Originally Posted by PaulS (Post 1156921)

I think it is bc you are so angry

Originally Posted by PaulS (Post 1156921)

I think it is bc you are so angry that you constantly find minute picky things to comment on so people push back. You find a pictur of the Clinton's at a funeral and for some reason need to comment on it.

The people on the left don't (for the most part) do that.

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1156914)

......because they Lost Hint Hint they aren't liberals

Originally Posted by PaulS (Post 1156938)

Who cares about a service dog in the grand scheme of things? If someone is so petty to talk about a dog (and I didn't read the article) I could care less.

I think you posted a picture of the Clinton's sitting in church - big deal. It would be like my posting the picture I saw of all the Pres/families reading aloud from the Bible or the program and Trump standing there like he is bored out of his mind. I couldn't be bothered doing that bc I'm not petty (or angry) enough to start a thread about it.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156942)

and another diversion to Trump.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156942)

once again, the character flaw is mine. and another diversion to Trump. How original. The character flaw is yours in posting about the article. Trump really hasn't been discussed in this thread other than my giving you an example above.

apparently the Slate author cared enough about the dog, to feel obligated to put a stop to the goodwill we all felt because of the images of the dog. On my side, we like that stuff. your side calls it “demented.”. That’s why i like my side.isn't that what you did in the modified tribute thread where you added things about the Clinton's even after Bruce made a new thread and asked everyone to not do that. You did it in the very next post I believe. So you stopped the good will and caused a diversion to the Clinton. Pretty funny you complain about that here but just did the same exact thing in the other thread.

i do take it personally, i guess, i had an amazing golden retriever many years ago who was a certified therapy dog. I took him to Newtown a couple of times after the Sandy Hook shooting. Maybe that was ‘demented’ and ‘wasteful’ of me, Slate magazine would
say so, and none of the liberals here seem to have an issue with it.

Again, thankful for my side.

one of the best gifts of dogs, is that occasionally, they remind us what it is, to be human. I’d say liberals could use a reminder. I think we see what it looks like to be human when Conserv. try to cut taxes where the primary benefit goes to the rich, run up the deficit and then propose to cut benefits like food stamps for poor people.

Here let me respond for you, save younthe teouble.

Why are you so angry? Why am I angry? And did you see what Trump did yesterday? You mean when he didn't read from what everyone else was reading and stood there looking bored?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by scottw (Post 1156943)

the whataboutismists do a lot of whataboutisming

Originally Posted by PaulS (Post 1156944)

NM

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156948)

"isn't that what you did in the tribute thread where you added things about the Clinton's even after Bruce made a new thread and asked everyone to not do that"

The original tribute thread was my thread, so I'm not sure I see how I can be accused of hijacking my own thread. But if it makes you feel better, OK, that's what I did. So ignore the mods. here bc why? It made you feel good to get one more dig on the Clintons?

"So you stopped the good will and caused a diversion "

Sure. I did that, and I got criticized here by all the liberals for doing that. Yet those same liberals, cannot criticize a fellow liberal for doing that. It's only bad when I do it. Why? Can you tell me why that is? It certainly is different doing it in a tribute thread than a thread about a dog.

"I think we see what it looks like to be human when Conserv. try to cut taxes where the primary benefit goes to the rich"

And what happened to black unemployment, and Hispanic unemployment, after that tax cut? It pretty much continued on the same trajectory as it was going on before. I've said here many times lower unemployment (black or othewise) is good for all us How come you left that out. I agree with you 100%, that the tax cut should have been more focused on middle class and below. Where you and I differ, is that I don't have to pretend that there was no benefit to the middle class and below. The benefit was minor to the middle class and that is why the Repubs. didn't run on it in the elections.

You're saying the GOP tax cut was "inhuman"Tax cuts are not inhumane (I think that is what you mean - hopefully Scott won't read it) but when the deficit balloons as many people said and the reaction is to cut spending for the poor- that is inhumane. . Interesting. I'd say it was imperfect, not aimed enough at the people you and I both want to help. But those people were helped by the tax cut, just not as much as they could have been. Is that true or false?

"run up the deficit "

And where was your concern over the deficit, exactly, from 09-16? You mean when the economy was in the crapper? Different times need different measures. I agree the deficit and debt is a MAJPOR issue. But again, the difference between us, is that my concern doesn't depend on the party of the sitting president. Yours does. Which means your concern is selective, which means it's fake.

Originally Posted by PaulS (Post 1156950)

Just proved that last statement wrong.

Originally Posted by PaulS (Post 1156950)

Tax cuts are not inhumane (I think that is what you mean - hopefully Scott won't read it)

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman (Post 1156941)

If they were liberals, they'd be looking to abolish the Electoral college, Don Pussy hats, Call everybody Nazis, Change the voting age to 16, smash store windows, and scream "Not My President" incessantly :hihi:

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1156955)

There is only one issue with your statement none of those things happened in a lame duck session ..

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156846)

Not victimized. Empowered by pointing out the ugliness.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156952)

"It (black unemployment) pretty much continued on the same trajectory as it was going on before"

Ah yes, it was Obama's doing. How silly of me. When things continue on the same trajectory, it's because of the person who initiated that trajectory? It doesn't take work to maintain progress along that trajectory? Fascinating, simply fascinating.I never claimed that did I? Trump can get credit for continuing if that will make you happy. Show me how the trajectory changed though?

"I've said here many times lower unemployment (black or othewise) is good for all us "

Have you ever said that the GOP tax cuts helped us in that goal?I don't think they did. Most of the tax cuts to corp. went to stock buy backs.

"The benefit was minor to the middle class and that is why the Repubs. didn't run on it in the elections. "

$200+ a month for me, not minor, and they did run on it.I'm glad you make more than the average carpenter, plumber and middle class person on this site. Most Repubs infact did not run on it.

"You mean when the economy was in the crapper? "

The economy was in the crapper in the last couple of years of Obama's presidency? I missed that, I guess, lucky me.Stick with #s (although sometimes I don't think you are that good with them). Was the deficit declining in Obama's later years from the earlier years?

"Just proved that last statement wrong."

No, you proved it true. Liberal=good, conservative=bad. that was your whole post.

Originally Posted by scottw (Post 1156954)

inhuman is a word dummy :huh:

inhuman
/inˈ(h)yo͞omən/Submit
adjective

1.lacking human qualities of compassion and mercy; cruel and barbaric. synonyms: cruel, harsh, inhumane, brutal, callous, sadistic, severe, savage, vicious, barbaric; More

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1156955)

but again thanks for showing how much you care that Republican power grabs .. are equal to pussy hats
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by PaulS (Post 1156959)

I know it is a word dummy. I thought inhumane should have been used.

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1156957)

I can tell by how many times you posted in this thread, that you need an intervention.
I thought the eulogies were all great, most of the articles I read also, you can tell he had good friends and family, a great sense of humor and didn't take himself too seriously.
Look for something good, Jim.
The dog moved on, you should too.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156962)

so you post incessantly about what a demonic figure trump is. but because i’m simply responding often here, i need an intervention. okee-dokee.

the eulogies were great. it was all great, the sendoff he deserved.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1156969)

Just trying to help
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device