TRUMP - Just because.....................Naw, I just can't say it!
POSTED BY: SHINYGOODGUY
UPDATED: Monday, March 9, 2026 20:06
VIEWED: 244478
PAGE 36 of 170
Quote:No, YOU need to re-read my post.
It applies to you. YOU'RE the one calling Trump a Hitler, and YOU'RE the one backing a candidate who compared Putin to Hitler. The person throwing around those "Hitler" comparisons is you and your candidate, dearie. You've just demonstrated another liberal-logic-fail. But I've discovered that if you scratch a liberal, what do you find under the skin? A dictator! -SIGNY
*snort* another Signym fail. Really, you need to read your posts. You just said, "Nuh-uh! You're Hitler!"
Did I say that liberals are "Hitler"? No.
I said "tyrant". There are plenty to choose from besides Hitler.
Quote:
One of Trump's recent tweets - using the "2 word slogan rule" mandated by the Trump campaign because their followers can only hold 2 words in their head at any time - links to a story at the NYPost. Funny enough, on the very same page are 2 stories about his wife Melania. I have blurred them for public consumption. The actual web page is much more explicit. The story titles are bad enough:
Melania Trump's girl-on-girl photos from racy shoot revealed
Melania Trump like you've never seen her before
I noticed something about the MSM and their coverage of the candidates. Something more insidious than their pandering to voyeurism and irrationality.
I'm going to wait and see if anyone has noticed the same thing, because it's darn peculiar.
--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Do you really believe that is true or are you just saying it for entertaining an Internet audience? SignyM (and Trump) see doom everywhere, while I see Trump is jackass. I can't say what SignyM really sees doom without knowing what SignyM really believes, not just what SignyM writes for an Internet audience. Obviously Trump is also playing to an audience, but in his case there is no indication that in private and in person he is any different than he is on twitter or TV.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
You really believe that, don't you? Holy shit, SECOND, whatever happened to your reasonableness?
And that picture that you posted???
It applies to you. YOU'RE the one calling Trump a Hitler, and YOU'RE the one backing a candidate who compared Putin to Hitler. The person throwing around those "Hitler" comparisons is you and your candidate, dearie.
You've just demonstrated another liberal-logic-fail.
But I've discovered that if you scratch a liberal, what do you find under the skin? A dictator!
We're now so overexposed to the worst parts of society that it's hard to believe the World is getting better. Cameras, the internet, and most importantly, social media are everywhere showing the worst. This is what’s new....In the attention economy, people are rewarded for extremism. They are rewarded for indulging their worst biases and stoking other people’s worst fears. They are rewarded for portraying the world as a place that is burning to the ground, whether it’s because of gay marriage, or police violence, or Islamic terrorism, or low interest rates. The internet has generated a platform where apocalyptic beliefs are celebrated and spread, and moderation and reason is something that becomes too arduous and boring to stand.
And this constant awareness of every fault and flaw of our humanity, combined with an inundation of doomsayers and narcissistic nihilists commanding our attention space, is what is causing this constant feeling of a chaotic and insecure world that doesn’t actually exist.
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/08/if-world-getting-better-why-do-
we-all-feel-so-much-worse
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
Does SignyM really think Trump should be President? Easier question: Does SignyM really think the USA will be better eight years from now with Trump as President than Hillary as President, knowing that Trump is committed to wiping out everything good Obama has done, such as Obamacare and raising taxes on the wealthy?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
"I'll let those who wish to waste their time fact check what else you posted. Me, I know you post subjectively (to confuse an issue so people believe an untruth) so I won't waste my time further."
Yes, I did just that, wasted my time I mean, but to prove a point.
Senate supporters were 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats. Clinton signed it into law on December 8, 1993; the agreement went into effect on January 1, 1994.
Source: BING search; Wikipedia on NAFTA.
The point you make about our little comrades is spot on; they often conflate information to confound and confuse and present it as fact......i.e.
Hillary's decades long "lying" record:
"And she has a decades-long history of lying about her positions on free-trade agreements. And she has a decades-long history of lying about Libya, and Ukraine, and Syria ... and Russia.
The very structure of that sentence is factually wrong. For one, the NAFTA agreement was championed by her husband, Bill Clinton as POTUS. Backed by both sides of the aisle as shown above. Hillary had nothing to do with it, but you knew that (and so do they). She may have supported it, that's about as far as one could take it. And (b), Libya, Ukraine, Syria and Russia all happened within the last 5 years. I know it's a technicality, but you know how our "friends" profusely expound upon their presentation of the "facts"; so I'm splitting hairs here.
Then they complete their confusing contributions by claiming that certain
media outlets provide few facts, thereby nullifying any contributions others may make in presenting their arguments. An old T-Bag tactic. The MSM argument is just such a misleading POV. All media, including our good friends at Fox, are mainstream (they are owned and operated by giant media moguls who put forth their own biases and prejudices).
That, of course, is different than having a candidate standing at a podium and lying through their teeth. That is a fact that cannot be denied, no matter who the politico is. If one wishes to claim Hillary is a liar and cannot be trusted, that's hyperbole and opinion, not fact and cannot be enter as such unless one has incontrovertible proof. I'm talking smoking gun proof. Otherwise it's assumption, inference......not fact. Funny, the FBI investigated, but did not arrest or recommend prosecution. Odd, because
there are those that suggest that "crooked" Hillary is so powerful that she can "influence" the FBI.
We all know that life exists on other planets, but...............
SGG
Yes excellent work. We have been showing 1KIKI and SIG as doing this for a very long time. I hope others here have seen enough evidence of their behavior that going into detail each time they post is not necessary.
To call Hillary a liar and not Trump who lies about everything is laughable to serious people. Because they are Russian trolls I have no illusions they will change their ways. However more people calling them on there lies and their spreading of Putin's propaganda would be nice.
____________________________________________
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:Don't being going there because Trump still has a pretty good chance of becoming President. I think it is significant that Trump's chance of winning is the same chance as losing at a game of Russian Roulette with two bullets in the revolver -- 33.3%. If I were Putin, I would try to put another Trump brand bullet or two in the six-shooter in hopes that the USA would pull the trigger.
Originally posted by THGRRI:
This election is over. This proves his stupidity and how dangerous it would be to elect this moron to anything. If the Republican party doesn't split from Trump they are doomed as well.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
Wait for it. I now believe his ceiling is 43%
____________________________________________
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:No, YOU need to re-read my post.
It applies to you. YOU'RE the one calling Trump a Hitler, and YOU'RE the one backing a candidate who compared Putin to Hitler. The person throwing around those "Hitler" comparisons is you and your candidate, dearie. You've just demonstrated another liberal-logic-fail. But I've discovered that if you scratch a liberal, what do you find under the skin? A dictator! -SIGNY
*snort* another Signym fail. Really, you need to read your posts. You just said, "Nuh-uh! You're Hitler!"
Did I say that liberals are "Hitler"? No.
I said "tyrant". There are plenty to choose from besides Hitler.Quote:
One of Trump's recent tweets - using the "2 word slogan rule" mandated by the Trump campaign because their followers can only hold 2 words in their head at any time - links to a story at the NYPost. Funny enough, on the very same page are 2 stories about his wife Melania. I have blurred them for public consumption. The actual web page is much more explicit. The story titles are bad enough:
Melania Trump's girl-on-girl photos from racy shoot revealed
Melania Trump like you've never seen her before
I noticed something about the MSM and their coverage of the candidates. Something more insidious than their pandering to voyeurism and irrationality.
I'm going to wait and see if anyone has noticed the same thing, because it's darn peculiar.
In other words you are making shit up. Nothing unusual here.
____________________________________________
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Alternative explanation is "making entertainment", as Colbert did at Trump's expense yesterday:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
In other words you are making shit up. Nothing unusual here.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's funny to me how you try and blame NAFTA on Hillary because her husband passed it.
I didn't say that, idiot.
And CONGRESS passed it. Bill SIGNED IT INTO LAW AS PRESIDENT. And Hillary was cheerleading it all the way - until it became politically inconvenient in 2000 and then she started lying about what role Bill and his administration had in it. AS PER THE PBS TIMELINE I POSTED.
What's the matter? You can't read English? You don't know how the US government works? Then you need to go back to Estonia, where you belong.
Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
It's funny to me how you try and blame NAFTA on Hillary because her husband passed it.
I didn't say that, idiot.
And CONGRESS passed it. Bill SIGNED IT INTO LAW AS PRESIDENT. And Hillary was cheerleading it all the way - until it became politically inconvenient in 2000 and then she started lying about what role Bill and his administration had in it. AS PER THE PBS TIMELINE I POSTED.
What's the matter? You can't read English? You don't know how the US government works? Then you need to go back to Estonia, where you belong.
You remind me of Trump. He too tries to walk back what he says. He is on par with you for how often he has to do so.
____________________________________________
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
THUGGR
It's funny to me how you try and blame NAFTA on Hillary because her husband passed it.
1kiki
And CONGRESS passed it. Bill SIGNED IT INTO LAW AS PRESIDENT. And Hillary was cheerleading it all the way - until it became politically inconvenient in 2000 and then she started lying about what role Bill and his administration had in it. AS PER THE PBS TIMELINE I POSTED.
THUGGR
You remind me of Trump. He too tries to walk back what he says.
There's nothing that I need to walk back. This is what I posted.
1993: NAFTA Dec 8 1993 Signed into law by President Bill Clinton
Takes effect Jan. 1, 1994.
2007: NAFTA outright lie, Bill Clinton could have vetoed it
"NAFTA was inherited by the Clinton Administration." (Feb. 1, 2007: Time interview.)
Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
In case you’re wondering whether or not Hillary Clinton’s advisers harbor similar contempt for the American public, let the following Facebook post from Robert Reich dispel any confusion:
An acquaintance from my days in the Clinton administration, who has been advising Hillary, phoned this morning.
ACQUAINTANCE: “Don’t you think your blog post from last night was a bit harsh?”
ME: “Not at all. The Democratic Party is shooting itself in the foot by not officially opposing the Trans Pacific Partnership.”
ACQ: “But you know why. The Party can’t take a stand opposite the President’s. He’s the leader of the Party, for chrissake. And he wants the TPP.”
ME: “Yeah, because he sees the TPP as a way to limit China’s economic influence. So he made a Faustian bargain with big global corporations who want more protection for their foreign investments. But he’s wrong. The TPP won’t crimp China. Global corporations will give China whatever it wants to gain access to the Chinese market. The TPP ….”
ACQ: “Look, it doesn’t matter what you or I think. The President wants the TPP, and the Party isn’t going to oppose him.”
ME: “You mean Hillary won’t oppose him.”
ACQ: “Hillary won’t, and Debbie [Wasserman Schultz] won’t, and neither will Nancy [Pelosi] or Harry [Reid] or Dick [Durbin] or Chuck [Schumer].
Back in 2014, we received confirmation of what politicians and their “very smart” advisers think of the American public. Namely, that we’re a bunch of stupid slobs who need to be tricked into agreeing to elitists legislation that always ends up working against us. I’m specifically referring to comments from Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber exposed in the post, Video of the Day – Obamacare Architect Credits “Lack of Transparency” and “Stupidity of the American People” for Passage of Healthcare Law. Here’s some of what we learned:
An architect of the federal healthcare law said last year that a “lack of transparency” and the “stupidity of the American voter” helped Congress approve ObamaCare. He suggested that many lawmakers and voters didn’t know what was in the law or how its financing worked, and that this helped it win approval.
In case you’re wondering whether or not Hillary Clinton’s advisers harbor similar contempt for the American public, let the following Facebook post from Robert Reich dispel any confusion:
An acquaintance from my days in the Clinton administration, who has been advising Hillary, phoned this morning.
ACQUAINTANCE: “Don’t you think your blog post from last night was a bit harsh?”
ME: “Not at all. The Democratic Party is shooting itself in the foot by not officially opposing the Trans Pacific Partnership.”
ACQ: “But you know why. The Party can’t take a stand opposite the President’s. He’s the leader of the Party, for chrissake. And he wants the TPP.”
ME: “Yeah, because he sees the TPP as a way to limit China’s economic influence. So he made a Faustian bargain with big global corporations who want more protection for their foreign investments. But he’s wrong. The TPP won’t crimp China. Global corporations will give China whatever it wants to gain access to the Chinese market. The TPP ….”
ACQ: “Look, it doesn’t matter what you or I think. The President wants the TPP, and the Party isn’t going to oppose him.”
ME: “You mean Hillary won’t oppose him.”
ACQ: “Hillary won’t, and Debbie [Wasserman Schultz] won’t, and neither will Nancy [Pelosi] or Harry [Reid] or Dick [Durbin] or Chuck [Schumer].
ME: “But it’s terrible policy. And it’s awful politics. It gives Trump a battering ram. Obama won’t be president in six months. Why risk it?”
Now here’s how extraordinarily dismissive and contemptuous of the American public Hillary Clinton’s people really are.
ACQ: “They don’t see much of a risk. Most Americans don’t know or care about the TPP.”
ME: “But they know big corporations are running economic policy. They think the whole
ACQ: “He can’t. She’s inoculated. She’s come out against the TPP.”
ME: “
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME