Trump's Second and Third year in office
Quote: petroglyphSpeak for yourself, she was a good governor.
Actually, I agree. She WAS a good governor, before she quit on the state of Alaska and made the transition from Alaska Sarah to Fox News Sarah. I hold her directly responsible for sowing hate in our politics and creating the deep divisions we have today. I don't know if she received marching orders or what, but her rhetoric during the 2008 campaign was shameful and disappointing.
Quote: RomesIs "tougher" a double meaning for more vigorous hand jobs to Putin? Pretty sure it was blatantly obvious that after trump denounced our own US intelligence agencies he got on his knees in front of Putin.
Man, trump really blew that one...
I wonder how Hannity feels about having an open relationship
Quote: ams288I've read this post a couple of times and I'm still not sure what you're getting at.
Are you mad that an article from Feb. 20th of this year isn't taking into account things that happened in the last week?
I’m not mad at all.
I’m just saying that there is no way most lefties and TDS sufferers will give credit to President Trump for anything positive he does if there is any possible way to disconnect it from him—as in--his administration did it, not him. Anything negative? All his fault.
Quote: TigerWuI don't think that Politifact article means what RonC thinks it means.... haha....
I’m pretty sure I do. Thank you for your concern.
*********************
I think President Trump is wrong if he really thinks there is no meddling by anyone going on at this point. I’m not sure why he would say that.
Quote: TomGI wonder how Hannity feels about having an open relationship
He's a sycophant. He'll feel however Trump tells him to feel, and he'll love it.
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/
Bookmark it.
Quote: beachbumbabsWhat is your issue here? Martingale isn't mandatory either way. In my opinion, the insult was vague and in response to some pretty sharp jabs from Boz. Which didn't stop at the point this was said ,either, but would also not fall under the insult rule. So it's fairest to make it a 3 day rather than a 7 day.
It's not my forum obviously. If it was, someone calling another member a piece of sh.t gets nuked. There should be no middle ground here. He didn't say he was delusional, irrational, illogical, he said piece of sh.t.
Help me out here..... In your real life, if someone ever calls you a piece of sh.t, you just say "I'm not talking to you for 3 days?"
So calling someone a "piece of sh.t" is such a low level insult it doesn't even qualify for the even mild martingale type penalty of more than the minimum suspension? What is a bad insult to you?
Quote: SOOPOOIt's not my forum obviously. If it was, someone calling another member a piece of sh.t gets nuked. There should be no middle ground here. He didn't say he was delusional, irrational, illogical, he said piece of sh.t.
Help me out here..... In your real life, if someone ever calls you a piece of sh.t, you just say "I'm not talking to you for 3 days?"
So calling someone a "piece of sh.t" is such a low level insult it doesn't even qualify for the even mild martingale type penalty of more than the minimum suspension? What is a bad insult to you?
Well pos is mild to me
If someone calls me a trump supporter then i ask for at least a 14 day suspension
Quote: ams288I agree with this guy’s take on the state of things. I’ve tried to express similar sentiments here before, but this guy does it way better than I could:
I agree with all of that. Hillary would have been a lame duck on the tail end of her political career, going up against a strongly conservative Republican House and Senate. She would have gotten absolutely NOTHING accomplished. She would have been LESS than a caretaker President, because she would have had to capitulate with Republicans on literally everything to cement any kind of legacy. That's why I'm so confused as to why Republicans say, "At least Hillary isn't President," because she would have been the best thing to happen to the GOP in ages, and they would have gotten a stranglehold on D.C. for years to come.
Instead Trump is destroying their party from the inside out, and we can see it happening in real time.
Oops.
This is easy to answer. A liberal member called a conservative member a POS, so it's only a minor insult. It's only a major insult if a conservative calls a liberal a POS.Quote: SOOPOOSo calling someone a "piece of sh.t" is such a low level insult it doesn't even qualify for the even mild martingale type penalty of more than the minimum suspension? What is a bad insult to you?
Quote: bandittoThis is easy to answer. A liberal member called a conservative member a POS, so it's only a minor insult. It's only a major insult if a conservative calls a liberal a POS.
LOL
Quote: TigerWuI agree with all of that. Hillary would have been a lame duck on the tail end of her political career, going up against a strongly conservative Republican House and Senate. She would have gotten absolutely NOTHING accomplished. She would have been LESS than a caretaker President, because she would have had to capitulate with Republicans on literally everything to cement any kind of legacy. That's why I'm so confused as to why Republicans say, "At least Hillary isn't President," because she would have been the best thing to happen to the GOP in ages, and they would have gotten a stranglehold on D.C. for years to come.
Instead Trump is destroying their party from the inside out, and we can see it happening in real time.
Oops.
I disagree--the death of either party is often predicted but rarely materializes in the long run.
Hillary gets elected. Garland is either approved before she takes office or she makes a pick (him or someone else). We could see the Senate doing nothing. Refuse to confirm any nominee. Another opening comes up--perhaps Ginsberg instead of Kennedy; maybe two openings. The Democrats take the Republicans to task in the midterms for not approving one, two, or possibly three nominees. Their base is highly energized. They take the Senate and the House. Nominees approved. Perhaps Hillary turns to the EO to tweak things a bit.
Of course, that is a stretch..maybe she really would get nothing done.....but it is less of a stretch than thinking one party or the other is going to die because of ____________________________.
Quote: bandittoThis is easy to answer. A liberal member called a conservative member a POS, so it's only a minor insult. It's only a major insult if a conservative calls a liberal a POS.
Does that mean calling an independent a pos is not an insult at all?
I say Bill Ryan did not insult anyone
It should be obvious POS means "Piece of Steak"
Looks like he was banned for a compliment
Perhaps, however, I'm sure Boz finds .99 cent store steak Absoulutty repulsive.Quote: darkozSince we live in Trump era we should moderate as such
I say Bill Ryan did not insult anyone
It should be obvious POS means "Piece of Steak"
Looks like he was banned for a compliment
Quote: darkozDoes that mean calling an independent a pos is not an insult at all?
Depends
Point of sale
Parent over shoulder
Position
ect
Quote: MaxPenAs expected the usual suspects come out into the light to defend the indefensible.
Wait!!
Whats your avatar again?
Quote: MaxPenAs expected the usual suspects come out into the light to defend the indefensible.
This is rich, coming from a guy whose side:
Defended a child molester and tried to get him elected to the Senate.
Defended separating infants and toddlers from their parents and locking them in cages.
Defended a moronic President siding with a hostile dictator over his own intelligence community.
Quote: ams288This is rich, coming from a guy whose side:
Defended a child molester and tried to get him elected to the Senate.
Defended separating infants and toddlers from their parents and locking them in cages.
Defended a moronic President siding with a hostile dictator over his own intelligence community.
BUT OBAMA PUT MUSTARD ON A CHEESEBURGER WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE HOW CAN YOU DEFEND THAT
Quote: TigerWuBUT OBAMA PUT MUSTARD ON A CHEESEBURGER WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE HOW CAN YOU DEFEND THAT
Isnt that at Fatburgers?
But... but... I put mustard on all my cheeseburgers =(.Quote: TigerWuBUT OBAMA PUT MUSTARD ON A CHEESEBURGER WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE HOW CAN YOU DEFEND THAT
Quote: RomesBut... but... I put mustard on all my cheeseburgers =(.
By Fox News rules that makes you a secret Kenyan Muslim gun-grabbing Socialist.
Quote: bandittoThis is easy to answer. A liberal member called a conservative member a POS, so it's only a minor insult. It's only a major insult if a conservative calls a liberal a POS.
Since you seem to have only joined this forum to attack and disparage the moderation,
And since you show every indication of being a previously banned member,
I'm invoking rule 12. G'day.
Quote: beachbumbabsSince you seem to have only joined this forum to attack and disparage the moderation,
And since you show every indication of being a previously banned member,
I'm invoking rule 12. G'day.
Ohhh
Looks like Bandito turned out to be an illegal
Deported!
Quote:Some people HATE the fact that I got along well with President Putin of Russia. They would rather go to war than see this. It’s called Trump Derangement Syndrome!
But is it?
Is it "deranged" to wonder how our President accepts the word of a single adversary while diminishing the scores of information from his own intelligence units that states otherwise?
Is it "deranged" to question the Presidents "explanation" about that previous statement when it was widely panned as being non-nonsensical and was followed immediately by a qualifier of "and other people too"?
Is it "deranged" to question a President that thinks that people who protest for white power are "good people too"?
Is it "deranged" for people to find it beyond the pale that the current count of "false claims" the President has made since his inauguration is, as of today, 2,029?
And the list could go on and on.
You can almost hear the snickering whenever a right leaning post is made using that phrase, but which is more "deranged": people who oppose the President for documented reasons or those who dismiss or ignore them entirely?
I'm about as close to the middle as anyone can be. I'm happy to vote on either side of the aisle, PROVIDED the candidate is truly interested in working for "We The People".
I have followed Trump for more than 20 years and always thought he was a jackass and Hillary is close behind.
I understand why people voted for Trump. The country is a mess and has been for some time. People wanted change.
But it's time to take off those rose colored glasses. Trump is just as flawed as we all are but the difference is he has the power destroy our nation. I've not seen any indication that he has the inclination or temperament to effectively change the country, but he does has the fallibility to put us in great danger without the humility to realize he's doing it.
We're all Americans, (except the Canadians, Brits and everyone else on the board who isn't of course). Sure, we have differences but while the loony left and rabid right, along with the media, like to paint us as far apart the reality is that the vast majority of us have relatively similar needs, hopes and dreams.
Maybe if we stopped treating everyone with a different political view as an adversary we might actually end up with a better nation.
I believe this is my first political post, and it will be my last. Arguing politics on a forum has got to be the dumbest thing in the world. No matter what side you are on, do you really think you are going to change someones mind? The only thing you are accomplishing is flaming a fire that's already too far out of control.
Quote: HullabalooToday the President tweeted:
But is it?
Is it "deranged" to wonder how our President accepts the word of a single adversary while diminishing the scores of information from his own intelligence units that states otherwise?
Is it "deranged" to question the Presidents "explanation" about that previous statement when it was widely panned as being non-nonsensical and was followed immediately by a qualifier of "and other people too"?
Is it "deranged" to question a President that thinks that people who protest for white power are "good people too"?
Is it "deranged" for people to find it beyond the pale that the current count of "false claims" the President has made since his inauguration is, as of today, 2,029?
And the list could go on and on.
You can almost hear the snickering whenever a right leaning post is made using that phrase, but which is more "deranged": people who oppose the President for documented reasons or those who dismiss or ignore them entirely?
I'm about as close to the middle as anyone can be. I'm happy to vote on either side of the aisle, PROVIDED the candidate is truly interested in working for "We The People".
I have followed Trump for more than 20 years and always thought he was a jackass and Hillary is close behind.
I understand why people voted for Trump. The country is a mess and has been for some time. People wanted change.
But it's time to take off those rose colored glasses. Trump is just as flawed as we all are but the difference is he has the power destroy our nation. I've not seen any indication that he has the inclination or temperament to effectively change the country, but he does has the fallibility to put us in great danger without the humility to realize he's doing it.
We're all Americans, (except the Canadians, Brits and everyone else on the board who isn't of course). Sure, we have differences but while the loony left and rabid right, along with the media, like to paint us as far apart the reality is that the vast majority of us have relatively similar needs, hopes and dreams.
Maybe if we stopped treating everyone with a different political view as an adversary we might actually end up with a better nation.
I believe this is my first political post, and it will be my last. Arguing politics on a forum has got to be the dumbest thing in the world. No matter what side you are on, do you really think you are going to change someones mind? The only thing you are accomplishing is flaming a fire that's already too far out of control.
Damn. I wanted to answer you
Whats the point now?
Quote: HullabalooToday the President tweeted:
I saw that tweet and I didn't understand it because who is he talking about that wants to go to war with Russia?? Literally no one wants that...
So, saying wouldn't instead of would, or saying "no" to if he thinks Russia is still interfering because he was saying no to an unheard question, are expressions of TDS.
When you need your press secretary to explain what you actually meant, you might have TDS.
Show me proof he Defended a child molester and tried to get him elected to the Senate. Then show me proof the guy you claim he supported was a child molester.Quote: ams288This is rich, coming from a guy whose side:
Defended a child molester and tried to get him elected to the Senate.
Defended separating infants and toddlers from their parents and locking them in cages.
Defended a moronic President siding with a hostile dictator over his own intelligence community.
I wonder how many of them infants and toddlers will be forced to be reunited with child molesters, sex traffickers, and criminals?
Best rule ever!! obviously, they are not using it enough.Quote: FutbolRule 12 is pretty nifty. It allows you to accuse literally anyone of "being a previously banned member", yet you never have to prove whether or not it's true. Everyone just has to take your word for it.
Hooray for Rule 12!
Quote: AxelWolfShow me proof he Defended a child molester and tried to get him elected to the Senate. Then show me proof the guy you claim he supported was a child molester.
I wonder how many of them infants and toddlers will be forced to be reunited with child molesters, sex traffickers, and criminals?
I don't know, but Roy Moore sounds like a perfect Trump pick.
Quote:The JIC's complaint charged Moore with violating the Alabama Canon of Judicial Ethics by:[60]
disregarding a federal injunction.
demonstrated unwillingness to follow clear law.
abuse of administrative authority.
substituting his judgment for the judgment of the entire Alabama Supreme Court, including failure to abstain from public comment about a pending proceeding in his own court.
interference with legal process and remedies in the United States District Court and/or Alabama Supreme Court related to proceedings in which Alabama probate judges were involved.
failure to recuse himself from pending proceedings in the Alabama Supreme Court after making public comment and placing his impartiality into question.
On May 27, Moore filed a federal lawsuit against the JIC (Moore v. Judicial Inquiry Commission), alleging that his automatic suspension was unconstitutional.[63][64] On August 4, the federal district court dismissed Moore's suit, ruling that under the abstention doctrine, federal courts generally do not interfere with ongoing state court proceedings.[65][66]
In Vietnam the soldiers he commanded apparently threatened to frag him. ( deliberately kill (an unpopular senior officer), typically with a hand grenade.)
and this
Quote:his belief that Christianity, as interpreted by him, should order public policy,[14][15] and his past ties to neo-Confederates and white nationalist groups.[16][17][18][19][20] Moore was a leading voice in the birther movement, which promoted the false claim that former President Barack Obama was not born in the United States.[2
And then of course there were also the sexual accusations of underage girls. The guy probably shouldn't even be elected to dog catcher. Insult to dogs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Moore
Quote: AxelWolfShow me proof he Defended a child molester and tried to get him elected to the Senate.
Who is “he?”
Quote: FutbolRule 12 is pretty nifty. It allows you to accuse literally anyone of "being a previously banned member", yet you never have to prove whether or not it's true. Everyone just has to take your word for it.
Hooray for Rule 12!
Actually, Rule 12 is usually used with pretty good proof...a few people stick around a bit of time before going bye bye...but your mileage may vary...
We don't own the joint. The joint has several greenies and maybe even some super-de-duper secret disguised in blue greenies. We aren't there boss.
I have raised some concerns about a wee bit of bias...but I have been here a while.
Since your first post was a comment against the board rules and you are commenting about a guy who just absorbed a lot of radiation, you will probably be gone before much more time passes...
Quote: FutbolI didn't see any proof. Did you?
Which rule does that violate? The brand new rule that somebody is going to make up on the fly any moment now? C'mon, man. At least use a cogent argument.
I don't give a rat's behind whether you stay or not.
Obviously, you saw a new member (one post) get the heave-ho for criticizing a moderator in his first post.
Now your first post goes after that action.
People don't usually take too well to being attacked or criticized in the first post of a new member.
So...you either will start making posts relative to a subject of a thread, take your current comments to the thread for discussing suspensions, or you've got a shot at being the next glowing ex-member.
We're both in someone else's house. Their house, their rules.
Simple enough...no need to discuss it further with me.
Quote: FutbolAgain, which rule was violated?
Or do you not have an answer?
ROTFL
There is only one rule
The Mods rule
That's it
Not complicated
There is a list of rules but they are interpreted by the Mods as they see fit
In the end
The Mods rule
Pretty simple
Quote: ams288This is rich, coming from a guy whose side:
Defended a child molester and tried to get him elected to the Senate.
Defended separating infants and toddlers from their parents and locking them in cages.
Defended a moronic President siding with a hostile dictator over his own intelligence community.
Careful there ams, last time you went that route you ended up in time out for a few days. I’d hate to see that happen again. Just some sincere helpful advice.
http://steelturman.typepad.com/thesteeldeal/2006/10/itsy_bitsy_spid.html
Quote: dogqckThe perfect Christmas gift for my liberal friends.
http://steelturman.typepad.com/thesteeldeal/2006/10/itsy_bitsy_spid.html
Not trying to be funny but im having a wee bit trouble pronouncing your screen name
It appears as an animal appendage
Am I wrong on this?
First I thought you made a typo when picking your screen name
Quote: dogqckI once had a dog that quacked, Never had a duck that barked.
Got it
Not what i expected but innocent enough
:)
Give me an example of the last time a Mod nuked someone just for calling them out.Quote: HatTrickWhy do you say "call me out" when you know full well that the mods will nuke said person for doing so?Quote: OnceDearWhen you see my interpretation of the forum rules, and my actions as a moderator showing bias based on those opinions, then by all means call me out
Quote: AxelWolfGive me an example of the last time a Mod nuked someone just for calling them out.Quote: HatTrickWhy do you say "call me out" when you know full well that the mods will nuke said person for doing so?Quote: OnceDearWhen you see my interpretation of the forum rules, and my actions as a moderator showing bias based on those opinions, then by all means call me out
It’s happened quite a bit when a “newly registered” user’s first post is b!tching about the mods or any other member.
IMO it’s fair to assume those situations are sock puppets
Edit: we agree on this I just misunderstood what you meant by your post
Quote: RSCareful there ams, last time you went that route you ended up in time out for a few days. I’d hate to see that happen again. Just some sincere helpful advice.
“Last time?”
I’ve brought up the GOP’s embrace of that child molester many times since then. You must not have been paying attention!
Quote: TomGGetting paid back $11 after risking $8 means the field would be the favorite and Trump would be the underdog. Obviously he is more likely to win than any other single person, but that's true of any sitting president up for reelection less than half-way through their first term. Based on those Bovada odds, the D side is favored over the R side, which is what anyone who can find the Caps Lock key on their computer is concerned about at this time
In a horse race, the "favorite" often pays less than the others in the field, but often goes off at something more than 1/1 odds (2/1, 5/2, etc.). I don't think that makes him anything less than the favorite. If your Kentucky Derby pick is 11/8, you would be betting on the favorite.
That gap will get closed, most likely, as the candidates dwindle and a Democrat may become the "favorite" later on if what Bovada has is true. Most people listed will be off the board and the support they show will transfer to someone else.
Maybe the overall odds are better that someone else will win, but how come we call the "favorite" in a horse race "the favorite" if he isn't?
Quote: ams288“Last time?”
I’ve brought up the GOP’s embrace of that child molester many times since then. You must not have been paying attention!
I just don't get the republican party today
Whats with covering up for sexual deviants
It makes me sick to my stomach republicans defending some of the most disgusting people simply due to politics
Jim Jordan totally disgusts me.
Multiple wrestlers have spoken out saying Jim Jordan was well aware of sexual molestation going on.
Jim Jordan is a disgusting piece of filth covering up sexual molestation.
Its brought to me attention , dam right I would speak out. Sexual molestation totally disgusts me.
Really sad to see republicans such as Paul Ryan defend disgusting Jim Jordan
I believe the wrestlers. Its really hard for a man to come out and say they were sexually abused
I applaud the wrestlers for coming out and speaking the truth about what went on in the Ohio St wrestling program when disgusting Jim Jordan was coaching
https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/10/us/ohio-state-university-wrestling-jim-jordan/index.html
Another former OSU wrestler says Jim Jordan knew about alleged abuse
When it comes to sexual abuse, I could care less about politics. Politics is meaningless when it comes to sexual abuse
Bill Clinton disgusts me
Donald Trump disgusts me
It is not a stunt when D's want to abolish ICE.
Both are stunts. My opinion is that ICE is not perfect, but it would be much better to fix the imperfections than to abolish the agency.
I don't think abolishing ICE, as an issue, would resonate for the D's. Perhaps it would for the base but, if their base is not stirred up enough already to vote for a D, any D, at this point, the base may be dead at this point.
Well, okay, some are...
--has that ever been done before?
--would doing that, which would make it "ok" to do the next time someone wants to do so, be the wrong path to go down? (see "Nuclear Option"...)
--is that a position that an interpreter should be put in?
--leaks
Quote: RonCThe latest push over the Monday Meeting seems to be to have the interpreter come before a committee behind closed doors so they can find out just what happened in the 1 on 1 meeting between the two leaders.
--has that ever been done before?
--would doing that, which would make it "ok" to do the next time someone wants to do so, be the wrong path to go down? (see "Nuclear Option"...)
--is that a position that an interpreter should be put in?
From my understanding presidents have never met privately like this
Certainly a president who is under scrutiny for possibly being under the influence of russia says he has to meet with the RUSSIAN president in private cannot possibly bode well. The optics alone are horrible yet they had to meet in private?
No accusations trump is under german or english or canadian or north korean influence
Notice he didnt have a need to meet with them privately
He even met the queen of england with observers
Something doesnt smell right. If righties think it does yhen righties must think doodoo smells good
