Posts Moved From Unrelated Thread

[Major]

For the life of me, I don't understand the vitriol expressed by some posters here. Tilton says he knows Mr. Brown, and in his opinion he's a good man. Is his opinion to be supplanted by others who said they read bad things about him? Is it because he's wealthy? That he built something that's pretty cool? There is a lot of envy on this forum. I could provide a laundry list of other successful people eviscerated by the members, but in the end it doesn't matter.

Also, be careful of facts. We are instructed by the media to believe --

Climate change is real.

Russian collusion.

Obamacare saves money.

Black lives matter (over all others).

Tax breaks are only for the top 1%.

Etc., etc., etc.

[Flylady]

Instructed by the media....with no basis would not be facts. Supported by scientific evidence or other proof which is known to be true, i.e. global warming, the melting of the ice caps (view with your own eyes) would be fact...no matter who presents it.

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by Flylady

Instructed by the media....with no basis would not be facts. Supported by scientific evidence or other proof which is known to be true, i.e. global warming, the melting of the ice caps (view with your own eyes) would be fact...no matter who presents it.

Must be "fake news". We all know the real news comes from Twitter!

[Major]

Originally Posted by Flylady

Instructed by the media....with no basis would not be facts. Supported by scientific evidence or other proof which is known to be true, i.e. global warming, the melting of the ice caps (view with your own eyes) would be fact...no matter who presents it.

The climate constantly changes. After all, where we live was once covered by ice. It's just that there's no evidence that man causes it, except by "scientists" who make a living from perpetuating the myth. Read Richard Lindzen. The religion of climate change is merely a wealth transfer mechanism. I would have more respect for those who subscribe to this religion if they called it for what it is.

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by Major

The climate constantly changes. After all, where we live was once covered by ice. It's just that there's no evidence that man causes it, except by "scientists" who make a living from perpetuating the myth. Read Richard Lindzen. The religion of climate change is merely a wealth transfer mechanism. I would have more respect for those who subscribe to this religion if they called it for what it is.

Ya, man hasn't polluted the Earth either, it's all a wealth transfer scam.

[Major]

Originally Posted by Biggd

Ya, man hasn't polluted the Earth either, it's all a wealth transfer scam.

You're showing your ignorance. What I'm talking about is whether man causes climate change. I believe there is no evidence, while others may disagree. Like most conservatives, I am very much against pollution. It sickens me. However, I'm not willing to commit to an agreement in which the US contributes billions of dollars while other countries get to pollute with immunity. Doesn't make sense.

[Phantom]

............… and now it's time to close this Thread and move on to the next victim

[The Real BigGuy]

Originally Posted by Biggd

Must be "fake news". We all know the real news comes from Twitter!

Not Twitter, the National Inquirer!


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[The Real BigGuy]

Originally Posted by Major

You're showing your ignorance. What I'm talking about is whether man causes climate change. I believe there is no evidence, while others may disagree. Like most conservatives, I am very much against pollution. It sickens me. However, I'm not willing to commit to an agreement in which the US contributes billions of dollars while other countries get to pollute with immunity. Doesn't make sense.

How about committing to a President who eviscerates the clean air & clean water acts?


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[ITD]

That went down hill quickly, lol.

[Major]

Originally Posted by The Real BigGuy

How about committing to a President who eviscerates the clean air & clean water acts?


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

It's a cost-benefit analysis. I'm willing to loosen regulations to promote growth in business. I trust our President, and it appears to be working well. And before I hear it from those of you concerned about our kids and grandkids, I would think you'd be far more concerned about the national debt. Every man, woman, and illegal in the U.S. is saddled with $60,000+ of debt. And it's only getting worse.

[Phantom]

COME ON !

What does any of this have to do with the Threads title -
Winnipesaukee island owner faces fines of $1,000 a day for home expansion



oh wait -- I am sure someone will have a twisted view of how it does ( never mind )

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by Major

Like most conservatives, I am very much against pollution. It sickens me.

I understand that not everyone cares about the environment, and I try not to be judgmental.

But I do not think its right for you to assert that pollution sickens you on the very same thread that you vigorously defend a guy who obviously violated environmental rules, question climate change in the face of a mountain of evidence, and assert that economic growth is more important than environmental protection.

[Major]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

I understand that not everyone cares about the environment, and I try not to be judgmental.

But I do not think its right for you to assert that pollution sickens you on the very same thread that you vigorously defend a guy who obviously violated environmental rules, question climate change in the face of a mountain of evidence, and assert that economic growth is more important than environmental protection.

It seems like you're pretty judgmental. Notwithstanding, I think the US has come a long way in protecting the environment. Liberals want perfection, a utopia, which is unachievable. There's no evidence that lessening restrictions has negatively impacted anything. In fact, under the old administration, with lots and lots of regulations, Deepwater Horizon, Flint City and the Gold King mining accident happened. I'm not blaming Obama, but these environmental tragedies occurred on his watch so he should own them.

Economic growth is important. What I am against is destroying our economy because of the globalists' obsession with climate change. There should be a balance.

[Garcia]

Originally Posted by Major

Also, be careful of facts. We are instructed by the media to believe --

Climate change is real.

Russian collusion.

Obamacare saves money.

Black lives matter (over all others).

Tax breaks are only for the top 1%.

Etc., etc., etc.

So do you see the things listed as real or not?

[Major]

Originally Posted by Garcia

So do you see the things listed as real or not?

Fake news!

[Biggd]

"The cost of believing climate change is not real is too high" A quote from Bill Ford, chairman of Ford motor Company.

[Major]

Originally Posted by Biggd

"The cost of believing climate change is not real is too high" A quote from Bill Ford, chairman of Ford motor Company.

Another globalist.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

I understand that not everyone cares about the environment, and I try not to be judgmental. But I do not think its right for you to assert that pollution sickens you on the very same thread that you vigorously defend a guy who obviously violated environmental rules, question climate change in the face of a mountain of evidence, and assert that economic growth is more important than environmental protection.

As one who has pontificated on the alternate topic that this thread has shifted to, I suggest we all call ourselves "apostate" on the topic for a few centuries. This topic has closed other threads "back when".

In the meantime, I'm going to ask neighbors for a tow to Welcome Island and maybe take some pictures. (And sail back). Can someone advise the best route from the Marriott Compound—where we'll start the tow? This will be a tow, so boat-traffic will be an important consideration.

Also, is "Welcome Island" a real name?

.

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by Major

Another globalist.

No, he's just pi$$ed because his company changed course to meet fuel efficiency requirements and promoted their Company as a leader in that regard and this president has just taken away all their advantage in being leader in environmental friendly automobiles by loosening the standards. Basically changing the rules that everyone already geared up to meet. It's always about the $$$$$$$$$.

[Major]

Originally Posted by Biggd

No he's just pi$$ed because his company changed course to meet fuel efficiency requirements and promoted their Company as a leader in that regard and this president has just taken away all their advantage in being leader in environmental friendly automobiles by loosening the standards. Basically changing the rules that everyone already geared up to meet. It's always about the $$$$$$$$$.

Let the market place decide. If customers want fuel efficient cars, then Ford should be in a great position to dominate the market. Personally, fuel economy isn't something that rates as a factor to me when purchasing a car. However, given the inclinations of the younger generation, fuel efficiency is an important factor when considering purchasing a car. In fact, a lot of the younger people in my office would prefer a bicycle to a car!

My recollection is that the big three were not in favor of the regulations when they went into effect. Maybe Bill Ford was thinking about $$$$$ when he decided to adopt the Religion of Climate Change.

[Garcia]

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

I know, NASA and 97% of the actively publishing scientific community are somehow wrong, making up lies, swayed by liberal politics, etc., etc., etc.

The whole idea of believing what we want, discounting any evidence to the contrary, and throwing out labels like fake news or alternative facts is fascinating.

[Phantom]

OH my gawd --- make this STOP !!

Now we are onto "Fake News"

Focus people -- "Winnipesaukee island owner faces fines of $1,000 a day for home expansion"

[Major]

Originally Posted by Garcia

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

I know, NASA and 97% of the actively publishing scientific community are somehow wrong, making up lies, swayed by liberal politics, etc., etc., etc.

The whole idea of believing what we want, discounting any evidence to the contrary, and throwing out labels like fake news or alternative facts is fascinating.

Phantom, I promise this is my last statement on the subject. For those of you who are familiar with the trust equation, trust is equal to credibility, reliability and intimacy divided by one's self interest. Thus, if self interest is really high, then trust is severely diminished. In this case, it is in the best interest of NASA and research scientists to perpetuate the myth of man made climate change. Their jobs and research dollars depend on it.

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by Major

Phantom, I promise this is my last statement on the subject. For those of you who are familiar with the trust equation, trust is equal to credibility, reliability and intimacy divided by one's self interest. Thus, if self interest is really high, then trust is severely diminished. In this case, it is in the best interest of NASA and research scientists to perpetuate the myth of man made climate change. Their jobs and research dollars depend on it.

Well we know where your self interest lies so I agree, "trust is severely diminished". Thank you for making that your last post on the subject.

[Garcia]

Originally Posted by Major

Phantom, I promise this is my last statement on the subject. For those of you who are familiar with the trust equation, trust is equal to credibility, reliability and intimacy divided by one's self interest. Thus, if self interest is really high, then trust is severely diminished. In this case, it is in the best interest of NASA and research scientists to perpetuate the myth of man made climate change. Their jobs and research dollars depend on it.

There’s so much here, yet so little...

[TiltonBB]

Originally Posted by ApS

.

In the meantime, I'm going to ask neighbors for a tow to Welcome Island and maybe take some pictures. (And sail back). Can someone advise the best route from the Marriott Compound—where we'll start the tow? This will be a tow, so boat-traffic will be an important consideration.

Also, is "Welcome Island" a real name?

.

Really?

You would have your "raghangar" towed by a "stinkpot" Oh the horror! Oh the pollution! Oh the noise from the straining GASOLINE engine!

What if your neighbors see this? Oh my!

[The Real BigGuy]

Originally Posted by Major

It's a cost-benefit analysis. I'm willing to loosen regulations to promote growth in business. I trust our President, and it appears to be working well. And before I hear it from those of you concerned about our kids and grandkids, I would think you'd be far more concerned about the national debt. Every man, woman, and illegal in the U.S. is saddled with $60,000+ of debt. And it's only getting worse.

So, wait a second, you’re against pollution as long as it doesn’t affect the pocketbook. And frankly, I’m a lot more concerned about having clean water to drink and clean air to breath then I am with the debt (which, by the way, your guy just increased by an estimated $2.3 trillion over the next decade) not just for my kids and grand kids but for me.

Have you checked the air in countries without air quality standards like China, Mexico, Chile, etc, etc. I spent over 35 years in the environmental field and remember the Cuyahoga River burning; the Charles & Blackstone Rivers so polluted you couldn’t swim or fish them; and areas of a tidal river in Salem that the color depended on what a local ink company was running that day.




Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by Major

Phantom, I promise this is my last statement on the subject. For those of you who are familiar with the trust equation, trust is equal to credibility, reliability and intimacy divided by one's self interest. Thus, if self interest is really high, then trust is severely diminished. In this case, it is in the best interest of NASA and research scientists to perpetuate the myth of man made climate change. Their jobs and research dollars depend on it.

Don’t worry Major, you’re not alone in your beliefs about this bogus global warming baloney. It’s just PC to be on that bandwagon...

This article was just published today:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/08/...climate-alarm/

[loonguy]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

Don’t worry Major, you’re not alone in your beliefs about this bogus global warming baloney. It’s just PC to be on that bandwagon...

This article was just published today:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/08/...climate-alarm/

It might be PC, but I trust the the science (and the 99% of the scientists supporting it) much more than the naysayers focused on their personal interests and contrarian ways. PC is often actually correct. For a current real news article go to https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/07/healt...ntl/index.html

[thinkxingu]

Originally Posted by The Real BigGuy

So, wait a second, you’re against pollution as long as it doesn’t affect the pocketbook. And frankly, I’m a lot more concerned about having clean water to drink and clean air to breath then I am with the debt (which, by the way, your guy just increased by an estimated $2.3 trillion over the next decade) not just for my kids and grand kids but for me.

Have you checked the air in countries without air quality standards like China, Mexico, Chile, etc, etc. I spent over 35 years in the environmental field and remember the Cuyahoga River burning; the Charles & Blackstone Rivers so polluted you couldn’t swim or fish them; and areas of a tidal river in Salem that the color depended on what a local ink company was running that day.




Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Exactly this. Here's an interesting article (I know it's probably fake news to some of you): https://www.popsci.com/america-before-epa-photos.

My truth--one backed up by pesky facts--is that (post 1960's) Republican ideology rarely, if ever, helps the masses. The policies enacted over the last couple years reward the rich. The tax cuts did very, very little for the average person, while returning millions/billions to the ultra rich, especially since those cuts are going away in the next few years while the deficit is growing at a rate Republicans promised they'd never allow. In addition, facts show most of the money corporations received from the tax cuts (60-70%) has gone not into their workforces but into shareholder profits. At the same time, public lands are at risk both in terms of pollution by current corporate use and reduced protection as well as the threat to "sell them off" (once again, to corporations).

Effective buying power for the masses has gone down because raises haven't outpaced inflation (a few years ago we started to see the first raises for middle class Americans in a decade, but those are gone now) and added to education costs (both trade and college) the ability for the masses to get ahead is being weakened.

Add to all this the recent Supreme Court hits to unions--the organizations that achieved safety regulations, fair wages, 40-hour work week, vacation time, etc.--and we've got a bleak future for the masses.

Since we allowed so much money into politics, the rules are now made/bought by those with that money. Every policy enacted in the last couple years has been transparently better for the rich than the masses. (The Democrats aren't perfect, BTW--Obama should've slaughtered all those bankers who knowingly destroyed the system as well as prevented those asinine severance packages after corporations and banks received OUR money...)

NOW, the reason I wrote this on this thread is because the anger over the owner of this home is a reflection of an America that is growing tired of what it sees as rich privilege--that rich people can "buy" anything they want, including influence.

I'm not sure that happened here--as mentioned above, there's not enough evidence to know for sure--BUT that seems like an extreme house to be built on such a small island, especially when people with 20' docks are sometimes run through the ringer just to get them fixed.

Just my thoughts--Godspeed, friends!

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

[joey2665]

Originally Posted by thinkxingu

Exactly this. Here's an interesting article (I know it's probably fake news to some of you): https://www.popsci.com/america-before-epa-photos.

My truth--one backed up by pesky facts--is that (post 1960's) Republican ideology rarely, if ever, helps the masses. The policies enacted over the last couple years reward the rich. The tax cuts did very, very little for the average person, while returning millions/billions to the ultra rich, especially since those cuts are going away in the next few years while the deficit is growing at a rate Republicans promised they'd never allow. In addition, facts show most of the money corporations received from the tax cuts (60-70%) has gone not into their workforces but into shareholder profits. At the same time, public lands are at risk both in terms of pollution by current corporate use and reduced protection as well as the threat to "sell them off" (once again, to corporations).

Effective buying power for the masses has gone down because raises haven't outpaced inflation (a few years ago we started to see the first raises for middle class Americans in a decade, but those are gone now) and added to education costs (both trade and college) the ability for the masses to get ahead is being weakened.

Add to all this the recent Supreme Court hits to unions--the organizations that achieved safety regulations, fair wages, 40-hour work week, vacation time, etc.--and we've got a bleak future for the masses.

Since we allowed so much money into politics, the rules are now made/bought by those with that money. Every policy enacted in the last couple years has been transparently better for the rich than the masses. (The Democrats aren't perfect, BTW--Obama should've slaughtered all those bankers who knowingly destroyed the system as well as prevented those asinine severance packages after corporations and banks received OUR money...)

NOW, the reason I wrote this on this thread is because the anger over the owner of this home is a reflection of an America that is growing tired of what it sees as rich privilege--that rich people can "buy" anything they want, including influence.

I'm not sure that happened here--as mentioned above, there's not enough evidence to know for sure--BUT that seems like an extreme house to be built on such a small island, especially when people with 20' docks are sometimes run through the ringer just to get them fixed.

Just my thoughts--Godspeed, friends!

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

I’m sorry the “facts” cannot and do not show that the new tax laws did not help the average person nor that 60-70% of Corp cuts have gone to shareholders. The FACT is the changes took affect 1/1/18 and no person or company has filed a tax return yet that includes the changes. These are merely assumptions and many incorrect. This was a complicated change to the code and conclusions can only be drawn after this coming tax season in 2019.

Also you point out the bad but left out the good such as increase in the stock market (which helps many employees 401k), reduced unemployment and increased GDP.

Not to mention that politicians local or otherwise have been influenced by money since the beginning of time, certainly nothing new.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[thinkxingu]

Originally Posted by joey2665

I’m sorry the “facts” cannot and do not show that the new tax laws did not help the average person nor that 60-70% of Corp cuts have gone to shareholders. The FACT is the changes took affect 1/1/18 and no person or company has filed a tax return yet that includes the changes. These are merely assumptions and many incorrect. This was a complicated change to the code and conclusions can only be drawn after this coming tax season in 2019.

Also you point out the bad but left out the good such as increase in the stock market (which helps many employees 401k), reduced unemployment and increased GDP.

Not to mention that politicians local or otherwise have been influenced by money since the beginning of time, certainly nothing new.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Unemployment has been dropping for almost a decade, jobs reports show the change is trivial while wage growth is stagnant, and most economists agree the current GDP/economic situation is unsustainable. Something bad is coming because we moved from a conservative (ironic!), sustainable, approach to an aggressive, unsustainable one.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

[thinkxingu]

PS I agree on politicians having always been corruptible, but never as much as now, especially as a system.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

[joey2665]

Originally Posted by thinkxingu

Unemployment has been dropping for almost a decade, jobs reports show the change is trivial while wage growth is stagnant, and most economists agree the current GDP/economic situation is unsustainable. Something bad is coming because we moved from a conservative (ironic!), sustainable, approach to an aggressive, unsustainable one.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

In our history no period of growth in ever sustainable that is economics 101 so no one is going out on a limb saying it can’t continue. The question is always how long will it continue and while it’s happening accept the best and as always in the economy prepare for the worst.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by joey2665

In our history no period of growth in ever sustainable that is economics 101 so no one is going out on a limb saying it can’t continue. The question is always how long will it continue and while it’s happening accept the best and as always in the economy prepare for the worst.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

In my adult life I've seen and been affected by 3 good down turns. I've been bit enough to know that another one is coming. I was fortunate enough to read the last one ahead of time but this time it's much more difficult but it's coming.

[Shreddy]

Originally Posted by joey2665

I’m sorry the “facts” cannot and do not show that the new tax laws did not help the average person nor that 60-70% of Corp cuts have gone to shareholders. The FACT is the changes took affect 1/1/18 and no person or company has filed a tax return yet that includes the changes. These are merely assumptions and many incorrect. This was a complicated change to the code and conclusions can only be drawn after this coming tax season in 2019.

Also you point out the bad but left out the good such as increase in the stock market (which helps many employees 401k), reduced unemployment and increased GDP.

Not to mention that politicians local or otherwise have been influenced by money since the beginning of time, certainly nothing new.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

As someone with a highly vested interest in the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act and understanding most if not all of the intricacies, I have no issue educating anyone that thinks this was merely a tax break for large corporations or the wealthy. The entire TCJA is a landmark overhaul that is intended to make the U.S. significantly more competitive as compared to other jurisdictions. I will not bore with the logistics of how, but confident in this and would be happy to filter a discussion outside of being behind a keyboard.

[Biggd]

While everything looks rosy now the true effects are in the distant future. Everything now is just a prediction. We will see where this takes us. I like many of the things Trump has done but I don't like the man. There's no reason why he couldn't do many of the things he's doing and be a respectable person at the same time.

[Shreddy]

Originally Posted by Biggd

While everything looks rosy now the true effects are in the distant future. Everything now is just a prediction. We will see where this takes us. I like many of the things Trump has done but I don't like the man. There's no reason why he couldn't do many of the things he's doing and be a respectable person at the same time.

I don't disagree here, but I also disliked the personable "beer summits" that Obama needed to have at times. As POTUS, your job is not to be everyone's best friend. Inevitably, there will be folks that dislike no matter the circumstances.

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by Shreddy

I don't disagree here, but I also disliked the personable "beer summits" that Obama needed to have at times. As POTUS, your job is not to be everyone's best friend. Inevitably, there will be folks that dislike no matter the circumstances.

The warts of this expansion won't be know for some time. The faster you go up the harder it comes crashing down. I prefer moderate growth as opposed to fast past pace expansion. If we start to hit 5% GDP like this president wants to see then we'll be headed for a hard fall. Everything was rosy under Bush until it came crashing down and the real warts were exposed.

[TheProfessor]

Originally Posted by Major

Also, be careful of facts. We are instructed by the media to believe --

Yep.

The "media" meet every morning in a coffee shop in Brooklyn, NY and decide which news to feed the general public.

Yep, the CEO's of Viacom, News Corp., Disney, Time Warner, all divvy up the news. Rupert Murdoch and George Soros usually share a cappuccino together.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by thinkxingu

Exactly this. Here's an interesting article (I know it's probably fake news to some of you): https://www.popsci.com/america-before-epa-photos.

My truth--one backed up by pesky facts--is that (post 1960's) Republican ideology rarely, if ever, helps the masses. The policies enacted over the last couple years reward the rich. The tax cuts did very, very little for the average person, while returning millions/billions to the ultra rich, especially since those cuts are going away in the next few years while the deficit is growing at a rate Republicans promised they'd never allow. In addition, facts show most of the money corporations received from the tax cuts (60-70%) has gone not into their workforces but into shareholder profits. At the same time, public lands are at risk both in terms of pollution by current corporate use and reduced protection as well as the threat to "sell them off" (once again, to corporations). Effective buying power for the masses has gone down because raises haven't outpaced inflation (a few years ago we started to see the first raises for middle class Americans in a decade, but those are gone now) and added to education costs (both trade and college) the ability for the masses to get ahead is being weakened. Add to all this the recent Supreme Court hits to unions--the organizations that achieved safety regulations, fair wages, 40-hour work week, vacation time, etc.--and we've got a bleak future for the masses. Since we allowed so much money into politics, the rules are now made/bought by those with that money. Every policy enacted in the last couple years has been transparently better for the rich than the masses. (The Democrats aren't perfect, BTW--Obama should've slaughtered all those bankers who knowingly destroyed the system as well as prevented those asinine severance packages after corporations and banks received OUR money...) NOW, the reason I wrote this on this thread is because the anger over the owner of this home is a reflection of an America that is growing tired of what it sees as rich privilege--that rich people can "buy" anything they want, including influence. I'm not sure that happened here--as mentioned above, there's not enough evidence to know for sure--BUT that seems like an extreme house to be built on such a small island, especially when people with 20' docks are sometimes run through the ringer just to get them fixed. Just my thoughts--Godspeed, friends!

Karl Marx, having just learned of Republican ideology, must be spinning in his grave.

[Major]

Originally Posted by TheProfessor

Yep.

The "media" meet every morning in a coffee shop in Brooklyn, NY and decide which news to feed the general public.

Yep, the CEO's of Viacom, News Corp., Disney, Time Warner, all divvy up the news. Rupert Murdoch and George Soros usually share a cappuccino together.

The gym that I work out in has two televisions, one set to CNN and the other to MSNBC. I work in Cambridge, MA, so go figure. My experience is somewhat anecdotal, but it seems to me that every single second, of every minute, of every hour, of every day is dedicated to destroying Trump. Every time I look at these televisions, there is a story or panel bashing Trump. You can't tell me that these media outlets do not have an agenda. It is clear they don't like Trump and want to see him destroyed. It is also clear that seemingly, Trump sells and is good for business!

[Major]

Originally Posted by thinkxingu

Exactly this. Here's an interesting article (I know it's probably fake news to some of you): https://www.popsci.com/america-before-epa-photos.

My truth--one backed up by pesky facts--is that (post 1960's) Republican ideology rarely, if ever, helps the masses.
Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

I remind you that it is not republican ideology that created the messes that we have in cities like Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, Washington DC, St. Louis, etc. These cities have been run exclusively by democrats for the past 50+ years. It is liberal, not conservative, policies that brought them to where they are right now.

I do agree with you that both sides are to blame. Rhino republicans like the Bushes, McCain, Romney, McConnell, Ryan spend like democrats. Bush is as much to blame for our national debt as Obama, although Obama put it on warp speed.

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by Major

The gym that I work out in has two televisions, one set to CNN and the other to MSNBC. I work in Cambridge, MA, so go figure. My experience is somewhat anecdotal, but it seems to me that every single second, of every minute, of every hour, of every day is dedicated to destroying Trump. Every time I look at these televisions, there is a story or panel bashing Trump. You can't tell me that these media outlets do not have an agenda. It is clear they don't like Trump and want to see him destroyed. It is also clear that seemingly, Trump sells and is good for business!

He gives the media more ammunition than any other president ever has. They do it because they know it's going to get a rise and response out of him.
They love the fact that he Tweets ridiculous crap every day because that feeds another story.

[VitaBene]

I don't think that Don meant by moving it here, that talking politics is OK so I will stay out of that discussion!

I will weigh in on the potential causes of our next 2 economic downturns: unfunded pension liabilities and student debt defaults. These are both huge issues that must be solved.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

I don't think that Don meant by moving it here, that talking politics is OK so I will stay out of that discussion!

I will weigh in on the potential causes of our next 2 economic downturns: unfunded pension liabilities and student debt defaults. These are both huge issues that must be solved.

This sounds like my neighbor, whose sentences (and opinion) run-on without taking a breath:

"I refuse to talk about politics...have you seen Trump's latest lie?"

Her beliefs are supposed to stay apolitical, but arrived from North Carolina with a family stoked by deep memories of the KKK, whose donkey-party history goes back to the Civil War!

.

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by ApS

This sounds like my neighbor, whose sentences (and opinion) run-on without taking a breath:



Her beliefs are supposed to stay apolitical, but arrived from North Carolina with a family stoked by deep memories of the KKK, whose donkey-party history goes back to the Civil War!

.

WTF, was this really needed?

[ApS]

And let us remind you:

Originally Posted by Biggd

WTF, was this really needed?

It's needed—should those who are ignorant of history try to shift blame to the wrong people—"those people" who saved The Union in 1865. (And who are today trying to save The Republic from those living burdened with saving Democracy).

In a lesser context, part of my answer was needed to show the hypocrisy of those who "know" exactly how we should be governed.

But, like many big-city Governments, are wrong!

.