TRUMP - Just because.....................Naw, I just can't say it! by SHINYGOODGUY

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.

Which Public Office has The Donald held?

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

Just because you believe that Progressives, or Socialists, or Communists are status quo does not mean it is so. Hilliary can still be recognized as status quo because when she is revealed as a Socialist or Communist she still denies these facts.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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-tr
ump-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.

Have you seen ben Stein's wonderful documentary "Expelled" yet?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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

Keep in mind that is taxable INCOME, not accumulated wealth.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 6, 2016 10:50 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Keep in mind that is taxable INCOME, not accumulated wealth.

His income is pretty substantial, but he takes advantage of fancy tax accounting to reduce his taxable income to approximately zero. This is why he doesn't want to release his tax returns. Even for his fans, this might seem a little obnoxious.

When it became public that Trump requested the tax credit last year, he naturally claimed it was all because of a city error and it was being fixed. Nothing is ever Donald's fault, after all. But guess what? It was NOT fixed. Trump is getting this year's $304 tax credit. Weird, huh? I mean, he had to apply for this credit, which means that Trump actively sought it out again, even though he said he doesn't want it and makes too much to qualify for it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 7, 2016 7:31 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Trump really has no rebuttal to this ad:

Americans and Republicans, remember: You asked for this. Given the choice between a dozen solid conservatives and one con artist and game-show host, you chose the con artist. You chose him freely. Nobody made you do it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 7, 2016 12:17 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

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.

------

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? People who attacked Trump supporters in San Jose, waving Mexican flags ... which BTW I saw here in LA too ... my god, if you're that fucking attached to Mexico, do us a favor and cross the border going the other way.

As far as the Hispanic judge is concerned ... he released documents on the Trump University lawsuit, not AFTER trial, not DURING trial, but BEFORE trial.

I did a quick search on "release of documents before trial", and while I found cite after cite of documents released AFTER trial, this was the only one where documents were released BEFORE trial. I think someone with more time and resources than I (ie like a LexisNexis subscription) should do an investigation and see whether pre-trial records release is common overall, and whether or not the judge has ever done it before or did he make an exception in this one case. Because if these seems to be an exceptional procedure then -yes- the judge should recuse himself from the case because of demonstrated bias.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 7, 2016 5:35 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

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.

Hillary and Trump have started the same number of wars. It's either Bush's or Obama's wars, not Trump's or Hillary's. I suppose Trump could have denounced Bush and resigned from the Republican party. That's as reasonable as Hillary resigning from the State Department in protest of what Obama ordered the Defense Department to do. If you're a fan of Firefly, being a pacifist is out of character.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 7, 2016 5:53 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

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?

Poor Donald Has Been "Misconstrued" Yet Again. Why Does This Keep Happening to Him? Why?
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/06/poor-donald-has-been-miscontrue
d-again-why-does-keep-happening-him

Donald Trump has issued a statement about his beef with Judge Curiel:

It is unfortunate that my comments have been misconstrued as a categorical attack against people of Mexican heritage. I am friends with and employ thousands of people of Mexican and Hispanic descent.

Unfortunate indeed. But no one has construed his comments that way. We've all construed them as a categorical attack on Curiel. That's because Trump has explicitly said that Curiel is "a hater" of "Mexican heritage" who is handing down unfair rulings because he dislikes Trump's anti-immigrant politics. "I think that's why he's doing it," he told Jake Tapper, just to make sure there was no question about it. Then this:

Due to what I believe are unfair and mistaken rulings in this case and the Judge’s reported associations with certain professional organizations, questions were raised regarding the Obama appointed Judge’s impartiality. It is a fair question. I hope it is not the case.

"Questions were raised." Golly. I wonder who raised them? No one knows, I suppose. But raised they were, and then Donald had no choice but to address them. But he really hopes these questions all turn out to be unfounded. Really. He does.

There it is. You have the whining, the lying, the passive voice rowback, and the faux sorrow that this has become such a divisive issue, all in just a few sentences. It's vintage Trump, folks.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 7, 2016 6:08 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

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.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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.

If never before, it is about time this happened. No more despicable candidate has the GOP had, none more deserving of an endorsement retraction.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 7, 2016 6:39 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

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.

Paul Ryan does not agree with either you or Sen. Mark Kirk. Trump is still Paul Ryan's Man.

In a remarkable 45 seconds captured today by CNN, House Speaker Paul Ryan, who is currently the highest-ranking elected official in the Republican party, first called Trump’s comments racist and then immediately urged Americans to vote for him anyway.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 8, 2016 9:15 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

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-hel
ped-crack-the-case-of-donald-trumps-1-million-donation-to-veterans/

www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/caught-fibbing-trump-scrambles-addres
s-veterans-controversy#64470

www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-vets-donations_us_57448908e4
b0613b512b6131

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-veterans-group-donations-timel
ine

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

Shall I discuss what Hillary has done recently?

The Clinton Foundation, and how - during her tenure as Scy of State - the Foundation accepted tens of millions of dollars from donors who then asked for special favors from Hillary

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.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-
new-clinton-documents-raise-questions-on-benghazi-clinton-foundation/

Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department
http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hil
lary-clintons-state-department-1934187

Quote:
Hillary and Trump have started the same number of wars.

And Hillary was just a poor, helpless First Lady, Senator, and Secretary of State, and her endless, strident advocacy for war within her family, in Congress, and in the Obama administration, had no effect whatsoever.

And her endless advocacy for FREE TRADE won't have a negative impact on Americans either.

I think many of your criticisms of Trump are about rumors.... his hair, his urine, his hands. Can you stick to the substantive?

There is nothing ... NOTHING .... that you can point to of Trump's actions that haven't been exceeded by Hillary in terms of impact on people's lives, and sheer callous corruption.

Consider that a challenge, if you like.

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.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 8, 2016 10:09 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

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.

Trump’s lawyers haven’t filed any motion asking for the case to be reassigned to a different judge. If the judge was bias in Trump’s lawyers’ opinion (Trump’s opinion is worthless) than Trump’s lawyers would file. When the client is a fool, his lawyers ignore the client. If the client insists, the lawyers will either resign or file the motion. That is the way it works.

Until Trump’s lawyers make their move, I have another lawyer that looked into Trump’s accusation that the Judge is biased against Trump. The conclusion is that Trump is full of shit:
www.litigationandtrial.com/2016/06/articles/attorney/consumer-protecti
on/curiel-trump/#.V1bo0DYd2po.twitter

The Makaeff case was filed on April 30, 2010, and transferred to Judge Curiel on January 30, 2013....On the issues where Judge Curiel had discretion, he generally ruled against the plaintiffs....On the issues where Judge Curiel had to rule on disputed legal concepts, he generally ruled against the plaintiffs....There’s only really one issue where Judge Curiel truly sided with the plaintiffs, and that was over the appropriate proof of damages.

....Summing Up: Judge Curiel is doing his job like a normal judge, issuing rulings consistent with the case law. But you already knew that.

For the record, note that the "plaintiffs" in this case are the folks suing Trump. So when Curiel rules against the plaintiffs, he's ruling for Trump. There's a whole lot of detail to back up Kennerly's summary, and you should read it if you're interested in this stuff.

Trump's major whine is that the whole case should have been tossed out on summary judgment long ago. Kennerly points us to Ken White for an explanation of all that. Roughly speaking, White confirms that Trump is full of shit. You don't get summary judgment unless your opponents literally have no credible evidence on their side. If they have even a small amount, then you let a jury decide. Obviously Trump's victims do have some evidence, so summary judgment was never really a possibility.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 8, 2016 1:44 PM

Quote G

Just wanted to repeat this burning runaway logic train for the fun of it.

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

1. I know somebody who knew somebody who lived in Weimar Germany as a boy and young man. [a long time ago in a continent far away]

2. (He is dead now, passed away a decade ago.) Some people, including this person and his family, were starving. They literally boiled shoes and ate them to appease their hunger.

3. What do liberals offer to that? [ 0_o What do Germans offer that? ]

4. Nothing. They vote for Hillary, [how does that even relate as a logical course of action in response to someone eating their shoes?) who was one of the supporters of gutting welfare as we know it. [cites]
________________________________________

Quote G

Curious: what would you expect Liberals to offer people who ate their shoes who lived in another country and are dead now...?

What Does Donald Trump offer them btw?

G what SIG is about as I am sure you know, is posting in the most negative way about the west. In her reply to your query about what Trump offered she quotes herself as though she is quoting someone else, "What do liberals offer to that"? and attacks Clinton by suggesting liberals somehow create the problems that bring a society to rebellion; why.

“The next U.S. administration looks at the Middle East in more traditional terms, that is, like the current administration treats Ukraine, the Caucasus, the Black Sea, and the Baltics. Russians could be surprised by the significant pushback against their agenda.”

http://breakingenergy.com/2016/06/08/russian-views-on-the-middle-east-
a-trip-report/

I think they know Clinton is much more the hawk than Obama and fear the push back they know is coming. This suggests Russia is going to have many more confrontations with the United States. Something they can ill afford.

So, what is the playbook SIG and 1kiki use when posting here? It comes from the concept of a show on Russian TV suggesting the fall of the United States to pump up nationalism; which in turn means support for Putin. The show is called Good by America. SIG and 1KIKI are determined to destroy anything West and use the hate, lies and differing views of the American population, mixed with Russian propaganda to promote this agenda.

This being the case, all the negativity they post cannot have the distinction of being labeled fair, balanced and free of bias.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, June 9, 2016 8:16 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Thanks for the relevant and interesting information, SECOND. So just OOC, why do you think Judge Curiel released trial documents before the final verdict?

I'd have to look this up, and I'm not sure the info is available, but is it possible that he made his (usual, typical) rulings before Trump decided to run for President, but AFTER Trump started campaigning and saying all of those horrible things about Mexicans the judge decided to have a political impact?

-----

OK that information is in the article that you linked. All of Judge Curie's rulings, except one, were made BEFORE Trump started saying that Mexicans are criminals. The earliest I can trace back Trump's public comments to that effect was June 2 2015, the last ruling by Curiel was Sep 18 2015. So it's possible that Curiel had a change of heart - when he went from being a regular judge to being a political actor - some time after Sep 2015, and the release of documents was politically-motivated.

Because so far, the case has been quietly progressing in the background and the brouhaha - and Trump's complaints- didn't surface until all related documents were made public. Which still seems like an odd move to me and one that has never been addressed.

Let me reframe this:

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?

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 10, 2016 8:43 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

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?

Do you want to know how I evaluate what people (you included) say about Trump? Probably not, but I'm going to tell you anyway.

Compare EVERYTHING that is said about Trump - what he would do, what he's like, etc - to the current establishment

Trump's hair = Hillary's cankles

Trump's ridiculing the disabled = Hillary's "We came, we saw, he died" moment. In fact, I think Hillary comes out the worse in that comparison

Trump's (presumed) conversion of the USA into some dystopian gulag = the REAL warmongering, jihadist-supporting, torturing, destabilizing, progressively impoverished, and eternally-surveiled dystopia that we currently live in

See? All you have to do is substitute "Hillary" for "Trump", or vice versa, or find the logically-equivalent comparison and proportion suddenly emerges.

You shouldn't be afraid of "the future" because it's already here. You just didn't notice the conversion.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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?

Shall we assume you are looking for a reply from Second?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 10, 2016 3:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:

Quote G

Just wanted to repeat this burning runaway logic train for the fun of it.

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

1. I know somebody who knew somebody who lived in Weimar Germany as a boy and young man. [a long time ago in a continent far away]

2. (He is dead now, passed away a decade ago.) Some people, including this person and his family, were starving. They literally boiled shoes and ate them to appease their hunger.

3. What do liberals offer to that? [ 0_o What do Germans offer that? ]

4. Nothing. They vote for Hillary, [how does that even relate as a logical course of action in response to someone eating their shoes?) who was one of the supporters of gutting welfare as we know it. [cites]
________________________________________

Quote G

Curious: what would you expect Liberals to offer people who ate their shoes who lived in another country and are dead now...?

What Does Donald Trump offer them btw?

G what SIG is about as I am sure you know, is posting in the most negative way about the west. In her reply to your query about what Trump offered she quotes herself as though she is quoting someone else, "What do liberals offer to that"? and attacks Clinton by suggesting liberals somehow create the problems that bring a society to rebellion; why.

“The next U.S. administration looks at the Middle East in more traditional terms, that is, like the current administration treats Ukraine, the Caucasus, the Black Sea, and the Baltics. Russians could be surprised by the significant pushback against their agenda.”

http://breakingenergy.com/2016/06/08/russian-views-on-the-middle-east-
a-trip-report/

I think they know Clinton is much more the hawk than Obama and fear the push back they know is coming. This suggests Russia is going to have many more confrontations with the United States. Something they can ill afford.

So, what is the playbook SIG and 1kiki use when posting here? It comes from the concept of a show on Russian TV suggesting the fall of the United States to pump up nationalism; which in turn means support for Putin. The show is called Good by America. SIG and 1KIKI are determined to destroy anything West and use the hate, lies and differing views of the American population, mixed with Russian propaganda to promote this agenda.

This being the case, all the negativity they post cannot have the distinction of being labeled fair, balanced and free of bias.

Unquote

Another example of confusing posting errors by THUGGERY, which he denies in other threads.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 10, 2016 3:29 PM

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

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 10, 2016 11:49 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
No answer?-SIGNY
Shall we assume you are looking for a reply from Second?-JSF

yes

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

Well, I have to admit that JSF isn't the only one confused by your posts. That's why I tend to ignore them.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 12, 2016 10:00 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

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?

If this was a question for me, my answer is that all the documents about Hillary were released before Hillary was even indicted for mishandling government documents. Because of "National Security" you can read the non-classified parts of only 29,444 of Hillary's emails and letters at http://graphics.wsj.com/hillary-clinton-email-documents/

And when will Trump be releasing his tax returns? After the election will be a little too late.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 12, 2016 2:19 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

How Donald Trump made millions running failed casinos in Atlantic City

One way to make a lot of money is founding and managing a successful company. The Trump way is to run a business that stays afloat without being profitable, pay yourself a high salary, and when it eventually goes bankrupt, that’s the investors’ problem.

Donald Trump’s business dealings in Atlantic City illustrate this core point — Trump’s New Jersey casinos were never successful businesses, but they did make a lot of money for Donald Trump personally because he funneled assets out of the enterprises and into his own pockets, exploiting people who are impressed by his name. If you are impressed by Trump's name, please send your money to his campaign.

The pattern started with his very first Atlantic City venture, a partnership with Harrah’s for which he was paid a $24 million construction management fee.

In 1993, Trump Plaza casino sold over $100 million in junk bonds and "more than half of the new money went to pay off Mr. Trump’s unrelated personal loans."

In 1995, the company staged an IPO and then a week later "the new company began using some of the almost $300 million it had raised to clear Mr. Trump’s personal debts."
www.vox.com/2016/6/12/11909176/trump-atlantic-city-business

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 12, 2016 4:35 PM

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.

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.

Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 12, 2016 6:00 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

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.

Elizabeth Warren has finally endorsed Hillary Clinton. You should inform Warren of her horrible mistake when the morally superior Trump ought to be getting Warren's endorsement, instead. Nothing could possibly be crooked with Trump since he doesn't even need to publicize any of his income tax returns, unlike Hillary who was forced to release all her returns because of her utterly dishonest reputation. She must be hiding something inside all that paper.
http://qz.com/703540/elizabeth-warren-has-finally-endorsed-hillary-cli
nton/

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 12, 2016 6:27 PM

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.

"when the morally superior Trump"

strawman, much?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 12, 2016 8:09 PM

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.

But since YOU are too dumb to understand your own hypocrisy, let me spell it out.

If you want to throw shade on Mr Trump because of allegations against him - maybe a sense of honesty, fairness and proportion - you DO understand what those mean, don't you? - should compel you to throw equal shade on the too-big-to-fail bankstas for their documented role in bringing down the global economy in late 2007. Which spelled ruin for many ordinary people, and from which people have yet to be made whole. And for which Wall Street has yet to be held accountable.

Hillary's position? IF banks become problematic I'll break them up. (Apparently the need for a bail-in policy doesn't indicate to her that they already ARE a problem.) That $11 MILLION I got for speeches in 2014 and the first quarter of 2015? Doesn't affect my positions. Those speeches I gave to Goldman Sachs that netted me $625,000? You don't need to know what I said. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-hillary-clint
on-speeches-goldman-sachs-edit-0429-jm-20160428-story.html

And YOU seem to think her close ties with banking and financialism, and all its documented malfeasance, is not worth criticizing.

Can you say hypocrite? Sure you can. Just look in the mirror when you do.

https://newrepublic.com/article/129247/hillary-clinton-wants-believe-s
hes-tough-wall-street-shes-not

Back in November, Hillary Clinton responded to criticisms of her Wall Street ties by pointing out that, as a senator from New York who had represented the state before and during 9/11, she was obligated to represent their interests. It was perhaps the most curious notion adduced in the Democratic race up to that point, and the oddity of Clinton’s reasoning did not escape notice. It was the kind of bizarre statement that critics like to linger on, and repurpose for useful attacks. But for Clinton it has turned out to be worse than ammunition, not for what it was but for what it wasn’t: In the end, it simply wasn’t a satisfactory answer. It did not decrease interest in her relationship with Wall Street, or mollify voters concerned about her ability and willingness to handle big banks and the financial industry.
Signal

Her new strategy to downplay her relationship with Goldman Sachs and to win trust for her plans for Wall Street regulation will likely fail, if not backfire.

In the first hour of Thursday night’s Democratic debate in New Hampshire, two questions targeted Clinton’s history with banks. MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow pointed out that the “most frequent area of concern” reporters hear from voters leaning toward Sanders is whether Clinton has been “too close to Wall Street.” Maddow asked Clinton if she has been too dismissive of voters’ concerns in that regard, including the $675,000 that Goldman Sachs paid her in speaking fees. A little while later, co-moderator Chuck Todd read a question from a voter who wanted to know if Clinton would release the transcripts of her speeches to Goldman. Todd observed that transcription services had been used at those speeches, meaning that transcripts likely do exist.

Clinton, for perhaps the first time in the debate, faltered.

“I will look into it,” she said. “I don’t know the status, but I will look into it... But, I can only repeat what is the fact, that I spoke to a lot of different groups with a lot of different constituents, a lot of different kinds of members about issues that had to do with world affairs...”

It was a marked departure from her former efforts to explain the speaking fees. Gone were the shadows of the twin towers, the uniqueness of her relationship to an important New York industry. Instead Wall Street had become, in Clinton’s parlance, “just one street,” just one industry among many, one problem among many, one stop on the speaking circuit among very many.

The brush-off didn’t quite land. Nor did Clinton’s other defense, aired earlier in the debate: that she simply isn’t moved by large sums of money. “You will not find that I changed a view or a vote because of donations I received,” she said early on to Bernie Sanders. “So I think it’s time to end the very artful smear that you and your campaign have been carrying out in recent weeks.” On Twitter, observers seemed less than convinced.

Otherwise Clinton mainly cited “vigorous agreement” with Sanders, claiming that both of them are wary of Wall Street power over the economy, based on the example set by the Great Recession.

“We have a law,” Clinton said, “It was passed. It was signed by President Obama— It lays out a process that you go through to determine whether a systemic risk is posed...So we have a law in place. If the circumstances warrant it, I know I will certainly use it.” It was the second time in the debate she had said she would break up big banks if “they prove to be a systemic problem,” and the second time she alluded to Obama having less-than-pure progressive credentials by Sanders’s standards, having received Wall Street money himself.

Again, neither point quite represented “vigorous agreement” with Sanders. First, Sanders believes Wall Street is already a systemic problem. “This is what a rigged economy, and a corrupt campaign finance system is about,” Sanders said. “These guys are so powerful that not one of the executives on Wall Street has been charged with anything after, in this case, paying a $5 billion fine. A Wall Street executive destroys the economy ... and has no criminal record. That is what power is about, that is what corruption is about, and that is what has to change in the USA.”

Second, though Sanders himself did not call Obama out for failing to handle big banks harshly enough, he did cite Senator Elizabeth Warren, who has lodged just such a critique of the president. According to the International Business Times,

“In the financial crisis of 2008, it was fraud right down at the heart of that crisis, and yet not one major bank executive was even charged, much less prosecuted and taken to trial — not one,” she said. Noting that the federal government prosecuted hundreds of Wall Street executives after the Savings and Loan scandal a few decades ago, she said, “You’re telling me that something changed between the 1980s, when more than a thousand people got prosecuted in the Savings and Loan crisis, but by 2008, a far bigger financial crisis involving far bigger and bolder frauds, that no one was legally responsible for that? That’s just not possible.”

Warren’s critique, that Wall Street executives can commit crimes with vastly greater impacts than the average drug-buyer but face drastically fewer consequences, mirrors Sanders’s insistence on the same (which he made during Thursday’s debate).

Meanwhile, despite Clinton’s having cancelled scheduled fundraising events with Wall Street firms amid criticism from the Sanders campaign, Democratic supporters inside those firms are, according to CNBC’s Eamon Javers, not concerned about her loyalties. And close examinations of her record on Wall Street reveal a far warmer attitude toward big banks than the one Sanders advances.

It all adds up to a disturbing picture for the future of Clinton’s campaign. Like her 9/11 answer in November, her new strategy on Thursday night to downplay her relationship with Goldman Sachs and to win trust for her plans for Wall Street regulation will likely fail, if not backfire. And despite her insistence that she stridently agrees with Sanders on how to address Wall Street, the two differ in both tone and tactics, something voters aren’t likely to miss. Lastly, this particular effort at wrapping up the Wall Street question on Clinton’s behalf has the potential to call her opposition to Citizens United into question, given her claim that money in politics shouldn’t necessarily be read as a corruption threat.

Sanders didn’t buy it. “Why in the 1990s did Wall Street get deregulated?” he asked rhetorically. “Did it have anything to do with the fact that Wall Street spent billions of dollars on lobbying? Well, some people might think it does.”

And after this debate, it seems unlikely those people will be any less convinced.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 11:48 AM

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.

Ok 1kiki, explain to SIG why she is wrong about Trump who fits her description of a corporate criminal. Below is an old post of hers.

Friday, February 13, 2009 4:32 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

This is the ONE TIME when harsh punishment would act as a deterent.

'Cause MOST criminals are so out of control of their own emotions that they're not thinking an hour ahead of time, much less a week or a year.

But corporate criminals???

They weigh the odds. They balance the risk of getting caught and the severity of punishment against the reward of potentially killing people for a higher profit.

If they really thought they'd be strung up by their balls for it their equations would come out a whole lot differently!

"Lynching is too good for 'em!"
---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 11:52 AM

Be right back

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 11:58 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

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

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.

http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=60433&mid=1
012085#1012085

Now, since this is a thread about Trump, I'll tell you what I DON'T like about him: I think that he has never confronted either the international banking cartel, nor the CIA-State Dept multi-headed hydra, nor the military-industrial complex. The last person to confront them was JFK (BTW, ALL immigration was illegal under JFK) and look what happened to him.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 11:58 AM

Below is a thread started by 1kiki. Yet NOW she is down playing the bad about Trump and viciously attacking Hillary Clinton about global a organization that attempts to help impoverished countries. Also I am including a quote from her about ghettos. Now keep in mind the people in those ghettos are voting for Clinton not Trump.

capitalism, by definition, is a stupid and foolish human system

POSTED BY: 1KIKI
UPDATED: Sunday, November 29, 2015 08:26
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 9714
PAGE 4 of 6

Now, let's take a look at YOUR system for its inconsistencies. Did you ever walk through a ghetto? The most memorable times I've walked through one (the same one) were summer and winter. Now in summer there were many many young black males loitering around with nothing to do. In winter the driving snow was blowing in through the broken windows and the curtains were flapping in the wind. The building privided no protection from the weather. So here we have an obvious need to fill, and the labor to do it. Your theory says capitalism will rise to fill the need. Why didn't it?

http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=58208&p=4

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 12:21 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

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.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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.

You’re such an ASS. Below are just a couple of headlines that cover what Trump says he would do if commander in chief. And you suggest it is Hillary who would start world war three. When you want something as proven here, you will post made up nonsense. You even started a thread where your first post is to declare Clinton to be the war monger. What a joke you are. Trump is running on a populist strategy. It is very dangerous, you should educate yourself about it.

Military analysts: Donald Trump's plan to bomb Iraq's oil fields not a good one
Donald Trump Promises To Force Our Military To Commit War Crimes
Donald Trump, Ted Cruz and the folly of carpet bombing
Donald Trump: ban all Muslims

Carpet bombing SIG, kill everyone in an entire city. What a fuck up you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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.

Quote you SIG

Shall I discuss what Hillary has done recently?

The Clinton Foundation, and how - during her tenure as Scy of State - the Foundation accepted tens of millions of dollars from donors who then asked for special favors from Hillary

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 12:42 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

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.”

I happen to agree. Obama has NOT done a bang-up job on eliminating terrorism. He prefers to send arms to terrorists in Syria via the apocryphal and un-findable "FSA".

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.”

Trump is talking about "thousands" or radicalized Muslims, not the "millions" who are already here. And he isn't asking for people to turn in Muslims because they're Muslim, but to turn in people who are planning terrorist attacks. Isn't it like turning in a criminal? I mean, if you know your son is jacking up cars and might move on to murder, maybe you should say something?

--------------
I'll tell you what I DON'T like about Trump: I think that he has never confronted either the international banking cartel, nor the CIA-State Dept multi-headed hydra, nor the military-industrial complex. The last person to confront them was JFK (BTW, ALL immigration was illegal under JFK) and look what happened to him.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 12:46 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

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.

--------------
I'll tell you what I DON'T like about Trump: I think that he has never confronted either the international banking cartel, nor the CIA-State Dept multi-headed hydra, nor the military-industrial complex. The last person to confront them was JFK (BTW, ALL immigration was illegal under JFK) and look what happened to him.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 1:11 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

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

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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.

Your opinion as stated by you is that most charitable foundations are covers for investment and development which is Capitalism used in impoverished areas of the world to help move them out of poverty. That very concept is admirable. Yet without prof you claim foul against the Clinton foundation which does this, because it suits your purpose and helps you to promote Trump the Capitalist. A contradiction don't you think? Promoting the man who uses capitalism for nothing more than personal gain, and chastising those who use it help out those in need.

What you're really doing, is starting your attacks now against who you know will be the next president. Why, because she is going to be much tougher on Putin. Hell, she already is.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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

That's just SIG making up her own set of facts again.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 2:48 PM

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.

Science confirms: Online trolls are horrible people (also, sadists!)
New research out of Canada finds trolls are sadistic. Who knew?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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?

Who knew you ask. Not you I'm sure. That would require you to take a good long look at yourself.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 5:19 PM

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.

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!

My point is!

If you see me as father time
Then I shall respond in kind
If you see me as the Reaper
Into your soul I shall go deeper

"New research out of Canada finds trolls are sadistic. Who knew?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 5:57 PM

www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/5/30/1530799/-Cartoon-Even-more-primary-
phenomena

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 6:06 PM

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.

The death of surrealism:

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 6:23 PM

www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/5/23/1528990/-Cartoon-The-great-Trump-ov
erload

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 6:43 PM

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.

That would be far more apropos if he actually said any of that. Did he?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 6:50 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
That would be far more apropos if he actually said any of that. Did he?

Yes, Trump did. But now let's go to fantasy, except he really did this stuff, too!

www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/5/9/1523884/-Cartoon-Primary-pandemonium

www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/4/25/1518987/-Trump-pivots

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 8:19 PM

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.

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?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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!

My point is!

If you see me as father time
Then I shall respond in kind
If you see me as the Reaper
Into your soul I shall go deeper

I would love to see a cite that shows who posted the statement "why come to a DISCUSSION board if you don't come with the INTENTION to DESTROY anyone who disagrees with you!" Was it you?

As for the poem, if you think that is what is being said then it is obviously beyond your powers of comprehension. I think you should go back and examine why it was posted and in response to whom.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 13, 2016 10:07 PM