Bluegrassrivals

To this point, rather than draining the swamp, he is swamping the drain.

Kleptocracy, anyone?

This just in: PE Trump secret decoder rings, when set to 7 digits, leave Goldman Sachs to direct America's economic policy.

Grabbin em right by the

The Urban Sombrero Wrote:To this point, rather than draining the swamp, he is swamping the drain.

Kleptocracy, anyone?

You mean like the one which is vacating the White House, having force fed 'the people' fake news for the past 8 years and then feigning concern over the false reports which the left generated regarding fake news?

The recount has fallen flat, so our President has called for a "full report" about the faked reports of faked and baseless election hacking, supposedly perpetrated by Russia, to be laid on his desk before he leaves office. Unfortunately we still have 40 days left before Mr Trump takes the oath of office. I will be nervous until they clear out.

TheRealThing Wrote:You mean like the one which is vacating the White House, having force fed 'the people' fake news for the past 8 years and then feigning concern over the false reports which the left generated regarding fake news?

The recount has fallen flat, so our President has called for a "full report" about the faked reports of faked and baseless election hacking, supposedly perpetrated by Russia, to be laid on his desk before he leaves office. Unfortunately we still have 40 days left before Mr Trump takes the oath of office. I will be nervous until they clear out.

Now you're just being funny. Or, are you a corporate toy, a billionaire's play thing, like the economy, and the environment, and the rest of us common folks?

Rex Tillerson for Secretary of State: and the hits just keep on coming. Kleptocracy, anyone?

The Urban Sombrero Wrote:Now you're just being funny. Or, are you a corporate toy, a billionaire's play thing, like the economy, and the environment, and the rest of us common folks?

I'm just being funny huh? Surely you don't think I expected to see a sudden renaissance had occurred for you?

Let's see if you can keep up here. The court jester is funny until he gets put in charge. At that point the jester's tomfoolery, which prior to was idle ridiculousness, rises above existing law and corny mirth suddenly becomes the stuff of nightmares. But then, I am loathe to mention the past 8 years even in digressive terms until this coming Jan 20th.

But I'm not kidding myself. Lou Dobbs believes for example that Mr Trump came along at the right time in history, and will save the republic. I differ with that and am sticking by my given analysis. The US is going down the drain. I just think that where frothing liberals wanted to see Hillary keep the ship of state headed straight for the whirlpool, Trump will slow the process down and our country has a chance to remain out on the edge, in the calmer waters of history yet a little while longer. What that means in real terms remains to be seen. I am nonetheless thrilled to see the left awash in denial, and the one thing about all of this which I find joyously uplifting is knowing that 'the people' rejected the lunacies of the left last November 8th. That was worth the price of admission.

But back to earth and sober reality. Government have already taught millions of people to look to them for life's necessities, and thus the seeds of socialism have sprouted and taken root in our society. Expecting millions of citizens to repent, begin seriously looking for work and gain a legitimate love of country overnight is asking a bit much. And then there are the weightier matters of prophecy coming to bear. As I have said, God's timetable cannot be amended and from what I can see, things are close.

I can't say I think anybody really knows what is going on with the Secretary of State appointment, John Bolton should be the default no-brainer pick in my view. The duties of the US Secretary of State include 14 major categories, only one of which deals with international commerce. If you ask me, Bolton would be able to adequately delegate such responsibilities to a department head of his choosing. After 8 years of suffering under Hillary and John Kerry, a novice is the last thing we need to lead in the current global pressure cooker of international affairs.

TheRealThing Wrote:I'm just being funny huh? Surely you don't think I expected to see a sudden renaissance had occurred for you?

Let's see if you can keep up here. The court jester is funny until he gets put in charge. At that point the jester's tomfoolery, which prior to was idle ridiculousness, rises above existing law and corny mirth suddenly becomes the stuff of nightmares. But then, I am loathe to mention the past 8 years even in digressive terms until this coming Jan 20th.

But I'm not kidding myself. Lou Dobbs believes for example that Mr Trump came along at the right time in history, and will save the republic. I differ with that and am sticking by my given analysis. The US is going down the drain. I just think that where frothing liberals wanted to see Hillary keep the ship of state headed straight for the whirlpool, Trump will slow the process down and our country has a chance to remain out on the edge, in the calmer waters of history yet a little while longer. What that means in real terms remains to be seen. I am nonetheless thrilled to see the left awash in denial, and the one thing about all of this which I find joyously uplifting is knowing that 'the people' rejected the lunacies of the left last November 8th. That was worth the price of admission.

But back to earth and sober reality. Government have already taught millions of people to look to them for life's necessities, and thus the seeds of socialism have sprouted and taken root in our society. Expecting millions of citizens to repent, begin seriously looking for work and gain a legitimate love of country overnight is asking a bit much. And then there are the weightier matters of prophecy coming to bear. As I have said, God's timetable cannot be amended and from what I can see, things are close.

I can't say I think anybody really knows what is going on with the Secretary of State appointment, John Bolton should be the default no-brainer pick in my view. The duties of the US Secretary of State include 14 major categories, only one of which deals with international commerce. If you ask me, Bolton would be able to adequately delegate such responsibilities to a department head of his choosing. After 8 years of suffering under Hillary and John Kerry, a novice is the last thing we need to lead in the current global pressure cooker of international affairs.

Donald Trump lost the popular vote. Thus, "the public" chose HRC. Donald Trump won the election. Whether "the public" will support the privatizing of social security, the "free for all-ing" of healthcare, and other GOP mindsets for "making America great again" remains to be seen. However, TRT, it is disingenuous to portray this past election as some sort of public revolt in the direction of right wing principles. Both parties these days oversell individual elections, then get reminded in two years of their oversell.

The Urban Sombrero Wrote:Donald Trump lost the popular vote. Thus, "the public" chose HRC. Donald Trump won the election. Whether "the public" will support the privatizing of social security, the "free for all-ing" of healthcare, and other GOP mindsets for "making America great again" remains to be seen. However, TRT, it is disingenuous to portray this past election as some sort of public revolt in the direction of right wing principles. Both parties these days oversell individual elections, then get reminded in two years of their oversell.

This Presidential elections of this land according to the Constitution, are governed by the electoral college and have been since the days of Jefferson himself. There are any number of ways liberals such as yourself may choose to try and mitigate Mr Trump's valid and sweeping mandate. Take California for example, (by far the most populous for Latinos and certainly a Democrat treasure trove of illegal voters to be sure), in which the vote disparity between Trump and Hillary as of a few days ago was just over 3.23 million in favor of Clinton. But if you look at the nationwide vote total, Clinton's margin shrinks a full million to 2.23 million. Which means Trump won the popular vote by one million in the other 49 states, and that total certainly includes the remaining 17 states Clinton won BTW.

The disparity on which libs hung their hats, and should be hanging their heads FWIW, for even suggesting that the Constitution should be assaulted yet again by the liberal's meat tenderizer, involves only one state. You don't like to mention the rest of it, including the fact that Trump won at least 7 'unwinnable' swing-states, 3 of which were part of Hillary's vaunted 6 state firewall as was confidently outlined as recently November 4th.
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2...s-firewall But hey, I believe in helping my neighbor. If the good folks of California cannot accept the results of the election and were to secede from the union, I'll try and buck up a little bit to help you relocate. :biggrin:

Nonetheless, I do not buy your effort to mitigate the scope of the people's mandate this time around. It was only 2012 when we saw leaders of the DNC signing the GOP's death certificate. Talk about your oversell, Dems did it so well Paul Ryan is still trying to champion leftist identity politics. In fact, I would not be surprised to see him switch parties if he can't have his way with Trump. I've called out the obvious on here a number of times, the GOP swept the House in 2010, the Senate in 2014, held serve in 2016 and won the White House. The only way Trump will not be reelected is if he falls on his face and that is extremely unlikely.

Not that you'll hear a lot of discussion about it, but despite an all-out nationwide effort by the Dems to secure another King's ransom to fund the Louisiana Senatorial Candidate the Republican Kennedy won handily, the Republicans retaining a comfortable 52-48 majority. The mood has changed Sombrero. I am delighted to inform you that liberalism will be on the wane for the next 8 years and the national reprieve for which I had prayed is assured. Now don't misunderstand, I don't see long term deliverance here, just a reprieve. During that time I expect the left to wax very nearly savage. Revival is our best hope and even then God's timetable will reign.

Not that the day has come, but in the day the people of this land allow a free and fair election to be washed away simply because the losing side is unwilling to accept it, will be our undoing.

"Wide and sweeping mandate."

Now, send in the clowns; TRT wants to sing and clean up after the elephant billionaires of the kleptocracy.

If brevity is the soul of wit, TRT's posts testify.

Note: nowhere has this poster suggested recounts or attacked the process, but rather pointed out that losing the popular vote and claiming mandate, "wide and sweeping" or otherwise, is patently ridiculous. With TRT, it's just an endless supply of straw men comin' out that loft and weathered barn.

The Urban Sombrero Wrote:"Wide and sweeping mandate."

Now, send in the clowns; TRT wants to sing and clean up after the elephant billionaires of the kleptocracy.

If brevity is the soul of wit, TRT's posts testify.

Note: nowhere has this poster suggested recounts or attacked the process, but rather pointed out that losing the popular vote and claiming mandate, "wide and sweeping" or otherwise, is patently ridiculous. With TRT, it's just an endless supply of straw men comin' out that loft and weathered barn.

Somehow I must have missed the point at which you left off from parroting the talking points and started making an argument of your own. It takes a lot more than a pocket pen organizer and weak deflection to break my train of thought. What you did say was that 'the public chose HRC', and that in spite of the fact that Trump got 306 electoral votes and the entirety of her popular vote advantage came from one state. There is your patently ridiculous. But if Hamlet's observation is accurate and brevity is indeed the soul of wit. Objectivity is certainly the focus that sharpens the objective. In point of fact I did not say wide and sweeping. What I said was completely different than your incorrect quote but then, this is not the first time your failing with regard to reading comprehension has let you down, publicly. I said valid and sweeping.

In 2008 Barack Obama carried 28 states, in 2012 only 26. That did not stop Dems from claiming a mandate in 2012 and a "mandate for change" in 2008. This time Trump carried 30 states and Clinton only 20. I don't believe he would have won if not for the Democrat crossover vote. In that limited sense depending on ones argument, he has at least a limited mandate thanks to Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina and Florida Trumpocrats. Further, 42% of women, 29% of Hispanics and NBC says 8% of blacks voted for Trump. Better than Romney and good enough to send Democrats into apoplectic shock.

And let's get something straight, your posts are hardly chiseled in granite at the foot of a holy mountain. You always forego factual evidence in favor of a personal swipe at me which admittedly, is all you got, other than feelings I guess. But not to despair, I understand a slot has opened up on 'The View', you might want to check it out.

TheRealThing Wrote:Somehow I must have missed the point at which you left off from parroting the talking points and started making an argument of your own. It takes a lot more than a pocket pen organizer and weak deflection to break my train of thought. What you did say was that 'the public chose HRC', and that in spite of the fact that Trump got 306 electoral votes and the entirety of her popular vote advantage came from one state. There is your patently ridiculous. But if Hamlet's observation is accurate and brevity is indeed the soul of wit. Objectivity is certainly the focus that sharpens the objective. In point of fact I did not say wide and sweeping. What I said was completely different than your incorrect quote but then, this is not the first time your failing with regard to reading comprehension has let you down, publicly. I said valid and sweeping.

In 2008 Barack Obama carried 28 states, in 2012 only 26. That did not stop Dems from claiming a mandate in 2012 and a "mandate for change" in 2008. This time Trump carried 30 states and Clinton only 20. I don't believe he would have won if not for the Democrat crossover vote. In that limited sense depending on ones argument, he has at least a limited mandate thanks to Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina and Florida Trumpocrats. Further, 42% of women, 29% of Hispanics and NBC says 8% of blacks voted for Trump. Better than Romney and good enough to send Democrats into apoplectic shock.

And let's get something straight, your posts are hardly chiseled in granite at the foot of a holy mountain. You always forego factual evidence in favor of a personal swipe at me which admittedly, is all you got, other than feelings I guess. But not to despair, I understand a slot has opened up on 'The View', you might want to check it out.

A dollar to a doughnut says that by the end of this thread you'll be labeled as a racist..:popcorn:

TheRealThing Wrote:Somehow I must have missed the point at which you left off from parroting the talking points and started making an argument of your own. It takes a lot more than a pocket pen organizer and weak deflection to break my train of thought. What you did say was that 'the public chose HRC', and that in spite of the fact that Trump got 306 electoral votes and the entirety of her popular vote advantage came from one state. There is your patently ridiculous. But if Hamlet's observation is accurate and brevity is indeed the soul of wit. Objectivity is certainly the focus that sharpens the objective. In point of fact I did not say wide and sweeping. What I said was completely different than your incorrect quote but then, this is not the first time your failing with regard to reading comprehension has let you down, publicly. I said valid and sweeping.

In 2008 Barack Obama carried 28 states, in 2012 only 26. That did not stop Dems from claiming a mandate in 2012 and a "mandate for change" in 2008. This time Trump carried 30 states and Clinton only 20. I don't believe he would have won if not for the Democrat crossover vote. In that limited sense depending on ones argument, he has at least a limited mandate thanks to Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina and Florida Trumpocrats. Further, 42% of women, 29% of Hispanics and NBC says 8% of blacks voted for Trump. Better than Romney and good enough to send Democrats into apoplectic shock.

And let's get something straight, your posts are hardly chiseled in granite at the foot of a holy mountain. You always forego factual evidence in favor of a personal swipe at me which admittedly, is all you got, other than feelings I guess. But not to despair, I understand a slot has opened up on 'The View', you might want to check it out.

Ah, TRT, you do have keyboard diarrhea. You know full well you were implying Trump has some sort of big mandate. Now, your revised "limited mandate" I can see somewhat. As per "The View," at those salaries, I might apply.

The "factual evidence" is that HRC won the popular vote. My point was not that she won the election, nor that a recount is needed, nor that the Russians cost HRC the election. My suggestion was only that your characterization of some sort of big mandate was inaccurate hyperbole. And it was. However, your revision is more accurate.

Bob Seger Wrote:A dollar to a doughnut says that by the end of this thread you'll be labeled as a racist..:popcorn:

Let's be clear, you and I. We disagree about Mohammed Ali. We disagree about conscientious objection. This does not mean, in my view, you or anyone else is a racist. However, to call the man "Cassius" and deny his importance within civil rights history? That has to be explained, in my view.

The Urban Sombrero Wrote:Ah, TRT, you do have keyboard diarrhea. You know full well you were implying Trump has some sort of big mandate. Now, your revised "limited mandate" I can see somewhat. As per "The View," at those salaries, I might apply.

The "factual evidence" is that HRC won the popular vote. My point was not that she won the election, nor that a recount is needed, nor that the Russians cost HRC the election. My suggestion was only that your characterization of some sort of big mandate was inaccurate hyperbole. And it was. However, your revision is more accurate.

Your suggestion was a dodge of recent history and you did try to cast the election outcome in the light of aberration. The people had liberalism, and all that went with it. ObamaCare, the repeal of DADT, globalism, government assault on the integrity of our own law enforcement entities, a highly politicized DOJ, amateur hour foreign policy, a depleted military, a reported covert effort to hand over US sovereignty to the UN through the TPP, nonexistent border controls under the leadership of both sides, the ridiculous green agenda as overseen by the present edition of an EPA given to absurdities, government moratoriums on all forms of viable energy sources, (not that Obama did not do his formidable best to advance wind power), and the list goes on and on. The people rejected all of it and never once did Trump mince words. Now, you can call the liberal's 180 degree reversal of fortunes a suggestion if you want.

But then my intention was not to change your mind or influence your biases. Mine was to point out accurately what just transpired in the election. The nation chose DJT in sweeping fashion, California chose Hillary, 55 electoral votes. Along with New York with it's 29 electoral votes and Illinois' 20 adds up to nearly half of her electoral vote total. Out of the remaining 17 states she won, only three even break double figures, Virginia's 13 being the greatest, and the rest of the states are down under 10 votes each. Trump won nearly all the big prizes.

Like I said the Dems had Republicans DOA as recently as 2014 and libs' denials, no matter how intense, and rationalizations will not change history. This election was a reaction to policy and the desire to disembark the lunar schooner. I say it's a mandate as do others of notable repute.

Back in the old days of the nuclear generation they had a survival strategy known as 'duck and cover.' You'd like to think you are very good at it, but it doesn't work any better now than it did then. I didn't even mention the mandate deal until deep into our little series of discourses here. In this case the popular vote margin can be literally pinned down to only one state, California. Your argument though not your own, is moot, and clearly lies outside of constitutional mandate. I don't need for you to admit that, frankly if your intention is to remain willfully ignorant who am I to interfere?

It's always refreshing to take a tall drink of the liberal tears. They seem to flow quite often among a few of our more special members but it doesn't look like anyone is taking their bait.

The Urban Sombrero Wrote:Let's be clear, you and I. We disagree about Mohammed Ali. We disagree about conscientious objection. This does not mean, in my view, you or anyone else is a racist. However, to call the man "Cassius" and deny his importance within civil rights history? That has to be explained, in my view.

It denies what his momma and daddy named him, Geraldo.

^^^LOVE that movie!!

"His momma named him Clay; I'm callin' him Clay!"

Bob Seger Wrote:A dollar to a doughnut says that by the end of this thread you'll be labeled as a racist..:popcorn:

RunItUpTheGut Wrote:It's always refreshing to take a tall drink of the liberal tears. They seem to flow quite often among a few of our more special members but it doesn't look like anyone is taking their bait.

Bob Seger Wrote:It denies what his momma and daddy named him, Geraldo.

Granny Bear Wrote:^^^LOVE that movie!!

"His momma named him Clay; I'm callin' him Clay!"

Liberals wrap themselves up in protective layers. The outer layers are the daily talking points. While their real armor are the familiar go-to's we saw again in the Hillary campaign.

Take the deal with the popular vote argument. Anybody who cannot understand that the entirety of Hillary's lead comes from out in California is in denial. It is a liberal deflection, elementary school yard style, to delegitimize the results of the election. But more importantly to take attention away from the fact that the people spoke. It is the best liberals have and only liberals use it. Of course the nuclear options of social intolerance which comprised the Democrat campaign remain at the liberal core, homo/you-name-it phobias, the war on women, charges of racism (the nuclear option), and frankly global warming make up the Kevlar defense vest for all libs.

Conservatives honor Christ, the founders and our legitimate heritage, they honor political leaders like Lincoln and Churchill, great military commanders such as George S Patton and Eisenhower, and citizens like Chris Kyle and Sgt York. Libs are loathe to even mention Christ, honor a living document because they might want to change things to suit their own palate like the electoral college for example, their revered leaders are Bill Clinton and Nelson Mandela, and their social heroes are men such as Mohammad Ali and Bowe Bergdahl. Anybody else see a pattern here?

So why does he even bother with these appointments.. you know I mean he is like smart you know, does not need to be briefed on anything...BRILLIANT!!! MAKE IT GREAT DONALD!!!

mr.fundamental Wrote:So why does he even bother with these appointments.. you know I mean he is like smart you know, does not need to be briefed on anything...BRILLIANT!!! MAKE IT GREAT DONALD!!!

Of course you know full well that's not what he said in the context that you're trying to imply that he said it...You stupid ass goof balls still cant figure out why he won the thing to begin with..And your too dang stupid to figure out that people like you and the media with your twists and your lies are what lead the American electorate to vote for someone besides Hillary..Bottom line goober, nut jobs like you are the ones who got Donald Trump elected....:Clap:

But go ahead and keep it up, you guys are hilarious, and more entertaining than old reruns of Andy Griffith...You make Barney, Goober, and Gomer look like geniuses..nicker:

Bob Seger Wrote:It denies what his momma and daddy named him, Geraldo.

The man himself changed his name to Mohammed Ali. The man himself was judged a conscientious objector by the Supreme Court. These things appear to matter nil to you.

TheRealThing Wrote:Liberals wrap themselves up in protective layers. The outer layers are the daily talking points. While their real armor are the familiar go-to's we saw again in the Hillary campaign.

Take the deal with the popular vote argument. Anybody who cannot understand that the entirety of Hillary's lead comes from out in California is in denial. It is a liberal deflection, elementary school yard style, to delegitimize the results of the election. But more importantly to take attention away from the fact that the people spoke. It is the best liberals have and only liberals use it. Of course the nuclear options of social intolerance which comprised the Democrat campaign remain at the liberal core, homo/you-name-it phobias, the war on women, charges of racism (the nuclear option), and frankly global warming make up the Kevlar defense vest for all libs.

Conservatives honor Christ, the founders and our legitimate heritage, they honor political leaders like Lincoln and Churchill, great military commanders such as George S Patton and Eisenhower, and citizens like Chris Kyle and Sgt York. Libs are loathe to even mention Christ, honor a living document because they might want to change things to suit their own palate like the electoral college for example, their revered leaders are Bill Clinton and Nelson Mandela, and their social heroes are men such as Mohammad Ali and Bowe Bergdahl. Anybody else see a pattern here?

Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, TRT. It's not up for debate. Donald Trump is President Elect. That's not up for debate. You shrank the scope from "wide" to "limited" mandate. I accept that the President Elect gets some latitude.

Now, I realize that in any exchange, you are windmill swinging at this monolithic giant "liberalism." However, in our exchanges, you ought to debate that which is on the table instead of dragging straw men repetitively out of the barn.

Were you a supporter of apartheid? If not, explain why Nelson Mandela should not be a hero to the black-skinned masses in South Africa.

Rex Tillerson, who scoured the globe looking for the least resistance to exploitative oil and gas agreements, who pals up to Putin, now Secretary of State. Kleptocracy anyone?

The Urban Sombrero Wrote:Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, TRT. It's not up for debate. Donald Trump is President Elect. That's not up for debate. You shrank the scope from "wide" to "limited" mandate. I accept that the President Elect gets some latitude.

Now, I realize that in any exchange, you are windmill swinging at this monolithic giant "liberalism." However, in our exchanges, you ought to debate that which is on the table instead of dragging straw men repetitively out of the barn.

Were you a supporter of apartheid? If not, explain why Nelson Mandela should not be a hero to the black-skinned masses in South Africa.

Nope. All I did was elaborate on my reasoning for saying Trump has a mandate. Good old 'rust belt' union boys like myself put him in there, and come 2020 we'll send him right back.

Whatever you realize, it has nothing to do with my posts as they consistently exceed your grasp. Every time you get painted into a corner, which is every discussion BTW, you duck out and change the subject. You went on crowing about how I said wide and sweeping until I pointed out I didn't say it, then like a hocker on a doorknob you just slid over a bit. But seriously you need to try and focus here, WIDE is not there, which of course means your latest weak attempt above to appear so smart, had the opposite effect.

Mandela was an evil mass murdering thug. A man known for a practice called necklacing, which was just one of the grisly fates waiting for those Mandela loyalists deemed to be apartheid sympathizers. That would be 'black-skinned' sympathizers FTR, his own people. For a full three years a monthly average of 250 of those unfortunate 'black-skinned masses' met there fates at the hands of their own countrymen. Necklacing was the practice of placing a car tire around the victim, filling it with as much gasoline as it would hold, and set it ablaze. Heroes of the left.

TheRealThing Wrote:Nope. All I did was elaborate on my reasoning for saying Trump has a mandate. Good old 'rust belt' union boys like myself put him in there, and come 2020 we'll send him right back.

Whatever you realize, it has nothing to do with my posts as they consistently exceed your grasp. Every time you get painted into a corner, which is every discussion BTW, you duck out and change the subject. You went on crowing about how I said wide and sweeping until I pointed out I didn't say it, then like a hocker on a doorknob you just slid over a bit. But seriously you need to try and focus here, WIDE is not there, which of course means your latest weak attempt above to appear so smart, had the opposite effect.

Mandela was an evil mass murdering thug. A man known for a practice called necklacing, which was just one of the grisly fates waiting for those Mandela loyalists deemed to be apartheid sympathizers. That would be 'black-skinned' sympathizers FTR, his own people. For a full three years a monthly average of 250 of those unfortunate 'black-skinned masses' met there fates at the hands of their own countrymen. Necklacing was the practice of placing a car tire around the victim, filling it with as much gasoline as it would hold, and set it ablaze. Heroes of the left.

You suggested Trump has a big mandate. You know you did. You want to focus on"wide" vs. "sweeping" vs. big in terms of mandate why? Do you want your "gotcha" moment? You know what you meant, and you meant "big mandate."

As for your crowing around about backing people into corners, and your bowel-flushing every post until "loquacious" is a gentle descriptor, eh, ho-hum.

The Urban Sombrero Wrote:The man himself changed his name to Mohammed Ali. The man himself was judged a conscientious objector by the Supreme Court. These things appear to matter nil to you.

The Supreme Court said it alright to kill babies....The man was an associate of Louis Farrakhan and Malcom X.....He was a coward while many young boys died so he could stay a coward..

These things appear to matter nil to you.

The Urban Sombrero Wrote:Rex Tillerson, who scoured the globe looking for the least resistance to exploitative oil and gas agreements, who pals up to Putin, now Secretary of State. Kleptocracy anyone?

Ah, an avid reader and follower of The Huffington Post, I see.:eyeroll:

Kleptocracy involves corruption..Where is that evident? He's not even president....Of course ole Hill and Bill used government ties to enhance their mass personal fortunes, didn't they...How come you haven't been spreading the warning on those TRUE criminals during the election process? True real life examples of kleptocracy.

Hypocrite!!

The Urban Sombrero Wrote:Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, TRT. It's not up for debate. Donald Trump is President Elect. That's not up for debate. You shrank the scope from "wide" to "limited" mandate. I accept that the President Elect gets some latitude.

Now, I realize that in any exchange, you are windmill swinging at this monolithic giant "liberalism." However, in our exchanges, you ought to debate that which is on the table instead of dragging straw men repetitively out of the barn.

Were you a supporter of apartheid? If not, explain why Nelson Mandela should not be a hero to the black-skinned masses in South Africa.

......

The Urban Sombrero Wrote:You suggested Trump has a big mandate. You know you did. You want to focus on"wide" vs. "sweeping" vs. big in terms of mandate why? Do you want your "gotcha" moment? You know what you meant, and you meant "big mandate."

As for your crowing around about backing people into corners, and your bowel-flushing every post until "loquacious" is a gentle descriptor, eh, ho-hum.

Of course Trump has a big mandate, how else would you characterize "valid and sweeping?" I would prefer that you at least be accurate when you quote me and then go on to build a case based on your own misconceptions and La-La Land alter-realities. But then, that is the stock and trade of the liberal. You say you want to debate, but there is little in your posts to debate. Feelings and elevated estrogen levels are not suitable debate parameters as far as I am concerned. I did notice though, that you've dropped all pretense as to originality, (the bolded). Instead of saving my use of vocabulary and inflection for later, you've taken the more immediate approach.

The present and mercifully outgoing administration, led by rabid chipmunks like Ben Rhodes, Valerie Jarrett, John Podesta, John Kerry and Jonathan Gruber has been a disaster. Everything they touched failed. But I see through your Freudian preoccupation with excrement of late. It will be "great again" to have a government whose priority rises to a level beyond a fascination with the deregulation of public bathrooms and imposing a unisex religious discipline on 'the people,' to again address things like national defense and the impossible level of debt the US has incurred, especially over the past 8 years. And now with desperation inundating the DNC sanctuary of identity politics, old Hill and John Podesta have seemingly abandoned all pretense of dignity in their push to lend validity to the Russian conspiracy theory du-jour.

So, here's to the hardy :flush: over which the voter saw fit preside, and at least 8 years of ensuing sanity. Hopefully, we will see a number of Supreme Court appointments. And heresies the likes of essential liberty and the recent rash of illegitimate activist bench legislations will suffer the same fate as those who dreamed them up.

:biggrin: I mean think of it, 8 glorious years of light. I may never get the smile off my face.