Politics

Tom Kalbfus · 2016-12-02 00:23:21

GW Johnson wrote:

"He hasn't done anything yet. I don't think it is fair to criticize someone's job performance as President before he is President."
-- actually, yes he has. He has chosen as his closest advisors mostly people who want to do the things Trump promised us he would not do, during the campaign.
Which puts him at near-100% verifiable lies. Worse actually than Clinton with her verifiable 50% lies.
Either of them would be disastrous as president, but I think he will be the worst of the two.
GW

Do you actually know any of these people? I think it doesn't matter what people Trump has chosen, you are just going to say they are the wrong people! Trump says, he'll make America Great Again, he is promising 4% growth in the economy, what's the matter, don't you like 4% growth? That is double the growth of any year during the Obama Administration! I think Presidents ought to be judged by results, and results haven't come in yet, if the 4% growth fails to materialize, then you can criticize Donald Trump! By criticizing him before he actual is President, you are only showing your bias against him!

Tom Kalbfus · 2016-12-03 02:14:04

SpaceNut wrote:

Maine GOP Gov. LePage Claims Non-Citizens Could Have Voted. He is telling state legislators he'll rubber-stamp their election certifications despite his concerns about the accuracy of the state's official results. Maine's election isn't in question and he hasn't received complaints regarding the integrity of it. This echo's Trumps claim that they cast there votes for Hillary and that he won the popular vote due to this action.....
Along with the previous races that are part of the swing states that are being recounted there could be some other states that will be doing recounts for the same voter fraud that Trump has claimed....
Trump promised the Carrier to be able to keep there business here in the states and touted his new deal to keep at least 1,000 U.S. jobs. Yet workers at another of the company's Indiana plants said they are still losing their jobs. With Sarah Palin Saying Trump's Carrier Deal Could Be 'Crony Capitalism' "When government steps in arbitrarily with individual subsidies, favoring one business over others, it sets inconsistent, unfair, illogical precedent," and not to meantion a conflict of interest if he does indeed own stock in the company....
The next Trump's pick for Defense Marine General James Mattis, has been Accused of Delaying Aid to Wounded Soldiers by A former Army Special Forces officer and his actions, which were not formally investigated at the time, are now likely to get far more scrutiny during the retired general's Senate confirmation process.

Do you want to keep the jobs in the United States or not? The reason that company was leaving was because of high taxes, by lowering those taxes we get to save those jobs, are you against that? Anyway Trump was acting as a private citizen making promises to the company of what he would do as President.

Also why not hold this president responsible for results instead of trying to set up road blocks for him to get the people he wants working for him? James Mattis is a General, generally you want someone in charge who knows what he is doing, so soldier don't end up getting killed unnecessarily. Putting amateurs or professors in charge of the Military is a bad idea!

SpaceNut · 2016-12-03 10:53:07

Actually only partial jobs were kept and they still may move out of the US as there is no way to lower state taxes let alone Federal as the money needs to come from someone and it will not be the rich that could afford an increase. The other reason for being on the path to leaving has to do with manufacturing regulation, unions and wages they can not afford as profits will suffer, that is why more companies use contract agencies to pay less for wages plus taxes and by reducing full time employee counts. These things are the nature of doing business in America.

As for private citizen Trump making deals as if he were president that is misrepersentation and fraudulent just not ethical to do.

The General made poor choices and there are better out there. This is not road blocking its asking to consider others just like all of his other cabinet choices.

kbd512 · 2016-12-03 13:52:04

SpaceNut wrote:

Actually only partial jobs were kept and they still may move out of the US as there is no way to lower state taxes let alone Federal as the money needs to come from someone and it will not be the rich that could afford an increase. The other reason for being on the path to leaving has to do with manufacturing regulation, unions and wages they can not afford as profits will suffer, that is why more companies use contract agencies to pay less for wages plus taxes and by reducing full time employee counts. These things are the nature of doing business in America.

If I gave you the choice between keeping 1,000 of 2,000 American jobs or 0 American jobs, which would you rather keep?

SpaceNut wrote:

As for private citizen Trump making deals as if he were president that is misrepersentation and fraudulent just not ethical to do.

By your logic, all politicians promising people things before they are sworn into office are also frauds.

Solyndra deal good, Carrier deal bad. Got it.

SpaceNut wrote:

The General made poor choices and there are better out there. This is not road blocking its asking to consider others just like all of his other cabinet choices.

Care to elaborate?

Tom Kalbfus · 2016-12-03 15:44:56

SpaceNut wrote:

Actually only partial jobs were kept and they still may move out of the US as there is no way to lower state taxes let alone Federal as the money needs to come from someone and it will not be the rich that could afford an increase.

Who's money will it come from if you don't have a job? If my job goes to Mexico, I won't have an income to pay taxes on regardless of what percentage it is.

The other reason for being on the path to leaving has to do with manufacturing regulation, unions and wages they can not afford as profits will suffer, that is why more companies use contract agencies to pay less for wages plus taxes and by reducing full time employee counts. These things are the nature of doing business in America.
As for private citizen Trump making deals as if he were president that is misrepersentation and fraudulent just not ethical to do.
The General made poor choices and there are better out there. This is not road blocking its asking to consider others just like all of his other cabinet choices.

I just have the feeling that whoever fill in the blank, Trump picks, you will have a problem with, has it occurred to you that maybe Trump could be right and you might be wrong? Trump was elected after all, if you don't agree with his choices on who should fill various positions, then accept that perhaps Trump might know something that you don't, let him have his people and then judge him by the results. If you get in his way, and don't allow him to fill out his cabinet they way he wants, he could then blame you for his failures, do you want that?

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2016-12-03 15:46:37)

Tom Kalbfus · 2016-12-03 15:52:18

kbd512 wrote:

SpaceNut wrote:
Actually only partial jobs were kept and they still may move out of the US as there is no way to lower state taxes let alone Federal as the money needs to come from someone and it will not be the rich that could afford an increase. The other reason for being on the path to leaving has to do with manufacturing regulation, unions and wages they can not afford as profits will suffer, that is why more companies use contract agencies to pay less for wages plus taxes and by reducing full time employee counts. These things are the nature of doing business in America.
If I gave you the choice between keeping 1,000 of 2,000 American jobs or 0 American jobs, which would you rather keep?
SpaceNut wrote:
As for private citizen Trump making deals as if he were president that is misrepersentation and fraudulent just not ethical to do.
By your logic, all politicians promising people things before they are sworn into office are also frauds.
Solyndra deal good, Carrier deal bad. Got it.
SpaceNut wrote:
The General made poor choices and there are better out there. This is not road blocking its asking to consider others just like all of his other cabinet choices.
Care to elaborate?

I don't know anything about this general, I haven't done independent research on him, and I don't trust the opinions of the Media that is reflexively opposed to everything Trump does, I do not trust the research they do on Trump's picks. I assume Trump is an intelligent man, he is a billionaire after all, I expect that his did intelligent research on all his candidates, just as the people he hired to run his company, and that he knows what he is doing most of the time. Since he has a record of success, and I don't, I would expect that he knows what he is doing, and I give him the benefit of the doubt, while all the Media does is doubt, it tries to find negative stuff on everything Trump does!

Antius · 2016-12-03 18:49:12

Left wing ideas end up dominating institutions, not least the media, partly because everyone wants to believe in a better tomorrow. And that is exactly what the left have always promised - a better future based upon utopian visions. There isn't one of us that doesn't want to believe that the future will be better in some way than the world of today. There wouldn't be much point in trying if we didn't believe that it was at least possible. And that understandable aspiration makes us vulnerable to believing in things that ultimately turn out to be delusions.

Human beings have some really fatal mental weaknesses that are difficult to get past. And there are some people that are especially vulnerable to utopian ideas. People who, for whatever reason, cannot accept the world for what it is. They come to depend upon them, they provide them with emotional security. And this explains the utter hostility that left-wing institutions have towards a man like Trump. It also explains the tendency of left-wing ideas to become dogma that cannot be questioned and why regimes based upon those sorts of utopian ideals tend towards autocracy. When you question ideals that people depend upon for emotional security, they are threatened by it and find it immensely painful. You are destroying a mental prop that they need. When whole institutions are founded on those ideals, you threaten not just their emotional security but also their authority and power base. At this point, any illusion of freedom of expression breaks down, because freedom to think becomes freedom to question. Hence, the network of anti free-speech laws in places like the UK. The strict regulation of media broadcasts, the 'Snooper's Charter', allowing government to monitor online communications. As utopian beliefs become more entrenched in the social institutions, the more frightened leaders become of anyone that might question them. Hence the media slander against Trump. Hence the UK government's Hate Speech laws. When an entire social construct is based on falsehoods, as all utopian ideals ultimately are, its defenders are natural control freaks. And that control must go further and further as the contradictions of the lie become more and more apparent. Heaven forbid that any bastard dares to point out that the emperor is naked. Pray that they don't say something that will burst our little bubble. And this is how wrong ideas end up becoming entrenched. It becomes dangerous to question them, or to fail to support them. The spite and anger directed against Trump isn't really surprising in this context. It would be hilarious if it weren't so tragic for real people.

At the centre of the left wing delusion is the social ideal itself: the belief that society can evolve into some perfect form, that can transcend the forces that created it. A perfect form in which a person's race, or sex, or physical limitations, or luck of birth do not matter and all are somehow perfectly equal, with equal opportunities and value. People can be interchangable parts, removed from one society and slotted into another. It is the contradictions and complete unworkability of this ideal that causes the Left to ruin the world. Utopian ideals like communism and racial equality have caused enormous suffering for countless people, as narrow minded ideologues have attempted to force societies into the simplified moulds that they have worked up in their minds to represent the embodiment of perfection. These people can never admit the unworkability of their ideals, so much of who they are and what they are so completely depends upon keeping the ideal alive. They reach the conclusion that individual lives do not matter, because the ideal itself is what matters more and individuals will always come in the way of realising perfection. It is too bad that a hundred people are murdered on London subway or that hundreds of young English girls are sexually abused by immigrants in Northern England. Their loss is simply a necessary sacrifice on the way to the achievement of utopia.

It will not be easy to get out of this mess. A lot of people stand to lose just too much to take this lying down. Some are more to blame than others, the individuals at the heart of our media and other left-wing institutions. But the reality is that we have all been undermined and ruined by nothing other than the sickness of our own minds. Our belief in a perfection that cannot be real and our inability to drop it. The very idea of perfection is an illusion of the human mind. Perfection exists nowhere in nature. Nature and real society are all about evolving and compromising against changing conditions. Nothing is ever perfect and what is good one day may be inappropriate tomorrow. Realities like race are part of human evolution and are deeply entrenched. One cannot in reality prentend that these things are not important. The only hope is in learning to understand and accept tge world for what it is and stop propping up old illusions. But there are many who will fight to their deaths to keep those illusions alive.

Last edited by Antius (2016-12-03 20:06:24)

SpaceNut · 2016-12-03 19:42:56

Tom that is the point in that no employer is forced to keep there business here as we are trying to make with jobs going elsewhere stay. I have said before of personal experience with outsourcing is that it does suck looking for another job when there are hundreds being laid off all at one time.Try to go 6 months or more with no income trying to keep a roof over you families head when all you get are under the table for cash or contractural labor ect... for the other types which can be had.....So taxes of all types, wages, inflation, housing, insurance, commodities to purchase all need to stabilize....and not keep going up.....

News reports are saying that the deal to keep company open have resulted in other plants closing losing many more jobs.....

So a state has Trump listed as the winner by a narrow margina dn the stop counting.

As of Friday, Trump's margin of victory in Pennsylvania was 49,000, or less than 1 percent, out of 6 million votes cast, according to state election officials. Final counts were outstanding in some counties, including heavily populated Allegheny County, but state and county officials did not expect any outstanding uncounted votes to change the outcome of the presidential election in Pennsylvania.

Finish the dam count and give the voters a sense of that their vote counts......

Also saw that voting machines in wisconsin have been tampered with.....

Speaking of votes why do we even vote for a candidate in a primary, then vote again in the run off and finally cast an electoral vote...Which mean a select few have cast a vote 3 times not once possibly for the same person each time.....

Terraformer · 2016-12-04 08:18:58

Antius, you are sounding... deplorable. As if you are... alternatively right.

Tom Kalbfus · 2016-12-04 09:10:11

The flawed system, such that it is, produced a Trump victory, and now that Trump has won, and is setting up his new Administration, liberals are finding fault with the voting because it produced a Trump victory, and are trying to recount and find the extra votes to make Hillary the winner, but the recount is only in three states, there are 50 of them, so if you find the extra votes to make Hillary the President by flipping three states, what about the other 47 states? How do we know there wasn't vote fraud in California or New York to produce a Hillary victory there? Trump won in spite of the opposition of most of the press, I don't think the vote would have been as cloe as it was if it weren't for press bias, they so badly wanted Hillary to be the next president, they pulled out all the stops for her, and if everything had gone on as they wanted Hillary would be the President elect now, but is it the press that is supposed to determine who the next president is by propagandizing us into believing that Trump is terrible and Hillary is good? Are they supposed to control the information we receive so we can't make educated choices?

The Media is a monolith, it is non competitive for the most part, it speaks with one voice and it has one chosen candidate in Hillary Clinton, and it was trying to make us vote fr her by telling us what a terrible person Donald Trump is. Now Hillary is a terrible candidate, so what the press was doing was trying to steer us toward the worst candidate they supposed the Republican party could nominate, who had a realistic chance o becoming president because he is a billionaire and one he won the nomination, it tried to convince us that he was even worse than Hillary so therefore we had no choice but to vote for Hillary as terrible as she was! I don't like being railroaded! For me its very simple, Trump represents change and Hillary is more of the same failed policies of 2% economic growth or recession that got us here in the first place, so I'd rather take a risk on Trump than vote for Hillary and expect a different policy from Obama's. Things are not going satisfactory in this country, so therefore Trump is the change candidate since he represents the party that has been out of power for the past 8 years. How much change, I don't know, we'll just have to see. But the people trying to install Hillary in the White House just want power, that is all they care about, they want their jobs and their security, they don't care about the future of this country, they just want their jobs and perks, and they want things to stay the same, whether its a downward course for this country or not, and those same people want a recount, hoping that Hillary will be found to be the winner so they can keep their jobs and cozy relationship with the government, and not have to endure chance, which for them and their careers is a negative thing!

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2016-12-04 09:11:49)

Antius · 2016-12-04 11:46:31

Terraformer wrote:

Antius, you are sounding... deplorable. As if you are... alternatively right.

I guess I am one of those grizzled geezers that would rather hear an ugly truth than a beautiful lie. I could reassure you that we all live in a Star Trek style Socialist utopia and that everyone is happy. But lying is deplorable.

Tom Kalbfus · 2016-12-04 20:23:38

A realistic Star Trek Style utopia would not have crewed starships. To provide everything for free to humans would require than machines do all the work. Any humans onboard starships would all be passengers.

SpaceNut · 2016-12-04 23:21:59

Here is another of the Russian connections to Trump as you remember one of the cabinet picks Exclusive: Snowden says Petraeus disclosed ‘far more highly classified’ secrets ‘than I ever did’ and where is Snowden now......

Tom Kalbfus · 2016-12-05 03:38:49

Where is Hillary Clinton now? Where is Obama now? At least Petraeus did not give the Russians nuclear weapons! Who are more our enemies, the Russians or the Iranians? I think we can make a deal with the Russians, we just have to make sure they pay a price for whatever land they take, and we tell them where to take the land from! If Turkey misbehaves, we could give the Russians a call, say, "Hey, would you like some land?" This threat will keep Turkey from going on any Jihads against the West. We could arm Ukraine with nuclear weapons, and if Russia complains, we just tell them, "If you don't want Ukraine to have nuclear weapons, just give back the land, or pay Ukraine for the land you took! That is all! he agreement was that you respect Ukraine's borders in return for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons. You did not respect Ukraine's borders, so therefore there is a price to pay! Now you can give back the land and we can forget about nuking up Ukraine, how about it?"

Antius · 2016-12-05 05:50:45

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Where is Hillary Clinton now? Where is Obama now? At least Petraeus did not give the Russians nuclear weapons! Who are more our enemies, the Russians or the Iranians? I think we can make a deal with the Russians, we just have to make sure they pay a price for whatever land they take, and we tell them where to take the land from! If Turkey misbehaves, we could give the Russians a call, say, "Hey, would you like some land?" This threat will keep Turkey from going on any Jihads against the West. We could arm Ukraine with nuclear weapons, and if Russia complains, we just tell them, "If you don't want Ukraine to have nuclear weapons, just give back the land, or pay Ukraine for the land you took! That is all! he agreement was that you respect Ukraine's borders in return for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons. You did not respect Ukraine's borders, so therefore there is a price to pay! Now you can give back the land and we can forget about nuking up Ukraine, how about it?"

Tom,

If this allegation against Petraeus is true, then it raises serious concerns about the judgement of the president elect. In my opinion Trump has some admirable qualities, he is a nationalist that wishes to restore his country to greatness and he is not part of the den of traitors and thieves that have plagued the western world for as long as I can remember. But he is also politically inexperienced. A lot of what he has to say (about global warming for example) make him sound downright naïve.

There is a light-year of difference between a nationalist and an imperialist. A nationalist makes hard hearted decisions that ultimately serve a greater good and understands that good fences make good neighbours. A true nationalist respects the right of others to do the same. An imperialist is a different beast entirely. He may show nationalist tendencies, but ultimately he lacks any interest in the good of humanity. He does what he does without compassion or understanding and looks upon the possessions of others as resources that he can exploit, he doesn't care about the consequences for the people that live there. I suspect Trump is a nationalist, Putin is an Imperialist. A lot of people don't understand the difference between the two philosophies, that one is good, the other is evil. I suspect that Trump may not understand either and that would be exceptionally dangerous when dealing with Russia.

Achieving better relations with the Russians is a laudable goal and one that I hope we achieve. But any sort of capitulation to these people, any weakening or perceived weakening of defences in Eastern Europe, risks starting WW3. An imperialist would see it as permission to take. When dealing with Putin, you need an iron fist in a silk glove.

Last edited by Antius (2016-12-05 06:08:57)

elderflower · 2016-12-05 09:12:44

A more clever man than I said ".....tread softly and carry a big stick."

SpaceNut · 2016-12-05 18:42:28

Here is the run down on Petraeus and hillary for comparison.
Retired Army general David Petraeus, who stepped down as CIA chief amid the scandal of an extramarital affair and pleaded guilty to divulging classified information. He admitted to spilling a massive amount of sensitive information to Broadwell and lying to FBI agents about it. Petraeus wasn’t sloppy with classified information. He purposely gave it away to his lover and biographer and sought to cover that up by lying to federal investigators, according to the plea deal. Petraeus delivered to Broadwell eight black books containing classified and unclassified notes he took during meetings, conferences and briefings he took as a military commander. The notebooks he forwarded contained a trove of the nation’s most guarded secrets, including secret code words, the names of covert operatives, war strategy, intelligence capabilities and mechanisms, and discussions at the highest levels of the national security establishment, including the president. The federal court levied a fine of $100,000 against him, $60,000 more than prosecutors had sought, and placed him on probation in the plea deal.

This what everyone is mad about with Hillary as she did the same thing as Petraeus which is “unlawfully and knowingly” removed classified materials and kept them in unauthorized locations. His was in notebooks and her's was on a privae email server.

In recent months, Petraeus' case has become a rallying point for both sides in the roiling debate over Hillary Clinton's use of a personal email server found to contain classified information.In the current controversy over Clinton's use of a private email server, her critics have often described her actions as far more serious than Petraeus'. They argue that her receipt and transmission on an unsecure system of emails now deemed classified may have allowed foreign governments or hackers to gain access to American government secrets. Some observers have noted that the public charges against Petraeus only indicated that he shared classified information with Broadwell, who had a security clearance but appeared to lack the required need-to-know. Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

There’s also the difference of intent; Petraeus knew the information contained classified information; it’s unclear whether Hillary did. (However, the statutes being looked at in Clinton’s case required either intent or gross negligence, according to Comey.) Comey did say a few of the emails in the Clinton case had classified markers but others did not; however, he also said in his statement that someone in Clinton’s position should have known better and that she was extremely careless.

While the email server could have been hacked as others say it was not, but for those that are of governement service there servers have been hacked. So whom is the one's that should be punished for those hacks......

Tom Kalbfus · 2016-12-05 22:15:52

Antius wrote:

We are past the point where it matters how good Trump looks compared to Hillary. Before the election, keeping Hillary out of power was one of Trump's biggest saving graces. For all his faults, at least he wasn't her. She lost the election and whatever she might have done is an irrelevance to all but a few dusty political historians. She is about as important to us now as Michael Dukakis was in 1989. In a few years she will be forgotten.
Now, we cannot excuse any problems there may be with Trump just because there could have been a bigger turd in the Whitehouse. What he does after 20th January matters enormously, peoples lives will be made or broken by his decisions and a lot of people could die if he makes the wrong decisions. It may be that the concerns I raised are unjustified and he has a cunning masterplan. I hope so. How he deals with Russia will define how his presidency is remembered and whether half the people reading this site are still alive in 10 years time.
You talk about 'giving' Putin a piece of Ukraine. Does nothing about that not sound eerily familiar to you? 78 years ago a British prime minister brokered just such a deal with a German imperialist. It is remembered as the 1938 Appeasement. We all know what happened just 1 year later.

I'm talking a trade, Putin doesn't get it for free! One possible price is Ukraine gets nukes in exchange for letting Russia keep the part it took. If Ukraine gets nukes, Russia dare not take any more, after all Russia violated its agreement, therefore Ukraine gets nukes, and all things go back to normal between Russia and the West, Russia has to accept a nuclear Ukraine, it gets its warm water port it always wanted without paying rent, and we can put an end to this cold war. Is that really such a bad deal? The way you negotiate a piece is you have each side give up something and each side gain something, so neither side goes away humiliated and seeking revenge.

Or Russia can simply give back the land and say Sorry!

Tom Kalbfus · 2016-12-05 22:24:55

SpaceNut wrote:

Here is the run down on Petraeus and hillary for comparison.
Retired Army general David Petraeus, who stepped down as CIA chief amid the scandal of an extramarital affair and pleaded guilty to divulging classified information. He admitted to spilling a massive amount of sensitive information to Broadwell and lying to FBI agents about it. Petraeus wasn’t sloppy with classified information. He purposely gave it away to his lover and biographer and sought to cover that up by lying to federal investigators, according to the plea deal. Petraeus delivered to Broadwell eight black books containing classified and unclassified notes he took during meetings, conferences and briefings he took as a military commander. The notebooks he forwarded contained a trove of the nation’s most guarded secrets, including secret code words, the names of covert operatives, war strategy, intelligence capabilities and mechanisms, and discussions at the highest levels of the national security establishment, including the president. The federal court levied a fine of $100,000 against him, $60,000 more than prosecutors had sought, and placed him on probation in the plea deal.
This what everyone is mad about with Hillary as she did the same thing as Petraeus which is “unlawfully and knowingly” removed classified materials and kept them in unauthorized locations. His was in notebooks and her's was on a privae email server.
In recent months, Petraeus' case has become a rallying point for both sides in the roiling debate over Hillary Clinton's use of a personal email server found to contain classified information.In the current controversy over Clinton's use of a private email server, her critics have often described her actions as far more serious than Petraeus'. They argue that her receipt and transmission on an unsecure system of emails now deemed classified may have allowed foreign governments or hackers to gain access to American government secrets. Some observers have noted that the public charges against Petraeus only indicated that he shared classified information with Broadwell, who had a security clearance but appeared to lack the required need-to-know. Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

How about we make a deal? If Clinton goes to jail, Petraeus goes to jail, if Clinton is pardoned, then so to is Petraeus. If Clinton gets a "Get out of Jail Free" card, then so does Petraeus! We can't have "Justice" work one way for Democrats and another way for Republicans, now can we!

There’s also the difference of intent; Petraeus knew the information contained classified information; it’s unclear whether Hillary did. (However, the statutes being looked at in Clinton’s case required either intent or gross negligence, according to Comey.) Comey did say a few of the emails in the Clinton case had classified markers but others did not; however, he also said in his statement that someone in Clinton’s position should have known better and that she was extremely careless.
While the email server could have been hacked as others say it was not, but for those that are of governement service there servers have been hacked. So whom is the one's that should be punished for those hacks......

I'd say we give Hillary a break, she can retire like all other first ladies with her husband instead of going to jail, we avoid the partisan Rancor, and in exchange David Petraeus gets another chance too. One reason I'm suspicious is this whole affair occurred under Obama, the justice system got all screwed up and corrupted, so lets make clean break, both get second chances, we let bygones be bygones, and we'll let Trump decide who should be the secretary of state based on qualifications.

elderflower · 2016-12-10 14:11:13

Or hers!
Just like the UK then, GW. I would like to prosecute Boris Johnson for treason, instead he gets made foreign secretary. I can't think of anyone less suited to the post!

Last edited by elderflower (2016-12-10 14:12:42)

Terraformer · 2016-12-10 15:31:56

What treason has Boris committed?

SpaceNut · 2016-12-10 21:07:33

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

SpaceNut wrote:
When I look at the percentage of counted I am upset that many votes have not been counted regardless of any change of out come in that it means votes do not count.....that needs to be fixed.
There are many votes that should not be counted as well, the votes of noncitizens, the votes of dead people, the votes of people who have already voted and are now voting in a different state, for example. I have received voting cards in the mail for my dead mother, and my brother who lives in Alaska! I have seen my brother's name on the voting register next to mine, even though he doesn't live with us, its not hard to imagine someone taking advantage of this and voting more than once. Not every vote should be counted, the illegitimate ones should not be! We definitely need voter ID, people who cannot prove they are US citizens should not be allowed to vote. No legitimate voter should be disenfranchised, but illegitimate voters who's votes are counted when they should not be disenfranchise every legitimate voter who voted opposite of an illegitimate voter.

That would mean a passport for every citizen and not just a voter/ driver & non driver ID, probably both are needed....I do agree with the list of issues which need to be prevented but after that all votes do need to be counted and verified.....This was why some want the recounts and why some wanted proof that there was no hacking or altering of votes made....

By the way Trump has been bankrupt 4 times that I can find....

As for the Russian resorts these are now a confict of interest as president.....

Tom Kalbfus · 2016-12-10 21:51:53

I don't know if there are any Russian resorts, never heard of any. Trump likes warm places anyway. You saying only poor people like me should be president? Anyone who is likely to do a good job should be disqualified, right?

Actually poor people like me are more likely to have conflicts of interests, I'm more easy to bribe than a billionaire, the temptation would be greater for me, than for Donald Trump, who is already rich! Trump could retire right now, but he is in it for the challenge, not the money!

Tom Kalbfus · 2016-12-12 09:45:52

If the government goes bankrupt, then you lose your social security, or else the government just prints money. You can only retire if other people work to provide you services. If you go to a supermarket to buy food, other people have a job of putting that food on the supermarket shelves so you can buy it. Saving the system means people have to make sacrifices, one thing that should not be sacrificed is economic growth, because economic growth is what solves the deficit and debt, and if you do things like raise taxes to pay for social security, that hampers economic growth. Do you really want to impose a stagnant economy with rising unemployment in order to pay for retired people's social security? I think Social Security can be privatized, and I think tat's better than it going bankrupt. The big picture is the economy needs to function in order for you to retire. I am hopingsome other developments come first, like automation.

RobertDyck · 2016-12-12 10:18:06

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

economic growth is what solves the deficit and debt

It won't if they keep increasing spending. They tend to increase spending when the economy increases. For anyone or any organization to balance their budget, they have to control spending. And please stop blaming it on "entitlements"; all spending has to be controlled. After all, social security is paid via its own premium. It doesn't come out of income tax.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#276 2016-12-02 00:23:21

Re: Politics

#277 2016-12-03 02:14:04

Re: Politics

#278 2016-12-03 10:53:07

Re: Politics

#279 2016-12-03 13:52:04

Re: Politics

#280 2016-12-03 15:44:56

Re: Politics

#281 2016-12-03 15:52:18

Re: Politics

#282 2016-12-03 18:49:12

Re: Politics

#283 2016-12-03 19:42:56

Re: Politics

#284 2016-12-04 08:18:58

Re: Politics

#285 2016-12-04 09:10:11

Re: Politics

#286 2016-12-04 11:46:31

Re: Politics

#287 2016-12-04 20:23:38

Re: Politics

#288 2016-12-04 23:21:59

Re: Politics

#289 2016-12-05 03:38:49

Re: Politics

#290 2016-12-05 05:50:45

Re: Politics

#291 2016-12-05 09:12:44

Re: Politics

#292 2016-12-05 18:42:28

Re: Politics

#293 2016-12-05 22:15:52

Re: Politics

#294 2016-12-05 22:24:55

Re: Politics

#295 2016-12-10 14:11:13

Re: Politics

#296 2016-12-10 15:31:56

Re: Politics

#297 2016-12-10 21:07:33

Re: Politics

#298 2016-12-10 21:51:53

Re: Politics

#299 2016-12-12 09:45:52

Re: Politics

#300 2016-12-12 10:18:06

Re: Politics

Board footer