| Author |
|
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132391
|
| Posted: 28 May 2019 at 2:35pm | IP Logged | 1
|
post reply
|
|
Well, he’s worked so hard for it....
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Richard Stevens
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 04 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1933
|
| Posted: 28 May 2019 at 2:45pm | IP Logged | 2
|
post reply
|
|
PS - I sure hope I haven't misspelled any words in this post. I'd hate t be ticketed again by the grammar police and have all of my arguments rendered null and void by a spelling error.
***
You'd hate to be ticketed again...
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Steven Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 10 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5629
|
| Posted: 28 May 2019 at 4:31pm | IP Logged | 3
|
post reply
|
|
While I would agree that it is smarter to understand that investment in society, including education and health care, are long-term wins, I do not think these things should be the exclusive domain of Democrats. Fiscal conservatives should also see this as an investment that pays off financially in favor of society, in that a smarter, healthier, and more educated populace should lead to LESS taxes and government spending in the long run. Just as our country spends more government money on health care than countries that have socializes medicine.
Also, there is a tendency towards personal freedom. Libertarians have certain things right, except they go too far. We should allow everyone to have as much personal freedom as possible, which has shown to lead to more educated and better societies.
I'm rambling (sorry I'm not writing a research paper here) but my point is that, whereas the liberals/Democrats don't have it all figured out, the conservatives/Republicans are really off track. Are any of them even a little bit fiscally conservative? They only seem to want to cut taxes, then cut spending on select programs they see as "liberal".
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Brian Floyd
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 07 July 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 8375
|
| Posted: 28 May 2019 at 4:52pm | IP Logged | 4
|
post reply
|
|
Well, I removed Paul from ignore to see what he was posting in this thread. Should not have bothered. Typical right wing conservative who refuses to listen to any opinion but his own and feels persecuted. When the right wing conservatives more or less have their noses up Trump's rear and like it that way.
Back to ignore for him.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Koroush Ghazi
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 25 October 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1656
|
| Posted: 28 May 2019 at 5:40pm | IP Logged | 5
|
post reply
|
|
Steven Myers wrote:
While I would agree that it is smarter to understand that investment in society, including education and health care, are long-term wins, I do not think these things should be the exclusive domain of Democrats. Fiscal conservatives should also see this as an investment that pays off financially in favor of society, in that a smarter, healthier, and more educated populace should lead to LESS taxes and government spending in the long run. Just as our country spends more government money on health care than countries that have socializes medicine.
Also, there is a tendency towards personal freedom. Libertarians have certain things right, except they go too far. We should allow everyone to have as much personal freedom as possible, which has shown to lead to more educated and better societies. |
|
|
Well put, I agree with all of this. The US Democrats, and various left-of-center parties around the world, aren't necessarily a solution to our problems. At this point though, they are certainly far less crazy than the far right!
Paul Buchanan wrote:
| I know you love to find articles that somehow fit your narrative, however poorly thought out or obscure they may be. You're the master of the appeal to authority fallacy. |
|
|
Make your mind up mate! On the one hand, you say "Hard to argue with those facts (whatever they are since you don't mention them) presented by "subject matter experts"." Then a short while later, you say that by citing relevant articles, I'm appealing to authority. Would you prefer that we stick to only citing positive articles from Fox (a.k.a. American Pravda)? For the record, I'm an Economist. I could explain this stuff to you without graphs or layman's terms, and without referencing international authorities. But then you'd simply turn around and say "but that's just your opinion!".
And what exactly are all of these positive things that Trump has done? You casually dropping "I'd say he's got 50% approval" or "3.6% unemployment" into the conversation, bereft of all-important context (much less an actual reference to source), is hardly the clinching argument you may think it is.
You also seem to think that thoughtless belligerence is a substitute for logic. I particularly love the way you say "I'll post a response on whatever I damn well feel like here, be they Trump topics or not." No, you may not. This is a private forum. JB, and Matt as his proxy, determine what we're allowed to post here. You get no say in it whatsoever. I've posted things here before that JB or a mod has deleted, and I've kept my mouth shut. That's the way it works on private platforms, like JBF, or Twitter, or Facebook. You post at the host's pleasure, no more no less.
But of course, what could one expect from a person who supports the very same people who argue for "greater freedom" (esp. religious freedom) while simultaneously trying to blanket ban everything from abortion to gay weddings to migrants from a range of countries; who argue that private businesses can do whatever the hell they want when it comes to refusing service based on "their religious beliefs", but cry a river when a private business kicks one of theirs out of a restaurant, or removes their hate speech from a private Internet platform.
Seriously, it's time for a reality check. As I noted before, you seem to exhibit many of the basic characteristics indicating the ability to think rationally. At some point though, it seems you (and many others) have decided to sacrifice sense and reason on the altar of right-wing dogma. To paraphrase the poet and philosopher Ice Cube: "Check yo self before you wreck [the entire bloody planet!]"
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 30914
|
| Posted: 28 May 2019 at 6:45pm | IP Logged | 6
|
post reply
|
|
Guys, take the lead from Mr Floyd and me. Ignore him. Stop giving him attention and he’ll just fade away like a turd down a toilet.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Matt Hawes
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 16437
|
| Posted: 29 May 2019 at 8:57am | IP Logged | 7
|
post reply
|
|
Robert Mueller to speak today!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15833
|
| Posted: 29 May 2019 at 10:06am | IP Logged | 8
|
post reply
|
|
And he speaks to say, the report contains all I have to say.
What is interesting is that his firm opinion is that he was allowed to investigate but not allowed under the Constitution to charge the President with a Federal crime -- that that is the responsibility of Congress.
Of course, Trump's predictable response was 'the case is closed!' (how he arrives at such a conclusion is unfathomable beyond that's what suits him best, but there you go).
Edited by Peter Martin on 29 May 2019 at 10:08am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Charles Valderrama
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4726
|
| Posted: 29 May 2019 at 11:40am | IP Logged | 9
|
post reply
|
|
The bottom line is that while impeachment IS the natural solution going forward, (Mueller said "IF the President did not commit a crime, they would have said so". Thats pretty significant. Also said he couldn't indict a sitting president.) the House Dems are scared to "pull the trigger" because the GOP Senate wouldn't likely convict Trump... and it might cost them the 2020 election.
At least start the Barr impeachment.... he lied to Congress.
-C!
Edited by Charles Valderrama on 29 May 2019 at 12:18pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15833
|
| Posted: 29 May 2019 at 11:43am | IP Logged | 10
|
post reply
|
|
Mueller said "IF the President did not commit a crime, they would of said so"------------------------------------- If Mueller truly said this, he should be expecting a visit from the grammar police shortly :)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Charles Valderrama
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4726
|
| Posted: 29 May 2019 at 12:17pm | IP Logged | 11
|
post reply
|
|
LOL - Sorry, my bad. I was quickly summarizing and let that slip!
-C!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Mark Haslett
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6143
|
| Posted: 29 May 2019 at 1:43pm | IP Logged | 12
|
post reply
|
|
Charles: the House Dems are scared to "pull the trigger" because the GOP
Senate wouldn't likely convict Trump... and it might cost them the 2020
election.
**
I keep reading this theory as self-evident: a failed impeachment could cost
the Dems the election.
Can anyone spell that out for the dumb guy in the bleachers?
The Trump base is on constant 4 alarm radical blaze.
Impeachment would mean a long drawn out examination of Trumps' crimes
being on TV for every day of the 2020 campaign, and then (all seem to
agree) the Senate would hold their nose and vote to acquit anyway.
And this would somehow increase the number of Trump voters in America...
how?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
