GT40s.com Paddock Politics Thread

[Rod]

At what point did I ever indicate I voted for Trump? You make a lot of assumptions about the posters on this board, most of which are false. I can respect Jeff's well thought out response.... not yours (of course we know you don't care). Your emotions, in this case your hatred of everything Trump, cloud any rationality.

Now why don't you pony up and pay for part of this site rather than using it as your own personal toilet.

First, I don't need your respect. And you're right I don't care one iota.

I think you to re-read my posts. Where did I indicate that you voted for him? I asked how you, I or the 33% in the most recent poll can SUPPORT Trump.

As for hatred of Trump, that's your assumption. I never said I hated him, although I intensely dislike him. He's a terrible human being and I can only hope there's Karma in this world.

Steve, if you don't like my posts in this Politics thread, then I'd suggest to you to use the ignore feature of this site. I'm sorry you find my posts so distasteful, but for all the reasons I've mentioned above, the guy needs to be removed from office.

 

[Rod]

...if so, they reported truthfully.

What's important right now are the two indictments and the one guilty pleading with more to come I hope. Can't wait. :thumbsup:

 

[Terry Oxandale]

One more thought Steve.

What do you say to your children, when someone like Trump, a despicable human being, is elected to the highest office in the United States?

"Dear Child, you can demean and harass women, divide a country thru hatred for others, insult anyone and everyone, bully other human beings, call them names like little, clown, lying or connect their father to a 50+ year old conspiracy theory, not apologize for pushing a stupid theory that the current occupant of the Oval Office was not born in America, when there was ample evidence otherwise, and the list can go on almost indefinitely...., but you too can do all this crap and still be elected POTUS!"

No, I don't know how I or you can look at your child's face and tell them it's OK to support a person like that ever, before, during or after the election. I don't want ever to have to say to my kids that I supported this President. NEVER!

Interesting how whenever this question is asked (or others such as "would you hire a person with the character of our president to work for you", or "would you trust him with your kids", is never answered directly, but instead attacked for assumptions made in hearing the question. Reflective of how this person eventually became President...so much anger that people overlooked the horrible person he presents himself to be, and instead focus on their own anger, and all for things that don't even impact their lives. "I want to focus my anger on hidden emails rather than the polluted air my kids have to breath" is just one example. Your kids are not going to give a rat's ass about those emails in 10 or 20 years when our kids are fighting to repair the damage we are doing today for the sake of a penny or two per kilowatt.

 

[Larry L.]

What's important right now (to you) are the two indictments and the one guilty pleading with more to come I hope. Can't wait. :thumbsup:

^^^ Alleged illegalities that had nothing to do with Trump or the Trump campaign...whereas you choose not to even mention - OR pay any attention whatsoever to - all the actual EVIDENCE recently brought to light showing the DNC and Billary's campaign actually did "collude" with Russia in an attempt to influence the 2016 election...something a year's worth of sleuthing has yet to find on Trump's side of the ledger...and we all know the anti-Trumpers have sure tried.


Regardless, I'm still at a loss to find any statute anywhere that makes "collusion" a crime. "Conspiracy" is a crime...but, not "collusion" 'near as I can figure.

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

A friend in San Diego was telling me about Mexican sewage spills that affect the California shoreline. I really can't believe we aren't doing anything about it. They dump millions of gallons of raw sewage at a time into the Pacific.

San Diego to join lawsuit over border sewage spills | fox5sandiego.com

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

Imperial Beach poised to sue feds over border pollution - The San Diego Union-Tribune

Port, Chula Vista take action to halt border sewage spill | fox5sandiego.com

 

[Jeff Young]

^^^ Alleged illegalities that had nothing to do with Trump or the Trump campaign...whereas you choose not to even mention - OR pay any attention whatsoever to - all the actual EVIDENCE recently brought to light showing the DNC and Billary's campaign actually did "collude" with Russia in an attempt to influence the 2016 election...something a year's worth of sleuthing has yet to find on Trump's side of the ledger...and we all know the anti-Trumpers have sure tried.


Regardless, I'm still at a loss to find any statue anywhere that makes "collusion" a crime. "Conspiracy" is a crime...but, not "collusion" 'near as I can figure.

How many times does this have to be explained to you? You are being distracted -- squirrelled -- the tweeting President continues to make claims about collusion with Russians that simply did not happen they way he claims. To reiterate, AGAIN:

1. The initial work done by FUSION GPS was paid for by the Bush Campaign and conservative media sources that at the time did not like Trump.

2. During the general election, the DNC and the Clinton campaign paid FUSION GPS to do opposition research, in general, on Trump.

3. The DNC and the Clinton Campaign had no contact with Russians (unlike the Trump campaign). The DNC and the Clinton Campaign did not seek dirt on Trump from the Russians (unlike the Trump campaign). The DNC nad the Clinton Campaign did not suggest that favorable treatment of RUssia post election could be had in exchange for dirt on the opposing candidate (unlike the Trump Campaign).

4. What did the DNC and the Clinton Campaign do? They paid money to an opposition research firm, FUSION GPS, that then conducted opposition research of a variety of types on Trump, including obtaining a dossier from a former MI6 agent on certain activities that may or may not have taken place.

There was no contact, much less conclusion, between the DNC and Clinton campaign with Russians, Russian intelligence or the Russian government.

And, just a simple country observation here: it is literally STUPID to think the DNC and the Clinton campaign colluded with a government who our intelligence agencies have unanimously concluded preferred Drumpf.

 

[Larry L.]

Oh, shame on ME. I forgot YOUR VIEW is always the one that is completely 100% dead-on factual...and any DIFFERING view is not only completely WRONG - it's "stupid"...just for starters...

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

Oh, shame on ME. I forgot YOUR VIEW is always the one that is completely 100% dead-on factual...and any DIFFERING view is not only completely WRONG - it's "stupid"...just for starters...

And don't forget racist, hatemonger, and old man! You're forgetting he is an attorney, that's way above your lowly butt.

 

[Jeff Young]

And don't forget racist, hatemonger, and old man! You're forgetting he is an attorney, that's way above your lowly butt.

LOL -- never said anything like that. That's your inferiority complex talking. Has nothing to do with me.

Well, yeah, you did vote for a racist, old hatemonger and on occasion you post things that make you look like that.

 

[Jeff Young]

Oh, shame on ME. I forgot YOUR VIEW is always the one that is completely 100% dead-on factual...and any DIFFERING view is not only completely WRONG - it's "stupid"...just for starters...

No "view" involved. Those are the facts.

You nutjob rightwingers have an extremely hard time with the facts these days. Your view of fact is "anything Sean Hannity says" which has been proven over and over to be wrong.

 

[Walter Williams]

Christmas is coming early this year

 

[Rod]

Your kids are not going to give a rat's ass about those emails in 10 or 20 years when our kids are fighting to repair the damage we are doing today for the sake of a penny or two per kilowatt.

I agree with you Terry. Trump and his picks for the various Cabinet positions, besides being all wealthy white men, but for Billionaire Betsy, will destroy our enviroment or National Parks for a few extra bucks today. Getting rid of those regulations so we can pollute the air more. :thumbsdown:

And Trump is also hiring at least few unqualified lawyers to be judges too. The ABA has stated that at least a few of Trump's picks have been unqualified, which the ABA rarely does. So, the US court system could be filled with a bunch judges who are unqualified ideologues that no one can get rid of.

 

[Larry L.]

Oh, shame on ME. I forgot YOUR VIEW is always the one that is completely 100% dead-on factual...and any DIFFERING view is not only completely WRONG - it's "stupid"...just for starters...

You nutjob rightwingers...

Like I said.......................

 

[Terry Oxandale]

I agree with you Terry. Trump and his picks for the various Cabinet positions, besides being all wealthy white men, but for Billionaire Betsy, will destroy our enviroment or National Parks for a few extra bucks today. Getting rid of those regulations so we can pollute the air more. :thumbsdown:

And Trump is also hiring at least few unqualified lawyers to be judges too. The ABA has stated that at least a few of Trump's picks have been unqualified, which the ABA rarely does. So, the US court system could be filled with a bunch judges who are unqualified ideologues that no one can get rid of.

A perfect example is the pick to head up NASA. I know it's been said before, but I am still amazed (and I'm sure it's my science-technical based background) that anybody will choose their beliefs over science. Can you imagine where we'd all be if we took everything we were taught in school, and threw it out or ignored because it conflicted with our internal personal beliefs? If 95 doctors tell me that an action on my part is very likely to kill me, and 5 doctors tell me not to worry about it, why in heaven's name would I place an inordinate reliance on those 5? It makes no sense to believe in something, based on something I am not (an expert in that subject).

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

LOL -- never said anything like that. That's your inferiority complex talking. Has nothing to do with me.

Well, yeah, you did vote for a racist, old hatemonger and on occasion you post things that make you look like that.

I've never felt inferior to anyone least of all an attorney.

 

[Larry L.]

I know it's been said before, but I am still amazed (and I'm sure it's my science-technical based background) that anybody will choose their beliefs over science.

...even when, as in the case of "global warming"/"climate change", various 'scientific' findings/conclusions were arrived at via data proven to be wrong or flat-out fraudulent.

How many things deemed true by "science" 'back in the day' have since been proven wrong?

"Science" isn't infallible.

'Just sayin'...

 

[Terry Oxandale]

...even when, as in the case of "global warming"/"climate change", various 'scientific' findings/conclusions were arrived at via data proven to be wrong or flat-out fraudulent.

How many things deemed true by "science" 'back in the day' have since been proven wrong?

"Science" isn't infallible.

'Just sayin'...

Very true Larry, but until I know as much, or more than the scientists, I find it difficult to call bullshit on what they say, especially the opinion of the vast, vast majority of them.

 

[Larry L.]

...I find it difficult to call bullshit on what they say, especially the opinion of the vast, vast majority of them.

...even when, particularly in the case of GW/CC, the "vast, vast majority" (if in truth they actually ARE the "vast, vast majority"...and there are doubts about that) simply declares the matter has been 'decided', refuses to entertain/consider opposing arguments, and brushes them off as coming from "flat Earthers"...contrary to the long-standing guiding principle that "science" is supposed to embrace opposing opinions and the debates they engender? (Could 'big money' study/research grants from "greenies" have something to do with that?)


'Rhetorical question(s)...

 

[Terry Oxandale]

You haven't seen any big money until all the impacts of this change are eventually recognized. In the mean time there will always be those that gain the other "big money" keeping the status quo. Big money is a silly reason or excuse, because it's already there and will always be there, just depends which side you want to pay it to.