(01-24-2017, 12:29 PM)Maggot Wrote: He certainly is the biggest target right now.

I don't view him as a target. He can't stand being reported on accurately, maybe if he and his team stopped lying on a daily basis he might be able to get some positive press because as it is, they all provide fodder and it's going to remain that way until they get their act together.

(01-24-2017, 11:08 AM)FAHQTOO Wrote:

(01-23-2017, 05:48 PM)username Wrote: He lied about the rain FFS. And how many times has he said he didn't support the Iraq war when they have him on tape endorsing it. He insults the hell out of the intelligence agencies and then pulls one of his "I love them; they love me". Barf.

And yes, the Repubic's started the obstructionism.i can't recall specifics but I recall several times when Obama or the Democrap's brought forth agenda items that should have received bi-partisan support and didn't. That's how they earned their "do nothing" name. And how many times did they shut down or come close to shutting down the government? Because they were fractured. Tea party vs everyone else.

What a mess. At least Trump is semi interesting. He's like a fire hose and somebody dropped him. Don't know where he's going to go next.

The other thing I find unforgivable about him is he's uncouth. Money doesn't buy class. I'm sure we've had other uncouth Presidents but in my lifetime, those that I remember redeemed themselves (Clinton).

Hahaha!!! It's unforgivable that he's uncouth? Hahaha....
You crazy butthurt crybabies are really grasping at straws trying to find something to be pissed about.

He's been uncouth since day one...did you seriously think that would change?

I've expressed a lot of other complaints about him (including what came across as threatening our news media) freaking dictator. The uncouth part is just a capper. I had hoped that he would be able to demonstrate some self control, *gasp* dignity when he assumed office and so far, nada.

He looks like a bumbling, lying, narcissistic, fool. As I said before, I hope the substance doesn't match the cover.

I've just been told that the trump administration has muzzled the EPA and the USDA. They can no longer tell the taxpayer what is going on within their departments. I haven't had a chance to fact check it yet.

(01-24-2017, 12:59 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: Pipelines Green-lighted

Also today, President Trump signed orders for the Keystone Pipeline and Dakota Access Pipeline to move forward. He cites job creation as the reason. Environmentalists contend that the risks to water supply and cultural grounds greatly outweigh the creation of a couple dozen permanent jobs.

A couple dozen permanent jobs? That's fan fucking tastic! A few hours before signing those he declared himself an environmentalist.

I just love the phrases reporters use to describe things. Barnum and Baileys is alive and well in the journalistic halls of justice. And the funny thing is people gobble it up like cake.

(01-24-2017, 04:55 PM)Maggot Wrote: I just love the phrases reporters use to describe things. Barnum and Baileys is alive and well in the journalistic halls of justice. And the funny thing is people gobble it up like cake.

Yeah, that can be funny. But don't laugh out loud unless you're alone, Maggot. You've been gobbling up so much of it lately, you've got horse pucky stuck in your teeth.

I'm able to ignore his personality, in fact I think it's funny. I don't care one bit that he's uncouth and I'm not going out of my way to nitpick everything he's says. But I do care about the decisions he makes and I don't want them to be reckless ones. I don't know that I much agree with the global gag rule or the pipeline. I haven't researched any of this and I have a feeling he hasn't either.

The new pipeline will go right next to an existing one for God's sake.

And I've heard that Sally has mastered the technique to avoid the gag rule.

(01-24-2017, 09:29 PM)sally Wrote: I don't know that I much agree with the global gag rule or the pipeline. I haven't researched any of this and I have a feeling he hasn't either.

You don't have a problem with censorship? That's exactly what he did yesterday when he muzzled the EPA and USDA.

...and discussing their daily lies is hardly nitpicking.

(01-25-2017, 05:53 AM)Duchess Wrote:

(01-24-2017, 09:29 PM)sally Wrote: I don't know that I much agree with the global gag rule or the pipeline. I haven't researched any of this and I have a feeling he hasn't either.

You don't have a problem with censorship? That's exactly what he did yesterday when he muzzled the EPA and USDA.

...and discussing their daily lies is hardly nitpicking.

No, They don't have an appointed executive yet, and for government science, silencing them until one has been appointed is standard operating procedure. It happens every time there is a change of the guard. The media is just making a big deal out of it this time. "Scientists are still able to publish their findings in peer-reviewed journals, but they are unable to talk about that research without prior consent from their agency." Basically, you can't talk about it (but you CAN publish it) until you get consent from someone higher up. Right now there is nobody higher up to give consent. But the media would have you believe Trump has these scientists bound and gagged in the white-house basement. Opine on liberals.

This one never gets old: two liberals stuck on an escalator


This is more like transition stuff than it is a gag order. Stand down until the new boss gets here.

(01-24-2017, 12:59 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: Pipelines Green-lighted

Also today, President Trump signed orders for the Keystone Pipeline and Dakota Access Pipeline to move forward. He cites job creation as the reason. Environmentalists contend that the risks to water supply and cultural grounds greatly outweigh the creation of a couple dozen permanent jobs.

The oil has to get from point A to point B right? The alternative is to send it by rail, which has far more risks considering the railway is overburdened already (http://www.voanews.com/a/dakota-access-p...63592.html). Higher risk, higher carbon footprint, and higher cost. Oil traffic on the rail lines is also causing big issues with grain shipments (https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/26/us/gr....html?_r=0). Derailments of trains are far more devastating than pipeline spills. Ask the people of the town of Lac-Mégantic...oh that's right, you can't they were incinerated by a derailment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lac-M%C3%A...l_disaster). The choice then is simple. Build the pipeline. I say good call.

Sources posted for HoTD so she doesn't lose her shit.

Trump has put a hold on refuges until a better vetting process can be assumed. That is freaking great! I wonder how many anti Americans are here now. (not counting the american ones)

Pointing out bullshit you post as fact and asking you to defend your point when you want to argue about it isn't "losing shit", except in your mind, Gunnar. But, it's encouraging to see you actually attempting to know what you're talking about and then noting what amounts to your opinion on the subject. Gold star!

As far as the pipelines, I understand the points of pipeline advocates which you posted, and I understand your opinion that the pipelines are a good deal. I understand that the oil companies want to increase their transport lines in order to increase their revenues and profits as much as possible too; that's business.

I also understand the points of the pipeline objectors: even the newest piping technologies are not leak-risk free and water supply is of extreme importance to some of them (me too), continuing to invest in fossil fuels and temperature-increasing tar sand burning deters investment in renewable and clean energy (renewable energy which brings long term job and environmental advantages), fixing/upgrading the existing infrastructure would increase safety and also increase temporary construction jobs, etc...

Anyway......as with the TPP issue, there are valid arguments and trade-offs with moving in either direction, in my opinon.

I've listened and read those who passionately protest against and advocate for moving forward vs. scrapping the plans, and I don't post false claims about their motives.

I hope Bernie and Trump are right (and most conservative Republicans are wrong) about scrapping TPP being a better option for the American economy long-term and helping to increase job creation. And, if the pipelines move forward, I hope the very valid environmental concerns of the objectors are heard and considered in the plans.

(01-25-2017, 09:32 AM)Blindgreed1 Wrote: This is more like transition stuff than it is a gag order. Stand down until the new boss gets here.

Why would they so quickly rescind that order if it were standard operating procedure?

I'd like to read about it being done in the past but I can't find any information pertaining to it always being done like this.

Because Trump is not the media darling Obama was. Everything Trump does will be reported using only the bad talking points. Instead of saying "this may be contested" they will say "this is the most devastating thing that could ever happen" funny how organizations get testy when they get slapped around a bit and called on their downright stupidity.

(01-24-2017, 09:29 PM)sally Wrote: I'm able to ignore his personality, in fact I think it's funny. I don't care one bit that he's uncouth and I'm not going out of my way to nitpick everything he's says. But I do care about the decisions he makes and I don't want them to be reckless ones. I don't know that I much agree with the global gag rule or the pipeline. I haven't researched any of this and I have a feeling he hasn't either.

Do you have an opinion about President Trump making it clear that the U.S. will go back to supporting Netanyahu's perspectives and actions, no matter what, sal?

I support some of Trump's proposals, am neutral on others, and object to several. His stance on Israel is one with which I object. I think President Obama was right to continue viewing Israel as an important ally, working to minimize the threat of nuclear war between Israel and Iran, and standing up to Netanyahu's settlement rhetoric and actions which ignore international law and conflict with Israel's previous commitments to move towards a two-state solution with the Palestinians.

The U.S. gives Israel $4 billion a year for "defense", which is much higher than our aide to any other country. I think that should be contingent upon Israel keeping its commitments in regards to dealings with the Palestinians and Arab nations, personally.

I also think Trump's repeated comments about how the U.S. should have illegally taken Iraq's oil when the U.S. occupied the country (based on a proven lie) is wrong and extremely careless. He needs to stifle it, yet he said yesterday that maybe we'll have a chance to take the oil in the future. WTF. Talk about causing distrust and justifiably ratcheting-up anti-American sentiment unnecessarily.

(01-25-2017, 01:06 PM)Maggot Wrote: Everything Trump does will be reported using only the bad talking points.

Good! I don't care a wit. I do my own fact checking, I don't count on others to do it for me nor do I take what I hear & read at face value, no one should but people will. I don't support him and I find it highly unlikely that I ever will. He's a petulant child hiding in an old man's body. My joy lately comes from watching the dumpster fire that is his administration. Wah. The media is demoralizing us, Sean cried.