[vector]

Which political MISTAKE was the worst

NO WMDS

[Image: http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/pic...tureid=782]


OR FIRING JAMES COMEY ?

[Image: http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/pic...tureid=781]

[Hoot Gibson]

Neither was a mistake. President Trump's mistake was in not firing Comey on his first day in office. Comey is a criminal who should be the target of a special investigator, not a good friend of one.

[4_real]

Hoot Gibson you're such a hack. where did that picture go you had, something about you not supporting trump or Hillary? Worse than a Bengals fan.

[Hoot Gibson]

I support politicians when they take actions with which I agree and oppose then when I disagree with their actions. Trump is a bit of a carnival barker, but I agree with the actions he has taken with foreign policy and his actions that have improved the economic climate in this country. I consider Obama and Hillary to be criminal traitors whose actions I fundamentally opposed.

I will leave the partisan cheerleading to guys like you need and TheRealThing. I will continue to give my honest opinions about the actions and accomplishments of elected office holders and their appointees.

[Bob Seger]

Hoot Gibson you're such a hack. where did that picture go you had, something about you not supporting trump or Hillary? Worse than a Bengals fan.

And you actually have the nerve to call someone else a "hack"?

:eyeroll::eyeroll::eyeroll:

[TheRealThing]

I support politicians when they take actions with which I agree and oppose then when I disagree with their actions. Trump is a bit of a carnival barker, but I agree with the actions he has taken with foreign policy and his actions that have improved the economic climate in this country. I consider Obama and Hillary to be criminal traitors whose actions I fundamentally opposed.

I will leave the partisan cheerleading to guys like you need and TheRealThing. I will continue to give my honest opinions about the actions and accomplishments of elected office holders and their appointees.

What a load. 4real's in grafted politics left aside, his memory seems just fine. You did have a sig blasting Trump, and you started a number of threads blasting him for all manner of uncommitted sins. My favs are "The case against Trump" and "The election-my final decision" threads. I warned you back when you engaged in all that #NeverTrump stuff that it would be hard to live down. Instead of being at all gracious though, as is your penchant, you made it personal.

So, rather than admit that you were wrong about Trump and I was right. It has now come down to my being a supposed partisan cheerleader. Anybody is welcomed to take a little stroll through those old threads to verify the truth, and whether you've got the lock on it that you claim to.

[TheRealThing]

Sorry GB. I didn't realize that you'd deleted any posts.

[Hoot Gibson]

What a load. 4real's in grafted politics left aside, his memory seems just fine. You did have a sig blasting Trump, and you started a number of threads blasting him for all manner of uncommitted sins. My favs are "The case against Trump" and "The election-my final decision" threads. I warned you back when you engaged in all that #NeverTrump stuff that it would be hard to live down. Instead of being at all gracious though, as is your penchant, you made it personal.

So, rather than admit that you were wrong about Trump and I was right. It has now come down to my being a supposed partisan cheerleader. Anybody is welcomed to take a little stroll through those old threads to verify the truth, and whether you've got the lock on it that you claim to.

Likewise, I would encourage anybody who is interested in ferreting out the truth to examine your recent posts and comparing them with the posts in which I corrected your wildly misleading assertions. When I make factual mistakes, I correct them.

My opinion of Trump has not changed but I believe in giving credit where credit is due. No more, no less.

I agree with most of Trump's actions but his tweets and unfortunate habit of publicly attacking his own appointees is doing some heavy political damage to him, as well as the GOP. Otherwise, I strongly approve of his job performance so far. But I will never lie to support a politician, no matter how strongly I support them.

[TheRealThing]

Likewise, I would encourage anybody who is interested in ferreting out the truth to examine your recent posts and comparing them with the posts in which I corrected your wildly misleading assertions. When I make factual mistakes, I correct them.

My opinion of Trump has not changed but I believe in giving credit where credit is due. No more, no less.

I agree with most of Trump's actions but his tweets and unfortunate habit of publicly attacking his own appointees is doing some heavy political damage to him, as well as the GOP. Otherwise, I strongly approve of his job performance so far. But I will never lie to support a politician, no matter how strongly I support them.

Right. You’re incapable of uttering any sort of untruth. And and given that, you are then worthy to call other people liars (including the President) in the absence of any proof in substantiation whatever should any point of contention arise. Forget those pesky archives.

[TheRealThing]

^^ And you have corrected exactly nothing. On September the 7th, a Friday, David Asman and his cohost were discussing statements which DJT made in his West Virginia rally. Asman quoted the 104 thousand number from The Hill article I cited and you went off about, in favor of your own interpretation which you have labored to establish so desperately. The date of The Hill article in question BTW was also September 7. Further, I cited SourceWatch which you also shot down because that one did not help your cause either.

Like I said, you got vector as your back up and believe me, I’m fine with it. But you’re not about to push your delusions onto me.

[Hoot Gibson]

Right. You’re incapable of uttering any sort of untruth. And and given that, you are then worthy to call other people liars (including the President) in the absence of any proof in substantiation whatever should any point of contention arise. Forget those pesky archives.

Those pesky archives include my warnings that Trump's sleazy friends such as Paul Manafort and Roger Stone were political liabilities.

Nobody bats 100 percent when they predict the future, but missing a few predictions is not quite the same as making up statistics and then refusing to own up to your actions when confronted with the truth now, is it? Character counts. nicker:

[Hoot Gibson]

^^ And you have corrected exactly nothing. On September the 7th, a Friday, David Asman and his cohost were discussing statements which DJT made in his West Virginia rally. Asman quoted the 104 thousand number from The Hill article I cited and you went off about, in favor of your own interpretation which you have labored to establish so desperately. The date of The Hill article in question BTW was also September 7. Further, I cited SourceWatch which you also shot down because that one did not help your cause either.

Like I said, you got vector as your back up and believe me, I’m fine with it. But you’re not about to push your delusions onto me.

Repeating a lie ad nauseum will not transform it into the truth. Absolutely nobody claimed that 104,000 coal mining jobs have been created since Oct. 2016. Nobody that is, except for you. The Hill clearly and correctly reported that 104,000 mining jobs have been created during that period. Coal mining jobs are but a fraction of all mining jobs in this country.

My backup is The Hill article and the source from which their article reported, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and truth.

All vector did was to point out your "mistake." :biglmao:

[TheRealThing]

Repeating a lie ad nauseum will not transform it into the truth. Absolutely nobody claimed that 104,000 coal mining jobs have been created since Oct. 2016. Nobody that is, except for you. The Hill clearly and correctly reported that 104,000 mining jobs have been created during that period. Coal mining jobs are but a fraction of all mining jobs in this country.

My backup is The Hill article and the source from which their article reported, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and truth.

All vector did was to point out your "mistake." :biglmao:

Donald J Trump spoke only of coal jobs as he addressed the good folks of West Virginia. Asman was speaking of coal mining jobs when he cited The Hill article, which also spoke of coal jobs. The subsequent article cited by SourceWatch defined all of the 174 thousand listed as being coal jobs. Transportation jobs, some jobs associated with coal fired electricity generating stations AND the actual mining jobs came to a total of 174 thousand. I pointed that out for two reasons. First was your ridiculous claim of 50 thousand total jobs, plus your intentional deception in which you insist on limiting coal mining jobs to the miners only. Then Gut came on and further clarified other jobs, but not all, which are also associated with coal mining.

Don't try to hide behind vector, all he did was post a link. The ensuing narrowing and redefinitions on your part, were meant to slake your own long standing obsessions. As I said your distortions notwithstanding, might cut some ice with the likes of Motley and vector, not me. At any rate your initial effort was to attack valid sourcing. As you then proceeded to suggest The Hill didn't know what they were talking about and further, SourceWatch didn't understand what coal mining jobs were either. I will stick with Asman and The Hill. You go ahead and change reality to your liking. :Thumbs:

Absurd.

[Hoot Gibson]

Donald J Trump spoke only of coal jobs as he addressed the good folks of West Virginia. Asman was speaking of coal mining jobs when he cited The Hill article, which also spoke of coal jobs. The subsequent article cited by SourceWatch defined all of the 174 thousand listed as being coal jobs. Transportation jobs, some jobs associated with coal fired electricity generating stations AND the actual mining jobs came to a total of 174 thousand. I pointed that out for two reasons. First was your ridiculous claim of 50 thousand total jobs, plus your intentional deception in which you insist on limiting coal mining jobs to the miners only. Then Gut came on and further clarified other jobs, but not all, which are also associated with coal mining.

Don't try to hide behind vector, all he did was post a link. The ensuing narrowing and redefinitions on your part, were meant to slake your own long standing obsessions. As I said your distortions notwithstanding, might cut some ice with the likes of Motley and vector, not me. At any rate your initial effort was to attack valid sourcing. As you then proceeded to suggest The Hill didn't know what they were talking about and further, SourceWatch didn't understand what coal mining jobs were either. I will stick with Asman and The Hill. You go ahead and change reality to your liking. :Thumbs:

Absurd.

You misquoted The Hill article and you continue to so. I distorted nothing. I used the same source as The Hill used. Anybody who claims that 104,000 coal mining jobs have been created since October 2016 is mistaken or lying. You claim that Asman said that 104,000 coal mining jobs have been created in that time frame but have provided nothing to support your claim.

I certainly have not said that The Hill did not know what they were talking about because all The Hill did was accurately report the statistics compiled and reported by President Trump's own Labor Department. I would say that you do not know what you are talking about, but at this point I am sure that you know exactly what you did and recognize that you misquoted your own source.

Not content to mischaracterize one article, you are also misrepresenting the report to which you linked that was prepared by the radical left wing activist organization, SourceWatch. You claimed that report was subsequent to The Hill article. In fact, the statistics cited in the SourceWatch report were from the Obama years. The purpose of the SourceWatch report, if one actually reads it, was to make the case that the average number of coal mining related jobs was higher under the Obama administration than it was under the administration of George W. Bush.

From the last section of the SourceWatch report to which you linked in an earlier thread:

Appalachian Voices

The 2013 Appalachian Voices report, "Growth of U.S. Coal Jobs: Federal Data Showing Coal Mining Employment Trending Higher Since 2009," looks at Mining Safety and Health Administration data on coal mining jobs, which shows that the average number of coal-mining jobs under the Obama administration has been 15.3 percent higher than the average under George W. Bush. The report points to increased exports and decreasing productivity - requiring more workers to extract harder to reach coal - as reasons for the increase.

The same "report" from SourceWatch that you excitedly cited after falsely claiming that 104,000 coal mining jobs have been created since 2016 also states:

There are approximately 174,000 blue-collar, full-time, permanent jobs related to coal in the U.S.: mining (83,000), transportation (31,000), and power plant employment (60,000). (See below for details on each sector.) The U.S. civilian labor force totaled 141,730,000 workers in 2005; thus, permanent blue-collar coal industry employees represent 0.12% of the U.S. workforce.[1] (Compare this percentage with the 1.89% of U.S. workers who worked in coal mining alone in 1920.)

Later, in the same SourceWatch report that you cite to support your false claim:

Coal mining jobs

In 2013, there were 80,209 people employed in coal mining in the U.S. Of those, 47,475 worked in underground mining, and 35,398 worked in surface mining.

Here is a breakdown of the geographical distribution of underground coal mining jobs in 2006 (with coal production in thousands of short tons):

In other words, you used a distorted, pre-2016 statistic from a pro-Obama, George Soros-funded organization to show that bolster your bogus claim that 104,000 coal mining jobs were created after October 2016. Is that a rational argument? Of course not. It is nonsensical.

BTW, even SourceWatch cites the Bureau of Labor Statistics as a source for some of its data. However, all of the references date to the time period prior to 2016.

So, TheRealThing, please explain the relevance of pre-2016 statistics reported by an organization funded by George Soros to the subject at hand. All that the SourceWatch proves is that there were more coal mining jobs under Obama in the early years of his War on Coal than there were when he left office. That is not news, is it?

Can an Obama era report prove your claim about coal mining jobs created after Donald Trump was elected president? How is that possible? The answer the the last question is that it is not possible at all.

The SourceWatch "report" is a classic example of the radical left lying with statistics. I never expected a conservative to cite such liberal propaganda as a legitimate news source.

Trump's record of supporting the coal mining industry is rock solid. He does not need anybody to make such lame attempts to exaggerate his stellar record in that area. Let his record speak for itself.

[TheRealThing]

I'm all done with entertaining your asinine defense. You're wrong and nuts according to others on here. Either way, only you would believe there could possibly be that much backstory to Asman's comments. The sources, the timeline, and the overall logic came via Fox News reporting. I marked you off a couple years back anyway.

[Hoot Gibson]

I'm all done with entertaining your asinine defense. You're wrong and nuts according to others on here. Either way, only you would believe there could possibly be that much backstory to Asman's comments. The sources, the timeline, and the overall logic came via Fox News reporting. I marked you off a couple years back anyway.

You really need to spend more time reading than posting. I am accustomed to seeing liberals cite sources that contradict their own positions, but it is odd seeing a self-proclaimed conservative doing the same.

Once again you chose to make a personal attack instead of addressing the fact that you misrepresented the SourceWatch report to which you linked, which was written well before Trump took office. I am no longer surprised at any of your antics.

[TheRealThing]

You really need to spend more time reading than posting. I am accustomed to seeing liberals cite sources that contradict their own positions, but it is odd seeing a self-proclaimed conservative doing the same.

Once again you chose to make a personal attack instead of addressing the fact that you misrepresented the SourceWatch report to which you linked, which was written well before Trump took office. I am no longer surprised at any of your antics.

The article is dated November 26, 2017.

[Granny Bear]

Gentlemen, post all the opinions and links that you want.

One more personal jab and this thread will close.

[Hoot Gibson]

The article is dated November 26, 2017.

First of all, the link to the SourceWatch page is not an article, it appears to be more of a wiki - and there is a big difference. The page was last edited on Nov. 27, 2017, when Ted Nace added an archive link to the page. (Mr. Nace is a freelance writer, activist, and former community organizer. )

Prior to that edit, Nace made some styling changes to the Coal Mining Jobs section of the page on June 26, 2015.

The page includes a log that details changes made to the page by date.

The bottom line is the job statistics on the page have not been updated in several years. The page has absolutely nothing to do with President Trump's job creation record, or with anything else that has happened during the last few years.

The page is not an article and its content is very outdated.

[TheRealThing]

First of all, the link to the SourceWatch page is not an article, it appears to be more of a wiki - and there is a big difference. The page was last edited on Nov. 27, 2017, when Ted Nace added an archive link to the page. (Mr. Nace is a freelance writer, activist, and former community organizer. )

Prior to that edit, Nace made some styling changes to the Coal Mining Jobs section of the page on June 26, 2015.

The page includes a log that details changes made to the page by date.

The bottom line is the job statistics on the page have not been updated in several years. The page has absolutely nothing to do with President Trump's job creation record, or with anything else that has happened during the last few years.

The page is not an article and its content is very outdated.

Thank you so much for all the profound insight regarding MY source. If SourceWatch is a hotbed of liberal propaganda the point still remains. There were 174 thousand coal mining jobs existing as of November 26th of last year. So what’s your argument now, there are LESS coal mining jobs a year later? :biglmao:

My original intent in citing SourceWatch was to demonstrate the fact that coal jobs are not limited to the guys who ride the mine cars as has been your continuing distortion.

[Bob Seger]

Come on guys, from someone who is personal friends with both of you guys, please knock it off and let this one die....

No one now cares if is 2 jobs or 200,000 jobs.

[Hoot Gibson]

Thank you so much for all the profound insight regarding MY source. If SourceWatch is a hotbed of liberal propaganda the point still remains. There were 174 thousand coal mining jobs existing as of November 26th of last year. So what’s your argument now, there are LESS coal mining jobs a year later? :biglmao:

My original intent in citing SourceWatch was to demonstrate the fact that coal jobs are not limited to the guys who ride the mine cars as has been your continuing distortion.

You are quite welcome, sir. Unfortunately, you are still not accurately referencing the source of the 174,0000 "coal mining jobs." That statistic was actually added to the SourceWatch wiki on February 6, 2009.

In fact, in the February 6, 2009, version of the SourceWatch Coal and jobs in the Unites States wiki, the following information was published:

There are approximately 174,000 blue-collar, full-time, permanent jobs related to coal in the U.S.: mining (83,000), transportation (31,000), and power plant employment (60,000). (See below for details on each sector.) The U.S. civilian labor force totaled 141,730,000 workers in 2005; thus, permanent blue-collar coal industry employees represent 0.12% of the U.S. workforce.[1] (Compare this percentage with the 1.89% of U.S. workers who worked in coal mining alone in 1920.)

Now, is it your contention that the number of "blue-collar, full-time, permanent jobs related to coal in the U.S." was exactly the same on February 6, 2009, as it was in November, 2017?

Before you answer, TRT, recall that developing and maintaining web applications has been part of my job for more than a decade. I understand how audit trails work. They exist to keep content managers of applications honest. Most of the time, audit trails are not available to public users, but in this case the webmasters of SourceWatch have chosen to make their audit trail public.

The number of coal mining jobs has dropped sharply since 2009 and so has the number of jobs related to coal mining. That is not a matter of opinion, that is a matter of fact. It is not my fact. It is not your fact. It is a fact that claims no ownership.

[TheRealThing]

Come on guys, from someone who is personal friends with both of you guys, please knock it off and let this one die....

No one now cares if is 2 jobs or 200,000 jobs.

Thought I’d wait to see what Hoot had to say before I responded Bob. As you can plainly see, it’s hopeless.

[Hoot Gibson]

Thought I’d wait to see what Hoot had to say before I responded Bob. As you can plainly see, it’s hopeless.

What Hoot did, as Granny Bear requested, was post a link and explain the source of that link. No more, no less. If you do not want to respond to the post, then I will take no issue with your decision.