The newer, brighter & shinier Random Thoughts Thread [R]

you're mixing up personality with policies.

at the time of the election ( and I didn't vote for Trump in the primary ) the choice was between Clinton, who I view as a slimy woman whose stances on several issues are, to use her word, "deplorable", and Trump, who hadn't really shown his true colors, IMO, as far as his arrogant, blowhard, narcissistic self is concerned.

He was sort of a cartoon, but i thought he would do some good stuff as far as "draining the swamp" was concerned. turns out that too little of that has happened...surprise, surprise...but getting out of Obama's Iran deal seems like a good thing and better border security is a must. I think most people who are not in support of building "The Wall" don't really know what is being proposed.

Here is a link to the existing border fencing. Do you not think better security would be beneficial?

https://www.usatoday.com/border-wall/us-mexico-interactive-border-map/

 

Oh for the love of Fowler, no more politics....

(stay off the thread then! I know, I know...)

 

Argue Brexit or something - that would be more interesting to me than dragging over the worst pair of presidential candidates in my 6 decade lifetime. \

 

What is going on with Brexit right now? Too lazy to look it up and Twatter seems to make me think that they're arguing about how to exit...or maybe there's a chance that they don't have to exit anymore? I don't know.

 

So, in response I hardly know where to begin. I think you're getting confused between policy and Trumps fantasy.
Your slimey comment on Hilary is straight from Fox News. Your repugnant party slimed her right from the start and you fell for it. From the foundation, her emails (groan, especially now that Trump and the First Lady and advisor Ivanka) both do it. To the 4 years and $70 million on Bengazi by that banjo playing throw back Goudy.

So that convinced you to look at and vote for a crook who would, to quote Drain the swamp. Instead he's just been breeding alligators.
You actually thought that a crooked builder who has to be taken to court by contractors to get paid. Who has declared banckruptcy at lest three times. Who talks about pussy grabbing and has paid off at least 2 women to the tune of $130k each for adulterous affairs. Then is a proven liar just asuch as he breaths. (8,000 times in 2 years)
Yeah, I know that evangelicals consider him the second coming regardless of his "shortcomings"

You chose him over Hillary.?!!!
(Just a quick question, do you regret that and do you think that the US and the world would be in a better place now if she won?)

Do I feel border security would be beneficial. That is the stupid F'kn question straight from right wing idiots who follow Hannity ask.

Of course I do and so do the Democratic Party. They have put bills up supporting more security and have been turned down by a repugnant house several times.
If you're confusing border security with The wall that Trump pulled out of his ass as a campaign promise that Mexico will pay for. Then no.

Immigrants, yeah those brown people. Or wait. Did those brown people really leave their prayer rugs along the border?
Did trump really see those women with duct tape over their faces in those super, faster bigger cars and vans than the border security have.
Or did he just see the same movie as me and think it real in his sick mind.

Ok I'll stop, I won't go into children in concentration camps. The ones were govt don't know who their parents are (or care) perhaps tattoos would have helped.

Apologes to burning247 and others. I didn't want to use the match day thread for my rant

 

The saddest thing is the debate has focused on which 2016 candidate would be worse for the country and the world. Yikes its depressing, glad we're getting back to football soon.

 

It's interesting that when it comes to discussing football we can have disagreements about who played well or what formation we would like to see or what player we might want to pick up during the signing season. We can dig into the facts and statistics about how many passes a person completed and how many of those went forward or backwards and how many were dangerous. When it comes to football we're all too happy to dig up the statistics and agree to them and then argue about who do we think would be a better pic for the Midfield against team X. When it comes to politics we don't seem to have that same Zeal for facts and statistics. Too many would rather base there opinions upon what they want the facts and statistics to be verses what they are. It makes it difficult to have a useful discussion.

 

Yeah, it's become pretty sad. But when. "The leader of the free world" Insults the rest of the our allies in the free world and befriends the countries enemies, it's hard to be impartial or even listen.
Especially when the count of lies he's spouted to the people of his own country. Over 8,000 in two years to date. Then his base believes what he says while the majority of the country calls BS. It's no wonder people are so divided.

 

Political statistics? Based on whose bias you want to believe...everything we read or hear is doctored to some extent.

 

The further a society drifts from the truth the more it will hate those who speak it'

George Orwell.

 

I bought one in the club shop in the City Centre in December!

 

I had to wear this one this morning. A little nippy on the ears at sunrise.

 

I didn't say he was crooked _ I don't know. I do say that he is a dangerous, infantile, destructive-willed cross between a descendant of humans and a rat that has been locked up in an alley behind a McDonalds for 5 years.

Given that choice and Hilary Clinton (who isn't fit to be President either), then yes, you probably were (as a theoretically functioning human) supposed to vote for her. There's no comparison. Trump's entire schtick is a mockery of all these institutions that Americans are supposed to be living and enduring by.

And with all that said, not that the Clinton Foundation or any other Foundation (including the Trump Foundation) has anything to do with the FACT that Trump can't open his mouth without spouting some form of inanity or other. You stated my comment to be inane. I state quite firmly that it wasn't, and then give a clear reason why, and then simply say that you don't get the right to be making such commentaries (using the word inane) after voting for this utterly inane fvckhead.....

Where Hillary Clinton is involved in that is beyond me ... Of course, where she's involved in a lot of things I've heard in the last few years is also beyond me....
Give it a rest, for God's sakes. We all know that if Hillary Clinton was President and accused (or being investigated) of the theories that Mueller is pursuing about Trump and his campaign, and if a numerous swathe of her high positioned talking heads had already faced criminal charges, there would be rioting in the streets already ....

 

Some people don't want to adjust their inner sets for sense.... It's easier to ramble on about Hilary Clinton, et al ....

 

He was the best player in England for a couple of years there.... 96-97

 

"and better border security is a must. I think most people who are not in support of building "The Wall" don't really know what is being proposed."

The wall thing is far down my list. My feeling is that if the US govenrment wants to limit immigration and has a mandate to do that then it is only the business of the US government to either build or not build barriers/walls. However, using the hyper-inflamed (and racially motivated) opinions of a relatively small section of the population to declare war on the idea of immigration in the manner that Trump and his cohort (Sessions, etc) have done, is not reflective of the opinion of the American people, who for the most part, don;t want to see Ice-Agents chasing SUV's until they crash and kill normal hard-working parents of 6 kids in the Central Valley, not do they want to see kids removed from their parents and locked up separately whilst applying for standard immigration procedures.
If the net that creates too large a cachement for refugees, etc is too large then it is the function of the government to change the law to reflect what policy people would prefer. This should be opinion arrived at via discussion and reasoned argument, not through vitriol and splenetic and totally irresponsible rhetoric.
That's that -

More Importantly-
Why exactly does getting out of Obama's Iran deal seem like a good thing? (This, incidentally, is the same kind of intransigently wrong reasoning which stated over and over that Hans Blix (the guy who knew most about the situation in Iraq in late 2002/early 2003) didn't know enough about the situation in Iraq.)

That may be among the outright worst things he has touched. The rest of the World is in favour of the Iran deal. It was a win-win situation for practially everyone involved. It was working well. No other advanced country (except one) seems to think differently. And Trump and his cronies (at the behest of murderous warmongers like John Bolton) claim it to be disastrous, without, of course, touching upon any of the specific reasons that it is supposedly disastrous, or being able to articulate any of them when asked.

The people who put Iran on a list of countries to not allow people entry to the US from due to a fear of terrorism from ISIS and the Al Quaeda are the same people who are telling us that the Iran nuclear deal was wrong/dangerous. If this was your doctor, would you feel healthy?
In case anyone is unclear about it - Iran is a stated enemy of both organizations. Both organizations are the stated enemies of Iran.

 

For the record - let me repeat myself on this bit, because it bears repeating:

It was working well. No other advanced country (except one) seems to think differently.

 

Except 2

 

Two? Let me guess. Russia and under orders from them. The US.

 

Loved the Mac-Attack.

 

By no other advanced country I count Trumplandia (US) as the one, and the no other bar one is Israel.

But apparently since lying brazenly about the threats of terrorism during the State of the Union address isn't to be considered treas

Starting point for the discussion: Does anyone think that the threat to Western Civilization posed by ISIS and/or Al Quaeda is on a similar level to that posed by Hezbollah? Does anyone think it is acceptable behaviour to be insinuating this?

 

Here you go lads, something to pass the time until Sunday....

(incidentally, apparently people are commonly known to faint from/while reading this...)

https://hesomagazine.com/pdf/Guts_Chuck_Palahniuk.pdf

 

and believe me, Nixon and Humphrey take some beating....

 

jeez, if only we'd had him passing thaty ball on the run the other night, it would have gottten to where it was supposed to!!