Teddy KGB Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 33 minutes ago, Buftex said: Lord, you really are an insufferable douche-bag. Which one of his points would you like to refute ? Whose the least embarrassing top Dem to you ? 26 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said: I also like Kamala Harris in part because she's well-spoken. Willie Brown taught her diction. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Trump made the right call to walk out of Hanoi, says … Susan Rice. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, transplantbillsfan said: No. You don't get to escape your dumbass racist comment. Don't project your own racism onto me when I said and implied nothing about race. You just obviously assumed it was about race because she's black. That's on you. If you we're accusing me of racism, that's clearly what you should call yourself. I also like Kamala Harris in part because she's well-spoken. I think a president should be well spoken and articulate him/herself well. That's one of the reasons I don't like Trump, didn't like Bush, don't like Warren. Booker fumbles around a bit too much and almost speaks at a speed that's incoherent at times. Has nothing to do with race, you racist bastard. I should call myself racist because you're racist? Ohhhh-kay. It was your dog-whistle, chump. Hell, it's your party that invented the concept of "dog whistle." Whine to your party intelligentsia about it, not me. https://newsone.com/3785854/stereotype-black-people-articulate-obama-cleveland-councilman-kevin-conwell/ Edited March 1, 2019 by DC Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted March 1, 2019 Author Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, DC Tom said: I should call myself racist because you're racist? Ohhhh-kay. It was your dog-whistle, chump. Hell, it's your party that invented the concept of "dog whistle." Whine to your party intelligentsia about it, not me. https://newsone.com/3785854/stereotype-black-people-articulate-obama-cleveland-councilman-kevin-conwell/ No. Call yourself a racist because you brought up race when it was completely irrelevant. Why in the world did you even bring race up after that post? I don't foray enough into this forum, but I get the impression you're viewed as one of the better contributors in PPP. If that's the case, this is a low point for you. It's funny how even in this post you're trying to steer the conversation into a broader discussion of racism to deflect the revelation of your own racism, jackass. Edited March 1, 2019 by transplantbillsfan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 1 hour ago, transplantbillsfan said: Did I or did I not say I would need to see someone's plan for reparations before saying whether I liked it or not? Wait, too many dumbasses here to ask rhetorical questions... The answer is yes, I did say that. I think people like you have an insanely extreme view of what these reparations would be, if they were ever implemented, and I kinda doubt our culture, where rich white guys still have all the power, will ever actually let it happen. You didn’t answer my question. I didn’t ask you what a reparations program look like. A plan for reparations is a plan to pay people. Not being a dumbass, I can easily deal with a nuanced plan. The problem is that nobody will propose a nuanced plan for reparations. The problem with a presidential candidate saying that reparations might be a good idea to explore is that it is a classic case of pandering. If you got paid reparations and there were no systemic change to the conditions that held you down, would you feel satisfied? I wouldn’t. I’d feel like someone was just trying to buy off my injustice. What should happen after people get paid? Why not focus on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 5 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said: I’ll remind you that Barack Obama was the most popular candidate of all time in terms of votes cast. President Trump won the Pesidential election doing worse than Mitt Romney, who was a milquetoast candidate. Conservatives are both a) abhorred by the New Democratic Party Line (IE. I’ll stay home if it’s a choice between Trump and Clinton, but I’ll be damned if I stay home if it’s a choice between open borders and infanticide, and Trump), and b) galivinized by both Trump’s record as Executive, and the behavior of rank and file progressives making war on them, often violently. I believe President Trump secures 72-75m votes in 2020. The state of the US was significantly different in 2008 so it's not the best comparison. I don't think Trump gets that many but it will be another close election if the economy stays strong as that's the number one thing he has going for him. The GOP will definitely struggle again with healthcare. It will likely come down to how strong a candidate the Democrats run as most people have already made their mind up about Trump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted March 1, 2019 Author Share Posted March 1, 2019 1 hour ago, snafu said: You didn’t answer my question. I didn’t ask you what a reparations program look like. A plan for reparations is a plan to pay people. Not being a dumbass, I can easily deal with a nuanced plan. The problem is that nobody will propose a nuanced plan for reparations. The problem with a presidential candidate saying that reparations might be a good idea to explore is that it is a classic case of pandering. If you got paid reparations and there were no systemic change to the conditions that held you down, would you feel satisfied? I wouldn’t. I’d feel like someone was just trying to buy off my injustice. What should happen after people get paid? Why not focus on that? Well, I said this all depends largely what people say their plan for reparations are. Right now, I like Harris's plan, which is the systemic change I would prefer. And if a candidate like Harris defines that systemic change as reparations, I definitely support reparations. The question of what a reparations program looks like is absolutely integral to this discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 10 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said: Was Donald Trump? A business is not a country. but a government is essentially a corporation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 1 hour ago, /dev/null said: but a government is essentially a corporation A really, really big corporation. You know, like the ones the dems think are evil. Oh...wait... 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 11 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said: #1 is the one I don't really care for. I'd ask for #2 the same thing he was asked when asked if he would commit to reparations like a couple of the other candidates... what exactly are reparations and how would they be implemented? Yes, I could get behind some form of reparations considering the massive economic disparity that's existed in our country since its founding and has persisted even after the Civil Rights Act of the 60s in subtle, but still pernicious practices like red lining. But I would need specific details. I'd get behind something, though, yes. I'd like it to include Native Americans and Hawaiians, too. Should we exempt the Obamas from reparations, since they seem to have already taken up a policy of self-reparations (some called it fraud)? I asked the following question earlier and haven't seen a response yet, so I'll repeat it: If it was discovered that both Michelle and her husband colluded with a known felon serving time to perpetrate fraud while accepting a bribe of 500K would you change your mind about them? The above is not some wild-ass accusation but a provable fact. Do you care to answer the question or do you want to keep your Black Camelot beliefs intact? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 4 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: Should we exempt the Obamas from reparations, since they seem to have already taken up a policy of self-reparations (some called it fraud)? I asked the following question earlier and haven't seen a response yet, so I'll repeat it: Reparations will bring up some inconvenient questions. Michele may be eligible, but what if tracing Barack's ancestry reveals a tie to the tribes who sent the slaves to the Americas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 2 minutes ago, GG said: Reparations will bring up some inconvenient questions. Michele may be eligible, but what if tracing Barack's ancestry reveals a tie to the tribes who sent the slaves to the Americas? Well, we know there are ties to Kenya and Kenyan Muslims were the catalyst for the slave trade in East Africa so I'm going to make the assumption that Barack owes money for reparations. Michelle Obama has white slavers in her ancestry so she too owes reparations. Since they both committed fraud to the tune of 500K one would surmise that not only do they owe for reparations but an additional 500K plus interest should be thrown into the pot too. 10 hours ago, Teddy KGB said: Which one of his points would you like to refute ? Whose the least embarrassing top Dem to you ? Willie Brown taught her diction. Yes, she sucked at it before Willie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 10 hours ago, B-Man said: Trump made the right call to walk out of Hanoi, says … Susan Rice. . So did Botox Nancy Pelosi and Chuck "Schmucky" Schumer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) 10 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said: US leads the world in reducing carbon emissions over the last decade... Hmmmmm.... who was our President been for most of the last decade???? Despite all these regulations Trump is lifting on things like gas mileage, most car companies are sticking with trends of improving gas mileage because they understand whatever regulations Trump lifts are likely to be brought back... and they already started the process, so why reverse course at this point? Yikes, this place is horrible... really brings out the worst in people. You're clueless. Obama didn't enact new environmental regs on day 1 of his presidency (2009) that went into effect immediately that retroactively reduced our emissions, but he is due some credit for continuing the march toward lower pollution/emissions like some of his predecessors. This has been a steady process for much longer. Our country both at a Federal and state level has been continually tightening environmental laws for decades. Remember the acid rain issue? Remember California smog? Trump's admin on fuel economy has simply proposed slowing the increased fuel econ regs. That reg for cars increases from 34.5MPG in 2016 to 41+ in 2020 and they've suggested flattening the requirement for a few years at that point. Obama the car guru arbitrarily set it at 54.5 for 2025 and the industry expressed concern in that large an increase in only 9 years, which is a real challenge in terms of R&D costs and the time to comply. Trump's adjustments seem like a fair compromise involving government and the industry responsible for compliance. Care to wager that emissions will show further reductions under Trump? Edited March 1, 2019 by keepthefaith 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) 5 minutes ago, keepthefaith said: You're clueless. Obama didn't enact new environmental regs on day 1 of his presidency (2009) that went into effect immediately that retroactively reduced our emissions, but he is due some credit for continuing the march toward lower pollution/emissions like some of his predecessors. This has been a steady process for much longer. Our country both at a Federal and state level has been continually tightening environmental laws for decades. Remember the acid rain issue? Remember California smog? Trump's admin on fuel economy has simply slowed the increased fuel econ regs. That reg for cars increases from 34.5MPG in 2016 to 41+ in 2020 and they've suggested flattening the requirement for a few years at that point. Obama the car guru arbitrarily set it at 54.5 for 2025 and the industry expressed concern in that large an increase in only 9 years, which is a real challenge in terms of R&D costs and the time to comply. It's a fair compromise involving government and the industry responsible for compliance. Care to wager that emissions will show further reductions under Trump? Of course he doesn’t. He’s a 20-something kid with his head three feet up his ass, who has managed to convince himself through a misguided sense of self importance (a trait all too common in his generation) that he has all the answers, and understands the world. Edited March 1, 2019 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) 8 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said: Well, I said this all depends largely what people say their plan for reparations are. Right now, I like Harris's plan, which is the systemic change I would prefer. And if a candidate like Harris defines that systemic change as reparations, I definitely support reparations. The question of what a reparations program looks like is absolutely integral to this discussion. Why is anyone alive today due reparations? Why is anyone alive today responsible to make compensation? Make the case. Edited March 1, 2019 by keepthefaith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 4 minutes ago, keepthefaith said: Why is anyone alive today due reparations? Why is anyone alive today responsible to make compensation? Make the case. @transplantbillsfan I‘m more interested in knowing for what other crimes the decendents, or worse, people who share immutable features with the decendents, of people who did things that we find to be wrong in modern times can be held accountable and punished for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Trump: I believe Kim that he felt bad for the American college student his regime murdered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 12 hours ago, Buftex said: Lord, you really are an insufferable douche-bag. Yes, but tomorrow I can stop being an insufferable douche-bag and you'll still be a passenger on the far-left brakeless crazy train to 2020. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 1 hour ago, keepthefaith said: Why is anyone alive today due reparations? Why is anyone alive today responsible to make compensation? Make the case. it's a bribe to buy the next election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts