Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
TRUMP - Just because.....................Naw, I just can't say it!
Monday, June 6, 2016 2:05 PM
SECOND
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
Monday, June 6, 2016 7:50 PM
JEWELSTAITEFAN
Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY: Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Too bad you're wedded to the idea of Hillary as the only alternative. Because it's not entirely clear at this point that she's going to remain unindicted, or that she'll win the general election. Too many people on both sides are enraged about the status quo = which is exactly what Hillary represents. I don't understand why so many don't see this. Of all the remaining candidates, she is the only one which truly embodies the status quo. Even when Cruz was in, she took the cake. Smoke and mirrors, my friend, smoke and mirrors. All the candidates, including Drumpf, are of the "establishment." Bernie because he's been in politics a number of years, Hilary and the Donald, because he uses the system to build his empire - all part and parcel of the status quo.
Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Too bad you're wedded to the idea of Hillary as the only alternative. Because it's not entirely clear at this point that she's going to remain unindicted, or that she'll win the general election. Too many people on both sides are enraged about the status quo = which is exactly what Hillary represents. I don't understand why so many don't see this. Of all the remaining candidates, she is the only one which truly embodies the status quo. Even when Cruz was in, she took the cake.
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Too bad you're wedded to the idea of Hillary as the only alternative. Because it's not entirely clear at this point that she's going to remain unindicted, or that she'll win the general election. Too many people on both sides are enraged about the status quo = which is exactly what Hillary represents.
Quote: All this talk about "establishment" is a ruse, a flim-flam, a con game perpetrated by people like Bernie and Drumpf so as to pretend to be different, and with the people. Nothing could be further from the truth. Hilary, at least, is not pretending to be anything else but part of the "establishment," the so-called status quo. Yes, Bernie does say he's a progressive.....really!? Then why did he declare himself a democrat? And why did he run for president? And Mayor, and so forth. All of these positions are a large part of the "establishment" regardless of ideology. Sure, Bernie marched with civil rights leaders and protested, but he decided to work within that very "establishment" and locked himself in with the rest of them. The Donald doesn't have a clue what he's doing; he's just doing his "puppet" thing and repeating what he's told. He actually thinks he's going to run things in the White House. Good luck with that. SGG
Monday, June 6, 2016 7:53 PM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Ben Stein: 'I don't think Trump knows a goddamn thing about economics' but he’ll still vote for Donald Trump despite his ‘preposterous’ ideas about the economy. www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jun/04/ben-stein-interview-donald-trump-economics He is appalled by Trump’s anti-free trade rhetoric that he says could lead to a trade war. Hillary Clinton probably has a better grasp of things, Stein thinks. Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is “willfully ignorant”. “I have seen a lot of elections and I have never seen anything like this. It seems to me it is a testament to the complete collapse of education that people can have such preposterous policies as an end to free trade and think that’s going to help America. It’s just startling that: a) the candidates know so little and; b) that the voters have not been better informed about this. The American education system is in a state of freefall collapse so that certainly explains a lot,” he says.
Monday, June 6, 2016 7:55 PM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Trump's latest property-tax bill, out June 3, 2016, shows he once again received a middle-class tax break. The self-proclaimed billionaire gets a tax break for New Yorkers whose incomes are $500,000 a year or less. www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20160606/BLOGS02/160609931/trumps-latest-property-tax-bill-out-june-3-shows-he-once-again You can draw your own conclusions about Trump's honesty. Because Trump has refused to release his income tax returns, for now his property-tax bills are about the only available window into his finances that doesn’t come from him. www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20160513/BLOGS02/160519926
Monday, June 6, 2016 10:50 PM
Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: Keep in mind that is taxable INCOME, not accumulated wealth.
Tuesday, June 7, 2016 7:31 AM
Tuesday, June 7, 2016 12:17 PM
SIGNYM
I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.
Tuesday, June 7, 2016 5:35 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: So, how is that any worse than "We came, we saw, he died" *laughter* ? Just a a reminder... along with some other Hillary jackups of foreign people. When did Trump ever start a war? Hillary OTOH regularly lets loose clusterfucks in Libya and elsewhere, causing tens of thousands of people to be killed. I think your sense of proportion is screwed up.
Tuesday, June 7, 2016 5:53 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: In the latest attack campaign on Trump, I see that people are once again calling Trump a "racist" for something which isn't racism. Unless people think being "Mexican" is a race. Or being "Muslim" is a race. The question, which nobody seems to want to address is ... Where do your loyalties lie? Are you trying to benefit American citizens? Or are you more sympathetic to illegal and potential immigrants?
Tuesday, June 7, 2016 6:08 PM
Tuesday, June 7, 2016 6:33 PM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Sen. Mark Kirk, R. Illinois, Un-Endorses Trump for President Mark Kirk @MarkKirk tweets: Given my military experience, Donald Trump does not have the temperament to command our military or our nuclear arsenal. https://twitter.com/MarkKirk/status/740266906922438656 This might be the first time ever that a senator has un-endorsed a presidential candidate of his party. There have been plenty who never endorsed in the first place, but I'm not sure if anyone has ever endorsed and then taken it back.
Tuesday, June 7, 2016 6:39 PM
Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: If never before, it is about time this happened. No more despicable candidate has the GOP had, none more deserving of an endorsement retraction.
Wednesday, June 8, 2016 9:15 AM
Quote:While I have no doubt about the sheer meanness of republicans . . . It's easy to extend the generous hand when you feel your own life is secure. But when it starts to become a zero-sum system, their gain is your loss; and suddenly, people become far less charitable. . . . Well fuck [Hillary] and the disease-riddled donkey she's whipping to the finish line so she can pocket her gold.- KIKI I want to make this simple. Here's what Donald Trump did recently: He pledged $1 million to help veterans. He tried to weasel out of it for months by saying he already paid and hoped no one would notice he had not. When he finally got caught, he insulted the reporter who caught him. Even among sleazebags, this is not normal behavior. This is pathological sleaziness. It's literally beyond belief. Do not let Trump distract you with his latest barrage of insults. Do not turn your attention to Hillary. Do not let this be normalized away as "just another Trump thing." Maybe we need to put this in simpler terms. $1 million is one ten-thousandth of Trump's claimed wealth. The average American household has a net worth of about $50,000. One ten-thousandth of that is $5. In terms of its effect on his personal finances, what Trump did was the equivalent of promising five bucks to a homeless vet and then trying to weasel out of it. What kind of person would do that? This deserves far more attention than it's gotten. If character is supposed to be important in our presidents, this is evidence of the most contemptible kind of character imaginable. He tried to cheat a bunch of veterans! Can we please not shrug our shoulders and let this fade away into talk of Hillary? www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/25/how-social-media-helped-crack-the-case-of-donald-trumps-1-million-donation-to-veterans/ www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/caught-fibbing-trump-scrambles-address-veterans-controversy#64470 www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-vets-donations_us_57448908e4b0613b512b6131 http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-veterans-group-donations-timeline Need I mention that multi-billionaires can go insane? Houston's very own billionaire Howard Hughes for example. Trump is already going there. Eight years from now, President Trump could be hoarding bottles of his own urine like Hughes did. Or in Trump's case, his own hair. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Hughes#Later_years_as_a_Las_Vegas_recluse= SECOND
Quote:Judicial Watch today released 276 pages of internal State Department documents revealing that within two days of the deadly terrorist attack on Benghazi, Mohamed Yusuf al-Magariaf, the president of Libya’s National Congress, asked to participate in a Clinton Global Initiative function and “meet President Clinton.” The meeting between the Libyan president and Bill Clinton had not previously been disclosed. The documents also show Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s staff coordinated with the Clinton Foundation’s staff to have her thank Clinton Global Initiative project sponsors for their “commitments” during a Foundation speech on September 25, 2009.
Quote:Hillary and Trump have started the same number of wars.
Wednesday, June 8, 2016 10:09 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: And since this is a thread about Trump, I'm going to repeat my observation and my question about Judge Curiel: Is releasing documents BEFORE trial standard operating procedure, either within the judiciary as a whole, or for this particular judge? It may be LEGAL, but is it usual? Because if not, then this judge is demonstrating a bias, and we are free to speculate on where that bias comes from.
Wednesday, June 8, 2016 1:44 PM
THGRRI
Thursday, June 9, 2016 8:16 AM
Friday, June 10, 2016 8:43 AM
Quote:If there was a Republican judge overseeing a case against Hillary's use of a private email server, and he were to release all of the relevant documents BEFORE the final verdict and BEFORE the November elections ... what would YOU think?
Friday, June 10, 2016 3:10 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote:If there was a Republican judge overseeing a case against Hillary's use of a private email server, and he were to release all of the relevant documents BEFORE the final verdict and BEFORE the November elections ... what would YOU think? No answer?
Friday, June 10, 2016 3:12 PM
Quote:Originally posted by THGRRI:
Friday, June 10, 2016 3:29 PM
Friday, June 10, 2016 11:49 PM
Quote:No answer?-SIGNY Shall we assume you are looking for a reply from Second?-JSF
Quote: First of all it's END QUOTE not UNQUOTE. To unquote is to remove the quotes. Secondly, if you cannot understand my posts I don't care. And third, it is time for me to go back to not responding to you because as you say, my posts are confusing to you. Therefore you are responding many times to posts you admit to not understanding. GOODBYE - THIRDSTOOGE
Sunday, June 12, 2016 10:00 AM
Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote:If there was a Republican judge overseeing a case against Hillary's use of a private email server, and he were to release all of the relevant documents BEFORE the final verdict and BEFORE the November elections ... what would YOU think? No answer? Shall we assume you are looking for a reply from Second?
Sunday, June 12, 2016 2:19 PM
Sunday, June 12, 2016 4:35 PM
1KIKI
Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.
Sunday, June 12, 2016 6:00 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: If the purpose of running a business is to get rich - and generally that seems to be the case - then Trump succeeded admirably. Though not as admirably as the too-big-to-fail bankstas who are Clinton's friends - after all they're holding the US government hostage. Because they COULD take down the global economy, again. And the US government, with its bail-in policy and easy money going to the banks (but not citizen borrowers), and its inability to assert meaningful restrictions, is too afraid to touch them. Maybe THAT'S the problem you have with Trump. He's a penny-ante crook, not a globe-spanning government-controlling banksta behemoth crook.
Sunday, June 12, 2016 6:27 PM
Sunday, June 12, 2016 8:09 PM
Monday, June 13, 2016 11:48 AM
Monday, June 13, 2016 11:52 AM
Monday, June 13, 2016 11:58 AM
Quote:And that is what I like abut Trump. HE WEIGHS THE ODDS. So unlike Hillary, who is so mesmerized by her neocon vision of the world that she will bounce in her seat a little, clap her hands, and laugh as she initiates WWIII (Yanno, kind of like she did when she unleashed Armageddon on Libya) Trump will take a much more realistic view of who might actually win, and how much damage he - and the USA- would sustain. In addition to being somewhat manic (IMHO) Trump is a bully. But like all playground bullies, Trump has a pretty fine ear for anyone who might come along who is stronger than he is. At that point, he will negotiate. Trump is 50/50. Hillary, OTOH, is a proven loser. She reliably initiates international confrontations that she can't possibly bring to successful conclusion.
Monday, June 13, 2016 12:21 PM
Quote: and viciously attacking Hillary Clinton about global a organization that attempts to help impoverished countries
Monday, June 13, 2016 12:22 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Great, now you're spamming the board, posting the same post in multiple threads. So here is my answer to that, which I posted in the other thread HE WEIGHS THE ODDS. So unlike Hillary, who is so mesmerized by her neocon vision of the world that she will bounce in her seat a little, clap her hands, and laugh as she initiates WWIII (Yanno, kind of like she did when she unleashed Armageddon on Libya) Trump will take a much more realistic view of who might actually win, and how much damage he - and the USA- would sustain. In addition to being somewhat manic (IMHO) Trump is a bully. But like all playground bullies, Trump has a pretty fine ear for anyone who might come along who is stronger than he is. At that point, he will negotiate. Trump is 50/50. Hillary, OTOH, is a proven loser. She reliably initiates international confrontations that she can't possibly bring to successful conclusion.
Monday, June 13, 2016 12:39 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote: and viciously attacking Hillary Clinton about global a organization that attempts to help impoverished countries First of all, what organization is that? Because without that information, you look like the corner soapbox orator, shouting into the wind and pointing at the sky. -------------- You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
Monday, June 13, 2016 12:42 PM
Quote:“We’re led by a man that either is, is not tough, not smart, or he’s got something else in mind. And the something else in mind, you know, people can’t believe it. People cannot — they cannot believe that President Obama is acting the ways he acts and can’t even mention the words radical Islamic terrorism. There’s something going on. It’s inconceivable.”
Quote:“The problem is we have thousands of people right now in our country. You have people that were born in this country” who are susceptible to becoming “radicalized,” the billionaire real estate mogul told Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends. He claimed that there are Muslims living here who “know who they are” and said it was time to “turn them in.”
Monday, June 13, 2016 12:46 PM
Monday, June 13, 2016 1:11 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: The last person to confront them was JFK (BTW, ALL immigration was illegal under JFK) and look what happened to him.
Monday, June 13, 2016 1:35 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Oh,the CLINTON FOUNDATION! As far as I can tell, most foundations are just charitable covers for further investment development (Gates Foundation) or political control of foreign nations (National Endowment for Democracy). Almost none of the foundations/ NGOs that I can point to are politically or monetarily disinterested entities who just really want to help.
Monday, June 13, 2016 1:48 PM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: The last person to confront them was JFK (BTW, ALL immigration was illegal under JFK) and look what happened to him. Not exactly. There was Operation Peter Pan (or Pedro Pan, whichever you prefer) during the Eisenhower and Kennedy Administrations. Cubans came to the USA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Peter_Pan About 14,000 unaccompanied minors arrived in the United States in 1960 and 1961 alone through a clandestine U.S. program code-named "Operation Pedro Pan.” http://immigrationtounitedstates.org/453-cuban-immigrants.html
Monday, June 13, 2016 2:48 PM
Monday, June 13, 2016 2:59 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Science confirms: Online trolls are horrible people (also, sadists!) New research out of Canada finds trolls are sadistic. Who knew?
Monday, June 13, 2016 5:19 PM
Monday, June 13, 2016 5:57 PM
Monday, June 13, 2016 6:06 PM
Monday, June 13, 2016 6:23 PM
Monday, June 13, 2016 6:43 PM
Monday, June 13, 2016 6:50 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: That would be far more apropos if he actually said any of that. Did he?
Monday, June 13, 2016 8:19 PM
Monday, June 13, 2016 8:48 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Posted by ONEOFTHETHREESTOOGES, because - why come to a DISCUSSION board if you don't come with the INTENTION to DESTROY anyone who disagrees with you!
Monday, June 13, 2016 10:07 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: kiki - That would be far more apropos if he actually said any of that. Did he? second - Yes, Trump did. Really? not here https://www.google.com/#q=%22no+you+can%27t+see+my+tax+returns+haters%22 here https://www.google.com/#q=%22i+respect+women+especially+the+hot+ones+i+can+dress+up+in+bikinis%22 or here https://www.google.com/#q=%22people+who+complain+when+i+retweet+nazis+are+such+losers%22 Care to double down on your bullshit?
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL