It's On, Trump vs Clinton

[The emperor has no clothes]

I was disapointed in the moderator. Asking the "birthing" question was a waste of time and stupid.

No it wasn't a waste of time.  It was done intentionally.  If you recall, he didn't just question him about it, he asked the question in the context of racism, trying to confirm Hillary's assertions that Trump's a racist.

Lester Holt: "For Five Years You Perpetuated A False Claim That The Nation's First Black President Was Not A Natural Born Citizen"

The fact that Obama is black had nothing to do the birther issue.  Only in eyes of a racist would it.  You see racists think about these things in there own minds and then project them onto others.  Lester could have just asked him about it, leaving out Obama's skin color, right?

It must have just been a coincidence that 43 White Presidents weren't asked for their birth certificate .

So, a question asked to the only black president has to be a racist one if it wasn't asked to the others?  

What if there happened to be a Jewish president.  Would question asked of him be considered antisemitic if never asked before?

I would say if the purpose of the question was to delegitimize the Jewish president then yes it would be viewed as antisemitic . As a hypothetical example. If a Jew were elected president in 2020 and he or she were asked to prove their allegiance was to the USA and not to Israel. I would say that was probably antisemitic . The reason being that the insinuation is that they are not "one of us". Just as that was the insinuation with Obama.

[Jersey mike]

And my claiming my mortgage interest doesn't stiff thousands of hard working people out of money they're owed. Just another favorite tactic of this 'candidate'.

What "hard working people" are owed money out of my income tax? or anyone else's for that matter?

[Willow]

I would say if the purpose of the question was to delegitimize the Jewish president then yes it would be viewed as antisemitic . As a hypothetical example. If a Jew were elected president in 2020 and he or she were asked to prove their allegiance was to the USA and not to Israel. I would say that was probably antisemitic . The reason being that the insinuation is that they are not "one of us". Just as that was the insinuation with Obama.

Bullshit, meathead, bullshit.  It's not good when people choose to extrapolate their own cheap motivations in reverse in assuming the reasoning of anyone with whom they disagree.  The Obama supporters would have been pleased to interpret any question regarding Obama as racist.

It would have been very easy for the Obama team to officially answer that question.  They fueled that fire themselves.

[The emperor has no clothes]

I would say if the purpose of the question was to delegitimize the Jewish president then yes it would be viewed as antisemitic . As a hypothetical example. If a Jew were elected president in 2020 and he or she were asked to prove their allegiance was to the USA and not to Israel. I would say that was probably antisemitic . The reason being that the insinuation is that they are not "one of us". Just as that was the insinuation with Obama.

Bullshit, meathead, bullshit.  It's not good when people choose to extrapolate their own cheap motivations in reverse in assuming the reasoning of anyone with whom they disagree.  The Obama supporters would have been pleased to interpret any question regarding Obama as racist.

It would have been very easy for the Obama team to officially answer that question.  They fueled that fire themselves.

You may choose to believe what you want. When a person is presented evidence and chooses not to see it there is not much room for other thought than racism. The birth certificate was presented. That is a fact, not bullshit.

[baldo]

I would say if the purpose of the question was to delegitimize the Jewish president then yes it would be viewed as antisemitic . As a hypothetical example. If a Jew were elected president in 2020 and he or she were asked to prove their allegiance was to the USA and not to Israel. I would say that was probably antisemitic . The reason being that the insinuation is that they are not "one of us". Just as that was the insinuation with Obama.

Bullshit, meathead, bullshit.  It's not good when people choose to extrapolate their own cheap motivations in reverse in assuming the reasoning of anyone with whom they disagree.  The Obama supporters would have been pleased to interpret any question regarding Obama as racist.

It would have been very easy for the Obama team to officially answer that question.  They fueled that fire themselves.

Willow,

You've got a different way of seeing things. I'll give you that.

[Willow]

I would say if the purpose of the question was to delegitimize the Jewish president then yes it would be viewed as antisemitic . As a hypothetical example. If a Jew were elected president in 2020 and he or she were asked to prove their allegiance was to the USA and not to Israel. I would say that was probably antisemitic . The reason being that the insinuation is that they are not "one of us". Just as that was the insinuation with Obama.

Bullshit, meathead, bullshit.  It's not good when people choose to extrapolate their own cheap motivations in reverse in assuming the reasoning of anyone with whom they disagree.  The Obama supporters would have been pleased to interpret any question regarding Obama as racist.

It would have been very easy for the Obama team to officially answer that question.  They fueled that fire themselves.

You may choose to believe what you want. When a person is presented evidence and chooses not to see it there is not much room for other thought than racism. The birth certificate was presented. That is a fact, not bullshit.

It wasn't.  A supposed replication (with explanation that the official record had been destroyed) of a birth certificate was presented but not an official copy.  It wasn't, incidentally, presented by either Barrack or one of his representatives.  At this point I don't really care whether he was or wasn't but he did not bother to answer the question.  If you choose to believe the only reason for a person to oppose Barrack Obama's legitimacy for whatever reason is obviously racism then you are practicing a rather wide sprung assumption and demonstrating that you really don't know crap but it seems to make a good argument to silence the opposition.  

[Willow]

Willow,

You've got a different way of seeing things. I'll give you that.

Coming from certain people I take that as a high compliment.   

[The emperor has no clothes]

I would say if the purpose of the question was to delegitimize the Jewish president then yes it would be viewed as antisemitic . As a hypothetical example. If a Jew were elected president in 2020 and he or she were asked to prove their allegiance was to the USA and not to Israel. I would say that was probably antisemitic . The reason being that the insinuation is that they are not "one of us". Just as that was the insinuation with Obama.

Bullshit, meathead, bullshit.  It's not good when people choose to extrapolate their own cheap motivations in reverse in assuming the reasoning of anyone with whom they disagree.  The Obama supporters would have been pleased to interpret any question regarding Obama as racist.

It would have been very easy for the Obama team to officially answer that question.  They fueled that fire themselves.

You may choose to believe what you want. When a person is presented evidence and chooses not to see it there is not much room for other thought than racism. The birth certificate was presented. That is a fact, not bullshit.

It wasn't.  A supposed replication (with explanation that the official record had been destroyed) of a birth certificate was presented but not an official copy.  It wasn't, incidentally, presented by either Barrack or one of his representatives.  At this point I don't really care whether he was or wasn't but he did not bother to answer the question.  If you choose to believe the only reason for a person to oppose Barrack Obama's legitimacy for whatever reason is obviously racism then you are practicing a rather wide sprung assumption and demonstrating that you really don't know crap but it seems to make a good argument to silence the opposition.  

That is not what I said. And you are more than smart enough to know that.

[Valkorado]

And inhale... exhale... inhale... exhale...  

[baldo]

Willow,

You've got a different way of seeing things. I'll give you that.

Coming from certain people I take that as a high compliment.   

Watch you don't break your arm patting yourself on the back, my friend.... 

[Wizzard]

Baldo,, you still have not answered my last question and scenerio

[DK]

I would say if the purpose of the question was to delegitimize the Jewish president then yes it would be viewed as antisemitic . As a hypothetical example. If a Jew were elected president in 2020 and he or she were asked to prove their allegiance was to the USA and not to Israel. I would say that was probably antisemitic . The reason being that the insinuation is that they are not "one of us". Just as that was the insinuation with Obama.

Bullshit, meathead, bullshit.  It's not good when people choose to extrapolate their own cheap motivations in reverse in assuming the reasoning of anyone with whom they disagree.  The Obama supporters would have been pleased to interpret any question regarding Obama as racist.

It would have been very easy for the Obama team to officially answer that question.  They fueled that fire themselves.

WOW!!!

The universal retort.

I'm copying that for my own use if you will permit.

It's just a double negative away from infailibility.

[baldo]

Who is paying big agribusiness, big oil corps, and the banks? What are they paying and how?

Agribusiness

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/20/business/richer-farmers-bigger-subsidies.html

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2002/02/farm-subsidies-are-americas-largest-corporate-welfare-program

Oil

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/06/upshot/do-oil-companies-really-need-4-billion-per-year-of-taxpayers-money.html


Banks

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2013-02-20/why-should-taxpayers-give-big-banks-83-billion-a-year-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/big-banks-taxpayer-money-subsidy_us_572a4ebfe4b0bc9cb0458b68

That last one should get your blood pressure up.....

[Gavin_Sons]

Willow, i can't believe you would talk to such a high ranking member like that. I mean he does have 10,397 posts in just 4.5 short years. Someone outta give him a trophy for "most meaningless posts in the shortest time".  Maybe you can present it to him at Inzane.

[baldo]

Willow, i can't believe you would talk to such a high ranking member like that. I mean he does have 10,397 posts in just 4.5 short years. Someone outta give him a trophy for "most meaningless posts in the shortest time".  Maybe you can present it to him at Inzane.

Gavin,

Are you stalking again?



Not judging...

[Wizzard]

Who is paying big agribusiness, big oil corps, and the banks? What are they paying and how?

Agribusiness

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/20/business/richer-farmers-bigger-subsidies.html

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2002/02/farm-subsidies-are-americas-largest-corporate-welfare-program

Oil

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/06/upshot/do-oil-companies-really-need-4-billion-per-year-of-taxpayers-money.html


Banks

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2013-02-20/why-should-taxpayers-give-big-banks-83-billion-a-year-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/big-banks-taxpayer-money-subsidy_us_572a4ebfe4b0bc9cb0458b68

That last one should get your blood pressure up.....

So you are pissed about subsidies yet you want to subsidize education? I don't get it!

[The emperor has no clothes]

Willow, i can't believe you would talk to such a high ranking member like that. I mean he does have 10,397 posts in just 4.5 short years. Someone outta give him a trophy for "most meaningless posts in the shortest time".  Maybe you can present it to him at Inzane.

For someone that's on your ignore list you sure have a lot of interest in what I say or do. "High ranking member" ? Hardly, don't confuse quantity with quality.  I would gladly accept any trophy. But unfortunately it will have to wait another year.

[baldo]

Who is paying big agribusiness, big oil corps, and the banks? What are they paying and how?

Agribusiness

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/20/business/richer-farmers-bigger-subsidies.html

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2002/02/farm-subsidies-are-americas-largest-corporate-welfare-program

Oil

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/06/upshot/do-oil-companies-really-need-4-billion-per-year-of-taxpayers-money.html


Banks

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2013-02-20/why-should-taxpayers-give-big-banks-83-billion-a-year-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/big-banks-taxpayer-money-subsidy_us_572a4ebfe4b0bc9cb0458b68

That last one should get your blood pressure up.....

So you are pissed about subsidies yet you want to subsidize education? I don't get it!

Yes, I'm pissed about these corps getting our tax dollars when they don't need it.

And YES, I think it's an excellent idea for our government to subsidize higher education for as many people as possible. Don't you think that would be a better investment for us as a whole, then shoveling BILLIONS OF $$$ to corps that don't need or deserve it?

How do you feel about it?

[baldo]

Willow, i can't believe you would talk to such a high ranking member like that. I mean he does have 10,397 posts in just 4.5 short years. Someone outta give him a trophy for "most meaningless posts in the shortest time".  Maybe you can present it to him at Inzane.

For someone that's on your ignore list you sure have a lot of interest in what I say or do. "High ranking member" ? Hardly, don't confuse quantity with quality.  I would gladly accept any trophy. But unfortunately it will have to wait another year.

MH, I don't know what's up with that. I don't know if you should be nervous or flattered....

[..]

http://ijr.com/2016/09/703663-fbi-director-let-hillary-off-the-hook-now-we-know-why-he-wouldnt-talk-about-the-clinton-foundation/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=owned&utm_campaign=ods&utm_term=ijamerica&utm_content=politics

[baldo]

http://ijr.com/2016/09/703663-fbi-director-let-hillary-off-the-hook-now-we-know-why-he-wouldnt-talk-about-the-clinton-foundation/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=owned&utm_campaign=ods&utm_term=ijamerica&utm_content=politics

You should change your name to Linkman......

[The emperor has no clothes]

Willow, i can't believe you would talk to such a high ranking member like that. I mean he does have 10,397 posts in just 4.5 short years. Someone outta give him a trophy for "most meaningless posts in the shortest time".  Maybe you can present it to him at Inzane.

For someone that's on your ignore list you sure have a lot of interest in what I say or do. "High ranking member" ? Hardly, don't confuse quantity with quality.  I would gladly accept any trophy. But unfortunately it will have to wait another year.

MH, I don't know what's up with that. I don't know if you should be nervous or flattered....

I think neither. 

[Wizzard]

Who is paying big agribusiness, big oil corps, and the banks? What are they paying and how?

Agribusiness

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/20/business/richer-farmers-bigger-subsidies.html

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2002/02/farm-subsidies-are-americas-largest-corporate-welfare-program

Oil

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/06/upshot/do-oil-companies-really-need-4-billion-per-year-of-taxpayers-money.html


Banks

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2013-02-20/why-should-taxpayers-give-big-banks-83-billion-a-year-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/big-banks-taxpayer-money-subsidy_us_572a4ebfe4b0bc9cb0458b68

That last one should get your blood pressure up.....

So you are pissed about subsidies yet you want to subsidize education? I don't get it!

I am not for subsidies period,, education or otherwise.

Ok, so you want to subsidize education, ,that's your opinion. Who decides what we subsidize and what we don't?

Also,, lets say I graduate from high school and want to be a doctor. I get loans,, sign papers ,,all the while knowing I have to pay it back. I get out of school and cannot find a job so I blame the banks and the govt that loaned me the money and say I cannot pay it back. Where did my responsibility end?
Maybe I should be responsible and plan better and maybe work a year or two and save up some money so I can afford school. Or just maybe I cannot afford it and need to do something else.
Why is everything someone else's fault? I signed the papers,,took the loan, as an adult.
Just my opinion that if one gets off the hook that easy,, likely to repeat the problem.

[Moonshot_1]

I don't know "who" decides what should be subsidized but I know what should be.

It is inevitable that the US will find itself in a desperate conflict in the future. Another world war, another great conflagration. Don't know when. Might be next year, might be 100 years from now.

What we need to subsidize are the things that would provide us the resources to win such a war or conflagration.

So we subsidize:
Agra business - we need food for us and our troops
Manufacturing - Ships, trucks, tanks, planes etc.
Energy - The fuel for the above.
Natural resources - Iron, copper, other metals, salt etc.

If these resources are up and economically sound, stay out of their way, if they are struggling, prop them up as necessary. When it all hits the fan, this is the stuff we are going to need and need a lot of.
 

[Jersey mike]

I don't know "who" decides what should be subsidized but I know what should be.

It is inevitable that the US will find itself in a desperate conflict in the future. Another world war, another great conflagration. Don't know when. Might be next year, might be 100 years from now.

What we need to subsidize are the things that would provide us the resources to win such a war or conflagration.

So we subsidize:
Agra business - we need food for us and our troops
Manufacturing - Ships, trucks, tanks, planes etc.
Energy - The fuel for the above.
Natural resources - Iron, copper, other metals, salt etc.

If these resources are up and economically sound, stay out of their way, if they are struggling, prop them up as necessary. When it all hits the fan, this is the stuff we are going to need and need a lot of.
 

Every branch of the military has some type of school program.

My son was contacted over the summer by the Navy, they want him to get involved in their Nuclear Engineering Program. They made him a very nice offer for 5 years of service and by the time his enlistment would be over he'd go from Ensign to Lieutenant, most of his time the 1st year would still be schooling. After graduation he would go to OCS, then to another school, then depending on what he wanted to do either off to another school for subs or into the Surface Warfare fleet or he could teach for 4 years at their school in CT.  He is currently majoring in bio-medical engineering and minoring in bio-mechanical engineering, he seems to want to build flight suits for NASA. The recruiter I spoke to told me with his current grades and if they stay where they are (3.94) the Navy would want to put him right in as an instructor but he would get to make his own decision.

[The emperor has no clothes]

I don't know "who" decides what should be subsidized but I know what should be.

It is inevitable that the US will find itself in a desperate conflict in the future. Another world war, another great conflagration. Don't know when. Might be next year, might be 100 years from now.

What we need to subsidize are the things that would provide us the resources to win such a war or conflagration.

So we subsidize:
Agra business - we need food for us and our troops
Manufacturing - Ships, trucks, tanks, planes etc.
Energy - The fuel for the above.
Natural resources - Iron, copper, other metals, salt etc.

If these resources are up and economically sound, stay out of their way, if they are struggling, prop them up as necessary. When it all hits the fan, this is the stuff we are going to need and need a lot of.
 

My problem with that is I don't see how most if not all of those industries need the govt. subsidies. And don't see the value to the American taxpayer. I can see a value to us as a whole of more educated people. 

[Willow]

My problem with that is I don't see how most if not all of those industries need the govt. subsidies. And don't see the value to the American taxpayer. I can see a value to us as a whole of more educated people. 

This may seem like a cynical view to you.  I grew up in a college town and as a high schooler I ran with college kids.  There were two very distinct groups.  Some were working their way through college and some had their way paid.  The ones experiencing free school more often than not treated it like free school while those who earned their way through took it very seriously.  Obviously there were exceptions but generally it went that way.

I have eight children.  I helped them a little with their advanced education but for the most part they worked their way.  I have four that chose to get post high school education and four who did not.

I do not think college educations paid for by the taxpayers would significantly benefit the U.S. population.

The question remains, not just about subsidies, but who decides on what is meaningful to spend the taxpayers' money?  I'm not real happy with some of the decisions.  I'm sure almost no one is happy with all of them. 

[Valkorado]

I agree 100%.  Much like printing currency without backing devalues our dollar, giving away diplomas will further devalue higher education.



What a can of worms!  Should all curriculum offered be covered, no matter the subject matter?  Just high demand fields?  How about students who want to earn several degrees over several decades?  On and on...

[MP]

Temper, temper.
Btw, enjoy the ride next weekend, and say hi to Oss for me.

Lol,, i used to say when I was in a debate the if I got the other person so frustrated they started swearing and calling me name,, I knew I won. 

Apologize for the unfortunate use of the single contraction. I have two nephews that are currently saddled with over $60K in loans and no jobs in sight. It's a sore spot for me.

I truly hope they get jobs.

But, why do they not have one?  All we have heard from Obama and Clinton on down to the resident Libs here on this board is how GREAT the economy is performing under them!  Your nephews seem to prove otherwise.

[The emperor has no clothes]

My problem with that is I don't see how most if not all of those industries need the govt. subsidies. And don't see the value to the American taxpayer. I can see a value to us as a whole of more educated people. 

This may seem like a cynical view to you.  I grew up in a college town and as a high schooler I ran with college kids.  There were two very distinct groups.  Some were working their way through college and some had their way paid.  The ones experiencing free school more often than not treated it like free school while those who earned their way through took it very seriously.  Obviously there were exceptions but generally it went that way.

I have eight children.  I helped them a little with their advanced education but for the most part they worked their way.  I have four that chose to get post high school education and four who did not.

I do not think college educations paid for by the taxpayers would significantly benefit the U.S. population.

The question remains, not just about subsidies, but who decides on what is meaningful to spend the taxpayers' money?  I'm not real happy with some of the decisions.  I'm sure almost no one is happy with all of them. 

Doesn't seem cynical at all. Seems realistic to me. My personal view is higher education should not be free. But I also don't think banks should be making money off of them. I see no good reason why we as a country can't reform our system to make it easier for people to go to college.

[Hooter]

IMHO, anything that is earned is much more valued by an individual than something that is given. So, have either of these candidates earned their right to be in the White House?

[..]

http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/30/presidential-debates-admits-trumps-mic-was-messed-up/

[Wizzard]

My problem with that is I don't see how most if not all of those industries need the govt. subsidies. And don't see the value to the American taxpayer. I can see a value to us as a whole of more educated people.  

This may seem like a cynical view to you.  I grew up in a college town and as a high schooler I ran with college kids.  There were two very distinct groups.  Some were working their way through college and some had their way paid.  The ones experiencing free school more often than not treated it like free school while those who earned their way through took it very seriously.  Obviously there were exceptions but generally it went that way.

I have eight children.  I helped them a little with their advanced education but for the most part they worked their way.  I have four that chose to get post high school education and four who did not.

I do not think college educations paid for by the taxpayers would significantly benefit the U.S. population.

The question remains, not just about subsidies, but who decides on what is meaningful to spend the taxpayers' money?  I'm not real happy with some of the decisions.  I'm sure almost no one is happy with all of them.  

Doesn't seem cynical at all. Seems realistic to me. My personal view is higher education should not be free. But I also don't think banks should be making money off of them. I see no good reason why we as a country can't reform our system to make it easier for people to go to college.

I agree,, but at the same time,, I should not be able to just decide what I want to go to school for and rack up some huge debt, then expect someone else to pay for it. We are responsible for our actions;.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Agreed. But if we are going to subsidize profitable businesses surely we can help our youth with some low interest loans ?

[Wizzard]

Agreed. But if we are going to subsidize profitable businesses surely we can help our youth with some low interest loans ?

From what i have seen and read,, I doubt the interest rate would make any difference to some of those complaining.
They just want out.  Free and clear.

[Valkorado]

Agreed. But if we are going to subsidize profitable businesses surely we can help our youth with some low interest loans ?

There are low interest Federal student loans already available.  Perkins and Stafford Loans have been available for many decades.  I worked almost 3/4 time through college and carried a full load.  The only small loan I took was in my senior year for $1500.  I paid it back within a year of graduation.

[baldo]

Agreed. But if we are going to subsidize profitable businesses surely we can help our youth with some low interest loans ?

From what i have seen and read,, I doubt the interest rate would make any difference to some of those complaining.
They just want out.  Free and clear.

Wizzard, I've refrained from answering your past comment because it appears we're on different planes here. My only reference to haviing school loans forgiven was in bankruptcy. That's it, not when things are 'inconvenient'. I was comparing how easy it is for the Trumpster to file bankruptcy and still be 'fabulously wealthy' (his words) to struggling graduates that aren't finding suitable work.

I tried several times to clarify, but it fell on deaf ears.

So do me a favor and listen to what I'm saying.

[baldo]

Agreed. But if we are going to subsidize profitable businesses surely we can help our youth with some low interest loans ?

There are low interest Federal student loans already available.  Perkins and Stafford Loans have been available for many decades.  I worked almost 3/4 time through college and carried a full load.  The only small loan I took was in my senior year for $1500.  I paid it back within a year of graduation.

My kids have two Stafford loans each, totaling about $6K each I believe. I'm not familiar with Perkins loans.

When did you go to school?

[Valkorado]

Right outta hs in 82.  Took a decade off.  Finished up 91-94 (when I took the small Perkins Loan).

[baldo]

Right outta hs in 82.  Took a decade off.  Finished up 91-94 (when I took the small Perkins Loan).

I was out of hs in 77. Tried a few semesters as a biomed major. Not so much.

Worked for a year or so with my Dad doing upholstery. Went to A&P school, grad in 81. Tuition at that time was around $7K if I remember correctly. Now it goes as high as 50K depending on school.....

 Been wrenching ever since.