Radio Paradise

Recently Active Forum Topics:

Page: Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 1161, 1162, 1163 ... 1327, 1328, 1329 Next

Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: The foot of Mount Belzoni
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 10, 2017 - 7:22pm
What the difference between a garbanzo bean and a chickpea? The president-elect of the United States of America wouldn't pay to watch a garbanzo bean.

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Jan 10, 2017 - 5:16pm
Nothing at all elitist about the incoming first family. Nothing.

Alexandra

Alexandra Avatar

Location: PNW
Gender: Female

Posted: Jan 10, 2017 - 5:09pm
People who declined performing at the inaugaration.... Hell, Ted Nugent would love to do it. Why hasn't he been asked? Markie Mark might too.

R_P

Gender:

Posted: Jan 10, 2017 - 5:08pm
Cons, cronies, and coconuts.

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Jan 9, 2017 - 5:06pm
Meet the Obscure Group Influencing Trump's Energy Policy

Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: The foot of Mount Belzoni
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 9, 2017 - 4:55pm
Trump is referring to New York Times investigative journalist Serge Kovaleski, a disabled reporter who suffers from arthrogryposis, which primarily restricts joint movement in the limbs.

steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth

Posted: Jan 7, 2017 - 8:34am
So, I guess it was not the 400-pound guy in New Jersey.

R_P

Gender:

Posted: Jan 6, 2017 - 2:15pm
Too bad "Orange Revolution" was already used...

aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 3, 2017 - 7:49am
steeler wrote: . Now you are picking up this ridiculous "elitist" spin. And blaming the media. Hard to imagine a more "elitist" person than an old rich dude whose attitude towards women who aren't models is basically, "you're too ugly for me to sexually assault". Perhaps elitism combined with mendacity, vanity, and narcissism is what some people see as the mark of a potential leader.

Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: The foot of Mount Belzoni
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 2, 2017 - 4:44pm

kurtster wrote:

So its like this. I've seen this movie before. Same circular arguments. Same going nowhere.

I voted for the guy and I'm happy so far. I know that is not an acceptable answer. It never will be. The more I try and articulate my thoughts the more it just goes back to the same place. My thoughts are illegitimate and poorly reasoned. They will never be accepted. I foolishly tried to play nice only to provide amusement for others who don't wish to hear what I have to offer on the matter, or prolly anyone else who might be happy with Trump so far.

So ... back to my original point. No reason being in here. The only acceptable reason to be in this thread is to beat up on Trump.

or back to buddy's statement that brought me back in here for the first time in weeks and who was thoroughly mocked for making it. When you see this thread at the top of the RAFT all the time, it won't be because someone in here is supporting Trump. It is your friends shredding him. Curious that it doesn't make you and everyone else around here happy.

{#Wave}

Then you're right: folks will continue to point out what he's doing. If that means it's all negative, it's something to consider.

However, you've seen me post some "let's see" posts at times - specifically, that he might repeal ACA and really put something more financially viable in its place. We'll see.
He might really help mend the rift that lingers after the Cold War and we start working in partnership with Russia, getting good things done. We'll see.
There could be a renaissance of fiscal responsibility in the USA, so we're not spending beyond our means, and there are jobs rebuilding our infrastructure. We'll see.

I'm open minded. But, based on his history (see my bullet points) I don't have a reason to be complacent. And I would think you'd be nervous, as well.

There's a great moment in the fantastic movie "Eyewitness" where the cops accuse William Hurt of killing a notorious corrupt Vietnamese businessman, saying "You served in Vietnam; I'd think you'd have a grudge against this guy a mile wide."
Hurt replies, "I'd think you would as well. It's your country, too."

Neither of us want the country to collapse, so it's right that we both, that we all, hold this guy's feet to the fire to perform. So far, he's been a disappointment.

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 2, 2017 - 4:12pm

steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth

Posted: Jan 2, 2017 - 3:48pm

kurtster wrote:

It is the Elitists who add on extra qualifications.

The Constitution leaves the rest is up to the voters. They decide who is or isn't qualified enough to do the job.

There are many who still don't need a weatherman to tell them which way the wind is blowing. Or that its not raining, they're being pissed on by the Elitists and the Media.
C'ya ...

What Steely said. You knew what he meant, and you sidestepped it. And you should have known that I was talking about qualifications for the office that voters consider that go beyond the eligibility requirements in the Constitution. Now you are picking up this ridiculous "elitist" spin. And blaming the media.

Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: The foot of Mount Belzoni
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 2, 2017 - 3:24pm

kurtster wrote:

Your answers were good, but trying to temper his failures by noting the Biden and Bill had concerns doesn't really address the magnitude and number of his negative checkboxes.

Technically, of course, he's qualified. But you sidestep the nuance of the question, since the answer seems straightforward. His learning curve is going to be the steepest of anyone in my lifetime - while our neighboring countries, both friend and foe, watch while he figures things out.

You know, Trump is the definition of Elite: born into money, avoided serving his country, documented that he acts like a vulgar boor but people tolerate it, buddies with banker barons and the worldly hoi-polloi, and thinks he knows more than...everybody, it seems. How do folks get around thinking he's not "Elite?" I bet if you told him that he wasn't elite he'd be the first to call you names on Twitter.

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 2, 2017 - 1:25pm

steeler wrote:

My, god, I am qualifiedto be President!

Who knew? I sure as hell did not, but now that I know there are no other qualifications necessary . . . .

steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth

Posted: Jan 2, 2017 - 12:12pm

kurtster wrote:

has never held a single public office, T
has a history of multiple bankruptcies, F corporate bankruptcies are different from personal bankruptcies.
cheated on his wives, T and what of Bill ?
doesn't have the support of the majority of the nation's voters, F unknown. The voting turnout and popular vote results could be completely different in a campaign operated without the Electoral College in place.
publicly questions the quality of our nation's intelligence community, T and I approve. Trust but verify. We never found any WMD's in Iraq, right ?
promotes Putin as a great leader in lieu of our President, F depends on how you spin things.
has many recorded instances of unquestionably vulgar and misogynistic language, and T then there is Biden...
communicates with the nation not by news conferences where his contentions can be discussed, but via Twitter monologues. F he was the most open and accessible candidate we have seen in decades. Then what about Hillary ? Where the hell was she the whole campaign ?

To the bolded ... these are the only qualifications that I am aware of ...

Article II

Section 1.

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

How is Mr Trump unqualified ? Is there a higher authority than the Constitution ? In your world maybe, not mine.

There, have I answered all your questions, straightforwardly ?

My, god, I am qualified to be President!

Who knew? I sure as hell did not, but now that I know there are no other qualifications necessary . . . .

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 2, 2017 - 12:03pm

Steely_D wrote:

Consensus Spin

edit - you ignored the bullet points. Do you think they're not true?
And if you think they're true, how do you get past that to think he's qualified?

has never held a single public office, T
has a history of multiple bankruptcies, F corporate bankruptcies are different from personal bankruptcies.
cheated on his wives, T and what of Bill ?
doesn't have the support of the majority of the nation's voters, F unknown. The voting turnout and popular vote results could be completely different in a campaign operated without the Electoral College in place.
publicly questions the quality of our nation's intelligence community, T and I approve. Trust but verify. We never found any WMD's in Iraq, right ?
promotes Putin as a great leader in lieu of our President, F depends on how you spin things.
has many recorded instances of unquestionably vulgar and misogynistic language, and T then there is Biden...
communicates with the nation not by news conferences where his contentions can be discussed, but via Twitter monologues. F he was the most open and accessible candidate we have seen in decades. Then what about Hillary ? Where the hell was she the whole campaign ?

To the bolded ... these are the only qualifications that I am aware of ...

Article II

Section 1.

How is Mr Trump unqualified ? Is there a higher authority than the Constitution ? In your world maybe, not mine.

There, have I answered all your questions, straightforwardly ?

Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: The foot of Mount Belzoni
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 2, 2017 - 11:06am
kurtster wrote: If not an echo chamber, then what ? What do you call something where only one point of view is expressed or tolerated ? Consensus edit - you ignored the bullet points. Do you think they're not true? And if you think they're true, how do you get past that to think he's qualified?

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 2, 2017 - 10:53am
aflanigan wrote: kurtster wrote: Tis why I quit posting *in here* Promises, promises. you left that out. later.

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 2, 2017 - 10:51am

Steely_D wrote:

Rational thought - rational - would recognize that Trump:

has never held a single public office,
has a history of multiple bankruptcies,
cheated on his wives,
doesn't have the support of the majority of the nation's voters,
publicly questions the quality of our nation's intelligence community,
promotes Putin as a great leader in lieu of our President,
has many recorded instances of unquestionably vulgar and misogynistic language, and
communicates with the nation not by news conferences where his contentions can be discussed, but via Twitter monologues.

Those aren't opinions. Those are the cards that have been dealt to rational thought.
There isn't a reasonable conclusion that Trump is a good choice for the Nation's President. (oh, he's not Hillary. Yawn.)
That means that talking about Trump isn't going to be some 50/50 pro/con thing, so you can complain about that, but it's an unrealistic expectation. There's no "echo chamber" if people simply agree based on the information in front of them. It's called consensus.

People jumping from a bridge? Don't be disappointed, but it's unlikely to happen.
Instead, I think you'll see talking, dissension, marching. Folks recognize that the Cheeto-in-Chief (remember how folks called the current President Obummer? Turnabout is fair play.) has to be under constant scrutiny, lest we lose the economic and social progress that folks fought for.

And, "Poseurs" is just another insulting, bullying term designed to stifle conversation. This is consistent with the new administration.

Wow, you're fast. I was going to comment on your assertion that I was deriding people for not jumping. I was deriding people for not leaving. But I guess you did figure that out.

Calling someone a poseur is far less insulting than calling someone racist and bigoted, at least in my world.

If not an echo chamber, then what ? What do you call something where only one point of view is expressed or tolerated ?

aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 2, 2017 - 10:50am
kurtster wrote: Tis why I quit posting Promises, promises. We've seen this movie before.

Page: Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 1161, 1162, 1163 ... 1327, 1328, 1329 Next