Discussion in 'Politics and Current Events' started by texvet16, Jan 22, 2019.
Or the monarchy that supports it. ;-)
Don't crash, my man.
Getting obliterated is his hobby.
Ha! I didn't. It was just a long light.
And you're the one who wants an honest discussion? Sorry, not bothering with you any more tonight.
I just avoid using the expression anyway I can, raises the question is a good one. But I gave up correcting people. Hell, if I corrected everything I read or hear, (some of it my own) Doc Longhorn would really have a valid beef with me. And I don't want to look it up, but I suppose my curiosity will make me if I don't get an answer toot sweet, where did the expression "having a beef" come from?
The etymology of "have a beef" is widely disputed. That's as far as I'll go, Father. Dive on in.
Apparently, that’s what he lives for.
I didn't mean to indicate I thought it was ok, just that one case bothered me more than the other. Did I fail to make that clear? Umm going back I see that I wrote perhaps the worst sentence I've see in a while as far as clarity, so ok I wasn't clear.
As far as Trump being my guy, believe me, if you had any familiarity with me at all, you'd know that about the only things I like about Trump are: his SCOTUS appointments, some of his executive orders with regard to bad rules adversely affecting commerce, and the fact that people I can't stand go apoplectic with TDS at the mention of his name. If he decides to resign tomorrow, I'll cheer, and hope Pence is a reasonable man. At least I don't think he's a p*ssy-snatcher, and that's a plus.
If rumors are accurate, he evidently eyes tube steak for dinner.
My, my. It appears that the man who is "not short on facts" trucks in lurid, unsubstantiated rumors, too. You run a full-service operation.
Anticipating one of your responses, I'll say that I don't care whether the Vice President of the United States sucks cock. Right now, I don't even care whether he's a R or a D. All I care about is whether he's mentally competent to faithfully execute the office of president should he be required to do so under Amendment XXV.
So, you're bigoted against gays? Who knew? Do you think it was that encounter with the preacher at the Baptist Church that is at the root (get it...ha, ha) of your phobia?
So... back to AOC...
Apparently the strategy now is to lie about the GND. After she took the review document down on her website, she and her people are claiming certain phrases were never in there (like people being economically secure for being "unwilling" to work). I guess we're doing the whole lying and gaslighting thing now, huh? Unfortunately, it is working among some morons who are still trying to defend her.
Dude, I don't care a bit if he is gay. I hope if he is, he shines one up well for his partner.
In case you haven't noticed, not a single Democrat here wants to see Trump go down for his sexual trysts. I don't care about their sex lives one bit. If only the Republicans kept the same attitude toward indecency and sexual promiscuity you guys might have already rid us of this troublesome priest.
Back to Pence, what I would not like at all, if he were gay, is the typical passive aggressive hatred he displays for gays. He has supported some of the nation's most archaic policies on LGBTQ issues. But if you've followed the secret lives of preachers that doth protest too much, it is funny when they are ultimately discovered. And I'm sure you can guess that I'll have zero surprise should such a revelation come to light given his political stances on the issue.
Now you are just pandering to stupidity.
Man. For someone who says they don't care about Mike Pence's sexual preferences, you sure talk about them a lot.
You mean in one post? Seriously, don't waste your time on that hill. You'll find ample testimony from everyone here that I could not care less with whom people sleep. My concern on this, like pretty much every other topic, is hypocrisy.
So you only imply someone is gay to meet a political end that suits you. Classy. A true hero of the LGBTQ community you are.
Poor little guy thinking I initiated the Pence is gay rumors. And again being gay is not an insult in my world. Not sure where the disconnect is on this with you?? You find it incriminating of his character. I merely find it potentially enlightening as to what has motivated his bigotry and suspected hypocrisy.
On that topic, from what I've seen of the LGBTQ community, they seem pretty convinced he is gay. And promoting gay conversion therapy and being as openly anti-LGBTQ as he has been on policy matters only adds to those rumors. Sorry, but they think it's a tell just like each preacher that gets caught with another guy while preaching Gods hatred for homosexuality.
Was that a research paper or field trip?
I never implied anything. You’re the one spreading rumors, again, to meet a satisfactory political end. Pretty pathetic. Also insulting to that community.
And, predictably, one of the aforementioned "morons" is ... The New York Times.
It was a short piece in the news columns; read it last night. I'll try to find the link.
No, I think it's three or four posts now. You're the one that keeps bringing it up. I understand the hypocrisy angle; it's one of my pet-peeves. But in couching it that way -- at least in this particular case -- you're exposing what I suspect is a sophist tendency, since what you're really doing is just old-school scandal sheet rumor-mongering for political purposes.
This isn't like bagging on Trump for his peccadilloes (one of my favorite sports); they're well-known and at least somewhat substantiated.
You're not unusual in this respect, mind you. I can dish the dirt with the best of them at the proper time and place and well-within the protective canopy of the trust tree. In my business, I've even had the unpleasant task of weaponizing certain kinds of personal information. Squeamish I'm not. (I'm also not proud of it.)
Postscript: I freely admit that my objection here is in some measure rooted in your form, which is in turn barbaric and bombastic. There's an art to the smear, and you're an amateur.
Hey @futures2015 .....This is where we need that on the floor laughing emogi thingy....lol
WWM....Welcome to the party.....
Talk about sliding the shiv smoothly....
Ah man, I thought we were going to get rid of airplanes!
Costly? Just keep spending. After all, according to one interview of AOC, it's not just taxes that fund the government (even though she wants them very high), even deficit spending somehow funds the government.
Government can afford anything that can be bought in its own currency!
This s*** is hilarious. It will be fun to see where they try to draw the line in order to not lose every ounce of credibility with normal Americans, Dem and Repub alike.
McConnell is bringing GND to a vote in the senate. Dems will have to put up or shut up.
It’s just too hilarious. It’s too costly for a state with one of the largest economies in the world, and that bows at the altar of environmentalism, but the rest of the country can afford it.
If he puts it to a vote:
“This is pure political theater on McConnell’s part.” - some journo, prolly
If he doesn’t:
“Further evidence the Right doesn’t take the existential threat of climate change seriously.”
That's awesome, Democrats will have to put their votes where their mouths are and live with it. And give how many Senate Democrats are eyeing a run for the nomination it'll be an issue.
I wonder who will be the first to utter he/she was for it before he/she voted against it!
I mean the the first draft by AOC was so looney tunes that even her fellow travelers got the media to disappear it, and her to say it was just some thoughts taken out of context, but the latest one I saw gives some cover by saying things like we're gonna make sheeeit not smell and other great things by doing "everything technologically feasible." Talk about using weasel words.
Not sure but here is the story.
22 billion dollars. Not enough oversight they say. Hilarious!
When its not your money and you're in power to tax more this is how they run their state (besides into the ground):
They didn't budget enough to pay the people to keep track of the budget.
Well, what's funny, in the ironic sense, is they did their own studies to determine budgets. Naturally, because governments suck at this, they undershot the numbers by billions. An outside consultant also ran the numbers and told them they were off by billions. They did their thing and now here we are. They'd have been better off helping the homeless and cleaning up the human feces on the ground in San Fran.
LOL, notice they didn't actually have any wording. And speaking of weasels, how'd you like Sherrod Brown's statement:
"Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, who is widely expected to enter into the 2020 race, has declined to say whether he supports the proposal.
'I'm not going to take position on every bill that's coming out," he said Tuesday, according to Politico. "I support a Green New Deal. I think we need to aggressively support climate change [legislation]. That's my answer.'"
So like I said, which version? Sherrod doesn't sound like he even wants to know.
Separate names with a comma.