Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
TRUMP - Just because.....................Naw, I just can't say it!
Tuesday, August 9, 2016 8:19 AM
SECOND
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: But on to more interesting topics: Hillary's "seizures". I agree KIKI, these don't look like seizures, they look possibly like an over-medicated movement disorder. A little too much dopamine, perhaps??? That "seizure" at the DNC convention looked like nothing so much as a sudden, distracting hallucination which can be caused by dopamine overdose.
Tuesday, August 9, 2016 8:22 AM
SIGNYM
I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.
Tuesday, August 9, 2016 9:24 AM
REAVERFAN
Tuesday, August 9, 2016 10:20 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: http://dilbert.com/strip/2016-08-09 That "angry" person? That's you, honey.
Tuesday, August 9, 2016 10:34 AM
THGRRI
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Hillary will get nothing on climate change, no matter what she wants you to think the future holds with her. She also won't get universal healthcare, the public option or any of the other fantasies she promotes. Obamacare will stand or fall in the courts. It will not be voted out in the senate, so Hillary's position is moot. If you're a typical democrat, you're a poor example of democrats in general. No wonder they've been such losers over the years.
Tuesday, August 9, 2016 10:38 AM
Quote:Originally posted by G: Welcome to Kikiville Second. You know how you crack a few eggs in a bowl to make an omelet and you see a small piece of shell in the bowl? And you try and fish it out but it keeps slipping one way or the other no matter how directly you try and address it? It just keeps side stepping to either side?? Ayep - Kiki. Obviously Kiki has an opinion on Global Warming, and Muslims, and Health care and OBVIOUSLY expressing that would back her into a corner of inner and yet public conflict. She will never admit her true motivations - trust me on that one. She'll just keep side stepping, left, right. At least she has Signym for comfort.
Tuesday, August 9, 2016 3:10 PM
Tuesday, August 9, 2016 7:07 PM
Quote:Originally posted by G: I don't know about you, but I feel some standard issue denyin' coming on.
Tuesday, August 9, 2016 8:35 PM
Tuesday, August 9, 2016 10:53 PM
Quote:Originally posted by THGRRI: Quote:Originally posted by G: I don't know about you, but I feel some standard issue denyin' coming on. I got the popcorn and am ready.
Quote: Mr. Trump said today that he would set the top individual income-tax rate at 33 percent...However, his plan would create a much lower rate than 33 percent for a substantial number of very-high-income households by allowing people to pay a new low rate of 15 percent on “pass-through” income (business income claimed on individual tax returns). ....This large tax cut for pass-through income would also undercut another tax change Mr. Trump mentioned today: eliminating the tax break for “carried interest.” Under current law, investment fund managers can pay taxes on a large part of their income — their “carried interest,” or the right to a share of their fund’s profits — at the 23.8 percent top capital gains tax rate rather than at normal income tax rates of up to 39.6 percent. The Trump plan ostensibly would tax carried interest at ordinary income tax rates. In fact, however, these investment fund managers generally would be able to arrange to receive their income as pass-through income.
Wednesday, August 10, 2016 6:01 AM
SHINYGOODGUY
Quote:Originally posted by second: http://time.com/4443382/donald-trump-economic-speech-detroit-transcript/ Donald Trump just finished his big economic policy speech. Every single one of his proposals would benefit the rich and do nothing for the working and middle classes. But he sure knows how to put a populist spin ("your tax will be zero!") on giveaways to the rich, doesn't he? Here are the pieces that caught my eye: Huge tax cut for the rich. But no spending cuts that he's willing to admit to. End of estate taxes. Cut corporate tax rate to 15 percent. Allow corporations to repatriate foreign earnings at a special 10 percent rate. Slash regulations on corporations. Pretend global warming doesn't exist. Ban all new financial regulation. Repeal Obamacare. Most of the speech was just the usual tired Republican orthodoxy. Mitt Romney could have given 90 percent of it. There was also a lot of random guff about how disastrous the economy is; how the unemployment rate is a hoax; and how American energy, planes, cars, steel, and so forth will employ way more American workers once he becomes president. You bet. The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
Wednesday, August 10, 2016 10:14 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY: Hey Second, We all know his intent, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out his intent. This is a president!?
Wednesday, August 10, 2016 10:28 AM
Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:27 PM
Quote:Originally posted by G: Quote:Originally posted by second: I knew Trump would bounce back due to Americans’ short-term memory loss, and it is happening! It makes me feel confident about the future of America! I'm ready to call it.
Quote:Originally posted by second: I knew Trump would bounce back due to Americans’ short-term memory loss, and it is happening! It makes me feel confident about the future of America!
Wednesday, August 10, 2016 2:53 PM
Wednesday, August 10, 2016 4:14 PM
Wednesday, August 10, 2016 4:22 PM
Wednesday, August 10, 2016 4:38 PM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Poll numbers actually show that Trump is now less popular with the white working class than Romney was. In 2012, Romney won 62 percent of noncollege-educated white voters. The latest NBC-Wall Street Journal poll showed that Trump isn’t even winning a clear majority with the group, with just 49 percent backing him. A McClatchy/Marist poll puts him even lower, at 46 percent. This is a reversal from earlier in the summer, when Trump’s support among the group was in the 60s, higher than Romney’s, though not by leaps and bounds. Much of the analysis of Trump’s support was based on the fact that he did very well indeed among a particular group of white working class voters early on: those who planned to vote in the GOP primary. Surowiecki, for instance, cited a July 2015 Washington Post/ABC News poll that showed a third of white GOP voters without college degrees had decided to support Trump, more than his rivals in the then-crowded field. But one third of white working class voters planning to vote in a GOP primary is not that many people. Just 14 percent of eligible adults took part in the presidential caucuses and primaries, 9 percent of the total American population. White working class Trump voters were a small subset of that number, not really enough to make much of a difference. If a candidate were to come along who was able to win most white working class voters – and energize them enough to boost their overall voter participation – that would indeed be noteworthy. But the evidence so far suggests Trump isn’t that candidate. https://theintercept.com/2016/08/10/the-great-white-hype-no-one-is-energizing-the-white-working-class-not-even-donald-trump/ The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
Wednesday, August 10, 2016 6:35 PM
ELVISCHRIST
Wednesday, August 10, 2016 7:15 PM
Quote:Originally posted by ElvisChrist: "If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is. I don’t know. But — but I’ll tell you what. That will be a horrible day." Drumpf threatening the life of a presidential candidate. He now claims that he was just pointing out that "blah-blah" . . .
Thursday, August 11, 2016 3:31 AM
Quote:Originally posted by ElvisChrist: "If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is. I don’t know. But — but I’ll tell you what. That will be a horrible day." Drumpf threatening the life of a presidential candidate. He now claims that he was just pointing out that "the Second Amendment people" would rise up and take political action. But why did he claim "that will be a horrible day" if that were to happen? As with most things, Drumpf doesn't make any sense, either in the things he says or in his weak-kneed attempts to explain those things after the fact.
Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:32 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY: He says things to excite and incite, fanning the flames so to speak. He knows his base and what they like to hear and repeats the rhetoric that got him the nomination. Actually, since his declining numbers in the polls, he's picked up his rhetoric and cranked it up to 11.
Thursday, August 11, 2016 8:31 AM
Thursday, August 11, 2016 9:26 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: So; listening again to Trump's extended quotes
Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:26 AM
Quote:The value of vague promises
Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:00 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote:The value of vague promises Yanno all of the quotes that I paraphrased??? They weren't "vague promises" they were DESCRIPTIONS OF A PROBLEM. Try reading with comprehension some time. It might help.
Thursday, August 11, 2016 12:23 PM
Thursday, August 11, 2016 2:20 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: They weren't "vague promises" they were DESCRIPTIONS OF A PROBLEM.
Friday, August 12, 2016 2:55 AM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Today's Perfect Storm of Trivial Lies From Donald Trump Too good to check: Sean Hannity’s tale of a Trump rescue www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/08/11/too-good-to-check-sean-hannitys-tale-of-a-trump-rescue/ This morning: a tale of (a) Trump largesse, (b) told by Sean Hannity, and (c) confirmed by the Trump campaign. Already, you know it's a lie. There are not enough Pinocchios in the world for something like this. Not that it matters, but this particular fairy tale is about Trump sending his private jet down to Camp Lejeune in 1991 to ferry home some Gulf War soldiers whose military flight had been FUBARed. We all know perfectly well that Trump would never do something like this unless there was some kind of massive publicity tied to it, because Trump never engages in any charitable act unless there's something in it for him. So it's already about 99 percent likely to be fiction. Sure enough, it turns out that the real story is just a demonstration of Trump's lousy business judgment—something far more common than Trump's acts of charity. When he bought the Eastern Shuttle in 1989 and turned it into the Trump Shuttle, he negotiated a terrible deal. Not only did he overpay, but he also accepted five extra planes he didn't need instead of a lower purchase price. So the Army leased the planes from him and used them for various tasks in order to free up military planes. In 1991, they were assigned to ferry troops home from Camp Lejeune. Does this matter? I suppose not, compared to insulting a Hispanic judge, attacking a Muslim family that lost a son in Iraq, and expressing his hope that someone will murder Hillary Clinton. But it's sort of Trump in a nutshell: Take credit for a charitable act even though it's a flat-out lie that's trivially easy to fact check and debunk. He doesn't care. He knows that guys like Sean Hannity will hype it to his credulous Fox News audience, and none of them will ever read Glenn Kessler, fact-checker at the Washington Post. And if they do find out it was a lie, they won't care. Trump 2016! I award this story 58 gazillion Pinocchios.
Friday, August 12, 2016 3:03 AM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote:The value of vague promises Yanno all of the quotes that I paraphrased??? They weren't "vague promises" they were DESCRIPTIONS OF A PROBLEM. Try reading with comprehension some time. It might help. For your first paraphrase "More illegal immigrants than ever before? Check." Google it and you find it is not true. As for your other paraphrases: "People pouring into our ..." "Foreigners laughing at us ..." "Mexicans coming ..." These are all true if you can find even one person "pouring" "laughing" or "coming". That makes each of your paraphrases empty of meaning. "Worthless paraphrases." Your best paraphrase: "Obama having no political record to speak of before running for President? check" is just so untrue. Obama has 8 years in the Illinois Senate and 4 years in the US Senate. I had to look it up because I don't know his past. You could do the same, SignyM.
Friday, August 12, 2016 9:38 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY: You know Second, I . . . SGG
Friday, August 12, 2016 1:42 PM
Friday, August 12, 2016 2:25 PM
Friday, August 12, 2016 7:45 PM
Saturday, August 13, 2016 6:40 PM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: They weren't "vague promises" they were DESCRIPTIONS OF A PROBLEM. Yes, yes, Drumpf knows what the problems are, as he revealed in an interview: Donald Drumpf, Insisting He Won’t Change His Style, Repeats Claim Obama Founded ISIS www.nytimes.com/2016/08/12/us/politics/donald-trump-obama-isis.html Donald J. Drumpf said Thursday that he intended to stick by his unorthodox campaign style, even if it meant taking “a very, very nice long vacation” after Nov. 8. In interviews on Thursday morning, Mr. Drumpf sounded an uncharacteristically fatalistic note, acknowledging the possibility he could be defeated on Election Day. Mr. Drumpf pledged on CNBC to “just keep doing the same thing I’m doing right now,” adding that he was the only presidential candidate who tells things “straight” and is “a truth-teller.” “At the end, it’s either going to work or I’m going to, you know, I’m going to have a very, very nice long vacation,” he added. It was a rare instance in which Mr. Drumpf has conceded that his approach might not work. Mr. Drumpf also defended his portrayal of the president as a “founder” of ISIS, despite criticism that the claim was both inaccurate and inflammatory. In an interview with the conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, Mr. Drumpf was given an opportunity to explain that he meant the claim only theoretically. But Mr. Drumpf would not budge. “You meant that he created the vacuum, he lost the peace,” Mr. Hewitt suggested, leaving Mr. Drumpf an opening. “No, I meant he’s the founder of ISIS. I do,” Mr. Drumpf said. “He was the most valuable player. I give him the most valuable player award. I give her, too, by the way, Hillary Clinton.”
Sunday, August 14, 2016 9:00 AM
Sunday, August 14, 2016 9:16 AM
Quote:Yanno all of the quotes that I paraphrased??? They weren't "vague promises" they were DESCRIPTIONS OF A PROBLEM. Try reading with comprehension some time. It might help.- SIGNY For your first paraphrase "More illegal immigrants than ever before? Check." Google it and you find it is not true.= SECONDRATE
Quote:As for your other paraphrases: "People pouring into our ..."
Quote:"Foreigners laughing at us ..."
Quote:"Mexicans coming ..."
Quote:These are all true if you can find even one person "pouring" "laughing" or "coming". That makes each of your paraphrases empty of meaning. "Worthless paraphrases."
Quote:Your best paraphrase: "Obama having no political record to speak of before running for President? check" is just so untrue. Obama has 8 years in the Illinois Senate and 4 years in the US Senate. I had to look it up because I don't know his past. You could do the same, SignyM.
Sunday, August 14, 2016 10:04 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: In fact, I have spoken to an illegal immigrant who thinks that USA policy is "stupid" (her word, not mine) with regards to people like her.
Sunday, August 14, 2016 11:36 AM
Monday, August 15, 2016 12:58 AM
Monday, August 15, 2016 1:15 AM
Monday, August 15, 2016 1:36 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: So, what are you saying, SECOND? That "we" should allow or even encourage the presence of illegal immigrants because Republican businessmen want to exploit them? Whose side are you on?
Monday, August 15, 2016 1:49 AM
Quote:And the American establishment is lining up to take him out. We are talking here in virtual terms - at least thus far. Nowadays, political assassination by US powers-that-be does not necessarily involve physical liquidation of the individual deemed to be an enemy of the state. Who needs all that blood and controversy? Especially when character assassination achieves the same desired end result — that is, elimination of target from the public domain. The fierce media crossfire that the Republican presidential contender is being subjected to leaves little doubt that this is a concerted effort to destroy this politician. In the past week, we have seen a fusillade of vilification fired at the New York property tycoon-turned presidential hopeful. Everything, it seems, has been thrown at him, from his Slovenian-born wife's alleged US visa violations, to his bullying of crying babies at rallies, to his serving as an unwitting agent for Russian leader Vladimir Putin. It's so transparent and preposterous, it is almost hilarious. Evidently, the US corporate news media are out to bring Trump down in spite of his stubborn support among ordinary Republican voters. It is obvious that the Washington establishment has determined that Democrat rival Hillary Clinton is the preferred choice to protect their privileged interests as the next occupant of the White House. And the US media — as a pillar of the establishment — is doing its bit to eliminate Trump from the supposedly free presidential election due in November by aiding and abetting in assassinating his character in the eyes of the public. Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton addresses the Democratic National Convention via a live video feed from New York during the second night at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US, July 26, 2016. © REUTERS/ Mark Kauzlarich If Hillary Becomes US President, She 'Will Look for Excuses to Bomb Damascus' It is ironic really given that there is so much more sordid stories to be reported on Clinton, given her involvement in warmongering, clandestine regime-change operations and abuse of state secrecy for her own self-aggrandizement with foreign sources of money. The latest sign that the secretive US Deep State — Pentagon, CIA, FBI, Wall Street financiers — is moving to install their White House candidate is the letter published this week by some 50 senior Republican "national security experts" who endorsed Clinton while eviscerating Trump. Yes, that's right, Republicans backing a Democrat. Which just goes to show the uniformity of interests. The signatories included former CIA director Michael Hayden, ex-chief of homeland security Michael Chertoff, both of whom served in the George W Bush administration, as well as John Negroponte who was a former director of national intelligence and alleged purveyor of death squads in Central America during the 1980s. The joint anti-Trump letter followed the publication only days ago of an oped piece in the New York Times by another ex-CIA head, Michael Morell in which he lambasted Trump as a Russian stooge.
Quote:All of these figures are intimately connected to the US Deep State and all are unanimously pillorying Trump as a "dangerous threat to American national security". For his part, Trump rebuffed the latest volley of vilification by saying that the list of national security "experts" are responsible for creating the Iraq war, the loss of American troops' lives and the rise of terrorism across the Middle East. Cheekily, he thanked them for all going public with their names so that the American people can hold them to account for foreign policy disasters. However, the point here is that the campaign to discredit Trump is not just some haphazard run of bad luck on the candidate's part for mis-steps and mis-speaks that he may have issued on the hustings trail. The intense, concerted nature of the campaign to destroy Trump demonstrates how the Washington power structure, including the corporate media, is setting him up for character assassination. This is the kind of political liquidation that the American plutocracy excels at. A few decades ago, American "executive action" — or "termination with extreme prejudice — involved, more often than not, literally murdering the individual target. The most notorious case is that of President John F Kennedy who was assassinated on November 22, 1963, in Dallas. Around that time, several other foreign political leaders were also killed by American state agents, including Patrice Lumumba of Congo, Rafael Trujillo of Dominican Republic and Ngo Dinh Diem of South Vietnam. Political murder was, still is, par for the American course. The late New Orleans attorney, Jim Garrison, who probed the JFK assassination, said that the primary reason for his murder was that the president was working to end the Cold War with Russia. Kennedy was quietly using backchannels with Russian counterpart Nikita Krushchev to implement ambitious plans for nuclear weapons disarmament. JFK had also flatly rejected secret proposals presented by the Pentagon for a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the Soviet Union. He was in addition closing down CIA-sponsored terrorist operations in Cuba and he had declared a withdrawal of US troops from the nascent Vietnam war. In this way, Kennedy had entered the political kill zone, as far as the powerful, unelected Deep State was concerned. His policies were threatening huge vested interests of military manufacturers, Big Oil and Wall Street financiers. Hence, the CIA and its contract killers were deployed to eliminate the "problem". Donald Trump shares two aspects with JFK. Like Kennedy, the business magnate is independently wealthy, which allows him to speak his mind without apparently having to ingratiate himself with powerful sponsors. Secondly, and more importantly, Trump has repeatedly pitched his election platform against the relentless build up of the US-led NATO military alliance in Eastern Europe, as well as overseas deployment of American forces, and, in particular, Washington's policy of hostility towards Russia. Trump has called for the normalization of relations with Russia. His foreign policy position is anathema to the Washington establishment which requires — as an absolute necessity — the demonization of foreign countries as "national security threats" in order to maintain the gargantuan US militarized economy. In short, the American Deep State thrives on continual war-making. War is a permanent function of bankrupt American capitalism. This systemic dysfunction is what the Cold War with Russia was and continues to be about — the pumping of trillions of dollars into corporate and financial elites, who get away with the scam because of their lackeys among the political and media channels. Anyone who defies these powerful American interests is liable for termination. They have entered the kill zone. In former times, the American methods of termination with extreme prejudice routinely involved physical elimination. Five decades after JFK, the US methods of political assassination have evolved to become more sophisticated. Character assassination may suffice most of the time. No need for contract hitmen or messy public enquiries. Media hitmen will do. The target just needs to be placed in the crossfire of a media barrage, with no let up in negative shots. Any foreign leader who likewise becomes a "problem" for US power interests is also targeted similarly. Russia's President Putin being perhaps the best example of this. As the US presidential election approaches over the next three months, just watch how the shadowy powers in Washington mobilize to take Trump out of the race. For taking out political enemies with extreme prejudice is the American way.
Monday, August 15, 2016 1:56 AM
Monday, August 15, 2016 2:17 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: So here is a Trump news conference. I hate political speeches, especially long ones, but this is a good sampling of Trump. Some of it is awkward, some of it is self-aggrandizing, a little bit of it is cringe-worthy, but there are also many rational, reasonable statements in it.
Monday, August 15, 2016 5:34 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: So many people talk about Trump without having even listened to him. Aside from the snippets of one or two words that the press delightedly serves up and replays over and over, and the fake news stories -like the Secret Service having talked to Trump about his Second Amendment, which officials had to come out and deny (quietly) - most people probably don't know what Trump has actually said. So here is a Trump news conference. I hate political speeches, especially long ones, but this is a good sampling of Trump. Some of it is awkward, some of it is self-aggrandizing, a little bit of it is cringe-worthy, but there are also many rational, reasonable statements in it. -------------- I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.
Monday, August 15, 2016 8:22 AM
Quote:I look forward to hearing what the GOP has to say in response to this
Quote:"So many people talk about Trump without having even listened to him. " You're basing that on what?
Quote:You know, when you make blanket statements like that, well suffice it to say that there are some of us who do use our better judgment and actually "look before we leap."
Quote:"Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every once in a while." In this allegory, Trump is both the squirrel and the nut.
Quote:So, what are you saying, SECOND? That "we" should allow or even encourage the presence of illegal immigrants because Republican businessmen want to exploit them? Whose side are you on?- SIGNY There is no "we". -SECOND
Monday, August 15, 2016 8:42 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote:I look forward to hearing what the GOP has to say in response to this The GOP will say about this what the DNC said about the Clinton Foundation getting lots of money from terrorist-funding Saudis. Too bad the DOJ quashed that nascent FBI investigation on that.
Monday, August 15, 2016 8:51 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote:So, what are you saying, SECOND? That "we" should allow or even encourage the presence of illegal immigrants because Republican businessmen want to exploit them? Whose side are you on?- SIGNY There is no "we". -SECOND Then why did you quote Republican businessmen?
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL