Gfted1 Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 I wish! You'd see a lot fewer big mouths. "I'm your biggest fan, Ill follow you until you love me, Papa" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azdeus Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 Awesome ideas! You need to start gathering signatures!! 1 Civilization, in fact, grows more and more maudlin and hysterical; especially under democracy it tends to degenerate into a mere combat of crazes; the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary. - H.L. Mencken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromnir Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 Seeing Gromnir's avatar reminds me of something. 214 years ago yesterday Aaron Burr shot and killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel. So as we watch folks on capital hill snipe at each other using veiled insults and exaggerated parliamentary procedure language the vice President once shot and killed the Treasury Secretary over who won what election. The US sure has come a long way. hmmm. http://time.com/4292836/forget-hamilton-burr-is-the-real-hero/ unlike hamilton, burr were a genuine hero o' the revolutionary war. burr were wide respected as honorable and progressive. hamilton for petty reasons, and jefferson for more pragmatic motives, attempted to destroy the reputation o' mr. burr. hamilton, a member o' burr's own party, were metaphorical driving a knife into burr's back during the election. is doubtful burr woulda' shot hamilton over losing the Presidency, but the underhanded way hamilton went 'bout attacking burr's reputation and honor were another matter entire. am not certain today is genuine progress. yeah, killing a man over slights real and perceived is hardly our ideal method o' conflict resolution. sadly, nowadays, as were the case in the day o' burr and hamilton, cowards on the Hill (or nearby addresses) will resort to mass media and rumor mill to fight destructive and petty wars o' attrition wherein truths is the first casualties. progress? perhaps. more o' a horizontal step from our pov. regardless, am thinking is a mischaracterization (or at least an oversimplification) to suggest the burr and hamilton duel were fought over the resolution o' a Presidential race. HA! Good Fun! "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) "Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoonDing Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 Melania on page 3 The ending of the words is ALMSIVI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agiel Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 (edited) "Re: NATO Spending As Mackenzie Eaglen (who is about as on defence spending as it gets) points out:" RE: Isn't the push for 4% new and set to attain it by 2024? Right now the 'goal' is 2$ish which the US (as shown above) and a few others are above it. This 'cumback' is silly. Of course, this doesn't change the fact that coutnries such as mine have no honour and can't follow through with promises. In light of stagnant wage growth, the tax cut, and the necessary Social Security and Medicare cuts that are unlikely to materialise in the foreseeable future such an increase is unlikely to happen (even in the depths of Operation Iraqi Freedom spending to GDP sat between 2.9-3.8%). And in any case given the United States' commitments in the Middle East and East Asia a distressing percentage of US spending is not directly related to the defence of Eastern Europe (and what is is at best towards tripwire forces that I imagine Trump himself is highly reluctant to keep in country). Edited July 13, 2018 by Agiel Quote “Political philosophers have often pointed out that in wartime, the citizen, the male citizen at least, loses one of his most basic rights, his right to life; and this has been true ever since the French Revolution and the invention of conscription, now an almost universally accepted principle. But these same philosophers have rarely noted that the citizen in question simultaneously loses another right, one just as basic and perhaps even more vital for his conception of himself as a civilized human being: the right not to kill.” -Jonathan Littell <<Les Bienveillantes>> Quote "The chancellor, the late chancellor, was only partly correct. He was obsolete. But so is the State, the entity he worshipped. Any state, entity, or ideology becomes obsolete when it stockpiles the wrong weapons: when it captures territories, but not minds; when it enslaves millions, but convinces nobody. When it is naked, yet puts on armor and calls it faith, while in the Eyes of God it has no faith at all. Any state, any entity, any ideology that fails to recognize the worth, the dignity, the rights of Man...that state is obsolete." -Rod Serling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gfted1 Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 What "US deal"? "I'm your biggest fan, Ill follow you until you love me, Papa" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smjjames Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 Some hypothetical trade deal Trump had in mind, obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gfted1 Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 Oh yeah I see that in the small print now. "I'm your biggest fan, Ill follow you until you love me, Papa" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoonDing Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 The ending of the words is ALMSIVI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Volourn Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 "In light of stagnant wage growth, the tax cut, and the necessary Social Security and Medicare cuts that are unlikely to materialise in the foreseeable future such an increase is unlikely to happen (even in the depths of Operation Iraqi Freedom spending to GDP sat between 2.9-3.8%). And in any case given the United States' commitments in the Middle East and East Asia a distressing percentage of US spending is not directly related to the defence of Eastern Europe (and what is is at best towards tripwire forces that I imagine Trump himself is highly reluctant to keep in country). " None of your spam disputes what I wrote. DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guard Dog Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 Seeing Gromnir's avatar reminds me of something. 214 years ago yesterday Aaron Burr shot and killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel. So as we watch folks on capital hill snipe at each other using veiled insults and exaggerated parliamentary procedure language the vice President once shot and killed the Treasury Secretary over who won what election. The US sure has come a long way. hmmm. http://time.com/4292836/forget-hamilton-burr-is-the-real-hero/ unlike hamilton, burr were a genuine hero o' the revolutionary war. burr were wide respected as honorable and progressive. hamilton for petty reasons, and jefferson for more pragmatic motives, attempted to destroy the reputation o' mr. burr. hamilton, a member o' burr's own party, were metaphorical driving a knife into burr's back during the election. is doubtful burr woulda' shot hamilton over losing the Presidency, but the underhanded way hamilton went 'bout attacking burr's reputation and honor were another matter entire. am not certain today is genuine progress. yeah, killing a man over slights real and perceived is hardly our ideal method o' conflict resolution. sadly, nowadays, as were the case in the day o' burr and hamilton, cowards on the Hill (or nearby addresses) will resort to mass media and rumor mill to fight destructive and petty wars o' attrition wherein truths is the first casualties. progress? perhaps. more o' a horizontal step from our pov. regardless, am thinking is a mischaracterization (or at least an oversimplification) to suggest the burr and hamilton duel were fought over the resolution o' a Presidential race. HA! Good Fun! Actually IIRC it was not a presidential race. It was for Governor of New York. And Burr blamed Hamilton for slandering him as part of the reason he lost. Hamilton was opposed to Burr for his involvement with the Federalists as I remember. It's been a while since I read all that so I may be mis-remembering. "While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before" Thomas Sowell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agiel Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 (edited) Few bemoaned the degradation of European capabilities and readiness in the period between 2000 and 2013 more than I, that said I've believed that things have been going in a positive direction since 2014 (for instance the Dutch deciding that perhaps they shouldn't sell _all_ of their Leopard 2A6es, even if it meant attaching their remaining armoured forces to the German Bundeswehr). But if you can't see how Trump's boasts ring hollow when he expresses such indifference (or even disdain) of constituent countries of NATO, especially its most vulnerable members like Estonia, then I guess I can't help you ("Hey, Trump, maybe it's not such a great idea ticking off the countries that have all the diesel-electric boats, stealth missile corvettes, and mine countermeasure ships, the capabilities the US Navy doesn't have.") lus, for all my misgivings about many European countries anemic defence budgets the 2% target was in my mind a poor measuring stick. The countries that do spend more than 4% on defence (Russia, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, militaries plagued by graft, cronyism, and more besides) should _not_ be models for European countries on defence spending policy. My criticisms of Trump would perhaps have been tempered if he focused more on Mattis' 30-30-30-30 proposal rather than fixating on the 2% target. Too long; didn't read: _How_ countries spend is just as, if not more important than _how much_. Edited July 13, 2018 by Agiel Quote “Political philosophers have often pointed out that in wartime, the citizen, the male citizen at least, loses one of his most basic rights, his right to life; and this has been true ever since the French Revolution and the invention of conscription, now an almost universally accepted principle. But these same philosophers have rarely noted that the citizen in question simultaneously loses another right, one just as basic and perhaps even more vital for his conception of himself as a civilized human being: the right not to kill.” -Jonathan Littell <<Les Bienveillantes>> Quote "The chancellor, the late chancellor, was only partly correct. He was obsolete. But so is the State, the entity he worshipped. Any state, entity, or ideology becomes obsolete when it stockpiles the wrong weapons: when it captures territories, but not minds; when it enslaves millions, but convinces nobody. When it is naked, yet puts on armor and calls it faith, while in the Eyes of God it has no faith at all. Any state, any entity, any ideology that fails to recognize the worth, the dignity, the rights of Man...that state is obsolete." -Rod Serling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartimaeus Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 The Special Counsel has indicted an additional twelve Russian intelligence agents for hacking into the DNC (great timing just days before Trump's meeting with Putin). An interesting tidbit sent between Guccifer 2.0 (the persona the Russians were using as a front for leaking what they'd found via the hack) and Wikileaks (referred to as Organization 1 here): On or about June 22, 2016, Organization 1 sent a private message to Guccifer 2.0 to "send any new material [stolen from the DNC] here for us to review and it will have a much higher impact than what you are doing." On or about July 6, 2016, Organization 1 added, "if you have anything hillary related we want it in the next tweo [sic] days prefable [sic] because the DNC [Democratic National Convention] is approaching and she will solidify bernie supporters behind her after." The Conspirators responded, "ok... i see." Organization 1 explained, "we think trump has only a 25% chance of winning against hillary... so conflict between bernie and hillary is interesting." Quote How I have existed fills me with horror. For I have failed in everything - spelling, arithmetic, riding, tennis, golf; dancing, singing, acting; wife, mistress, whore, friend. Even cooking. And I do not excuse myself with the usual escape of 'not trying'. I tried with all my heart. In my dreams, I am not crippled. In my dreams, I dance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromnir Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 (edited) Seeing Gromnir's avatar reminds me of something. 214 years ago yesterday Aaron Burr shot and killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel. So as we watch folks on capital hill snipe at each other using veiled insults and exaggerated parliamentary procedure language the vice President once shot and killed the Treasury Secretary over who won what election. The US sure has come a long way. hmmm. http://time.com/4292836/forget-hamilton-burr-is-the-real-hero/ unlike hamilton, burr were a genuine hero o' the revolutionary war. burr were wide respected as honorable and progressive. hamilton for petty reasons, and jefferson for more pragmatic motives, attempted to destroy the reputation o' mr. burr. hamilton, a member o' burr's own party, were metaphorical driving a knife into burr's back during the election. is doubtful burr woulda' shot hamilton over losing the Presidency, but the underhanded way hamilton went 'bout attacking burr's reputation and honor were another matter entire. am not certain today is genuine progress. yeah, killing a man over slights real and perceived is hardly our ideal method o' conflict resolution. sadly, nowadays, as were the case in the day o' burr and hamilton, cowards on the Hill (or nearby addresses) will resort to mass media and rumor mill to fight destructive and petty wars o' attrition wherein truths is the first casualties. progress? perhaps. more o' a horizontal step from our pov. regardless, am thinking is a mischaracterization (or at least an oversimplification) to suggest the burr and hamilton duel were fought over the resolution o' a Presidential race. HA! Good Fun! Actually IIRC it was not a presidential race. It was for Governor of New York. And Burr blamed Hamilton for slandering him as part of the reason he lost. Hamilton was opposed to Burr for his involvement with the Federalists as I remember. It's been a while since I read all that so I may be mis-remembering. yeah, there were a long-running feud 'tween hamilton and burr with the exclamation point, as it were, the loss o' the federalist nomination for governor and then loss o' Governor race by burr. the overt slanders by hamilton began a couple year earlier during the Presidential race were continued by hamilton and his fellows. 'course burr were not "vice President" at the time o' the gubernatorial race, so given your earlier comments we saw you as speaking more broadly o' the conflict which really exploded with the Prez race. regardless, it weren't the loss o' a political race which resulted in the duel. personal attacks o' character which the aggrieved party would not abase himself to respond to publicly were the cause o' the disagreement. as to trump nato comments, am doubting trump genuine cares 'bout nato issues. cadet bone spurs uses the public nato meetings to energize his base by projecting a pugnacious tough guy image. doesn't matter what he says so long as it appears to trump's base as if he is standing up for America... or somesuch silliness. HA! Good Fun! Edited July 13, 2018 by Gromnir 1 "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) "Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guard Dog Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 (edited) Seeing Gromnir's avatar reminds me of something. 214 years ago yesterday Aaron Burr shot and killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel. So as we watch folks on capital hill snipe at each other using veiled insults and exaggerated parliamentary procedure language the vice President once shot and killed the Treasury Secretary over who won what election. The US sure has come a long way. hmmm. http://time.com/4292836/forget-hamilton-burr-is-the-real-hero/ unlike hamilton, burr were a genuine hero o' the revolutionary war. burr were wide respected as honorable and progressive. hamilton for petty reasons, and jefferson for more pragmatic motives, attempted to destroy the reputation o' mr. burr. hamilton, a member o' burr's own party, were metaphorical driving a knife into burr's back during the election. is doubtful burr woulda' shot hamilton over losing the Presidency, but the underhanded way hamilton went 'bout attacking burr's reputation and honor were another matter entire. am not certain today is genuine progress. yeah, killing a man over slights real and perceived is hardly our ideal method o' conflict resolution. sadly, nowadays, as were the case in the day o' burr and hamilton, cowards on the Hill (or nearby addresses) will resort to mass media and rumor mill to fight destructive and petty wars o' attrition wherein truths is the first casualties. progress? perhaps. more o' a horizontal step from our pov. regardless, am thinking is a mischaracterization (or at least an oversimplification) to suggest the burr and hamilton duel were fought over the resolution o' a Presidential race. HA! Good Fun! Actually IIRC it was not a presidential race. It was for Governor of New York. And Burr blamed Hamilton for slandering him as part of the reason he lost. Hamilton was opposed to Burr for his involvement with the Federalists as I remember. It's been a while since I read all that so I may be mis-remembering. yeah, there were a long-running feud 'tween hamilton and burr with the exclamation point, as it were, the loss o' the federalist nomination for governor and then loss o' Governor race by burr. the overt slanders by hamilton began a couple year earlier during the Presidential race were continued by hamilton and his fellows. 'course burr were not "vice President" at the time o' the gubernatorial race, so given your earlier comments we saw you as speaking more broadly o' the conflict which really exploded with the Prez race. regardless, it weren't the loss o' a political race which resulted in the duel. personal attacks o' character which the aggrieved party would not abase himself to respond to publicly were the cause o' the disagreement. HA! Good Fun! Brevity is the soul of wit. Sometimes details are omitted and maybe even misrepresented. They are always relevant in a historical discussion but not so much on general comment on comparing political civility (or lack thereof) now and then. Hamilton wasn't the Treasury Secretary then either. They did try to kill each other and the main cause was political. That is the heart of it. I've been curious but never asked. Why did you chose Burr for your pic? Edited July 13, 2018 by Guard Dog "While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before" Thomas Sowell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromnir Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 Seeing Gromnir's avatar reminds me of something. 214 years ago yesterday Aaron Burr shot and killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel. So as we watch folks on capital hill snipe at each other using veiled insults and exaggerated parliamentary procedure language the vice President once shot and killed the Treasury Secretary over who won what election. The US sure has come a long way. hmmm. http://time.com/4292836/forget-hamilton-burr-is-the-real-hero/ unlike hamilton, burr were a genuine hero o' the revolutionary war. burr were wide respected as honorable and progressive. hamilton for petty reasons, and jefferson for more pragmatic motives, attempted to destroy the reputation o' mr. burr. hamilton, a member o' burr's own party, were metaphorical driving a knife into burr's back during the election. is doubtful burr woulda' shot hamilton over losing the Presidency, but the underhanded way hamilton went 'bout attacking burr's reputation and honor were another matter entire. am not certain today is genuine progress. yeah, killing a man over slights real and perceived is hardly our ideal method o' conflict resolution. sadly, nowadays, as were the case in the day o' burr and hamilton, cowards on the Hill (or nearby addresses) will resort to mass media and rumor mill to fight destructive and petty wars o' attrition wherein truths is the first casualties. progress? perhaps. more o' a horizontal step from our pov. regardless, am thinking is a mischaracterization (or at least an oversimplification) to suggest the burr and hamilton duel were fought over the resolution o' a Presidential race. HA! Good Fun! Actually IIRC it was not a presidential race. It was for Governor of New York. And Burr blamed Hamilton for slandering him as part of the reason he lost. Hamilton was opposed to Burr for his involvement with the Federalists as I remember. It's been a while since I read all that so I may be mis-remembering. yeah, there were a long-running feud 'tween hamilton and burr with the exclamation point, as it were, the loss o' the federalist nomination for governor and then loss o' Governor race by burr. the overt slanders by hamilton began a couple year earlier during the Presidential race were continued by hamilton and his fellows. 'course burr were not "vice President" at the time o' the gubernatorial race, so given your earlier comments we saw you as speaking more broadly o' the conflict which really exploded with the Prez race. regardless, it weren't the loss o' a political race which resulted in the duel. personal attacks o' character which the aggrieved party would not abase himself to respond to publicly were the cause o' the disagreement. HA! Good Fun! Brevity is the soul of wit. Sometimes details are omitted and maybe even misrepresented. They are always relevant in a historical discussion but not so much on general comment on comparing political civility (or lack thereof) now and then. Hamilton wasn't the Treasury Secretary then either. They did try to kill each other and the main cause was political. That is the heart of it. I've been curious but never asked. Why did you chose Burr for your pic? burr is a fascinating American who is largely remembered for his role in a single event. the sheer number o' pivotal moments in American history which burr were involved is staggering. heck, burr's treason trial and acquittal, which is all but forgotten by any save for historians, almost destroyed the US Judiciary-- such is not a hyperbolic statement. sadly, burr's greatest talent were his ability to gain the enmity o' powerful men and as a result, his legacy is one o' infamy. am not certain if we would say burr deserves better from history, but at the least we would suggest he deserves more. oh, and is apocryphal, but burr is claimed to have never lost a case as an attorney. HA! Good Fun! 1 "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) "Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadySands Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 That's really interesting stuff about Burr. All I've ever known about him was the duel with Hamilton and that he was the third Vice President and he was succeeded by Genuine thank you for sharing Free games updated 3/4/21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoonDing Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 I don't rember him from AssCreed 3. The ending of the words is ALMSIVI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guard Dog Posted July 15, 2018 Share Posted July 15, 2018 (edited) The California Democrat Party has endorsed Diane Feinstien's challenger. https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/07/14/feinstein-de-leon-california-democratic-party-endorsement-executive-board-oakland/ The Republican party lurches right and the Democrat party lurches left. Those of us who want to destroy them both are like: Edited July 15, 2018 by Guard Dog "While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before" Thomas Sowell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoonDing Posted July 15, 2018 Share Posted July 15, 2018 Actually they're all right-wing nutters. Remember Angela Merkel is right-wing yet in America is considered a librul commie. 1 The ending of the words is ALMSIVI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromnir Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 The California Democrat Party has endorsed Diane Feinstien's challenger. https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/07/14/feinstein-de-leon-california-democratic-party-endorsement-executive-board-oakland/ The Republican party lurches right and the Democrat party lurches left. Those of us who want to destroy them both are like: (image) 'cause every time in US history a political party has fallen into disrepute, it has been replaced with a more enlightened option... and 'course the option o' "destroy" is less than inevitable. in fact, am not seeing any reason why there need be a kinda critical mass for polarization. the (de)evolution european political parties would suggest polarization has no upper limit but instead, the rough beast slouches interminably towards bethlehem. That's really interesting stuff about Burr. All I've ever known about him was the duel with Hamilton and that he was the third Vice President and he was succeeded by (image) Genuine thank you for sharing am admitted a bit curious as to why burr hasn't received more attention, particular from modern liberals tired o' the established founding fathers narrative. is a popular pastime 'mongst hobbyist historians to paint heroic figures o' the past with a bloody brush. criticism o' jefferson and washington, franklin and adams is, as often as not, warranted. recognition that men, even great men, is almost universal flawed or broken is hardly an epiphany worthy observation. delve deep enough and you will find darkness. good. those great men should be appreciated for what they accomplished w/o willful ignorance o' their failures and foibles. even so, one would think with all the revaluation o' revolutionary heroes, more folks woulda' stumbled 'pon aaron burr. no less flawed than his contemporaries, burr actual stood for and fought for those core modern American values we often fallacious ascribe to the founders. a genuine revolutionary war hero, ill-treated by many o' the foremost founders, a man who believed in equality for women, freedom of the press, the abolition o' slavery, and that all people should be judged on their merits rather than their place o' birth or family name would appear to be the kinda guy the new age historian would notice. one event is the legacy. so it goes. HA! Good Fun! "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) "Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guard Dog Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 (edited) Note to Gromnir, when I stick a meme, particularly a humorous one, in a post whatever I said in that post was probably meant to be humorous. Or at the very least in the sarcasm spectrum. At the very, very least tongue-in-cheek. I don't resort to comedic crutches like memes if I have s serious point to make. Edited July 16, 2018 by Guard Dog "While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before" Thomas Sowell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromnir Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 (edited) note to gd: we choose to not ignore a poster's history simple 'cause they added an emoticon or meme. try pretend as if Gromnir has never read a gd post regarding the many faults o' the current dominant US political parties is cute. will take as a given this time your palpatine inspired gloating over party buffoonery is even more hyperbolic than is typical. wouldn't change our reply. HA! Good Fun! Edited July 16, 2018 by Gromnir "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) "Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guard Dog Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 touché "While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before" Thomas Sowell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoonDing Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 In the days before his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki Monday, President Donald Trump upset relations with America's allies during a visit to the United Kingdom and a contentious meeting with NATO leaders in Brussels.In addition to calling the European Union a "foe" of the U.S. and criticizing British Prime Minister Theresa May for her handling of Brexit, Mr. Trump slammed fellow NATO countries for not contributing more towards defense spending. On "CBS This Morning" Monday, Ian Bremmer, president of the Eurasia Group and a CBS News senior global affairs contributor, said that backstage at the NATO meeting there were elements that were even more eyebrow-raising than reports have suggested."One is that emergency session where they asked the Georgian and Ukrainian presidents to leave in the middle of their presentation. Apparently Trump said, 'OK, we're done with you now,'" Bremmer said."Trump was very frustrated; he wasn't getting commitments from other leaders to spend more. Many of them said, 'Well, we have to ask our parliaments. We have a process; we can't just tell you we're going to spend more, we have a legal process.' Trump turns around to the Turkish president, Recep Erdogan, and says, 'Except for Erdogan over here. He does things the right way,' and then actually fist-bumps the Turkish president." delicious fake news The ending of the words is ALMSIVI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts