|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
462
guests, and
3
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics39,502
Posts562,138
Members14,587
| |
Most Online9,918
Jul 28th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,786 Likes: 673
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,786 Likes: 673 |
Craig, .....
As usual, you've portrayed Obama as ignoring a problem he was very active with. He deported more aliens than Trump has. Fox probably forgot to mention it to you. craigd, as usual, Billy is not being honest... So what else is new? Since Billy is pretending to ignore me again due to fear and estrogen overload, perhaps you might ask him why his precious Liberal Democrats are going ape-shit over this recent Tweet from Trump:
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
Jun 17, 2019
Next week ICE will begin the process of removing the millions of illegal aliens who have illicitly found their way into the United States. They will be removed as fast as they come in. Mexico, using their strong immigration laws, is doing a very good job of stopping people.......
Of course, during the Dumbocrat Debates, the devout anti-gunner Joe Biden complained that deportations done under Trump are "immoral" compared to deportations done under Obama. We all know that is because deportations under Obama were done for show, and there was a revolving door where the same illegal aliens were deported multiple times, just for the sake of inflating numbers. Of course, that fooled dumb-asses and DNC sock-puppets like Billy, but the truth is that 17 states sued the Obama Administration for not enforcing illegal immigration. And the Obama Administration sued Arizona for doing their own enforcement, because the Federal Government under Obama was turning a blind eye to the problem. But Billy doesn't wish to acknowledge the truth. Billy actually runs from the truth. Billy really is showing his world famous stupidity and usual dishonesty with this argument, when the whole world knows that his Liberal Left anti-gun Democrats are doing everything they can to prevent Trump from deporting the vast majority of illegals. Democrats are pressing for open borders, and they are refusing to fund effective Border Security.
Voting for anti-gun Democrats is dumber than giving treats to a dog that shits on a Persian Rug
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,720 Likes: 1357
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,720 Likes: 1357 |
lonesome, I think The Dems should jump on that, and I'm not a golfer. Yea, why the hell not-they think everything else should be free, too. Best, Ted
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,710 Likes: 346
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,710 Likes: 346 |
Craig, I don't like gender politics. The Democrats speak up for everyone who is marginalized, and that's all to the good....
....On another topic, would you like your SS account to be managed by Wall Street? Is there ANY current Republican policy you have the slightest concern about? I left out the middle part because keith made relevant and important points. You could consider giving him the courtesy of a measured and factual response. If you reread my comment, I did not portray barak in any way, I pointed out that he was not held responsible for his policies and their results. You do know that keith is correct about dems going ape-shit against your current President, but no one ever meaningfully could hold your guy to task, wink, because of the identity politics you despise, right? About, who should be managing social security, all I gather is that you think the fed gov is the best manager of such things. pelosi is now in a twitter feud with three or four radical progressive America last gals. Does she seem like a uniter that can take an American citizen social security package to the senate and bring it to the President to sign? Don't beat around the bush, I believe the dems, and Rs, see it as a dribble of cash for pork. With all the talk of free, free, free can pelosi even put it on the table just to embarrass the insincere Rs? The folks you vote for are way to risky to assign responsibility for anything that requires rules or laws to be followed, period. And, yes I believe I am engaged in multiple issues, meaning policies, tactics and results. You have never disputed the many times that I have mentioned that an R will protect you right to be you, but a dem will never be satisfied with their unilateral nondemocratic reaches for control over you. You have an amazing but sad luxury to push facts out of your sight and mind. I never said the Rs are perfect, but the dems proposed policies are an absolute mess, and if you have an ounce of honesty, you'd admit that barry has nearly nothing to show for eight years leading the country, he has a legacy of feelings, opinions and some vague concept of pushing the social justice needle farther along than hill ever could. So, dems speak up for folks that're marginalized. Too funny, we were 'talking' about gender politics. Women are not marginalized, yet you feel it's all to the good to propagate a wedge issue that was fabricated by progressives. Please don't patronize me about your likes and dislikes, you have told me how you vote, pro gender politics. If you don't like it, don't vote for them. Not only that, if you can't factually and objectively respond to questions about the failures of progressive policy, then stop voting to perpetuate them. The words you type are always fun to play games with, the claims of who you vote for that want to change my country and my family's future on their whim are, well....a serious problem, eh? I look forward your discission about factual policy results for factual problems that will be address by the eventual dem candidate that you will be voting for, okay?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,674 Likes: 581
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,674 Likes: 581 |
Craig, I don't like gender politics. The Democrats speak up for everyone who is marginalized, and that's all to the good....
....On another topic, would you like your SS account to be managed by Wall Street? Is there ANY current Republican policy you have the slightest concern about? I left out the middle part because keith made relevant and important points. You could consider giving him the courtesy of a measured and factual response. If you reread my comment, I did not portray barak in any way, I pointed out that he was not held responsible for his policies and their results. You do know that keith is correct about dems going ape-shit against your current President, but no one ever meaningfully could hold your guy to task, wink, because of the identity politics you despise, right? About, who should be managing social security, all I gather is that you think the fed gov is the best manager of such things. pelosi is now in a twitter feud with three or four radical progressive America last gals. Does she seem like a uniter that can take an American citizen social security package to the senate and bring it to the President to sign? Don't beat around the bush, I believe the dems, and Rs, see it as a dribble of cash for pork. With all the talk of free, free, free can pelosi even put it on the table just to embarrass the insincere Rs? The folks you vote for are way to risky to assign responsibility for anything that requires rules or laws to be followed, period. And, yes I believe I am engaged in multiple issues, meaning policies, tactics and results. You have never disputed the many times that I have mentioned that an R will protect you right to be you, but a dem will never be satisfied with their unilateral nondemocratic reaches for control over you. You have an amazing but sad luxury to push facts out of your sight and mind. I never said the Rs are perfect, but the dems proposed policies are an absolute mess, and if you have an ounce of honesty, you'd admit that barry has nearly nothing to show for eight years leading the country, he has a legacy of feelings, opinions and some vague concept of pushing the social justice needle farther along than hill ever could. So, dems speak up for folks that're marginalized. Too funny, we were 'talking' about gender politics. Women are not marginalized, yet you feel it's all to the good to propagate a wedge issue that was fabricated by progressives. Please don't patronize me about your likes and dislikes, you have told me how you vote, pro gender politics. If you don't like it, don't vote for them. Not only that, if you can't factually and objectively respond to questions about the failures of progressive policy, then stop voting to perpetuate them. The words you type are always fun to play games with, the claims of who you vote for that want to change my country and my family's future on their whim are, well....a serious problem, eh? I look forward your discission about factual policy results for factual problems that will be address by the eventual dem candidate that you will be voting for, okay? And Bazinga!
The world cries out for such: he is needed & needed badly- the man who can carry a message to Garcia
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,720 Likes: 1357
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,720 Likes: 1357 |
The free variety of woke will, not surprisingly, be worth the exact same amount as anything else that comes free.
Yet, they see it not.
Best,
Ted
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 255 Likes: 20
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 255 Likes: 20 |
Id love to be able to manage the money Ive contributed to SS like I do my IRA. Put it all in some low cost Vanguard mutual funds and Im pretty sure Id come out ahead in the long run. But the people who dont save anything for retirement and rely almost solely on SS for their retirement would be the same ones who put their entire SS account into a few internet stocks and lose a big percentage of it. They would then go crying to their Democrat congressman that they didnt have anything to live on and it was someone elses fault. So I recognize it would be difficult to make work.
Nothing the government gives you is free.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,710 Likes: 346
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,710 Likes: 346 |
Goillini, I don't think Bill was ever thinking self managing the account. I believe his point is the knee jerk reaction against corporations and wall street. Why, don't ask, he'll just repeat it on autopilot.
Now, if a or multiple money managers were paid only on performance incentive, that could be fresh air compared to what congress has done with the money and particularly the direction money 'management' is going with the dems.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 765 Likes: 2
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 765 Likes: 2 |
*80% of the slave trade went south of what is now the United States. (according to National Geographic) There was even a Papal Bull following a 1452 delivery of slaves to Portugal BLESSING the permeant state of slavery allowed on "black gentiles" by the Portuguese. That is, non-Muslim subsaharan africans. (There were already treaties concerning treatment of Muslims by Christians, but it seems they felt that subsaharan blacks has never been granted such protections, so this was a Papal clarification/doctrine. Does anyone ever accuse the Portuguese or Spanish of their atrocities, or hold civil rights marches anywhere from the Carribean to South America? Of course not. So what is the vindication to vilify America? I am so sick of the liberal tripe--llike that on this thread, that I almost look forward to our coming civil war. You liberal Founding Fathers hating bastards better get ready to duck then!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,572 Likes: 165
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,572 Likes: 165 |
Generally speaking, Republicans support fewer regulations (like on the banks and those home loans). In this case, a prominent opponent of giving the banks too much leeway: The late Senator McCain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,710 Likes: 346
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,710 Likes: 346 |
Generally speaking, Republicans support fewer regulations (like on the banks and those home loans). In this case, a prominent opponent of giving the banks too much leeway: The late Senator McCain. Does this mean that generally speaking you are disappointed that the confiscation candidate swalwell dropped out?
|
|
|
|
|
