Does Trump have a voice of reason on his staff?

[Original Mountaineer1]

Most of thought or hoped that somewhere between the election and inauguration, Trump would "get it" and fully understand the importance of his role and essence of governing. During the election all we heard was that he wasn't a politician and we had to excuse his misteps, immaturity, un-Presidential behavior, and constant lies an/or exaggerations. Just wait until he is in office and we will a different Trump we were told. Obviously he hasn't change and it doesn't appear that anyone on his staff can control his childish behavior

Two weeks in and I think it safe to say that he has far exceeded all expectIons in the worst way. Even if we discount his reckless condemnation of our intelligence agencies (he wasn't the POTUS at that point), he has a lengthy list of head scratching moments. Let's list a few of them just for fun:

• Uses the inaguration speech to paint the U.S. as in a similar position to post WWI Germany.
• Immediatly starts criticizing the press. Calling out their lies about the attendance of his inaguration even though Fox noted the "average" attendance throughout the event due to the nasty weather
• Actually calls the head of the U.S. Park Service in an attempt to have him estimate the crowd or provide evidence that his inaguration was bigger than the 2009 inaguration
• Instructs his press secretary to chastise the press for reporting facts of the inaguration Attendance
• Propaganda Barbie is sent to address the press and concludes that alternative facts exist in the Trump Administration
• Trump says 1 million to 1.5 million attended the inaguration. Highest estimate is 400,000 by anyone. No evidence exists to support Trump's claim
• Holds a press conference at the CIA and tells everyone the press basically fabricated his critical comments about the intelligence agencies obviously forgetting the comments were recorded.....and tweeted
• Keeps regurgitating that Mexico will pay for a wall...the American consumer will pay
• Issues an unprecedented press release noting the positive press he is receiving
• Issues a poorly executed EO "Banning" Muslims from 7 countries. After he, Spicer, and Connelly use the word ban, the administration said it was never a ban.....a classic WTF moment
• Grandstands in a call with the Australian PM calling a formal agreement to accept 1250 illegals stupid....first of all they are refugees and not illegals and then he quietly agrees to uphold the deal
• Falsely claims two people were killed during an Obama speech. Never happened.
• Claims we gave Iran $150 billion when in fact the Treasury released $55 billion of frozen Iranian funds. Not that should have given them anything but at least Trump should have not lied.
• Trumps ban on muslims is overturned by a federal judge and Trump immediatly mocks him, clearly not understanding how the U.S. system of government works

What have I forgotten? Help me Atl!!!!

 

[WVPATX]

Most of thought or hoped that somewhere between the election and inauguration, Trump would "get it" and fully understand the importance of his role and essence of governing. During the election all we heard was that he wasn't a politician and we had to excuse his misteps, immaturity, un-Presidential behavior, and constant lies an/or exaggerations. Just wait until he is in office and we will a different Trump we were told. Obviously he hasn't change and it doesn't appear that anyone on his staff can control his childish behavior

Two weeks in and I think it safe to say that he has far exceeded all expectIons in the worst way. Even if we discount his reckless condemnation of our intelligence agencies (he wasn't the POTUS at that point), he has a lengthy list of head scratching moments. Let's list a few of them just for fun:

• Uses the inaguration speech to paint the U.S. as in a similar position to post WWI Germany.
• Immediatly starts criticizing the press. Calling out their lies about the attendance of his inaguration even though Fox noted the "average" attendance throughout the event due to the nasty weather
• Actually calls the head of the U.S. Park Service in an attempt to have him estimate the crowd or provide evidence that his inaguration was bigger than the 2009 inaguration
• Instructs his press secretary to chastise the press for reporting facts of the inaguration Attendance
• Propaganda Barbie is sent to address the press and concludes that alternative facts exist in the Trump Administration
• Trump says 1 million to 1.5 million attended the inaguration. Highest estimate is 400,000 by anyone. No evidence exists to support Trump's claim
• Holds a press conference at the CIA and tells everyone the press basically fabricated his critical comments about the intelligence agencies obviously forgetting the comments were recorded.....and tweeted
• Keeps regurgitating that Mexico will pay for a wall...the American consumer will pay
• Issues an unprecedented press release noting the positive press he is receiving
• Issues a poorly executed EO "Banning" Muslims from 7 countries. After he, Spicer, and Connelly use the word ban, the administration said it was never a ban.....a classic WTF moment
• Grandstands in a call with the Australian PM calling a formal agreement to accept 1250 illegals stupid....first of all they are refugees and not illegals and then he quietly agrees to uphold the deal
• Falsely claims two people were killed during an Obama speech. Never happened.
• Claims we gave Iran $150 billion when in fact the Treasury released $55 billion of frozen Iranian funds. Not that should have given them anything but at least Trump should have not lied.
• Trumps ban on muslims is overturned by a federal judge and Trump immediatly mocks him, clearly not understanding how the U.S. system of government works

What have I forgotten? Help me Atl!!!!

A few points. As you know, I don't think much of Trump personally, but some of your above "facts" are wrong.

1. It is ridiculous to assert this is a Muslim ban, it simply is not true. Very dishonest of you to assert so.
2. I showed you several articles a few days ago verifying the $150B. It has been widely reported. Even if you are right, you can't fault Trump for giving out that number it has been so widely reported.
3. Have you ever heard of LBJ? Have you listened to some of his phone calls? His would make Trump's look like a nun speaking. Obama cut a rotten deal with Australia, simply rotten. I actually like the fact that Trump did all he could to get us out of that deal.
4. Agree with the ban being very poorly executed. However, I welcome the policy. Trump's duty is to do all he can to protect American lives. Priority number one.
5. The "alternative facts" line is a ridiculous argument. It is very true that different conclusions are arrived at from a single event. That is all that she meant. Again, very petty point, Imo. You have lots more "meat" to go after than this point.
6. You have NO IDEA WHO OR HOW THE WALL WILL BE PAID FOR. NONE. Yet, you say the American consumer will pay. What if Trump simply puts a fee on the $28B sent to Mexico each year by Mexicans living in the U.S. That's one possibility being discussed. How would the consumer end up paying for that?


As I said, I don't care for Trump personally. He has many character flaws. But if he does these things, I don't give a rat's ***:

1. Tax cuts for individuals and families
2. Repatriation of overseas profits
3. Achieve GDP growth of 3.5% or more
4. Much greater competition in public education
5. Fixing/replacing the debacle that is Obamacare
6. Massive deregulation focused on keeping the necessary and killing the rest.
7. All of the above energy policy
8. Median family income growth
9. Jobs, jobs, jobs (not part time and good paying)
10. Stop the killings in Chicago
11. Rebuild our infrastructure
12. Rebuild of our inner cities with a public/private partnership aimed at creating businesses and jobs.
13. Restructring immigration by deporting all criminal illegal aliens, both those that crossed the border and those that overstayed their visas. Allow the remainder of illegal aliens to get green cards is they have a job, pay a fine, speak English and have no pathway to citizenship. Build the wall, add electronic surveillance, add drones, where appropriate, add border control agents, end catch and release.
14. Eliminate sanctuary cities
15. New immigrant approvals should be focused on strategic addition to our country. Highly skilled, upwardly mobile, possessing existing capital, etc. We don't need any more low skilled workers.
16. Defeat ISIS or start the process in earnest.
17. Restructure NATO so that it becomes relevant again, joins us in fighting terrorism, and pays their fair share.
18. Consolidates all U.S. funding of global warming studies into one group, truly independent, that researches the science. This will take years and years before we know very much. Climate science is very, very new.
19. Downsizes government significantly. Move as many departments as possible out of DC. Eliminate as many departments as possible.

Big agenda.

 

[atlkvb]

Most of thought or hoped that somewhere between the election and inauguration, Trump would "get it" and fully understand the importance of his role and essence of governing. During the election all we heard was that he wasn't a politician and we had to excuse his misteps, immaturity, un-Presidential behavior, and constant lies an/or exaggerations. Just wait until he is in office and we will a different Trump we were told. Obviously he hasn't change and it doesn't appear that anyone on his staff can control his childish behavior

Two weeks in and I think it safe to say that he has far exceeded all expectIons in the worst way. Even if we discount his reckless condemnation of our intelligence agencies (he wasn't the POTUS at that point), he has a lengthy list of head scratching moments. Let's list a few of them just for fun:

• Uses the inaguration speech to paint the U.S. as in a similar position to post WWI Germany.
• Immediatly starts criticizing the press. Calling out their lies about the attendance of his inaguration even though Fox noted the "average" attendance throughout the event due to the nasty weather
• Actually calls the head of the U.S. Park Service in an attempt to have him estimate the crowd or provide evidence that his inaguration was bigger than the 2009 inaguration
• Instructs his press secretary to chastise the press for reporting facts of the inaguration Attendance
• Propaganda Barbie is sent to address the press and concludes that alternative facts exist in the Trump Administration
• Trump says 1 million to 1.5 million attended the inaguration. Highest estimate is 400,000 by anyone. No evidence exists to support Trump's claim
• Holds a press conference at the CIA and tells everyone the press basically fabricated his critical comments about the intelligence agencies obviously forgetting the comments were recorded.....and tweeted
• Keeps regurgitating that Mexico will pay for a wall...the American consumer will pay
• Issues an unprecedented press release noting the positive press he is receiving
• Issues a poorly executed EO "Banning" Muslims from 7 countries. After he, Spicer, and Connelly use the word ban, the administration said it was never a ban.....a classic WTF moment
• Grandstands in a call with the Australian PM calling a formal agreement to accept 1250 illegals stupid....first of all they are refugees and not illegals and then he quietly agrees to uphold the deal
• Falsely claims two people were killed during an Obama speech. Never happened.
• Claims we gave Iran $150 billion when in fact the Treasury released $55 billion of frozen Iranian funds. Not that should have given them anything but at least Trump should have not lied.
• Trumps ban on muslims is overturned by a federal judge and Trump immediatly mocks him, clearly not understanding how the U.S. system of government works

What have I forgotten? Help me Atl!!!!

You forgot all of the lies and bias of the Media reporting on each of those stories. But keep being "open minded" your objective analysis is quite refreshing, if not altogether amusing.

You probably still believe the Media reporting that Trump hired Russians to "steal" the election for him?

I'm still waiting for their proof of that "fake news". Apparently you're still convinced it's true.

 

[Original Mountaineer1]

You forgot all of the lies and bias of the Media reporting on each of those stories. But keep being "open minded" you're objective analysis is quite refreshing, if not altogether amusing.

You probably still believe the Media reporting that Trump hired Russians to "steal" the election for him?

I'm still waiting their proof of that "fake news". Apparently you're still convinced it's true.

Quit making **** up now. You are the one losing perspective and objectivity if you ever had any. I'm the moderate and you are the wingnut. My hate for trump doesn't mean we don't share many conservative values.

 

[Original Mountaineer1]

A few points. As you know, I don't think much of Trump personally, but some of your above "facts" are wrong.

1. It is ridiculous to assert this is a Muslim ban, it simply is not true. Very dishonest of you to assert so.
2. I showed you several articles a few days ago verifying the $150B. It has been widely reported. Even if you are right, you can't fault Trump for giving out that number it has been so widely reported.
3. Have you ever heard of LBJ? Have you listened to some of his phone calls? His would make Trump's look like a nun speaking. Obama cut a rotten deal with Australia, simply rotten. I actually like the fact that Trump did all he could to get us out of that deal.
4. Agree with the ban being very poorly executed. However, I welcome the policy. Trump's duty is to do all he can to protect American lives. Priority number one.
5. The "alternative facts" line is a ridiculous argument. It is very true that different conclusions are arrived at from a single event. That is all that she meant. Again, very petty point, Imo. You have lots more "meat" to go after than this point.
6. You have NO IDEA WHO OR HOW THE WALL WILL BE PAID FOR. NONE. Yet, you say the American consumer will pay. What if Trump simply puts a fee on the $28B sent to Mexico each year by Mexicans living in the U.S. That's one possibility being discussed. How would the consumer end up paying for that?


As I said, I don't care for Trump personally. He has many character flaws. But if he does these things, I don't give a rat's ***:

1. Tax cuts for individuals and families
2. Repatriation of overseas profits
3. Achieve GDP growth of 3.5% or more
4. Much greater competition in public education
5. Fixing/replacing the debacle that is Obamacare
6. Massive deregulation focused on keeping the necessary and killing the rest.
7. All of the above energy policy
8. Median family income growth
9. Jobs, jobs, jobs (not part time and good paying)
10. Stop the killings in Chicago
11. Rebuild our infrastructure
12. Rebuild of our inner cities with a public/private partnership aimed at creating businesses and jobs.
13. Restructring immigration by deporting all criminal illegal aliens, both those that crossed the border and those that overstayed their visas. Allow the remainder of illegal aliens to get green cards is they have a job, pay a fine, speak English and have no pathway to citizenship. Build the wall, add electronic surveillance, add drones, where appropriate, add border control agents, end catch and release.
14. Eliminate sanctuary cities
15. New immigrant approvals should be focused on strategic addition to our country. Highly skilled, upwardly mobile, possessing existing capital, etc. We don't need any more low skilled workers.
16. Defeat ISIS or start the process in earnest.
17. Restructure NATO so that it becomes relevant again, joins us in fighting terrorism, and pays their fair share.
18. Consolidates all U.S. funding of global warming studies into one group, truly independent, that researches the science. This will take years and years before we know very much. Climate science is very, very new.
19. Downsizes government significantly. Move as many departments as possible out of DC. Eliminate as many departments as possible.

Big agenda.

1. Trumps own words.....ban. Reiterated by Spicer and wrinkled Barbie. And you called me dishonest? I stopped reading there.

 

[Boomboom521]

Most of thought or hoped that somewhere between the election and inauguration, Trump would "get it" and fully understand the importance of his role and essence of governing. During the election all we heard was that he wasn't a politician and we had to excuse his misteps, immaturity, un-Presidential behavior, and constant lies an/or exaggerations. Just wait until he is in office and we will a different Trump we were told. Obviously he hasn't change and it doesn't appear that anyone on his staff can control his childish behavior

Two weeks in and I think it safe to say that he has far exceeded all expectIons in the worst way. Even if we discount his reckless condemnation of our intelligence agencies (he wasn't the POTUS at that point), he has a lengthy list of head scratching moments. Let's list a few of them just for fun:

• Uses the inaguration speech to paint the U.S. as in a similar position to post WWI Germany.
• Immediatly starts criticizing the press. Calling out their lies about the attendance of his inaguration even though Fox noted the "average" attendance throughout the event due to the nasty weather
• Actually calls the head of the U.S. Park Service in an attempt to have him estimate the crowd or provide evidence that his inaguration was bigger than the 2009 inaguration
• Instructs his press secretary to chastise the press for reporting facts of the inaguration Attendance
• Propaganda Barbie is sent to address the press and concludes that alternative facts exist in the Trump Administration
• Trump says 1 million to 1.5 million attended the inaguration. Highest estimate is 400,000 by anyone. No evidence exists to support Trump's claim
• Holds a press conference at the CIA and tells everyone the press basically fabricated his critical comments about the intelligence agencies obviously forgetting the comments were recorded.....and tweeted
• Keeps regurgitating that Mexico will pay for a wall...the American consumer will pay
• Issues an unprecedented press release noting the positive press he is receiving
• Issues a poorly executed EO "Banning" Muslims from 7 countries. After he, Spicer, and Connelly use the word ban, the administration said it was never a ban.....a classic WTF moment
• Grandstands in a call with the Australian PM calling a formal agreement to accept 1250 illegals stupid....first of all they are refugees and not illegals and then he quietly agrees to uphold the deal
• Falsely claims two people were killed during an Obama speech. Never happened.
• Claims we gave Iran $150 billion when in fact the Treasury released $55 billion of frozen Iranian funds. Not that should have given them anything but at least Trump should have not lied.
• Trumps ban on muslims is overturned by a federal judge and Trump immediatly mocks him, clearly not understanding how the U.S. system of government works

What have I forgotten? Help me Atl!!!!

3-5 MILLION fraudulent votes in our voting system vital of health of democratic process.

 

[Boomboom521]

A few points. As you know, I don't think much of Trump personally, but some of your above "facts" are wrong.

1. It is ridiculous to assert this is a Muslim ban, it simply is not true. Very dishonest of you to assert so.
2. I showed you several articles a few days ago verifying the $150B. It has been widely reported. Even if you are right, you can't fault Trump for giving out that number it has been so widely reported.
3. Have you ever heard of LBJ? Have you listened to some of his phone calls? His would make Trump's look like a nun speaking. Obama cut a rotten deal with Australia, simply rotten. I actually like the fact that Trump did all he could to get us out of that deal.
4. Agree with the ban being very poorly executed. However, I welcome the policy. Trump's duty is to do all he can to protect American lives. Priority number one.
5. The "alternative facts" line is a ridiculous argument. It is very true that different conclusions are arrived at from a single event. That is all that she meant. Again, very petty point, Imo. You have lots more "meat" to go after than this point.
6. You have NO IDEA WHO OR HOW THE WALL WILL BE PAID FOR. NONE. Yet, you say the American consumer will pay. What if Trump simply puts a fee on the $28B sent to Mexico each year by Mexicans living in the U.S. That's one possibility being discussed. How would the consumer end up paying for that?


As I said, I don't care for Trump personally. He has many character flaws. But if he does these things, I don't give a rat's ***:

1. Tax cuts for individuals and families
2. Repatriation of overseas profits
3. Achieve GDP growth of 3.5% or more
4. Much greater competition in public education
5. Fixing/replacing the debacle that is Obamacare
6. Massive deregulation focused on keeping the necessary and killing the rest.
7. All of the above energy policy
8. Median family income growth
9. Jobs, jobs, jobs (not part time and good paying)
10. Stop the killings in Chicago
11. Rebuild our infrastructure
12. Rebuild of our inner cities with a public/private partnership aimed at creating businesses and jobs.
13. Restructring immigration by deporting all criminal illegal aliens, both those that crossed the border and those that overstayed their visas. Allow the remainder of illegal aliens to get green cards is they have a job, pay a fine, speak English and have no pathway to citizenship. Build the wall, add electronic surveillance, add drones, where appropriate, add border control agents, end catch and release.
14. Eliminate sanctuary cities
15. New immigrant approvals should be focused on strategic addition to our country. Highly skilled, upwardly mobile, possessing existing capital, etc. We don't need any more low skilled workers.
16. Defeat ISIS or start the process in earnest.
17. Restructure NATO so that it becomes relevant again, joins us in fighting terrorism, and pays their fair share.
18. Consolidates all U.S. funding of global warming studies into one group, truly independent, that researches the science. This will take years and years before we know very much. Climate science is very, very new.
19. Downsizes government significantly. Move as many departments as possible out of DC. Eliminate as many departments as possible.

Big agenda.

It's funny how you always seek to justify Trumps actions by pointing to the actions of a Democratic figure....LBJ, Clinton....when his action has no defense, you just pull out the old "Dems are worse" card. Intellectually dishonest? Ok buddy

 

[WVPATX]

1. Trumps own words.....ban. Reiterated by Spicer and wrinkled Barbie. And you called me dishonest? I stopped reading there.

Where did I call you dishonest? I just reread my post twice and can't find where I sad that.

I notice you didn't respond to any of my observations of the points you made. You simply refuse to respond because you claim I called you dishonest when I did not. Unless, in my rereading I missed something. Can you show me where I made that claim?

 

[Boomboom521]

You forgot all of the lies and bias of the Media reporting on each of those stories. But keep being "open minded" you're objective analysis is quite refreshing, if not altogether amusing.

You probably still believe the Media reporting that Trump hired Russians to "steal" the election for him?

I'm still waiting their proof of that "fake news". Apparently you're still convinced it's true.

You are ANYTHING but open minded, you are ANYTHING but objective. I honestly don't think you'd have a clue as to what it was if you ever read it.

 

[WVMade]

You probably still believe the Media reporting that Trump hired Russians to "steal" the election for him?

Who or what is "the Media"? I'm curious why you capitalized "Media" I want to see the "steal" headlines you quoted.

 

[WVPATX]

It's funny how you always seek to justify Trumps actions by pointing to the actions of a Democratic figure....LBJ, Clinton....when his action has no defense, you just pull out the old "Dems are worse" card. Intellectually dishonest? Ok buddy

Boom, do you have an ounce of intellectual integrity? If so, what have the Dems, Obama and this board's libs been doing for the past many years? Every time Obama did something stupid, he and this board would point to something Bush did. It has been done over and over again.

Now the shoe is on the other foot and libs, like you, don't like it. Did you ever point to something Bush did in defense of Obama? Be honest? I know many libs on this board have done just that.

 

[WVMade]

A few points. As you know, I don't think much of Trump personally, but some of your above "facts" are wrong.

1. It is ridiculous to assert this is a Muslim ban, it simply is not true. Very dishonest of you to assert so.
2. I showed you several articles a few days ago verifying the $150B. It has been widely reported. Even if you are right, you can't fault Trump for giving out that number it has been so widely reported.
3. Have you ever heard of LBJ? Have you listened to some of his phone calls? His would make Trump's look like a nun speaking. Obama cut a rotten deal with Australia, simply rotten. I actually like the fact that Trump did all he could to get us out of that deal.
4. Agree with the ban being very poorly executed. However, I welcome the policy. Trump's duty is to do all he can to protect American lives. Priority number one.
5. The "alternative facts" line is a ridiculous argument. It is very true that different conclusions are arrived at from a single event. That is all that she meant. Again, very petty point, Imo. You have lots more "meat" to go after than this point.
6. You have NO IDEA WHO OR HOW THE WALL WILL BE PAID FOR. NONE. Yet, you say the American consumer will pay. What if Trump simply puts a fee on the $28B sent to Mexico each year by Mexicans living in the U.S. That's one possibility being discussed. How would the consumer end up paying for that?


As I said, I don't care for Trump personally. He has many character flaws. But if he does these things, I don't give a rat's ***:

1. Tax cuts for individuals and families
2. Repatriation of overseas profits
3. Achieve GDP growth of 3.5% or more
4. Much greater competition in public education
5. Fixing/replacing the debacle that is Obamacare
6. Massive deregulation focused on keeping the necessary and killing the rest.
7. All of the above energy policy
8. Median family income growth
9. Jobs, jobs, jobs (not part time and good paying)
10. Stop the killings in Chicago
11. Rebuild our infrastructure
12. Rebuild of our inner cities with a public/private partnership aimed at creating businesses and jobs.
13. Restructring immigration by deporting all criminal illegal aliens, both those that crossed the border and those that overstayed their visas. Allow the remainder of illegal aliens to get green cards is they have a job, pay a fine, speak English and have no pathway to citizenship. Build the wall, add electronic surveillance, add drones, where appropriate, add border control agents, end catch and release.
14. Eliminate sanctuary cities
15. New immigrant approvals should be focused on strategic addition to our country. Highly skilled, upwardly mobile, possessing existing capital, etc. We don't need any more low skilled workers.
16. Defeat ISIS or start the process in earnest.
17. Restructure NATO so that it becomes relevant again, joins us in fighting terrorism, and pays their fair share.
18. Consolidates all U.S. funding of global warming studies into one group, truly independent, that researches the science. This will take years and years before we know very much. Climate science is very, very new.
19. Downsizes government significantly. Move as many departments as possible out of DC. Eliminate as many departments as possible.

Big agenda.

Hopefully your "alternative facts" defense is not something you're blathering in public. Makes you look deranged or at best ignorant.

 

[Boomboom521]

Boom, do you have an ounce of intellectual integrity? If so, what have the Dems, Obama and this board's libs been doing for the past many years? Every time Obama did something stupid, he and this board would point to something Bush did. It has been done over and over again.

Now the shoe is on the other foot and libs, like you, don't like it. Did you ever point to something Bush did in defense of Obama? Be honest? I know many libs on this board have done just that.

I was not on this board until Post Trump election, so I wouldn't know. But I would say this....defend the action, or agree that the action was wrong....comparisons are fine if making a point, but when you basically say "it might be wrong BUT THE DEMS STARTED IT", you just sound like a 12 yr old. I bet your dad could beat up my dad too.

 

[WVPATX]

I was not on this board until Post Trump election, so I wouldn't know. But I would say this....defend the action, or agree that the action was wrong....comparisons are fine if making a point, but when you basically say "it might be wrong BUT THE DEMS STARTED IT", you just sound like a 12 yr old. I bet your dad could beat up my dad too.

Boom, it is quite appropriate to point out someone's hypocrisy to point to a similar circumstance that they defended or were not upset about.

For example, the libs on the board complaining about the rollout of Trump's EO. I admit it was botched. But when I pointed out Obama's terrible rollout of Obamacare after months and months of planning and after spending $1B on a website, and libs either defending it or not saying a word, I have every right to point that out.

Another example, when the libs on the board complained about Trump's tweet regarding the judge's order. I pointed out how Obama very disrespectfully treated SCOTUS during his State of the Union speech.

It's part of the debate and very relevant.

 

[Boomboom521]

Boom, it is quite appropriate to point out someone's hypocrisy to point to a similar circumstance that they defended or were not upset about.

For example, the libs on the board complaining about the rollout of Trump's EO. I admit it was botched. But when I pointed out Obama's terrible rollout of Obamacare after months and months of planning and after spending $1B on a website, and libs either defending it or not saying a word, I have every right to point that out.

Another example, when the libs on the board complained about Trump's tweet regarding the judge's order. I pointed out how Obama very disrespectfully treated SCOTUS during his State of the Union speech.

It's part of the debate and very relevant.

Oh I guess I didn't see where you did that in this thread.

 

[WVPATX]

Oh I guess I didn't see where you did that in this thread.

Not sure to what you are referring.

 

[WVMade]

Not sure to what you are referring.

You lose any slight thread of credibility you "might" have with your alternative facts nonsense.

 

[atlkvb]

Who or what is "the Media"? I'm curious why you capitalized "Media" I want to see the "steal" headlines you quoted.

I refer to (Media) WVMade as the major disseminators of the daily anti-Trump hysteria. Turn on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, or read almost any major daily newspaper publication like the New York Times, Washington Post, USA today, the AP, or the LA Times, and you hear nothing but a constant stream of protests or anti-Trump negativity. It's universal in both its coverage and presentation.

So if I were to rely only on those sources for my information, I might actually believe Trump has no support, is universally hated, rejected, is an idiot, a tyrant, a maniac, a bully, a misogynist, a racist, a narcissist, naive, stupid, unpredictable, a liar, unpatriotic, dangerous, mentally unbalanced, petty, childish, lacking of basic understanding of Government functions, disrespectful, pedantic, pejorative, obstinate, myopic, xenophobic, selfish, greedy, untrustworthy, and basically a creep.

I'd defy you to find one of those Broadcasts, or one of those publications that even mentions ANY of the massive support he has among a vast majority of the American people who elected him to pursue the exact agenda he's pursuing, promised to do, and is in act fulfilling. Nope, none of that. Only the opposition to him.

You won't find his supporters anywhere. They're not reporting it.

If I had the time to find you the headlines you've asked me to produce WVMade I'd simply defer to you. Because you've quite frankly done the work for me, posting on an almost daily basis, all the negative bilge about Trump these and other Media outlets dedicated to destroying his credibility can dredge up.

So, he has NO support right WVMade?

You more than anyone else on this board knows who the "Media" I refer to is, because they are your primary "go to" sources for the negative images of Trump you so desperately wish were in fact reality.

 

[atlkvb]

You are ANYTHING but open minded, you are ANYTHING but objective. I honestly don't think you'd have a clue as to what it was if you ever read it.

I like the way you describe yourself here boomer. Very good self analysis. You've studied yourself well. Congratulations.

 

[atlkvb]

you are the wingnut

Now there's an "objective and open minded" opinion of my positions. I'm learning from a Master apparently.

 

[WVPATX]

I like the way you describe yourself here boomer. Very good self analysis. You've studied yourself well. Congratulations.

If I were a lib, ATL, I would make the following observation. You are an African-American. He just essentially called you stupid. Therefore, he is a racist.

I am beginning to see how the liberal mind works.

 

[Boomboom521]

If I were a lib, ATL, I would make the following observation. You are an African-American. He just essentially called you stupid. Therefore, he is a racist.

I am beginning to see how the liberal mind works.

Not objective and not open minded = stupid? Look, get each other's number....set up a date at a hotel in between you....and just let all that repressed attraction out naturally. Stop stroking each other in a db, and get down to the heart of the matter.

 

[atlkvb]

If I were a lib, ATL, I would make the following observation. You are an African-American. He just essentially called you stupid. Therefore, he is a racist.

I am beginning to see how the liberal mind works.

They love to accuse me PAX of being "close minded" when they reserve unto themselves the right to "label" anyone who disagrees with them whatever they choose to call them.

They lecture us about "tolerance" while smashing windows, blocking traffic, and in fact outright shooting those who disagree with them. Oh, and forget about offering a Religious point of view, they reserve special nomenclature for anyone with an opinion based on their Faith in a Supreme Creator.

If they weren't so dangerous I'd actually pay them for all of the entertainment they provide on a daily basis expertly talking simultaneously out of both sides of their arrogant ignorant mouths.

 

[WVPATX]

Not objective and not open minded = stupid? Look, get each other's number....set up a date at a hotel in between you....and just let all that repressed attraction out naturally. Stop stroking each other in a db, and get down to the heart of the matter.

You posted this:

You are ANYTHING but open minded, you are ANYTHING but objective. I honestly don't think you'd have a clue as to what it was if you ever read it.

Sounds to me like you are calling him stupid. Close minded.

I am simply pointing out what a lib would do (I don't believe you are a racist). If a conservative made the same post about a black person, they would immediately be labeled a racist. It goes on all the time. And not just on boards like this one. It happens every election. Libs make this claim daily, that conservatives are racists even when expressing opinions like you expressed.

 

[atlkvb]

Not objective and not open minded = stupid? Look, get each other's number....set up a date at a hotel in between you....and just let all that repressed attraction out naturally. Stop stroking each other in a db, and get down to the heart of the matter.

Thanks boom, I consider that expert advice from someone who's so infatuated with the idea of Men having Sex with one another.

Want to join us?

Let's get really kinky Bro!

 

[Boomboom521]

They love to accuse me PAX of being "close minded" when they reserve unto themselves the right to "label" anyone who disagrees with them whatever they choose to call them.

They lecture us about "tolerance" while smashing windows, blocking traffic, and in fact outright shooting those who disagree with them. Oh, and forget about offering a Religious point of view, they reserve special nomenclature for anyone with an opinion based on their Faith in a Supreme Creator.

If they weren't so dangerous I'd actually pay them for all of the entertainment they provide on a daily basis expertly talking simultaneously out of both sides of their arrogant ignorant mouths.

They, they, they! And Us, Us, Us!

 

[Boomboom521]

Thanks boom, I consider that expert advice from someone who's so infatuated with the idea of Men having Sex with one another.

Want to join us?

Let's get really kinky Bro!

Way to take a joke atl! I like it!

 

[atlkvb]

Way to take a joke atl! I like it!

The way you keep bringing it up my Man, you might just get me interested in arranging an up close analysis of your hairy ***!

Are you "cute" boomer. You sure sound like it?

 

[Boomboom521]

The way you keep bringing it up my Man, you might just get me interested in arranging an up close analysis of your hairy ***!

Are you "cute" boomer. You sure sound like it?

Not bad Atlanta!

 

[atlkvb]

Way to take a joke atl! I like it!

All kidding aside boomboom521, if you post something that I agree with I'll do it. However I'm just amused how you or others consider me 'close minded' just because I either disagree with something you say or think, or I try to defend what I'm thinking or saying (which is really all I ever try to do) that is different.

I'm not into name calling, or telling someone else they're wrong. I love debate. I'm always open to objective comparison and analysis. I am more than willing to hear the Left out, and consider their well reasoned factual presentation of effective or proven positions.

Unfortunately or rarely, that's not what passes for debate among many on this message board. We kid each other, and make jokes of course...I'm cool with all that. But lack of respect for the other's position is not only what I consider disrespectful debate, it's a form of irrational thought control that has no place among educated, civilized people. The name calling and childishness is quite frankly embarrassing and beneath me which is why I refuse to participate in it. (the personal name calling)

What's wrong with just respectfully agreeing to disagree? Why does the person who you (not you per se boom) disagree with have to be pejoratively pigeonholed as some sort of undesirable?

Aren't we better than that?

 

[Boomboom521]

All kidding aside boomboom521, if you post something that I agree with I'll do it. However I'm just amused how you or others consider me 'close minded' just because I either disagree with something you say or think, or I try to defend what I'm thinking or saying (which is really all I ever try to do) that is different.

I'm not into name calling, or telling someone else they're wrong. I love debate. I'm always open to objective comparison and analysis. I am more than willing to hear the Left out, and consider their well reasoned factual presentation of effective or proven positions.

Unfortunately or rarely, that's not what passes for debate among many on this message board. We kid each other, and make jokes of course...I'm cool with all that. But lack of respect for the other's position is not only not what I consider disrespectful debate, it's a form of irrational thought control that has no place among educated, civilized people. the name calling and childishness is quite frankly embarrassing and beneath me which is why I refuse to participate in it. (the personal name calling)

What's wrong with just respectfully agreeing to disagree? Why does the person who you (not you per se boom) disagree with have to be pejoratively pigeonholed as some sort of undesirable?

Aren't we better than that?

We should be. I'm guilty of it. Many on here like to lump together one side of the debate, and then it's easier for them to link the debater to hypocrisy and "intellectual dishonesty". I personally get linked to being not tolerant of others views (this is you atl) because I am opposed to a certain viewpoint. I don't like a law or position, I state why, then I'm accused of hating Christians or conservatives or republicans....linked to people protesting in the streets (as I'm sitting here playing with my kids).....and the debate shrinks down to an us versus them battle.

It's not debate. It's a digital shouting match over which teams going to win an imaginary game that belittles the democratic process and the American experience. Saying that...I'm sorry for every time I stoop down and let fly, cause I'm no better.

 

[atlkvb]

We should be. I'm guilty of it. Many on here like to lump together one side of the debate, and then it's easier for them to link the debater to hypocrisy and "intellectual dishonesty". I personally get linked to being not tolerant of others views (this is you atl) because I am opposed to a certain viewpoint. I don't like a law or position, I state why, then I'm accused of hating Christians or conservatives or republicans....linked to people protesting in the streets (as I'm sitting here playing with my kids).....and the debate shrinks down to an us versus them battle.

It's not debate. It's a digital shouting match over which teams going to win an imaginary game that belittles the democratic process and the American experience. Saying that...I'm sorry for every time I stoop down and let fly, cause I'm no better.

I hear you boomer. And quite honestly when passions fly it's easy to get sucked up in the emotion. I'll admit I'm biased too. I so distrust Big Government, and I'm so tired of its failures being defended (especially for my Black folks) that I'll admit I lose patience with those who do so. (defend it)

So I need to learn to listen more to honest pleas for Government intervention, or at least activism where injustice exists. I think we can agree that is a legitimate function of a civil society to assure justice exists for everyone.

I just have very little tolerance for forced compliance, forced thought, or forced results when I have so much desire to let people do what works best for them. We can figure that out without Government deciding it for us, or forcing us into what they think it is we should all do.

That's where the friction is, that's where the need for 'tolerance' exists, and until we can find a consensus to balance those two extremes, I suppose the arguing will never end.

Sad really, because what works to me is not arguable.

Go figure?

 

[Boomboom521]

I hear you boomer. And quite honestly when passions fly it's easy to get sucked up in the emotion. I'll admit I'm biased too. I so distrust Big Government, and I'm so tired of its failures being defended (especially for my Black folks) that I'll admit I lose patience with those who do so. (defend it)

So I need to learn to listen more to honest pleas for Government intervention, or at least activism where injustice exists. I think we can agree that is a legitimate function of a civil society to assure justice exists for everyone.

I just have very little tolerance for forced compliance, forced thought, or forced results when I have so much desire to let people do what works best for them. We can figure that out without Government deciding it for us, or forcing us into what they think it is we should all do.

That's where the friction is, that's where the need for 'tolerance' exists, and until we can find a consensus to balance those two extremes, I suppose the arguing will never end.

Sad really, because what works to me is not arguable.

Go figure?

Well said

 

[atlkvb]

Well said

One other thing boom, on the issue of Homosexuality (which you and I discussed in private conversation) I'm OK with what consenting adults do. We discussed and questioned what constitutes "promiscuity" and "deviancy" much of which I think I agreed with you on, and respected your views on too.

In fact you surprised me with your definition of promiscuity, because most Gay people I find to be very much that way. (promiscuous) The "deviancy" part is based more on my Faith, so I can't condemn them for choosing a behavior which runs counter to that, but I honestly do respect their right or choice to do so.

To each their own. I'm all about Freedom.

The only thing I try defend on that issue is my right to consider it "deviant" behavior...not natural choice, and to keep the traditional nomenclature of Marriage between a Man and a Woman. I don't have a problem with them wanting to Marry, as long as we call it something else. I'm not for discriminating against them, they deserve the same treatment and respect as all human beings, and in their Civil unions they have a right to be treated equally under the Law.

I'm good with all of that. I just think it is weird, kinky, unnatural, unhealthy, and in many cases can be fatal (STD's, AIDS, etc) so the opinion I have of it is more based on those things as not being something I think should be promoted or celebrated.

However among consenting, informed, fully free Adults aware of the risks who still choose or prefer that Lifestyle...I say go for it.

I can be a little kinky, unnatural, & weird too...I just prefer to be that way with big booty hot chicks instead of Men.

OK boomer?


Rock on Dude.