this country.

    The right was saying the same thing about Obama, but the difference is, Obama would rather give everything away, put up a white flag and announce to take it up anyone, including his own soul, if that means he could walk away from a war.

    Posted in: Donald Trump looks for a win in New Hampshire primary

  • -6


    Seeing as how Americans under the age of 29 have a more positive image of socialism than of capitalism,*

    Positive?? More like completely ignorant, lazy and blinded.

    Team Clinton can either speak to their concerns, or expect them to continue to gravitate towards Sanders.

    And he'll lose in the general election.

    Posted in: Donald Trump looks for a win in New Hampshire primary

  • -5


    The damned beast is ravenous.

    Well, then let's hope the rope and choke chain can restrain Clinton.

    Posted in: Trump calls for waterboarding, other methods in U.S. fight against ISIS

  • -2


    Looks likes the Republicans want to run against Sanders

    We sure do, we really, really do!!!

    It's irrelevant.

    Not for the women and families it's not, not even close.

    And 'enabler' wouldn't be the right word if she was ok with it, because he wouldn't be cheating if she was ok with it, so there would be nothing to enable.

    She stood by and allowed it, said nothing. Supported an enabler, a prowler.

    Posted in: Woman who accused Bill Clinton of assault to campaign against Hillary's presidential run

  • -5


    No, it's entirely relevant.

    How so?

    Just as you justify using torture because the enemy uses torture, so will other enemies justify torture against US soldiers.

    I'm aware, it's always been like that through history.

    By bringing the US down to that level,

    So how should they extract the intel if they don't use coercive interrogation methods? Make a cozy room, pillow, perhaps a hm or Nutella sandwich?

    you invite other enemies to bring them down to the level of the US

    I want an America that is powerful enough to scare the terrorists so bad, thinking about touching an American will be a very serious nightmare for them.

    Right now they know that their country has signed the Geneva Convention prohibiting torture, and therefore only the most despicable of enemies will use torture against them.

    If you think so.

    If the US starts using torture against enemies, the soldiers will know that even more enemies will be using torture against them.

    Then we will just have to perpetuate the cycle until one emerges the victor and by best estimate from the firepower, we have, it would be us.

    Have you ever even asked a soldier what they think of the idea of using torture against enemy combatants?

    Yeah, half of my family and friends in my neighborhood. They're all for it and then some.

    And if they are ok with it, knowing that this increases the risk of themselves being tortured.

    That's the sad and harsh reality of war.

    And also when the bad guys are doing interrogations? Then why were the Japanese water boarders found guilty of war crimes and executed? For doing what was essential at the time?

    I can't speak for Japan, but I remember they did bomb Pearl Harbor. So go figure.

    I read what you wrote several times over,

    Please go over it a few more times.

    I still see nowhere where you give any sources for your claims that most Japanese used it as a means to torture and not to gain pertinent information and I am saying most of the waterboarding that was done was not to extract information, I didn't mean all of it, this was from various allied soldiers that were held as POWs and as far as what we know MOSTLY so far historically speaking that is what happened.

    Yes, that's correct.

    It shouldn't need to be pointed out to you that 'bass sez so, so that's how it is' is NOT a legitimate source.

    If you think so, then that's what you think. I have no problem with your personal opinion. But I reject it, that's my stance.

    Posted in: Trump calls for waterboarding, other methods in U.S. fight against ISIS

  • -4


    So you'd agree its an essential tool when American soldiers are being interrogated, correct?

    I'm not here to speak for ANY foreign government. It's irrelevant what I think when it comes to foreign countries capturing and interrogating them. I know once their captured the same thing can happen to them. They know this going in. If your a pilot and you get shot down behind enemy lines and you are captured, you know and understand that you could possibly be subjected to their interrogations. For us, it's been a very essential and valuable tool, for others, I can't say.

    Are you saying we shouldn't care what America thinks?

    If the people don't, it's ok, as far as governments are concerned, the majority do care. Especially if they need and want our money.

    Posted in: Trump calls for waterboarding, other methods in U.S. fight against ISIS

  • -4


    You're saying torture isn't torture so long as it's used for interrogation? Even by the Bad Guys.

    No, I'm saying, regardless of what or how you want to define it, I think it's a very essential tool to use when you're doing interrogations.

    For the second time of asking, sources, please.

    I already explained my point, please go back and read what I wrote for the second time.

    I think most people understand that NOT turning the majority of moderate muslims against America would be very much in the best interests of the country.

    And they wouldn't, especially if they know it's in the best interest of national security, taking the emotional aspect out of the argument.

    looking at history to determine whether a 'we never did *whatever' in the past' statement is correct or not, is not making an irrational argument.

    That's your point of view and depend on what "You" personally find as irrational.

    You've written before that in rightwingland history began 7 years ago. Reagan negotiated with terrorists: reality. Were you in Iraq working for MSM, or is that still secret?

    No, it wasn't and the level of extortion and negotiation for a rouge regime such as Iran that is bent on destroying the US and Israel would not have been something Reagan would have went into.

    Wow. Whatever it takes.


    Take a big breadth. The more Republicans talk about about just how American torture is, the easier it is for Democrats to get elected

    "April 1st" is stil a couple of months away. LOL

    Doesn't the Geneva convention prohibit torture?

    Seriously, who cares what a useless empty vessel organization like the UN thinks? Sorry, they do a very nice job when it comes to distributing money for humanitarian efforts.

    Posted in: Trump calls for waterboarding, other methods in U.S. fight against ISIS

  • -4


    Stope revising history: Reagan's Iran Contra-gate? Or are you going to give him the 'he had Alzheimers' out?

    Stope? Anyway, so once again, let's go through the liberal time warp machine in order to make an irrational argument.

    Posted in: Trump calls for waterboarding, other methods in U.S. fight against ISIS

  • -4


    So, the Japanese used waterboarding as torture but it isn't torture?

    If you define it as torture, then maybe for you it is. I don't see it as torture, I see it when it is applied as such to obtain information, uncomfortable, yes. If it is not used in the process for fun or to purposely murder a person for pleasure, in that sense, then it wouldn't be torture.

    Sorry, that must have gone right over my head. What joke?

    It did, sorry that it went over your head.

    Can't say I understand the American military psyche,

    Then there is no need to comment.

    but I'm willing to bet most captured soldiers and their families would much prefer a prisoner exchange to any of the alternatives.

    Sure, but until this president came along, our policy for decades was to NEVER negotiate with terrorists, that's why we never had a problem with abductions, but that's changed now recently. Because once you give in to that, the price for Americans goes up knowing now these terrorists have something to gain and this will encourage more kidnapping.

    Sorry, but that's exactly what you said: I say go all the way and there are many people that will agree, even if a few on JT do care. - which means you are not one of the few who do care. Unless you got your sentence so mixed up you wrote the opposite of what you intended, which is hard to believe of one with your long and distinguished career in journalism.

    Cleo, if you care, that's fine. Do I care about my countrymen, I do. Do I know the risks involved as to what can happen if you are abducted, I do. Does that mean if we have a terrorist because some people think we should make a ham sandwich and talk to them, have them give us faulty information and go around the block and play mind games with them, I absolutely do not. You do whatever it takes to extract information, I firmly stand by that position and there are many people that will agree and some that won't. I am for whatever it takes to stop any attack on the country and if some people on JT disagree....Oh, well.

    Your source, please. At the Tokyo Trials following WWII, Japanese soldiers were charged with torture, including 'water-based interrogation' - waterboarding. Why do you think the Bad Guys torture people? Just for the fun of it?

    I am saying most of the waterboarding that was done was not to extract information, I didn't mean all of it, this was from various allied soldiers that were held as POWs and as far as what we know MOSTLY so far historically speaking that is what happened.

    R. John Pritchard, a historian and lawyer who is a top scholar on the trials, said the Japanese felt the ends justified the means.

    Ok, so what's your point. That's what they did, I understand.

    "The rapid and effective collection of intelligence then, as now, was seen as vital to a successful struggle, and in addition, those who were engaged in torture often felt that whatever pain and anguish was suffered by the victims of torture was nothing less than the just deserts of the victims or people close to them," Sounds a lot like your own expressed opinion, bass. Chillingly extreme.

    Still doesn't change my position on the matter, I believe it is a tool, we should use when it is necessary and No, I don't have any sympathy for any terrorist, the same people that would kill you in a heartbeat no matter how you try to defend the tactic. Also, I don't buy that Obama and his minions would not use enhanced interrogations, if the man where pushed to do so, as sneaky as he has been with his so called military advisors which are actually Special Ops engaged in a military conflict, but chooses NOT to use the euphemism.

    "Republicans overwhelmingly favor torture." Like pulling teeth and fingernails (with no anesthesia)?

    Whatever it takes to get the information.

    Republicans: party of torture.

    Democrats: party of capitulation and weakness.

    Is this where the GOP is at these days? Torture, carpet bombing, and a ban on Muslims?

    If the actions are appropriate to safeguard the country from radical Islam, then so be it. I hope so.

    Seems pretty extreme to me.

    To the majority of liberals, probably.

    I'm not sure how you can win the hearts and minds of regular Muslims with such policies, and we need those people to help us combat extremism. You'd have to be pretty short sighted to not see that.

    But we can't go by what they think, we have to go by what is in the best interest for the country. The difference is the GOP is honest about it and the liberals will do it behind closed doors.

    Posted in: Trump calls for waterboarding, other methods in U.S. fight against ISIS

  • -9


    Just answer the question. It's very simple. If it's okay for the US to use 'enhanced interrogation', is it okay for enemies of the US to use it against the US? If not, why not?

    Rhetorical question? Not up for me or anyone to decide. If the enemy uses it to try and extract information, that goes with the territory of war, you just might get captured and either be killed, tortured or interrogated. Irrelevant what my personal beliefs are.

    About a man dying? To what point?

    No, the joke about Hitchens.

    And in your world, they would have no reason to expect their leaders back home would do much more than shrug their shoulders?

    Not in my world, unless you can do a prisoner exchange, which seems to be the norm these days with this admin. or some other form of concessions, it's very hard to say what the Pentagon would do behind the scenes. In the old days, Americans weren't targets because we didn't negotiate with the enemy, now we have spineless president, soon to leave office thankfully and hope the next president doesn't do the same idiotic mistakes this blundering fools has been doing for the last 7 years.

    At least you admit that you don't number yourself among those who do care what happens to the people you're so eager to send out and fight for you. Good of you to be so honest

    Sorry, that's not what I said, nice try my dear, but I know the risks, been to Iraq and I knew the risks going there on assignment, but I had a job to do and thankfully I was lucky. Every soldier and journalist, mercenary and contract worker knows this. Has nothing to do with caring for my fellow countrymen.

    Waterboarding is torture.

    That's your opinion, in my opinion, I don't think it is at all and even if it were, when it comes to terrorists, who cares?

    At least it WAS when the Japanese military was doing it to Allied prisoners. In fact, in the war trials after WWII, several Japanese were executed for it.

    That's Japan and most Japanese used it as a means to torture and not to gain pertinent information, mostly.

    Funny how it no longer becomes torture when the US does it.

    Because it's not.

    Posted in: Trump calls for waterboarding, other methods in U.S. fight against ISIS

  • -8


    The opposite? So, you're saying you'd be fine with US soldiers being waterboarded by enemies as long as the enemies were not doing it to extract information and we're doing it for perverted sadistic pleasure?

    You're not funny. I'm perfectly content of US solidiers use Enhanced interrogation techniques of high value like Khalid Sheik Muhammad in order to extract vital Intel and as long as that's conducted solely for that purpose, I'm all for it.

    I don't think even Trump is going that.

    You might be wrong. So far, we've all been wrong to peg the man down.

    Posted in: Trump calls for waterboarding, other methods in U.S. fight against ISIS

  • -9


    You're being very unclear here with your "not necessarily" and "not really".

    No, that's just how you interpret it.

    It seems that you are saying you'd be fine with US soldiers being waterboarded by enemies as long as the enemies were doing it to extract information and not for perverted sadistic pleasure. Is that right?

    No, the opposite.

    And the right accuse the left of being fuzzy thinkers....

    But the left can't accuse the right of not at least being honest.

    Posted in: Trump calls for waterboarding, other methods in U.S. fight against ISIS


Search the Largest English Job Board in Japan.

Find a Job Now!

View all

Find Your
in Japan

10,000’s of properties available today!