non-partisian comment

Closed Thread

  #1  
Old 11-09-16, 09:09 AM
Norm201's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 6,034
non-partisian comment

I have to give Hillary credit for a very conciliatory speech. She stressed the need to come together.

Tim Kane on the other hand said everything to continue to polarize the nation and stress the split between Democrats and Republicans.
 
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 11-09-16, 10:48 AM
Handyone's Avatar
Forum Topic Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: U.S.
Posts: 5,451
That speech Hillary gave was a classic. It will probably go down in history.
How can I say that she isn't my favorite politician, but was very proud of her.
 
  #3  
Old 11-09-16, 10:33 PM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,446
I didn't hear all of what Hillary said but she was at least nice in defeat which was a clear 180 for her. While I don't like her I think what she said will help to heal the divide in time. I thought what Donald Trump said also will help to heal the divide over time. Again though like with Hillary Clinton I didn't hear all of his speech but what I heard was encouraging. I am not though really a fan of either candidate but I think things will work out over time.
 
  #4  
Old 11-10-16, 03:37 AM
Forum Topic Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 44,015
I just hope this election shakes up the politicians enough where they'll quit their infighting and actually do the job they were sent to DC to do!
 
  #5  
Old 11-10-16, 07:27 AM
Sharp Advice's Avatar
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: The Shake and Bake State USA
Posts: 10,440


Wondering how stressful the transition from high level lavish pent house with panorama windows and elevators to white house with no panorama windows and stairs only will be......

Transition Team soon to be hard at work.
Yes sir. We can install escalators and an elevator where wanted or desired...

No sir. White house property, at this time, has no personal airplane nor helicopter maintenance & storage facility... However, one can easily be built. Using the wall building contractor...LOL!

Yes sir. We can save the USA taxpayers all the $$$. We'll tack on all the costs onto our neighbors to the South's wall building expenses bill. HA HA.

 
  #6  
Old 11-10-16, 08:47 AM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,341
I just watched news reports of all the protests and wondered -

Aren't they protesting democracy?
 
  #7  
Old 11-10-16, 09:15 AM
Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: MI
Posts: 2,556
Yep--all the same "coexist" folks who blasted Trump for suggesting he might question the election results.
 
  #8  
Old 11-10-16, 09:20 AM
Norm201's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 6,034
Yes, CW they are.

Makes one wonder!

The Democrats had their 8 years of Obama. And in both cases there were no protest or violence of any consequence. All parties excepted the results and proceeded to do the democracy thing.

There's as adage with a bit of truth to it....Young and naive, vote Democratic, old and wise vote, Republican.

Voting for the person is what counts. For many years I was a die hard Democrat but over the past 20 years I changed to Republican. However, I voted for several Democrats (but not the party line ) because the candidates work for me and do a good job (Senator Chuck Schumer for instance). AS much as I dis-agree with much of what the Dems represent, locally I voted for most democrats. Again not on the party line but on another party if they were listed.
 
  #9  
Old 11-10-16, 02:11 PM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wet side of Washington state.
Posts: 18,399
The White House most assuredly has elevators to reach all floors AND the many basements. They also land Marine One helicopters on the lawn.

Aren't they protesting democracy?
No. They are protesting the election of a President that actually received fewer votes from the populace than the major opponent. The Electoral College is NOT democracy in action, not even a little bit.

For my money there isn't a dime's worth of difference between career politicians, Democrat OR Republican. Both major parties want to control your lives, both believe in big government and both want to expand government. The ONLY difference between them (and most of the minor parties as well) is HOW they are going to control you.

For the record, we do NOT live in a Democracy. Democracy is where everyone has a vote on every issue. Indeed, the ONLY Federal (National) offices we can vote on are the President/Vice President (as a team, not individually), US Senator and one US Representative, no other office on the federal level. Nor do we vote on any federal law, pact, treaty, declaration of war, confirmation of appointments or any other issue that may come before the Congress. There is NO national initiative or referendum process.

Even at the state and local government levels we do NOT vote on the day-to-day operations. Instead we elect people that we entrust with the power to govern us in a manner that is fair and equitable. Unfortunately, with the rise of career politicians that is often not the case anymore. The "why" of this could take me years to explain.

I did not support Mr. Trump and considered holding my nose and voting in favor of Mrs. Clinton although I personally detest the woman. I felt that she was the lesser of two evils, but still evil in her own right. I filled out my (mail-in) ballot about ten days prior to the election and because of the polls showing Mrs. Clinton the clear winner I felt that I didn't have to vote against Mr. Trump (by voting for Mrs. Clinton) to keep him from being elected. So I chose to follow my conscious and vote for a candidate that came close to expressing my own views.

However, I had forgotten the Electoral College. When talking with my sister's son the other day he reminded me that it made absolutely NO DIFFERENCE whom I voted for (or against) as it was absolutely set in stone that the majority of the voters in my state would support Mrs. Clinton and therefore the entire contingent of Electors would be Democrat supporters with 12 Electoral votes for Mrs. Clinton.

I vote on issues, state and local, while mostly dismissing any candidate unless there is a minor party candidate running for the office. I suspect ANYONE that runs for political office, regardless of party but especially career politicians and almost any major party politician IS a career, or career-minded politician. I have seen enough to know that major changes rarely come about due to changing party affiliation and that my life still marches on about the same as before any election.

I honestly do not see Mr. Trump being able to get even ten percent of what he spoke of during the long campaign accomplished and most of what will be accomplished won't have any major effect upon my life.

Just my opinion.
 
  #10  
Old 11-10-16, 02:53 PM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North East Kingdom of Vermont
Posts: 2,453
Originally Posted by Furd
". . . The Electoral College is NOT democracy in action, not even a little bit . . ."
Furd is correct; this is NOT a Democracy.

Election of the President is not direct; it's based upon 50 Separate State Elections.

If it were a "Direct" Election, then Hillary would have an extra 90,000 Votes here in Vermont that she could use to neutralize those Republican Trump Voters in someplace like Alaska, and pick up that State. But each State is tabulated separately, and that's why they conduct the Campaign the way they do.

If it were a Democracy, campaigning would be a whole lot cheaper and they'd just spend money in the major metropolitan areas (SMSAs) and the rest of us wouldn't count. Here in the Peoples Republic of Vermont, we really don't have two parties, and it's hardly worth going through the motions of Voting.

That's the way it could be nationally if we eliminated the Electoral College, and handed over control to the easily focused on, and easily influenced masses . . . . Government by the Lowest Common Denominator.

Maybe the concept of "States" and Commonwealths will one day outlive its usefulness, all Americans will be the same regardless of where they live and we can eliminate these expensive 50 semi-local governments and rule from Washington ?

But we haven't evolved to that point yet; so meanwhile, I still like the Republic and the recognition of our 50 regional differences . . . . so Alaska can't have our extra Hillary Votes !
 

Last edited by Vermont; 11-10-16 at 04:23 PM.
  #11  
Old 11-10-16, 03:40 PM
Norm201's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 6,034
Furd,

Interesting conversation. May I expand and criticize what you say?

In theory you are absolutely correct. But in practice we are considered a democracy as flawed as it is. A true democracy as you describe would be a vote on every single law and or ordinance. Might work in a small village but no possible way in a large metropolis or a country.

As you said we choose from those people who want to be involved (carer politicians) to do what we hope is the rule of the majority in relationship to our current morals and or society values. And I stress current society values and morals. As an example the legalization of marijuana or the abortion issue. They both may or may not reflect the majority, but they are definitely part of our social values and fiber. In fact weather these examples are pro or con in the majority or minority, the mere fact that a large number of the population is involved makes it an issue. Because it's an issue it gets into the political realm and must be addressed. Who addresses these issues? The politicians based on who makes the most noise, not necessarily the majority. Of course there will be those who like and those who don't like any decision that will be made. How we accept that decision shows if a practicing "Democracy" is working or not.

In a democracy we vote for those we hope, and think will have our best interest at heart. But in every society the interest of all people are not the same. So a method to choose is decided upon. Voting is one method. Appointment is another as is nepotism (royalty), and / or pay-off (political favors) is another.

Our founding fathers understood this and tried to balance it by using the checks and balances of our 3 branch government.

A big issue among most people is the Electoral College. Amount of voting power resting in a few hands based on population of each state. Most say the concept and practice is obsolete and outdated. If one reads why the founding fathers came up with this scheme you might not be so quick to dismiss it. Basically it was introduced because the Founding Fathers realized that the population and the common people were not educated enough to make decisions effecting the whole country. So in order still give the people some say in who leads the country and still choose a person who was knowledgeable (educated) they said representatives based on population will make the final decision (usually the will of the majority of the populous but not always).

So based upon the protest that we are seeing the past couple days, (and who is doing the protesting) I'm not sure I want a strictly majority vote always wins no matter what!

Furd, you're of an older generation, as I am. I know many things I believed in when I was younger were not necessarily the right things.

Trump has a big mouth and says things the wrong way, but not the wrong thing. He has been accused of bad behavior. But not proven guilty. A look into his back ground will reveal he is a very smart person and has in fact proved as much. Both by working the system (be it right or wrong) and not being afraid of who gets in the way. You don't have to like him, nor do I. But he gets things done. BTW... his off camera demeanor is said to be very good.

Hillary on the other hand is one of those career politicians you speak of and she is in fact a crook, liar, cheat and a nasty person. She has not accomplished anything of merit in the past 30 years. Between the two I'll take the one who has so far proved what he can do. If he is able to accomplish 10% of what he says , than that's 10% more than Hillary or Obama have done.

Much of what you said is true in theory and much is true in fact. But not voting is not helping.

I believe the election of Trump is a re-set of our current system.
 
  #12  
Old 11-10-16, 03:40 PM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,341
Peoples Republic of Vermont

Born and raised in VT. My family has been there for generations (1830's). I still consider myself a Vermonter although I have not lived there for more than 50 years.

We refer to it by it's more correct name of "The Peoples Republic of Northern Massachusetts"
 
  #13  
Old 11-10-16, 03:46 PM
Norm201's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 6,034
I've heard you New Englander's are bit strange.
 
  #14  
Old 11-10-16, 04:10 PM
Member
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 3,138
Well Norm, pretty clear you drank the cool aid. Election's over, time to move on, but next time do some research rather than regurgitating the nonsense some campaign puts out. I'm no Hillary fan, but she has devoted her life to helping others. Trump has only helped himself, and has taken unfair advantage of and cheated many good people in the process. I wouldn't hire someone with his lack of morals and ethics to mow my lawn. This gas too will pass.
 
  #15  
Old 11-10-16, 04:19 PM
lawrosa's Avatar
Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,607
but she has devoted her life to helping others.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!

 
  #16  
Old 11-10-16, 04:22 PM
Norm201's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 6,034
Please don't mis-read me. If there was another other than Trump, I would welcome him/her. But I have done my research and reading and looked at both sides. I choose the lesser of the two evils. And as far as the Kool-Aid goes, you ought to know, you've obviously have dank it for the past 8 years.

But lets not argue over past things. Hopefully Trump will do some good. If not then 4 years from now we can pick another chump.
 
  #17  
Old 11-10-16, 05:18 PM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wet side of Washington state.
Posts: 18,399
Well, Norm, I don't see where you criticized me except in not voting for people running for office. Perhaps you meant to critique my writing.

I am NOT suggesting the abolition of the Electoral College. I understand quite well the purpose behind it and I agree that without it the President would be chosen by a much smaller population.

Nor am I against the concept of a "living constitution" where everything must be subject to re-examination taking into account changers in mores and technology. The Framers wisely gave us a means to amend the Constitution but also wisely made it a difficult process to avoid changes made on a whim. I think the process is a good one and has stood the test of time.

HOWEVER, I also believe in the saying, "Politicians, like dirty diapers, should be changed often and for the same reason." I never stated that Hillary Clinton was anything but a typical crooked politician, no doubt worse than some.Make no mistake, I did NOT support her under any circumstance, the ONLY reason, or perhaps excuse is a better word, I would have voted for her would have been as a vote AGAINST Mr. Trump.

If you remember your history as you seem to, you will remember that George Washington made remarks about the country's leaders splitting into factions and how it would NOT be a good thing. Remember also, that the Constitution makes no provisions, indeed, no mention, of political parties. Note also that it wasn't until the twelfth amendment (ratified 1804) that the president and vice-president were elected as a team.

All through public school I heard that the US was very lucky in having a two-party system but I never heard WHY a two-party system was the ideal. There would be class discussions on the turmoil caused in countries where they had several different parties but never a discussion of what caused the turmoil (other than multiple parties) or why the US was the ideal system. I think I was well into my forties before I figured it out and the answer is so absurd it is beyond stupidity. It ASSUMES that everything is right/left, up/down, true/false correct/wrong. There are no grey areas, everyone has two choices, mo more and no less. It is then assumed that the majority will ALWAYS make the correct choice and, of course, majority rules.

BUT, in that circumstance there will also be a sizable minority that, in effect, is ignored. They are treated as incorrect, not having the correct thought processes, being backwards or uneducated. Their thoughts and ideas are simply wrong. But wrong by what standards? Why, the standards set by the winners, the ruling class.

Most of the Founders realized this and THAT is why few, if any, of them thought a person should make a career of politics. The idea was that a man (women were considered unqualified) would "serve his country" for a few years and then go back to his chosen line of work, whatever that was other than government. (Hamilton was a notable exception and most assuredly wanted a ruling elite that would act as caretakers to the lower classes.) And that is what we had for the first hundred years or so. Yes, there WERE exceptions but it certainly was not like the last hundred years. Today we have people who start as precinct committee-persons and never stop. Now I may be cynical (may?) but that is how I see it and have seen it for the bulk of my adult life.

I used to think that people first running for office had the best of intentions and really wanted to do the right thing for their constituents, be it a neighborhood council, city council, state legislator or whatever. I don't see that today, I see people running on the narrowest of parochial interests and their whole focus is on single issues. The two-party system does nothing but disenfranchise a large number of prospective voters BECAUSE the major parties refuse to entertain the notion that an issue important to a few people is important.

I live in a state where there is no party registration. I was a card-carrying member of the Libertarian Party for almost twenty years but I finally became disgusted with the in-fighting and back-biting between the purists and the more progressive members of the party. I disagree with the official stance of the Republican Party AND the Democrat Party about 80% of the time and I disagree with the Libertarian Party about 20% of the time. I have almost no use whatsoever for the Green Party, the Taxpayer Party, the Communist Party or the Socialist Parties other than I think they do supply a place for some fringe people. Of course since they rarely, if ever, get anyone elected they can be said to be ineffective.

There is more but I need to take a break.
 
  #18  
Old 11-10-16, 05:20 PM
Gunguy45's Avatar
Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 21,019
I'll tell you my main couple of issues with these big elections.

The fact that some start campaigning 2 years or more before the election gripes me big time. I say if they want to run for another office they have to declare that and vacate their current position. Here locally, we had a state Senator who tried to unseat McCain in the Primary. She gave up her seat in the Legislature saying she couldn't fully devote the time and resources needed at her State job while running a campaign. I respect that and would have voted for her except I'm registered "No Party Designated" (different than Independent) and would have to go in and request a specific Party ballot which leaves any other candidates off. Stupid, stupid, stupid! I vote for the person, not the party.

Electoral votes should be divided between candidates based on the number of voters each win in the State. Some states can do this I believe, others it's winner take all. So 500,001 people get to dictate to the other 499,999 how the entire state votes. Yes, I know, precincts and districts help, but here in AZ the 2 larger cities with universities and colleges normally decide the entire state. It used to be all red and then got bluer and bluer in those areas as there were more transplants and the cities grew. It was a big surprise I'll bet when Maricopa County (Phoenix area) went red, esp after Sheriff Joe was defeated so soundly.

Term limits need to be instituted. Political positions were not supposed to be careers. We have them here at the State level, though the way they are written doesn't give them much force. After 8 years of consecutive service, they can take a 2 year break and then re-run or just run for the other house and they can do that forever. If they limits are good enough for the President, they should be good enough for everyone else. Why do candidates never, ever talk about that once they are elected. I say maybe max 3 terms for Senators and 5 for Representatives? And no switching back and forth like AZ. 3 or 5 terms and yer done...so long, and thanks for all the fish.

At least the most we normally have to deal with a truly incompetent elected official, is a max of 6 yrs.

There are other things, but time to feed the cats. I'm just glad the whole thing is over for the most part. Now it's just talking heads saying they didn't say that 3 months ago (did they forget about the Internet and all the info and videos out there??) and don't understand why so many got the results wrong. All they had to do was come to my house 3-4 weeks ago. Told my ex- then, that the pollsters were full of it and why.

Notice I didn't talk about any candidates good or bad? I have my own opinions about things and rarely discuss politics or religions except with a few very close friends. That's gotten a lot easier since I stopped drinking. Now I can just smile and nod.
 
  #19  
Old 11-10-16, 05:26 PM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wet side of Washington state.
Posts: 18,399
Norm, you used the magic phrase, the lesser of two evils. Those are the same words I used when writing about Hillary Clinton. Obviously BOTH of us wanted to pick the lesser of two evils but what criteria is used to select which evil is less?

The one place where I find the Libertarian Party holding the high ground is that they add on to that phrase, "The lesser of two evils is still evil!" It is my opinion that a large number of people these days do not vote FOR someone as much as they vote AGAINST someone by casting their ballot for the opponent. I honestly think this is why Mr. Trump won and not Ms. Clinton; people didn't particularly like Trump but they despised Clinton. I think that if the Democrats had run just about anyone other than Clinton they would have won.
 
  #20  
Old 11-10-16, 06:50 PM
lawrosa's Avatar
Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,607
people didn't particularly like Trump but they despised Clinton. I think that if the Democrats had run just about anyone other than Clinton they would have won.

Amen!!!

Bernie would of got my vote ...
 
  #21  
Old 11-10-16, 11:07 PM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,446
I have to admit I voted for Trump not because I like him because I don't but I don't like Clinton even more so. As for Trump never having helped anyone there is one story I hear was true and that was he heard a child needed transport to a hospital in another state and for some reason the family couldn't get quick transport. So Donald Trump donated the use of his jet so the boy could get much needed care. Only verifiable instance I could find and even it could be false but somehow I don't believe so.

I also believe that the Clinton's together do donate to good causes through their foundation but the extent of true donations in my mind cannot be verified, at least according to what I have heard online. Trump too has a foundation which currently is suspended by the state of New York either because of politics or justified again I can't say. So neither candidate was perfect in my eyes but one was maybe not perfect but also not as bad in my own opinion. I respect the fact though that others voted for Clinton as this was a difficult election this year.
 
  #22  
Old 11-11-16, 03:12 AM
lawrosa's Avatar
Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,607
the Clinton's together do donate to good causes through their foundation but the extent of true donations in my mind cannot be verified, at least according to what I have heard online
You can fact check this.. The Clintons are corrupt IMO.

7 Things You Need To Know About The Clinton Foundation | Daily Wire.

Yes I voted trump also. Mostly to fix Obama care hopefully and for economic reasons to fix the middle class issues.

Example.. Health insurance for my family is $1000 a month as it stands because of obama care and what my wife and I make a year..

So if I make 90K a year with much OT I am really making 50K or less after healthcare, mortgage, taxes in NJ, etc..

The undocumented workers here in my state working cash money landscaping are making more then me and have free health care and housing.. etc..

Maybe im wrong IDK...
 
  #23  
Old 11-11-16, 03:46 AM
Norm201's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 6,034
Furd, Hedge, Lawrosa, Gunguy,

I guess we're all pretty much on the same page.

Furd, Yes a much better word that I could've used was critique. Thank you for the clarification.

I can't add any more than what all of you have said.
 
  #24  
Old 11-11-16, 04:19 AM
ray2047's Avatar
Group Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 32,990
I just wonder what odds the bookies are giving on if and when re impeachment.
 
  #25  
Old 11-11-16, 06:56 AM
Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: MI
Posts: 2,556
Ray I'll lay odds the wording is already being worked out for the petitions--before Trump ever has the chance to show us if the media painted him accurately or not.

Rioters are protesting the IMAGE of Trump that the DNC and mainstream media created. I say we wait and give the guy a chance to show by his ACTIONS what kind of leader he will be. I'm hoping he'll be as good a leader as he was as businessman.
 
  #26  
Old 11-11-16, 07:19 AM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North East Kingdom of Vermont
Posts: 2,453
Isn't it a bit curious that all of this rioting/protesting is occurring in States which voted for Hillary ?

It seems a case of mis-directed hostility . . . . punishing the very people who had done your bidding; blocking their commerce, destroying their businesses and vehicles. consuming their Police and public safety resources - STUPID !

But I guess they don't have guts enough to launch such a protest in one of the areas that supported the target of their venom.

And I hear tell that many are not college students; who should know how the electoral system works (unless they were exempted from 5th Grade Civics); but rather unemployed contract hires for as much as $3500 per the week via George Soros.

Tell me it ain't so !
 

Last edited by Vermont; 11-11-16 at 10:06 AM.
  #27  
Old 11-11-16, 07:54 AM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,341
My wife and daughter both voted for Trump. Neither of them were Trump supporters but they despised the Clintons. I voted for neither. Trump scares me and I think Clinton belongs in jail.

I carried a high level security clearance for almost 40 years. If I had done what she did as SoS I most certainly would have lost my job and I probably would have been jailed. That was the primary reason I could not vote for her.

And now the left wing, perpetually offended, alphabet groups and the professional agitators are rioting to protest the democratic process. Just like a bunch of 3 year old brats throwing a tantrum because they didn't get their way.
 
  #28  
Old 11-11-16, 09:43 AM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wet side of Washington state.
Posts: 18,399
I guess we're all pretty much on the same page.
I think that is a fair assessment. Each of us may have some small differences but in the big picture we have far more in common than at odds.

I just wonder what odds the bookies are giving on if and when re impeachment.
Pretty low I would imagine. I thought that at least one, if not several, attempts would be made on President Obama'a life but as far as I know there have been none. Maybe President Trump will lead a similarly charmed life in the White House. One thing that I DO know is that Mr. Trump is no dummy and the probability of him performing a truly impeachable act are extremely slim in my opinion. Honestly, I think his bark is far worse than his bite.

Rioters are protesting the IMAGE of Trump that the DNC and mainstream media created. I say we wait and give the guy a chance to show by his ACTIONS what kind of leader he will be. I'm hoping he'll be as good a leader as he was as businessman.
I agree. Remember, he is (will be) the President, not the dictator. We still have a Congress and Supreme Court to keep him from becoming the latter.

I hear tell that many are not college students (who should know how the electoral system works...
I would not be the least bit surprised to learn that these protesters don't know how the Electoral College works. I was in public schools during the 1950s through 1960s and I didn't learn anything about the Electoral College until I started reading independently on the subject. The most I remember from school was the teachers that DID mention it stated it was an old-fashioned idea that should be disbanded. I seriously doubt that any teachers since that time have understood the real reasoning behind the Electoral College, let alone try to point out the reasons to their students.

I think Clinton belongs in jail.
Both of them.

And now the left wing, perpetually offended, alphabet groups and the professional agitators are rioting to protest the democratic process. Just like a bunch of 3 year old brats throwing a tantrum because they didn't get their way.
I most definitely agree with that statement.
 
  #29  
Old 11-11-16, 12:48 PM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,341
Here's a good example of left wing tolerance -

Orange is the new black actress Lea DeLaria


The thing about libs is that they are all kumbaya, spouting inclusivity, tolerance and diversity until they don't get their way.

This Winston Churchill quote seems to apply - "Some people's idea of free speech is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone says anything back, that is an outrage"
 
  #30  
Old 11-11-16, 01:12 PM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 426
The thing about libs is that they are all kumbaya, spouting inclusivity, tolerance and diversity until they don't get their way.

I don't disagree with your thinking on liberals. I'm glad you didn't suggest conservatives would have been any different.
 
  #31  
Old 11-11-16, 01:18 PM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 426
And I hear tell that many are not college students; who should know how the electoral system works (unless they were exempted from 5th Grade Civics); but rather unemployed contract hires for as much as $3500 per the week via George Soros.

I'm not a college student and I live in Connecticut - won by Clinton. Please send me your information on the job. I can use $3,500 per week.
 
  #32  
Old 11-11-16, 01:20 PM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North East Kingdom of Vermont
Posts: 2,453
I've come to resent the phrase "have a conversation" about any touchy issue; because it amounts to nothing more than code words for subjecting yourself to being propagandized until you succumb.

While I'm in the shower, my bathroom radio is tuned to National Public Radio (NPR) so that I can know what I'm supposed to think . . . . see, I'm an equal opportunity listener.

That bathroom arrangement has proven to be a matter of real convenience because if the NPR discussion being broadcast causes me to puke, the necessary facilities are right handy.

Then, when I'm prepared to leave the Office/House, I'm equipped to carefully avoid subjecting myself to all unnecessary conversations aimed at altering the arrangement of my brain's synapses.

I like it like that.
 
  #33  
Old 11-11-16, 01:34 PM
Norm201's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 6,034
Vermont,

I'm a die hard listener of NPR, but I agree they are too liberal. But I think I can get a truer picture of the news in a more direct way than most other outlets that scream and yell and try to sensationalize the news. I like to listen to WAIT, WAIT, Don't Tell Me! They were very much anti-Trump. I'm waiting see what they have to say this week.
 
  #34  
Old 11-11-16, 01:56 PM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North East Kingdom of Vermont
Posts: 2,453
Originally Posted by Tony P.
". . . Please send me your information on the job. I can use $3,500 per week . . ."
Here's a link that includes a few of the Craig's List Solicitations:

It Looks Like George Soros is Funding the Trump Protests Just Like He Funded The Ferguson Riots

I don't see the $3500 one; but there are a couple that give you $1000 Cash for just getting on the bus to the protest venue; and others that allude to the skills they'd prefer.

Some participants have reported their experience to the authorities.
 
  #35  
Old 11-11-16, 01:58 PM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,341
Imagine the outcry if a conservative entertainer (admittedly there aren't many) advocated taking a baseball bat to a liberal elected official. Or called for a revolution (Katy Perry). That's just a couple examples of the inciteful rhetoric coming from the HRC's supporters.

I realize I'm getting up in years, but damned if I can remember any riots, or even protests when Obama was elected.
 
  #36  
Old 11-14-16, 08:06 AM
Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: MI
Posts: 2,556
Originally Posted by cwbuff
I realize I'm getting up in years, but damned if I can remember any riots, or even protests when Obama was elected.
 
  #37  
Old 11-14-16, 10:12 AM
Sharp Advice's Avatar
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: The Shake and Bake State USA
Posts: 10,440


There's no need to have incoming candidate fears. All political candidates make pie in the sky promises and express extremist views, etc.. Many never get all they want. Both of which are good and bad based upon ones personal views & political parties, etc.. Neither side of the isle will be totally satisfied with the end results....

The incoming next president has already made some compromises, concessions and scale backs. The non scalable wall will not be as long as once believed to be. Some parts will be fencing.

The door leading to a pathway to citizenship will remain. However, that door will not be at customary ground level. It will be a the TOP of the non scalable wall...

DT already mentioned keeping some aspects of the health care law. Nobody any of us know of wants to give up what they already have...:NO NO NO: Neither those whom are rich, poor, on wall street or main street. No body likes cutbacks, downsizing, scale backs, rollbacks nor take a way's! Everybody wants to keep what they have!

I too had my doubts about his win. Fear, as an outsider, he would be taken advantage of by the extremists in his party or those of the other party. Thus far DT has shown a willingness to be more open minded, thoughtful self thinker with a heart for those whom have less. Less is not more!

Ending foreign wars is a good thing. $$$ saved there best spent to rebuild Americas failing infrastructure is a great thing too! ETC & ETC..

My Two Cents.



:No Beer 4U:

 
Closed Thread

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Display Modes