|
Post by Phalon on Nov 10, 2016 7:08:45 GMT -6
A very interesting and enlightening article, Katina. I think we don't fully realize all the implications of who we elect as president has outside our borders except perhaps the general effects.
This is the hope.
But that is the dark cloud currently hanging over the hope.
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Nov 10, 2016 23:29:20 GMT -6
A very interesting and enlightening article, Katina. I think we don't fully realize all the implications of who we elect as president has outside our borders except perhaps the general effects. That's the point unfortunately Gams, as the saying goes, when American sneezes the would catches a cold, and in this case it has the potential to be Pneumonia. This is the hope. But that is the dark cloud currently hanging over the hope. If the rumours are true that the next Secretary of State could be Newt Gingrich then that dark cloud could well be the harbinger of the next Apocalypse.
|
|
|
Post by Phalon on Nov 11, 2016 5:53:14 GMT -6
Along with Gingrich, there are also rumors of him appointing Giuliani and Palin to his cabinet. So much for the hope of surrounding himself with levelheaded people.
Everyone expected civil unrest no matter the outcome of the election, and no one is surprised demonstrations and protests are taking place across the country. The surprising thing - and truly horrifying result of his inciting hatred throughout his campaign - is what is happening in some of our schools. Chants of 'build the wall' taking place in a middle school lunch room as Latino kids sit crying; racial slurs written on a bathroom door along with the words "Whites Only"; fake deportation papers handed out to students with ethnicities other than white. He could take the highroad here, and denounce these activities, even encourage his followers to stop the hateful acts of racism.
Instead he sends a Tweet saying the demonstrations against him carried out by "professional protesters" are "unfair".
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Nov 11, 2016 17:57:32 GMT -6
Along with Gingrich, there are also rumors of him appointing Giuliani and Palin to his cabinet. So much for the hope of surrounding himself with levelheaded people. Looks like he's decided to surround himself with people who'll make him look smarter by comparison if those rumours do eventuate, Talk about the unholy trinity, all it needs now is for Donald Rumsfeld to get a recall and he'll have the complete set. Everyone expected civil unrest no matter the outcome of the election, and no one is surprised demonstrations and protests are taking place across the country. The surprising thing - and truly horrifying result of his inciting hatred throughout his campaign - is what is happening in some of our schools. Chants of 'build the wall' taking place in a middle school lunch room as Latino kids sit crying; racial slurs written on a bathroom door along with the words "Whites Only"; fake deportation papers handed out to students with ethnicities other than white. He could take the highroad here, and denounce these activities, even encourage his followers to stop the hateful acts of racism. Instead he sends a Tweet saying the demonstrations against him carried out by "professional protesters" are "unfair". That's appalling, but not really surprising unfortunately, when this sort of behaviour is incited/encouraged by the words of someone in his position the knuckle draggers are going to take full advantage of it, hopefully it's just a short lived situation. I'm still holding out hope that he'll moderate his views once he's actually in the job, if not then I truly fear for the future of your country.
|
|
|
Post by stepper on Nov 11, 2016 19:57:31 GMT -6
To me, a lifelong Independent, I can say without a doubt whatsoever and with total honesty, it would not have mattered which party the unindicted criminal ran for, I could not with any conscience, and would not have voted for her.
I find this surprising - unless you are talking about the idiots rioting in protest of the election results. There's not a darned thing they can do to change the results, so they say lets go down town and fight, block highways, burn cars and stores, and generally cause trouble. Did this happen when Obama was elected - twice? No. It's not the president elect or that party you need to fear.
I don't know that I'd call it a shock Kat, but it was certainly a surprise. (Especially to the news media.) Personally, I never expected him to last longer than the first six months - but initially the press sort of gave him a pass for his foot in mouth problem. I remember telling the guys at work I wondered if the Clintonistas had convinced the news people to let him off the hook for a while since he was nearly the worst possible candidate and would be the easiest to defeat. Then Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died and the election implications were suddenly much more important. The justices the Obama administration considered would have seriously changed the makeup of the court to give it an unacceptably liberal bias. On top of this, it's expected that at least two more of the justices will retire during the next administration. Two more justices with a liberal bias would have (IMHO) destroyed jurisprudence in this country. It requires a balance.
There are underlying issues like the one I mentioned above. The exceptionally high cost of Obama-care and the yearly increases (20% and more for instance) caused many to fear what it would do to the economy. Then nearly all of the major insurers here stopped supporting it because it was so seriously killing their bottom line. What I'm trying to say is that a lot of people were and are unhappy with what's been happening here - and they were sufficiently unhappy they felt motivated to go vote. By the time all of this started to gel (along with other issues), there were only two serious candidates left. Clown or not - Clinton was facing a rising tide of discontent from too many people who simply could not willingly subject themselves to a corrupt president.
The only person under serious consideration that I've heard about is Rudy Giuliani - he's considered a superior prosecutor and is being looked at for Attorney General or Secretary of State. Also, the New Jersey governor who was heading up the transition team was changed out for the Vice President elect - Mike Pence.
I took a quick glance at the link you posted - heavy emphasis on quick. Trump has already contacted South Korea and confirmed that the US intends to back their government - including any issue where nukes are involved. Japan is a bit trickier since they waver between wanting a US presence there, and not wanting the US to have enough personnel there to defend a playground. Every time some jerk soldier does something offensive, and sadly this does happen, their immediate reaction is to publicly insist the US must go. But, Trump has already acknowledged Japan as a vital partner in the region and especially in regard to backing them up when it comes to China's global expansion plans.
Closing overseas bases for the USA is not a new concept - the acronym is BRAC - it's an economic decision that congress mandated several years ago. We've already had five rounds of BRAC affecting overseas and continental bases. Literally hundreds of bases have been closed.
I'm sorry Phalon, but no we didn't expect civil unrest, and yes we are surprised - at the least we are surprised at the unbridled vitriolic reaction of some of the Democrats (clearly not all) and their progeny. It feels like we've got a generation of spoiled children pouting about losing their favorite toy. We don't completely agree with who incited the hatred or how it was done, but we agree the actions of chants for 'build the wall' and racial slurs are unacceptable.
Things like Jennifer Lawrence encouraging her fans to 'be enraged', Katy Perry, who is the most followed person on Twitter with 94 million fans, tweeted: "THE REVOLUTION IS COMING. RISE UP. POWER TO THE PEOPLE. WE WILL NEVER BE SILENCED.", and Lea DeLaria declaring people should "'take out' Trump supporters with a baseball bat" don't help calm the situation either. But then, they are in the Clinton camp so the news media isn't complaining about them at all.
Instead, he requested that Obama and Clinton encourage their followers to stop the riots. They weren't very direct nor forceful in this. Trump’s initial message wasn't all that great either. I'm guessing that since he's the focus of the hate, a suggestion from him to knock it off would be perceived as "Hey, we've got his attention! Pour it on!" and then the news people would all announce how Trump incited more rioting and now it's all his fault.
|
|
|
Post by stepper on Nov 12, 2016 11:16:41 GMT -6
An article from Fox News...underlines and bold are my doing. The publisher of The New York Times penned a letter to readers Friday promising that the paper would “reflect” on its coverage of this year’s election while rededicating itself to reporting on “America and the world” honestly. Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr., the paper’s embattled publisher, appealed to Times readers for their continued support. “We cannot deliver the independent, original journalism for which we are known without the loyalty of our subscribers,” the letter states. New York Post columnist and former Times reporter Michael Goodwin wrote, " because it (The Times) demonized Trump from start to finish, it failed to realize he was onto something. And because the paper decided that Trump’s supporters were a rabble of racist rednecks and homophobes, it didn’t have a clue about what was happening in the lives of the Americans who elected the new president.Sulzbergers letter was released after the paper’s public editor, Liz Spayd, took the paper to task for its election coverage. She pointed out how its polling feature Upshot gave Hillary Clinton an 84 percent chance as voters went to the polls. She compared stories that the paper ran about President-elect Donald Trump and Clinton, where the paper made Clinton look functional and organized and the Trump discombobulated. Liz Spayd "The NYT would do well to plant some roots in Red America" Spayd wrote, “Readers are sending letters of complaint at a rapid rate. Here’s one that summed up the feelings succinctly, from Kathleen Casey of Houston: “Now, that the world has been upended and you are all, to a person, in a state of surprise and shock, you may want to consider whether you should change your focus from telling the reader what and how to think, and instead devote yourselves to finding out what the reader (and nonreaders) actually think.” She wrote about another reader who asked that the paper should focus on the electorate instead of “pushing the limited agenda of your editors.” “Please come down from your New York City skyscraper and join the rest of us.” Sulzberger—who insisted that the paper covered both candidates fairly-- also sent a note to staffers on Friday reminding the newsroom to “give the news impartially, without fear or favor.” “But we also approach the incoming Trump administration without bias,” he said. www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/12/new-york-times-publisher-vows-to-rededicate-itself-to-reporting-honestly.html On another note - this is one example of many - this was the first one that came up: Lena Dunham breaks her election promise. Lena Dunham promised she’d move to Canada if Donald Trump became president — but she backed out of the pledge on social media Friday. The “Girls” actress swore in April there was “100 percent chance” she’d flee to the land of maple syrup, hockey and Nickelback if The Donald was elected. “I love Canada. I think that it’s a great place, and there’s an area in Vancouver that I find beautiful and appealing, and I can conduct business from there,” she said at the 2016 Matrix Awards. But when critics asked on social media when she planned to pack her bags, she copped out Friday. www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/11/12/lena-dunham-breaks-her-election-promise.htmlWhat she fails to mention is that the Canadians said they aren't interested in American Liberals - especially Ms. Dunham; she isn't welcome. heatst.com/politics/canadians-dont-want-america-fleeing-american-liberals-especially-lena-dunham/Here's an example of the kind of coverage "responsible" reporting that we have been subjected to for months {their italics - not mine}: Study: 91 Percent of Trump Coverage on Network News Was Negative (a.k.a. ‘Accurate’) A new study finds that an outrageous 8 percent of the the major networks’ nightly news coverage about Donald Trump wasn’t negative, despite the fact that the Republican nominee is an authoritarian demagogue who has praised political violence, railed against the freedom of the press, and challenged the legitimacy of American democracy. This is from a NY magazine.
|
|
|
Post by Spock on Nov 13, 2016 16:05:03 GMT -6
Personally I didn't like any of the choices. I voted for trump for two reasons: - I think it's past time for a woman President as long as it isn't Hillary Clinton, and
- A vote for anyone other than Trump was a vote for Hillary.
|
|
|
Post by stepper on Nov 14, 2016 19:58:08 GMT -6
You know, I wonder about your #2 comment Spock. What if some of those independents hadn't run. More than one state was pretty darned close. I wonder what would have happened had they (the independents) not been running. The guy I work with said he voted for one of the independents because he simply couldn't vote for Clinton, and didn't like Trump. I think voting for one of the independents is wasting your vote since they have no chance of winning anything when it comes to the Presidency, but I'm more than a little curious how/if it would have modified the election outcome.
|
|
|
Post by Spock on Nov 14, 2016 20:52:41 GMT -6
I would be very interested in seeing a fair campaign where someone with no official political affiliation won the hearts of the people and was able to win the election. I'm really tired of both "parties". Neither cares about "the people", they just want to get back into office so they don't have to work any more.
|
|
|
Post by stepper on Nov 15, 2016 22:42:38 GMT -6
IMHO - I'd like to see someone with less extreme views - a middle of the road guy - someone who's not all 'my way or the highway.'
|
|
|
Post by Phalon on Nov 18, 2016 0:14:10 GMT -6
Stepper,
I have wanted to get back to you, but have been extremely pressed for time.
I could give my opinion on each of your points, you in turn will give your opposing opinion, and we can go back and forth, and around and around, and neither of us will ever influence the opinion of the other. As I said in another thread, you can never argue a person’s faith. The same is true of a person’s political stance. I will save you and me both the time which I’m sure neither of us have, by not going any further about the politics of the election.
Instead, I will focus on the human aspect.
You say you are surprised I fear for our country, saying it’s the demonstrators, and not the president elect or his party we should fear.
In a way you are right. As a white, heterosexual, Christian male, you will have nothing to fear under a Trump administration. That’s a lot of adjectives in there, isn’t there? That’s because you need all those qualifiers not to feel fearful of what the election results could mean to the population of this country who aren’t white, who aren’t heterosexual, who aren’t Christian, and who aren’t male.
You are mistaken if you think the “idiots”, as you referred to them, are protesting election results; they are not “pouting about losing their favorite toy” as you claim...unless the “toy” you are referring to is their human and civil rights, or those of their family members, of their friends and neighbors. What people are protesting, and cannot accept is a very possible loss of those rights – the right not to be discriminated against because of the color of your skin, your sexual orientation or gender identity, your freedom from religious persecution,(a concept that this country was founded upon), and that a woman has control over her own body, and that it should not be treated as an object to be groped or even spoken of in that manner. They are protesting against racism, misogyny, xenophobia, homophobia, Islamophobia, bigotry, and hatred.
I’ve thought about Q a lot this past week – about how she lives in a state that was governed by one of the most blatantly anti-gay extremists in the political field; a governor who signed a religious liberty act, essentially giving business owners the right to refuse service to gay customers, and who at one time proposed cutting AIDS funding, and instead using the monies for gay “conversion therapy”. Now she has to live in a country with this same man as vice president – a VP who will have more power than those before him, most reports say. I wonder if she thinks the protesters are idiots. I texted this past weekend, just to let her know I was thinking about her and Ana, and send my love and support.
That you believe that it can be contested as to whether Trump incited hatred is incomprehensible to me. Aside from those who voted for him solely because ‘a vote for Trump is a vote against Clinton', there were people who genuinely believed his promises to bring back blue collar jobs, and those who liked him because he was not status quo and not a politician. But he also appealed to a segment of the voting population that no other candidate dared openly pander to – white supremacists. Racism and bigotry certainly existed in this country before this election, but during his campaign, Trump poured on the fuel, and fanned the flames.
He attracted guys like Richard Spencer, who coined the term alternative right, and rejoiced last week, saying “When it happened, I thought I might have been dreaming," and stated of Trump’s win, “this is the first step, the first stage towards identity politics for white people." Of course, there’s the KKK who announced a victory parade in Trump’s honor with the message “Trump’s Race United My People”, and former KKK leader David Duke’s tweet, “GOD BLESS DONALD TRUMP! It’s time to do the right thing, it’s time to TAKE AMERICA BACK!!!”
Then there’s Steven Bannon, who Trump just appointed as his chief strategist – the executive chairman of the Breitbart News, the media voice for the "alt-right", a rather polite sounding euphemism for white nationalist. Oh heck, let’s scrap the euphemisms all together, and call the alternative right what it is – white supremacy. I hope you can see why a large portion of the population finds this alarming. You said racial slurs and chants of “build the wall” in a middle school are unacceptable (yet this phrase was chanted repeatedly at Trump rallies before the election. Apparently it was acceptable then.) Because you won’t see it on Fox News - as of Monday they only reported the couple of false claims of hate crimes, here is just a smattering on what’s going on in this country: spray-painted graffiti of Swastikas on store fronts in Philadelphia, on a dugout at a baseball field “Make America White Again”, “Heil Trump” on a church; on a school bathroom door “F*** N*****s #F***AllN*****s #WhiteOnly #WhiteAmerica Trump”, and “Black Lives Don’t Matter and neither do your votes” on a building for lease. Eviction notices were left under doors in Queens “Attention!!! All N*****s and Sp**s have one week to vacate this building! This is now a Trump Friendly Building! The time has come for good decent white people to take back our streets…”, and a note on a gay couple’s windshield, “Can’t wait until your ‘marriage’ is overturned by a real president. Gay Families = Burn in Hell #Trump2016”, a Muslim college student was threatened by a man with a lighter off campus until she removed her hijab. A public official’s Facebook post, "It will be so refreshing to have a classy, beautiful, dignified First Lady back in the White House. I'm tired of seeing a (sic) Ape in heels”, and the mayor responding back, “Just made my day.” These things aren’t just unacceptable. They’re repugnant, and to use a word we’ve all heard recently, they’re deplorable. And they all have Trump’s name attached to them. We have reason to be enraged about these kinds of things, and should not sit silent.
You tried to somehow show a similarity of these acts of hatred and celebrity Clinton supporters Jennifer Lawrence encouraging her fans to “be enraged” and Katy Perry and her series of tweets. It would be helpful to read Jennifer Lawrence’s “be enraged” comment in the context in which she wrote it:
“I want to be positive; I want to support our democracy, but what can we take away from this? It’s a genuine question that we all need to ask ourselves… We’re all allowed to be sad that the present isn’t what we thought it was. But we mustn’t be defeated. We will keep educating ourselves and working twice as hard as the man next to us because we know now that it is not fair...Do not let this defeat you — let this enrage you! Let it motivate you! Let this be the fire you didn’t have before. If you are an immigrant, if you are a person of color, if you are LGBTQ+, if you are a woman — don’t be afraid, be loud!”
Katy Perry, who you quoted as tweeting, “THE REVOLUTION IS COMING. RISE UP. POWER TO THE PEOPLE. WE WILL NEVER BE SILENCED.", also tweeted , “Do not sit still. Do not weep. MOVE. We are not a nation that will let HATE lead us”, “Fight for what is RIGHT”, and “PEACEFULLY PROTEST.”
Although the majority of the protests have been peaceful, some have been marred by violence, most notably one of the earliest demonstrations in Portland, which I think was the one you referenced. Rioting and violence are intolerable; I’ve always felt it lessens the cause of the protest. Individuals are now attacking individuals on both sides. I cannot describe how this makes me feel. “Use your words, Mom”, LX would say. I can’t – there are no words to adequately express how saddened I am by all of this.
I doubt you have read this far, and if you have, I imagine you are already formulating a rebuttal. Please don’t waste your time – I know it is valuable to you. Hubs wondered the same of me when I started writing this, citing the same reason I did in my first paragraph – “he’s never going to change his opinion, why bother explaining yours?” I believe though, that to remain silent when we see racial, religious, and gender intolerance is the same as turning a blind eye; to say nothing is the same as denying the problems exist, or being indifferent – "it doesn’t affect me, so why care?” These are my feelings, my concerns, and my fears for the country and the people who live in it, and nothing from Fox News or conservative opinion media sites you cite will invalidate them.
It’s my hope as your friend, that you can see through your seething hatred of Hilary Clinton for a moment, turn off Fox News, and step outside your white man’s world for just a few minutes; you may get a glimpse of what a large part of the population is feeling. It would be hard, I think – empathy is a more difficult emotion to feel than sympathy; it requires you to imagine yourself in someone else’s shoes, and I have no delusions that you’d entertain the idea. Call me, and others who feel the same, bleeding heart liberals; we’ve always been labeled as empathic, as if it’s a bad thing. But please, don’t call the protesters idiots until you understand what they are protesting. From the first protest, it was never about the candidate that lost; it is about what is threatened to be lost under the candidate that won. Please don’t equate the reaction to Hilary Clinton’s loss to “pouting children losing their favorite toy; what is in jeopardy of being lost - basic human rights, civil and Constitutional rights, and social justice are not, and must never be considered toys. And please don’t dismiss the fear of these things being lost – the fear is real, and so is the reason to feel it.
|
|
|
Post by Phalon on Nov 18, 2016 0:35:36 GMT -6
Joxie, I believe this last series of posts, starting with Spock's fascist comment, might better fit in the politics thread, with its warning label. If you agree, mightn't you wave your magic wand and move them?
|
|
|
Post by Mini Mia on Nov 18, 2016 1:11:00 GMT -6
Your wish has been granted.
|
|
|
Post by Scrappy Amazon on Nov 21, 2016 8:36:15 GMT -6
Phalon....... I have been swerving between tears and rage for the last week since the election. My facebook page is a wasteland of running arguments. I have lost people I called friends in the last week for exactly the reasons you have stated above. To me anyone who could so disregard the kind of rhetoric and ugly awful belief system that he holds up and reveres is a threat to my safety. Period. I could not have said anything better myself. I would like to point out too that the reason we (all of us) came to this board in the first place was because of a television show about two women who stood for everything that is antithetical to the thought process that was just elected by less than half the voter base. And that thought process is the main reason I have not been around here a lot in the last few years. www.ora.tv/politicking/2016/9/30/lucy-lawless-on-politicking-0_70fqsir6y75i
|
|
|
Post by quettalee on Nov 23, 2016 22:16:46 GMT -6
This is me, reading and feeling again like I have since the beginning of the month...and feeling what I've tried so desperately to push down since that night--that hour--when the tide started turning and I literally started feeling nauseated, realizing that this...man, this monster, this "joke" of a political leader was to be the person to take charge of our country and our lives. And as Phalon pointed out, he is the lesser of the two evils--Pence actually scares me more than Trump. I turned the TV to reruns of Bones and tried to go to sleep, tried to ignore the impending feeling that our lives--the lives of gays and blacks and Muslims, anyone NOT white and male and heterosexual are going to be turned upside down in the months and years to come.
I don't come here anymore, not even to read, so I was unaware of how far we've drifted since our beginnings as a "strong Amazon nation". I need time to process before I respond any further because as I have already stated, I've tried with every waking moment to move away from the uncertainty and uneasiness that feels like it's always "just right there"--in the back of my mind, the depths of my heart and the pit of my stomach.
OK...well...I've typed and deleted and retyped and deleted for almost two hours and this is all I have. I just can't respond right now.
Sis, your texts were so appreciated...and I didn't even know how much from the heart they came at the time because I was oblivious to what was going on here. Thank you, thank you from the bottom of my heart. That's all I'm gonna say here and now.
Jenn...much love. That's all I got right now for you too. We can always talk on Fb.
|
|
|
Post by Phalon on Nov 24, 2016 15:01:40 GMT -6
Quetta, I read your post this morning, and wanted to get back to you then, but many hands helping in the kitchen kept my hands busy! Even now that there's a lull in the Thanksgiving dinner preparations, I had to stop writing to explain to the girls what I was writing, which sparked meaningful discussion, though now I've got much less time than I did when I started to respond to your post.
I realize you've probably gone in greater detail on Facebook, but would encourage you to continue expressing your opinions here, on Facebook, and anywhere else you are a member. Although it's very possible it'll do little to nothing change opinions, doing so accomplishes a few things in my opinion - it helps you work through your feelings of fear, frustration, and in my case, helplessness; it may move you and others who've read your comments into positive action (I've reached out into my local community, for example, in ways I never imagined myself doing before the election); and someone may walk away with an idea they didn't have before - I loved Scrappy's idea of asking people who normally would give her gifts during the holidays, to donate instead to organizations that may be hardest hit under Trump's administration; I'm doing the same, as well as making donations in people's names to organizations whose missions I know they believe in, or in some way have helped them.
Peace, love, and hugs, Sis, always.
|
|
|
Post by Spock on Nov 24, 2016 16:37:00 GMT -6
And all of this discussion may be for nothing. Since he hasn't even taken office yet, there is actually no way we can know what will actually change. While supposedly the most powerful position in the country, there are a series of checks and balances in place to limit the damage (or good) any one President may have.
I don't doubt that many things will change but I have always thought that care for those marginalized by our society for whatever reason was best left to local authorities, social organizations, and churches. The Federal Government really has no place deciding policy for the entire nation in such matters. Maybe now the State governments will be forced to start doing what they should have already been doing.
My only hope is that, whether you believe in the man or not, no one will do anything irrevocable or violent. I am disappointed in the entire process this year as I don't think either of the two candidates were acceptable. Now that one of those candidates has won, I stand ready to do exactly the same thing I would have done if the other had won. If he does not live up to my idea of what a true leader should be like, I will vote against him in the next election ... just as I voted against the current President, twice. I many times felt depressed and overwhelmed but never thought violence was the answer. I can only hope that things settle down and everyone just waits to see what will happen.
You never know, you may come to like what happens. Even if you don't, you can take comfort in the fact that our system is still better than many of the others available. If you don't like him, organize opposition to his re-election or better yet, organize in support of the election of someone better.
|
|
|
Post by Scrappy Amazon on Dec 14, 2016 9:59:12 GMT -6
Curious Gentlemen. Do you have any concerns that it appears as though our president elect may have encouraged if not out right assisted Russia in tampering with the election?
|
|
|
Post by Spock on Dec 14, 2016 16:25:42 GMT -6
Curious Gentlemen. Do you have any concerns that it appears as though our president elect may have encouraged if not out right assisted Russia in tampering with the election? Not sure where you get your information: Leak, not a hack
|
|
|
Post by Scrappy Amazon on Dec 15, 2016 9:02:08 GMT -6
Maybe you should try established news sources that don't encourage hogwash fake news. The New York Times has been an actual (not always liberal, in fact was established by a republican) news source for 165 years. NY TimesAnd the Washington Post for 140 years: Washington Post
|
|
|
Post by Spock on Dec 17, 2016 12:08:33 GMT -6
I've seen fabricated news before and wouldn't be surprised if this were the same ... or real. In the end, it doesn't matter to me, Clinton did not get in.
While I'm not necessarily happy with Trump either, I'm willing to see how he does in the next four years. At least he won't try to give our country away to the Islamists.
If I don't like his policies, I will vote against him next time, which is what everyone in the country needs to realize is "The American Way."
|
|
|
Post by quettalee on Dec 17, 2016 12:33:36 GMT -6
Curious Gentlemen. Do you have any concerns that it appears as though our president elect may have encouraged if not out right assisted Russia in tampering with the election? Not sure where you get your information: Leak, not a hackCarmine Sabia Jr started his own professional wrestling business at age 18 and went on to become a real estate investor. Currently he is a pundit who covers political news and current events. (author of the above link--impressive credentials) www.npr.org/2016/12/13/505442914/trumps-cabinet-picks-take-the-establishment-and-shake-it-upside-downTrump will never stay President, if he does in fact even take the oath. No one that is as intelligent as he obviously is would continue the antics that he engages in and not expect tremendous fallout, inevitably leading to him either resigning or being impeached. As I have believed for many months now, I continue to believe that he is a distraction--a circus act orchestrated to divert attention from what is shaping up behind the scenes. The intelligent and educated tight-ass conservatives in this country know exactly what they are doing and the ignorant and uneducated will follow just as they have always done throughout history. And history always repeats itself (as we Battlestar Galactica fans absolutely know). We are headed for troubled times my friends. And others who post here.
|
|
|
Post by Scrappy Amazon on Dec 17, 2016 22:21:47 GMT -6
If I don't like his policies, I will vote against him next time, which is what everyone in the country needs to realize is "The American Way." Which is what 2 million people more than voted for him did and we still ended up with "Lord Cheeto" We are headed for troubled times my friends. And others who post here. That made me chuckle. The last part not the trouble....
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Dec 18, 2016 20:35:57 GMT -6
I've seen fabricated news before and wouldn't be surprised if this were the same ... or real. In the end, it doesn't matter to me, Clinton did not get in. While I'm not necessarily happy with Trump either, I'm willing to see how he does in the next four years. At least he won't try to give our country away to the Islamists.If I don't like his policies, I will vote against him next time, which is what everyone in the country needs to realize is "The American Way." Seems a bit of an alarmist statement there Spock, who exactly is giving the country away?
|
|
|
Post by Scrappy Amazon on Dec 19, 2016 8:31:02 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Phalon on Dec 20, 2016 7:36:14 GMT -6
To be fair, for those who might say that's just the opinion of a Democrat publication, BBC, which continually ranks among the most unbiased news sources available, reports the same: www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-38367363Somebody needs to teach that man - really teach him because he doesn't seem to get it - that he is not just speaking for himself now, but for the entire country.
|
|
|
Post by Scrappy Amazon on Dec 29, 2016 20:37:20 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Spock on Dec 30, 2016 8:39:09 GMT -6
I'm confused. That link points to a story about Obama expelling Russian diplomats ...
|
|
|
Post by Scrappy Amazon on Dec 31, 2016 8:59:29 GMT -6
I think the point is WHY he expelled them.
|
|
|
Post by Phalon on Jan 2, 2017 12:24:52 GMT -6
But wait!!!!
The man, who rarely uses a computer but "knows a lot about hacking", also "knows things that other people don't know"!!! Things that presumably seventeen intelligence agencies don't know. Could it be....?!
Could it be he's single-handedly tracked down that "guy in his home in New Jersey", and convinced him to turn himself in....
...via handwritten conversations sent by courier, of course.
Stay tuned until tomorrow to find out what it is he knows that other people don't. Or Wednesday. Or never.
|
|