[Bob Seger]

Upset? This stuff is rich. Keep it coming, BS. Laughter is good medicine.

uh huh!!

Sheesh Mr. SHEEP, at least associate your response to the applicable quote...:Shaking::Shaking:


Man, the truth really does get you rattled.

[The Urban Sombrero]

uh huh!!

Sheesh Mr. SHEEP, at least associate your response to the applicable quote...:Shaking::Shaking:


Man, the truth really does get you rattled.

And to think, to this point I have refrained from commenting on things I could have. Eh, I will still refrain. Yes, it is true, when I get to laughing hard at absurdity, I lose focus.

[Bob Seger]

And to think, to this point I have refrained from commenting on things I could have. Eh, I will still refrain. Yes, it is true, when I get to laughing hard at absurdity, I lose focus.

uh huh!!

[The Urban Sombrero]

uh huh!!

What is your view of the Holocaust? Something you said earlier about "Jews" piqued my interest.

[Bob Seger]

What is your view of the Holocaust? Something you said earlier about "Jews" piqued my interest.

Nothing I said had anything to do with Semitism, nor anything that I will ever say will have anything to do with Semitism..


So, don't even go there, because I will not respond. You better be understanding me on that.

[TheRealThing]

Seger, you are legitimately spouting some Grade A lunacy in this thread. Your point is understood, as you've made it but the use of such hyperbole seems unnecessary. You're acting like a guy that's about to climb the clock tower in his local town.

Sorry, but I can't let this one go. I am a fan of hyperbole. These boards would be pretty darn dull without it and frankly, the more hyperbole is aptly used, the more that use demonstrates a much more highly evolved understanding of the subject. Pour it on Bob. :Thumbs:

[TheRealThing]

What is your view of the Holocaust? Something you said earlier about "Jews" piqued my interest.

Nothing I said had anything to do with Semitism.

Ah, the old nutty buddy lotto of alternating but random debate topics. :biggrin:

[Bob Seger]

Sorry, but I can't let this one go. I am a fan of hyperbole. These boards would be pretty darn dull without it and frankly, the more hyperbole is aptly used, the more that use demonstrates a much more highly evolved understanding of the subject. Pour it on Bob. :Thumbs:

And just think, I could have called him Motley the Fool....But I refrained...

And to beat it all, I didn't even get a thank you for it either.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Nothing I said had anything to do with Semitism, nor anything that I will ever say will have anything to do with Semitism..


So, don't even go there, because I will not respond. You better be understanding me on that.

Ah, touchy and rattled

[The Urban Sombrero]

Ah, the old nutty buddy lotto of alternating but random debate topics. :biggrin:

If we are equating Charles Manson and the Clintons, the absurd suits this nutty lotto thread.

[The Urban Sombrero]

⬆⬆ By the way, I believe the Holocaust to be historical and to be a travesty at least the equal of any horror perpetrated by Man in history.

[Bob Seger]

Ah, touchy and rattled

That subject is off limits!!

I know what you were trying to do.

[Bob Seger]

If we are equating Charles Manson and the Clintons, the absurd suits this nutty lotto thread.

Oh really???

I guess I did insult Charlie, by equating him to the worst dynamic duo of corruption and murder in American political history.

He is by far more honorable than those two.

Yes, they are that bad.

[The Urban Sombrero]

That subject is off limits!!

I know what you were trying to do.

It's no skullduggery...I posted my thought. I make no assumption on yours. But, I won't bring it up with you again, though as any amount of research reveals the alt right draws from the 80's and 90's white supremacist movements. The Southern Poverty Law Center archives are full of evidence confirming this reality.

[Bob Seger]

⬆⬆ By the way, I believe the Holocaust to be historical and to be a travesty at least the equal of any horror perpetrated by Man in history.

Who said it wasn't?

[The Urban Sombrero]

Oh really???

I guess I did insult Charlie, by equating him to the worst dynamic duo of corruption and murder in American political history.

He is by far more honorable than those two.

Yes, they are that bad.

This line of reasoning requires no more response, as responding seems to dignify this extremist propoganda.

[TheRealThing]

If we are equating Charles Manson and the Clintons, the absurd suits this nutty lotto thread.

I just wonder Sombrero, would you sign a letter allowing your children to opt out of the pledge of allegiance at school?


I voted for Ronald Reagan, twice. I saw this nation go from it's glory days under Reagan, to national shame under the Clinton Administration in short order. Bill and Hill did not mind to stretch the truth in the 90's and the two certainly haven't lost a step in 2016. I heard Senator Clinton get up in front of the Senate and speak with passion in support of the Iraq Invasion.
EXCERPT---
"In 2002, Senator Clinton voted in favor of the authorization to use force in Iraq. In addition to this vote, Senator Clinton gave a 20 minute speech in which she stated that Saddaam Hussein was rebuilding his WMD stockpile, pursuing nuclear weapons, and giving aid and comfort to terrorists. She stated that left unchecked, he would continue to do this and would likely destabilize the middle east which would affect American security."
http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Profile...r_in_Iraq/

Please don't tell those of us who've already suffered enough under the Billary plague that we need another dose. If George W has blood on his hands, she's right there with him. Manson is a monster and a murderer with blood on his hands. As far as I can see having watched both rampage their way through history in their own unique way, the only difference, is between beards and pant suits.

[Bob Seger]

This line of reasoning requires no more response, as responding seems to dignify this extremist propoganda.

Poo poo it all you want. Call it ridiculous, call it extremist, sugar coat the Clintons, deny it, just do whatever you want to do because there is not a thing that you can do or say that will change the fact that I am spot on..

I know that cuts to the quick and burns to innermost regions of your soul.

Bottom line here Travolta, is that the Clintons are probably directly responsible for more people taking their last breaths in the world than Charlie Manson ever thought about.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Poo poo it all you want. Call it ridiculous, call it extremist, sugar coat the Clintons, deny it, just do whatever you want to do because there is not a thing that you can do or say that will change the fact that I am spot on..

I know that cuts to the quick and burns to innermost regions of your soul.

Bottom line here Travolta, is that the Clintons are probably directly responsible for more people taking their last breaths in the world than Charlie Manson ever thought about.

Well, TRT does enjoy the hyperbole. It seems to me, if you are going to assert that a former President and a current candidate for President are responsible for the murder of more people that the Manson family, that you ought to offer source material.

Why would extremist propoganda just burn my soul and cut me to the quick? It is what it is. Why do you seem to need to believe that sort of stuff? What psychological itch does it scratch?

[The Urban Sombrero]

I just wonder Sombrero, would you sign a letter allowing your children to opt out of the pledge of allegiance at school?


I voted for Ronald Reagan, twice. I saw this nation go from it's glory days under Reagan, to national shame under the Clinton Administration in short order. Bill and Hill did not mind to stretch the truth in the 90's and the two certainly haven't lost a step in 2016. I heard Senator Clinton get up in front of the Senate and speak with passion in support of the Iraq Invasion.
EXCERPT---
"In 2002, Senator Clinton voted in favor of the authorization to use force in Iraq. In addition to this vote, Senator Clinton gave a 20 minute speech in which she stated that Saddaam Hussein was rebuilding his WMD stockpile, pursuing nuclear weapons, and giving aid and comfort to terrorists. She stated that left unchecked, he would continue to do this and would likely destabilize the middle east which would affect American security."
http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Profile...r_in_Iraq/

Please don't tell those of us who've already suffered enough under the Billary plague that we need another dose. If George W has blood on his hands, she's right there with him. Manson is a monster and a murderer with blood on his hands. As far as I can see having watched both rampage their way through history in their own unique way, the only difference, is between beards and pant suits.

Hold on: a President sending troops to war should not be equated to what the Manson family did. I think the Iraq War was a strategic mistake, but I do not think President Bush has blood on his hands in the way the Manson family does.

Note: I was there for the Reagan years. His approval rating during his first term often made him despair of a second term. The returns on "trickle down" economics are mixed at best. I'm not being critical of Reagan, as I respected the man.

Ultimately, I am not defending the Clintons. They are career politicians. I've known a fair amount of politicians: most all of them have the same basic instinct: political survival, and that knows no red or blue, conservative or liberal distinction.

[The Urban Sombrero]

⬆⬆ As to the Pledge of Allegience, a Quaker wouldn't pledge allegience to a flag or a republic, as they viewed that as idolatry.

As for my kids, they said it, gladly. I told them that seeking liberty and justice for all is godly, and that doing no harm to civil authority is biblical. Also, that peaceful protest of civil authority on behalf of liberty and justice for all is patriotic. Because I am an American, I don't believe anyone should be forced to say the pledge.

[TheRealThing]

Hold on: a President sending troops to war should not be equated to what the Manson family did. I think the Iraq War was a strategic mistake, but I do not think President Bush has blood on his hands in the way the Manson family does.

Note: I was there for the Reagan years. His approval rating during his first term often made him despair of a second term. The returns on "trickle down" economics are mixed at best. I'm not being critical of Reagan, as I respected the man.

Ultimately, I am not defending the Clintons. They are career politicians. I've known a fair amount of politicians: most all of them have the same basic instinct: political survival, and that knows no red or blue, conservative or liberal distinction.

Fair enough, and we don't agree about Reagan, you were evidently too young to gain the proper perspective. But after your evil step mommy rose up on the Senate floor to make an impassioned plea for support to the Resolution from her brethren, she reversed herself (did you read the article?) and accused W of tricking her into supporting the Iraq War Resolution.

The irony there being that W was accused by the Dems who inhabited both houses of the congress in that day, all of them towering intellects themselves, of being dumb. So a dummy tricked Hillary and others of the lightening swift intellectuals of the Democrat conference, to do something they did not want to do. :please:

But, you will notice that I said 'if' W has blood on his hands. The only person I said that factually did have blood on his hands was CM. My opinion on the matter goes as follows. I believe the intelligence community of the day delivered what they believed was factual intel to be considered by the Congress and the Executive Branch in their deliberations as to whether or not the US should go to war. Further, I believe after the end result of the war did not offer the exonerations hoped for, the Dems seized on cheap and dishonest political theater to gain an edge with the people in what history will prove to have been a show of shameless opportunism. We did what we thought was right at the time, and if we hadn't withdrawn our troops according to the mindless missteps of a bunch of rabid liberal chipmunks, I would venture that stability in the region might just be a reality right now rather than the nightmare we have.

There are other reports in the news where Hillary is concerned, which I will not go into here. I am not about to defend Hillary though, I'll leave that to you if you want the job.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Fair enough, and we don't agree about Reagan, you were evidently too young to gain the proper perspective. But after your evil step mommy rose up on the Senate floor to make an impassioned plea for support to the Resolution from her brethren, she reversed herself (did you read the article?) and accused W of tricking her into supporting the Iraq War Resolution.

The irony there being that W was accused by the Dems who inhabited both houses of the congress in that day, all of them towering intellects themselves, of being dumb. So a dummy tricked Hillary and others of the lightening swift intellectuals of the Democrat conference, to do something they did not want to do. :please:

But, you will notice that I said 'if' W has blood on his hands. The only person I said that factually did have blood on his hands was CM. My opinion on the matter goes as follows. I believe the intelligence community of the day delivered what they believed was factual intel to be considered by the Congress and the Executive Branch in their deliberations as to whether or not the US should go to war. Further, I believe after the end result of the war did not offer the exonerations hoped for, the Dems seized on cheap and dishonest political theater to gain an edge with the people in what history will prove to have been a show of shameless opportunism. We did what we thought was right at the time, and if we hadn't withdrawn our troops according to the mindless missteps of a bunch of rabid liberal chipmunks, I would venture that stability in the region might just be a reality right now rather than the nightmare we have.

There are other reports in the news where Hillary is concerned, which I will not go into here. I am not about to defend Hillary though, I'll leave that to you if you want the job.

I'm not a Hillary defender; however, I do not believe the fate of America hangs in the balance on November 8, be it Trump or Clinton who is elected.

The dismissal of the Republican Guard was, to me, the single most disastrous decision of the Iraq War.

Politicians are career survivalists. Very few are immune to this instinct.

[TheRealThing]

I'm not a Hillary defender; however, I do not believe the fate of America hangs in the balance on November 8, be it Trump or Clinton who is elected.

The dismissal of the Republican Guard was, to me, the single most disastrous decision of the Iraq War.

Politicians are career survivalists. Very few are immune to this instinct.

>I've heard more than one respectable pundit say if Hillary gets elected, it's the end of America as we know it. The Supreme Court will be type cast for the next half century, and a perfectly robust system of law will continue to be ignored or at best validated by a comparison to the tenets of social justice. The list of unanswerable questions involving the Clintons, has only just now been compiled in a manner meaningful enough to get a grasp of the scope of their inconsistencies.

We differ on whether you are a Hillary defender. The people of Germany feigned innocence too, claiming they were either victimized by Hitler or just following orders. Hitler rose to power because the people did not raise their voice against him in spite of his obvious mania. I can't do a darn thing if Hillary gets elected, but I can assure you this. I and my family will vote against her on November 8.

>Norman Schwartzkopf made the Iranian Republican Guard look like a bunch of Girl Scouts. They wouldn't have done a thing to stop ISIS or any kind of terror organization, from doing whatever they wanted to in Iraq.

>It's one thing to strive for reelection, it's another to promise to, and this shows you just how sincere these liberal bozos really are, build a wall of separation between the Clinton Foundation and the US State Department and then not do it. Clinton's top state dept aids were also here top foundation aids. In 2013, according to Fred Barnes, the Clinton Foundation took in 143 million. Guess how much went to charitable pursuits? A whopping 9 million, or according to my reckoning, 5%.

[The Urban Sombrero]

>I've heard more than one respectable pundit say if Hillary gets elected, it's the end of America as we know it. The Supreme Court will be type cast for the next half century, and a perfectly robust system of law will continue to be ignored or at best validated by a comparison to the tenets of social justice. The list of unanswerable questions involving the Clintons, has only just now been compiled in a manner meaningful enough to get a grasp of the scope of their inconsistencies.

We differ on whether you are a Hillary defender. The people of Germany feigned innocence too, claiming they were either victimized by Hitler or just following orders. Hitler rose to power because the people did not raise their voice against him in spite of his obvious mania. I can't do a darn thing if Hillary gets elected, but I can assure you this. I and my family will vote against her on November 8.

>Norman Schwartzkopf made the Iranian Republican Guard look like a bunch of Girl Scouts. They wouldn't have done a thing to stop ISIS or any kind of terror organization, from doing whatever they wanted to in Iraq.

>It's one thing to strive for reelection, it's another to promise to, and this shows you just how sincere these liberal bozos really are, build a wall of separation between the Clinton Foundation and the US State Department and then not do it. Clinton's top state dept aids were also here top foundation aids. In 2013, according to Fred Barnes, the Clinton Foundation took in 143 million. Guess how much went to charitable pursuits? A whopping 9 million, or according to my reckoning, 5%.

I utterly reject as out of hand the dragging of Hitler and the Third Reich into some comparative analysis of Hillary Clinton. It's on one level to bludgeon posters who voice scruples against voting for Trump. It's a whole other to even lightly suggest that supporting Clinton ranks one with the German public supporting Hitler.

If your belief is that under HRC the SCOTUS will march the United States toward anything remotely resembling Nazi Germany, I would cease to think of you as much beyond a propogandist.

[The Urban Sombrero]

⬆⬆ The Iraqi forces, and Republican Guard, turned out, became the operational brains of ISIS. Young men without income and direction and purpose, rendered thus by being unceremoniously fired by the United States? Somewhere in that Bible we read you bound to have learned something of human nature and motivation. They would have made a police force capable of preventing the looting and chaos, in my view.

[TheRealThing]

I utterly reject as out of hand the dragging of Hitler and the Third Reich into some comparative analysis of Hillary Clinton. It's on one level to bludgeon posters who voice scruples against voting for Trump. It's a whole other to even lightly suggest that supporting Clinton ranks one with the German public supporting Hitler.

If your belief is that under HRC the SCOTUS will march the United States toward anything remotely resembling Nazi Germany, I would cease to think of you as much beyond a propogandist.

Oh of course you do. The problem with your argument is just this, it is a red herring. My point had nothing to do with any sort of comparison to Hillary and Adolf. No, my point had to do with a comparison between the general populace of Germany and the USA. The Germans knew old Adolf was a seamy character and supported him anyway because he promised them the moon.

If it makes you feel any better Obama did the same thing when he campaigned for the White House, and Hillary is no slouch to that end either. She's promising everything from free education to free childcare, again, promising her constituents the moon. And forgive me, they like you are all too eager to see her ascend to the highest office in the land.

I said the Court would be slanted to the left for the next 50 years, and it would. If you insist on burying your head there is not a lot I can do about it, but I'd suggest you give your next tirade a little more thought before you accuse me suggesting Hillary or Obama, for that matter, could or would try to take the US down the same road Germany went down prior to WW2. The whole idea is so absurd on it's face as to be laughable. What do you think Hitler would have done with the DADT, or the CBC? :please:

Now, a liberal Supreme Court? That is an altogether different animal. Your boy Soros is 86 and too old to benefit, but the liberal world he longs to see might not be all that far behind him under a Clinton seeded Supreme Court. The complaint of the Church over the past 2 generations however, hasn't been about the NAZI's, it has been that America is moving closer to being like Sodom, and farther away from being like the conservative bastion she was in the 50's, as was so vividly on display in the Eisenhower speech we've been discussing.

[TheRealThing]

⬆⬆ The Iraqi forces, and Republican Guard, turned out, became the operational brains of ISIS. Young men without income and direction and purpose, rendered thus by being unceremoniously fired by the United States? Somewhere in that Bible we read you bound to have learned something of human nature and motivation. They would have made a police force capable of preventing the looting and chaos, in my view.

And you think men of such impeccable character would have stood on that wall and defended freedom if they still wore those Republican Guard uni's? nicker:

[The Urban Sombrero]

And you think men of such impeccable character would have stood on that wall and defended freedom if they still wore those Republican Guard uni's? nicker:

I think, historically, in that region, the professional soldier often has a loyalty that goes to the one who puts food on the table. That is historical. I think it is reasonable to argue those forces would have been a serviceable police force.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Oh of course you do. The problem with your argument is just this, it is a red herring. My point had nothing to do with any sort of comparison to Hillary and Adolf. No, my point had to do with a comparison between the general populace of Germany and the USA. The Germans knew old Adolf was a seamy character and supported him anyway because he promised them the moon.

If it makes you feel any better Obama did the same thing when he campaigned for the White House, and Hillary is no slouch to that end either. She's promising everything from free education to free childcare, again, promising her constituents the moon. And forgive me, they like you are all too eager to see her ascend to the highest office in the land.

I said the Court would be slanted to the left for the next 50 years, and it would. If you insist on burying your head there is not a lot I can do about it, but I'd suggest you give your next tirade a little more thought before you accuse me suggesting Hillary or Obama, for that matter, could or would try to take the US down the same road Germany went down prior to WW2. The whole idea is so absurd on it's face as to be laughable. What do you think Hitler would have done with the DADT, or the CBC? :please:

Now, a liberal Supreme Court? That is an altogether different animal. Your boy Soros is 86 and too old to benefit, but the liberal world he longs to see might not be all that far behind him under a Clinton seeded Supreme Court. The complaint of the Church over the past 2 generations however, hasn't been about the NAZI's, it has been that America is moving closer to being like Sodom, and farther away from being like the conservative bastion she was in the 50's, as was so vividly on display in the Eisenhower speech we've been discussing.

You dredged up the ghost of Hitler and the Nazis. Are you suggesting that those voting for Hillary are as the German people who supported Hitler? These are the sorts of analogies that, in my view, taint you with extremism.

As for the SCOTUS as we move forward, I'm not sure HRC (if elected) will get to appoint any more than the present vacancy, in terms of replacing a conservative with a more liberal jurist. 2020 might be the pivotal election for SCOTUS appointments