doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Ticks and tick prevention

You know the truth of it is that you are just too silly to take seriously. So I don't.

I did at one time. Tried to have meaningful discussions with you. Gave you my opinion that stupid name calling was a pointless exercise. Encouraged you not to go down that road. But your paranoia got the best of you and that was the end of that.

You think being critical of my politeness is stinging? You are delusional. You have been ranting here now for several days. Yes, ranting. And the rest of us, even those members on my left, have been treated to your ad hominom attacks on everyone who disagrees with you, regardless of how they may have phrased their disagreement.

It is laughable that your criticism of Trump is centred around his "lies" when those you support are much better and at least as prolific liars as Trump. Simply laughable.

Do yourself a favour....get off the internet and this site for a while, gain some perspective and calm down.

Bill, like Jon, I'm an advocate of term limits. You suggest government is complicated and we need politicians with governing experience.

I'd suggest that political experience is overrated and the level of corruption and low level "back scratching" is underestimated. I think the idea of offering one's hard earned life and business experience to one's country for a limited, set period of time may actually attract more quality people to the job. Less partisanship, more effective, more patriotic.

Just a thought.

CB, if what candidates were offering were their "hard earned life and business experience" you'd be on firm ground. However, candidates are as suspect as incumbents. The difference is we have a record on incumbents.

But the incumbents know their way around and are already at the trough. At least the rookies will need some time before they can really fill their boots.

These men and women who spend their whole effective working life as a politician don't view the world remotely as either you or I. And I think that is a very bad thing. I also think the machinery/effort/money needed to get re-elected has contributed mightily to the historic divide and partisanship in politics in both our countries.

Term limits should go hand in hand with election finance reform. It's out of control. And the money being spent just to win elections should give you some inkling of the size of the prize. It's a lot more than a senator's salary.

Let's get this done, now. Do we raise any corn or soybeans down here?................funny question coming from a former spook analyst, but yes, we do. We raise more cotton and peanuts, however. Cotton was trading the highest in many years prior to the tariff "fright", at almost $.94. It fell to about $.82 in a week, and has already recovered to $.88, halfway back to it's original high, and in a short time. Why?.... fundamentals. Supply and demand, not deterred by unsubstantiated fears. Corn and beans have yet to recover. Lest you misunderstand, cotton is an overseas traded crop just like corn and beans.

As for how farmers vote........well, I can't say what motivates any individual except me. I vote guided by my morals and ethics, not my pocketbook. What I mean is, if I had always voted for the ticket that would have put the most money in my banking accounts I would have voted Democratic, for a long, long time. The Dems have had a history of putting more money into the Farm Bill for agriculture than the Repubs. But, I didn't. I voted the moral high ground, and doing so I knew I was voting against higher subsidies and deficiency payments. Money isn't the sole driver of all the farm vote. Some in ag have a conscience, and follow it, subsidies be damned. Just as a reminder, every major tariff on sales of US grains have been placed by the Repubs.

I'm good friends with all the owners and managers of the JD, Case and New Holland dealerships in this part of the country. If you think they're wishing, right now, that Hillary had been elected instead of Trump you'd be bad wrong. They, like I, understand that everyone has to take a hit occasionally to help get things straightened out. And, want to believe it or not, our trading "partners" need our produce a lot more than we need theirs. Time will straighten it all out, and we'll be much better off for it. I'm staking my business on my belief of that. Are you?

SRH

What about this, what about that... what about addressing the actual issue you dumb fu@cking troglodyte.


BTW in the past, I told you that my bet was if you ever confronted an ISIS fighter, you'd get skull fu@ked into the ground. Now that you have aided in giving our country's interests away to the Russians, thats too nice of an outcome for you.

CB, you have a very fatalistic viewpoint. I'd prefer to believe that there are politicians who can be trusted through a whole career. Not everyone is up for sale to the highest bidder. Nowadays, such public servants aren't as plentiful as they were, but many are still in office. Among Republicans we have John Kasich, and the female senators from Alaska and Maine. My senator, John Tester, is in the Montana tradition of Mike Mansfield. Being retired, I don't have a business to stake on Trump, but I wouldn't be inclined to do so at any rate. I grant you, Donald has been good for business as usual--so far. If I were a farmer, I'd be inclined to heed the Muslim adage, " Trust in Allah, but tie your camel."

Truth is CB you did not try to have meaningful conversations. You, for as much as you tried to be "nice" about it, spewed the same vile anti democratic propaganda and contempt for liberals that all of your internet pals do. Your message is still the same although delivered in a civil manner. At least kieth doesn't veil his contempt with a polite disposition.




If you think I'm just being critical of your politeness, your just plain misinformed. I'm being critical of your false pretenses. I'm also critical of your astounding lack of judgement. For some reason, Hillary Clinton has your ball hairs in a twist you just can't unwind. Each time I've "ranted" about the obvious and currently being thoroughly investigated Russian connection to trump, back from before the election to the last several threads Dave deleted, your right there with "Uranium One!" When I pointed out to you that its been debunked, and its a false conspiracy, you don't accept fact. I even provided you reporting from FOX debunking it. Your response was to "go research the internet for it" Sorry champ, if you take something InfoWars prints as fact over actual investigative journalism, what's the point of even trying with you?

And NO, I am not attacking everyone who disagrees with me. I am attacking everyone who whom either out of ignorance or greed saddled my country with this disastrous piece of sh!t traitor. Sorry you fell into that group, but you earned your spot.

Point in fact. A demonstrably false statement.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/...abulists-214024

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/donald-trump-lies-liar-effect-brain-214658

https://artofthelie.org/

https://www.esquire.com/uk/latest-news/a...ve-of-his-best/

Maybe in your world, where the sky is pink, and all is well, your last statement may be true. I hope your happy there. Me, not so much. I live in reality where I have to live with the consequences of yours and every other trump supporters poor poor judgment.

If you were an Iowa farmer, you would be looking for a new line of work.

If this is true and you voted for trump, you are so full of sh!t I can smell you from here.