Trump, Doctors and Taxes.

[GravelRider]

That's an awful lot of assumptions you're making there. I don't do Twitter and the only blog I follow is Dr. Grumpy. But nice try.

I generally read a conservative source and a liberal source (and an international one if I can) If they agree on something, I feel reasonably safe that it's at least mostly true.

I didn't make any assumptions. However, if you can't trust one source (like CNN), what allows you to trust the source or sources you choose to use? It's an honest question. What makes one source trustworthy and one source not and how do you decide? How are you evaluating these sources? Unless you've seen an event with your own eyes, you are putting a certain amount of trust in whoever is reporting to you. How do you decide who to trust?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[deleted171991]

Yeah. I know.

But, that does not imply a "natural" collusion within the Trump administration. I'm SURE they're acting on their own perception of their interests. I'm SURE they would deem Trump to be more in their interests given his more reconciliatory tone, versus the hostile rhetoric of Hilary's campaign.

And, don't think the U.S. hasn't mettled in a myriad of foreign elections. Hell, we've overthrown 2 governments, directly, in the past 15 years, several attempts, and who knows how many opposition parties we've funded. So, the old Soviet apparatus isn't the only one live and well.

This is why I find it so interesting how people are actually shocked at their probable interference. That's what is naive.

We are not angels either, far from it. But we have never done anything close to what the Russians did (and are doing now in Spain) to developed countries or other empires, and never on such a scale. Manipulating elections like this, stoking conflict, trying to create a national divide, hacking computer systems on such a scale, are serious forms of interference in our affairs, bordering war. It shows that the Russians are our enemies, not just adversaries.

I agree that all Americans should enjoy free speech in America. I also believe that foreign entities and their paid employees/contractors/consultants, and generally anybody who has foreign interests, even if American, shouldn't (in regard to those foreign interests).

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

I didn't make any assumptions. However, if you can't trust one source (like CNN), what allows you to trust the source or sources you choose to use? It's an honest question. What makes one source trustworthy and one source not and how do you decide? How are you evaluating these sources? Unless you've seen an event with your own eyes, you are putting a certain amount of trust in whoever is reporting to you. How do you decide who to trust?

If I take 2 separate sources with opposite biases and they both say the same things, I think that's reasonably likely to be true.

I also go for primary sources whenever possible, but that can get amazingly tedious.

 

[Precedexed Out]

That's an awful lot of assumptions you're making there. I don't do Twitter and the only blog I follow is Dr. Grumpy. But nice try.

I generally read a conservative source and a liberal source (and an international one if I can) If they agree on something, I feel reasonably safe that it's at least mostly true.

Much of the ignorance about this Russian garbage is based on assumptions.

I don't have a twitter account and follow no blogs. The only tweets I read are those I see on TV from Trump. I think his tweets are a great way to communicate with America, skips the dishonest media and goes straight to the citizens. Twitter is a very effective way for Trump to communicate and clarifyhis thoughts when the media slants everything his administration does in an extremely negative light.

 

[Precedexed Out]

We are not angels either, far from it. But we have never done anything close to what the Russians did (and are doing now in Spain) to developed countries or other empires, and never on such a scale. Manipulating elections like this, stoking conflict, trying to create a national divide, are serious forms of interference in our affairs, bordering war. It shows that the Russians are our enemies, not just adversaries.

I agree that all Americans should enjoy free speech in America. I also believe that foreign entities and their paid employees/contractors/consultants, and generally anybody who has foreign interests, even if American, shouldn't (in regard to those foreign interests).

Tax returns are important, unless you set up the Clinton Foundation and use your position as Secretary of State to solicit money for your "charity" that benefits only the Clintons. Where is all the outrage about Russian-Clinton collusion (uranium)?

 

[Precedexed Out]

I didn't make any assumptions. However, if you can't trust one source (like CNN), what allows you to trust the source or sources you choose to use? It's an honest question. What makes one source trustworthy and one source not and how do you decide? How are you evaluating these sources? Unless you've seen an event with your own eyes, you are putting a certain amount of trust in whoever is reporting to you. How do you decide who to trust?

How do you know if it is reliable? Evaluate your life and the things going on around you. Analyze and question all information and the motives behind those who are presenting it. Look for news that is presented based on facts without propaganda or emotion. Catherine Herridge and James Rosen are great examples. Compare that to Chuck Todd, Bob Schieffer, or many of the other "journalists" who made no attempt to hide their biases during the last election.

Think about context, does anyone really believe some massive collusion effort was going on between Trump and Russia and the intelligence agencies never picked up on it? Come on, logically, that is highly unlikely. Any collusion effort massive enough to influence an election would have plenty of connections that would be found by intelligence agencies. We know Obama and his crooked administration were abusing their surveillance powers trying to find something, but they found nothing. Where is the media on that scandal? Cough cough Susan Rice and Samantha Powers. That doesn't seem to bother anyone on the left, but oh, if the shoe was on the other foot, damn, it would be a massive investigation.

 

[Precedexed Out]

If I take 2 separate sources with opposite biases and they both say the same things, I think that's reasonably likely to be true.

I also go for primary sources whenever possible, but that can get amazingly tedious.

That is reasonable unless the truth is inconvenient for the liberal leaning news media or those who don't like the truth because it doesn't fit the Trump-Russia narrative as falsely portrayed by the Clinton News Network.

 

[RadOncDoc21]

Spicer, is that you?

 

[btbam]

That is reasonable unless the truth is inconvenient for the liberal leaning news media or those who don't like the truth because it doesn't fit the Trump-Russia narrative as falsely portrayed by the Clinton News Network.

Shouldn't you be busy studying?

 

[deleted59964]

Twitter is a very effective way for Trump to communicate and clarifyhis thoughts when the media slants everything his administration does in an extremely negative light.

Yep trump should stick to twitter

 

[GA8314]

Tax returns are important, unless you set up the Clinton Foundation and use your position as Secretary of State to solicit money for your "charity" that benefits only the Clintons. Where is all the outrage about Russian-Clinton collusion (uranium)?

Liberals (as well as most Republicans) never seem to acknowledge the deep connections between the establishment Democrats and Republicans. They protect the status quo. Meantime, divisive politics which doesn't really effect the super elite are used as false left/right paradigms. Meantime, no matter who wields the power, the super wealthy keep getting wealthier while the poor keep getting poorer. Blue/Red. Doesn't seem to matter.

Both parties get everyone riled up with things like abortion and gay rights which mean absolutely nothing to the super class. Again, the establishment (regardless of initial good intentions) serve to protect the status quo.

 

[deleted171991]

Liberals (as well as most Republicans) never seem to acknowledge the deep connections between the establishment Democrats and Republicans. They protect the status quo. Meantime, divisive politics which doesn't really effect the super elite are used as false left/right paradigms. Meantime, no matter who wields the power, the super wealthy keep getting wealthier while the poor keep getting poorer. Blue/Red. Doesn't seem to matter.

Both parties get everyone riled up with things like abortion and gay rights which mean absolutely nothing to the super class. Again, the establishment (regardless of initial good intentions) serve to protect the status quo.

You can include President Trump, too. Because the latest tax reform would do exactly what I emphasized above. Just by eliminating the estate tax, he will save his heirs at least 1 billion in taxes.

It takes a special amount of... naivete to think that the super rich would have the best interests of poor people in mind, against their own interests. And to expect a billionaire (who has never done anything for the poor, or the middle class) to go against his own interests.

The famous "never lose money" rule (of Warren Buffett) is actually the main rule of Old Money. Only the poor are preoccupied with making money.

 

[GA8314]

You can include President Trump, too. Because the latest tax reform would do exactly what I emphasized above. Just by eliminating the estate tax, he will save his heirs at least 1 billion in taxes.

It takes a special amount of... naivete to think that the super rich would have the best interests of poor people in mind, against their own interests. And to expect a billionaire (who has never done anything for the poor, or the middle class) to go against his own interests.

The famous "never lose money" rule (of Warren Buffett) is actually the main rule of Old Money. Only the poor are preoccupied with making money.

I completely agree that it's naive to think the super rich are going to go very far to advance the cause of the poor. In large part they want STATUS QUO. Indeed, I am convinced that they are very sophisticated when it comes to getting their agenda sold to the American public as if it's in "our" best interests.

I have no problem being critical of Donald Trump, but I still believe that Hillary would have championed the status quo better than he.

 

[Precedexed Out]

I completely agree that it's naive to think the super rich are going to go very far to advance the cause of the poor. In large part they want STATUS QUO. Indeed, I am convinced that they are very sophisticated when it comes to getting their agenda sold to the American public as if it's in "our" best interests.

I have no problem being critical of Donald Trump, but I still believe that Hillary would have championed the status quo better than he.

Precisely, because she represented the establishment. My definition of establishment includes the special interests that run the country on both sides of the political aisle. Example, illegal immigration, not good for our country. The democratic party and many republicans are either indifferent or supportive of it because it benefits the top 1%. It provides them cheap labor.

 

[GA8314]

Precisely, because she represented the establishment. My definition of establishment includes the special interests that run the country on both sides of the political aisle. Example, illegal immigration, not good for our country. The democratic party and many republicans are either indifferent or supportive of it because it benefits the top 1%. It provides them cheap labor.

How some people are so naive to not understand she was the 100% favorite from the establishments point of view. The same establishment that many leftists view with utter contempt and disdain. Hillary was the establishment's choice to defend their interests. Nicely packaged with just the right amount of "gibs" and left leaning rhetoric to placate the masses.

 

[deleted59964]

so you chose Mr. big water, ocean water instead ? ... sorry I still can't believe he's your president. WTF could you not find someone with his politics but who has an IQ > 80

 

[fakin' the funk]

I think his tweets are a great way to communicate with America, skips the dishonest media and goes straight to the citizens.

...and threaten nuclear war.

Funny how your opinion on Trump's tweets are exactly the same as Trump's opinion on Trump's tweets. If you investigate the possibility that you have an unreliable narrator, I don't think you'll be so enthused with his tweeting, or anything else.

 

[GA8314]

so you chose Mr. big water, ocean water instead ? ... sorry I still can't believe he's your president. WTF could you not find someone with his politics but who has an IQ > 80

The status quo made it very hard for anyone NOT representing them. Anyone attacking the power structure and threatening the status quo was total fodder in the debates and minimized/marginalized in the media. Unfair questions, misinformation allowed to be perpetuated about them etc. etc. So, we took the only option available to us which truly didn't even REALLY have the support of his own party, and not because they "didn't like him" but rather he was threatening to them. This concept, which still seems to elude so many, is fundamental in understanding power in the U.S.

Again, the power that the left so despises. Yet, over and over they are duped into voting for an only slightly different version representing the same power structure in the country. Duped with slick rhetoric, a token of faux empathy for the poor and struggling within our society. Meanwhile, once elected, and just like most other presidents (and Senators), they dutifully fulfill the agenda of the their true masters, who are the same entities whether they are Red or Blue.

Failing to understand this point, leaves one vulnerable to all kinds of false distractions about side issues, which albeit may be emotional for most Americans, but matter little to the truly elite class which holds overwhelming power and control in the U.S.

 

[Precedexed Out]

...and threaten nuclear war.

Funny how your opinion on Trump's tweets are exactly the same as Trump's opinion on Trump's tweets. If you investigate the possibility that you have an unreliable narrator, I don't think you'll be so enthused with his tweeting, or anything else.

Trump isn't threatening nuclear war. He is promising that North Korea isn't going to be allowed to act like this and have nuclear weapons. Period. End of story. End of discussion. He isn't backing down. Trump is showing America has a spine now and won't fold like the previous administration. Really, previous administrations, Obama, Bush, Clinton,...and so on. Appeasement doesn't work when dealing with terrorists and rogue regimes like NK and Iran. Trump has done a great job in dealing with NK to this point.

 

[linkin06]

 

[nimbus]

Failing to understand this point, leaves one vulnerable to all kinds of false distractions about side issues, which albeit may be emotional for most Americans, but matter little to the truly elite class which holds overwhelming power and control in the U.S.

Side issues like the NFL? The elite are definitely laughing while the president is getting huffy with football players. NFL definitely qualifies as opium of the masses....perpetuated by the elite to placate idiots and keep them out of trouble on Sundays. I could never understand how people get so excited about football. Who gives a s***?

 

[nimbus]

Trump isn't threatening nuclear war. He is promising that North Korea isn't going to be allowed to act like this and have nuclear weapons. Period. End of story. End of discussion. He isn't backing down. Trump is showing America has a spine now and won't fold like the previous administration. Really, previous administrations, Obama, Bush, Clinton,...and so on. Appeasement doesn't work when dealing with terrorists and rogue regimes like NK and Iran. Trump has done a great job in dealing with NK to this point.

He's promised a lot over the past year. Hope he can deliver this one.

 

[Precedexed Out]

He's promised a lot over the past year. Hope he can deliver this one.

I think all Americans are with you on this one. This loser needs to be stopped for oppression of his citizens and the safety of the world.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Side issues like the NFL? The elite are definitely laughing while the president is getting huffy with football players. NFL definitely qualifies as opium of the masses....perpetuated by the elite to placate idiots and keep them out of trouble on Sundays. I could never understand how people get so excited about football. Who gives a s***?

Maybe you have never played football so your perspective is different. I think the strategy, preparation, and discipline required to be successful makes it a very neat sport. There is an incredible amount of strategy and planning that goes into each play. One player lacking the discipline or ability to do their job correctly often disrupts the whole play.

 

[mwa]

My experience is not meant to be representative of all of America, but I am in a redder-than-red state (Utah), and I can't find any doctors under 50 who still support him. (My state only gave Hillary 27.5% of the vote.) Some doctors near retirement still support Trump, but nobody young seems to.

 

[Precedexed Out]

My experience is not meant to be representative of all of America, but I am in a redder-than-red state (Utah), and I can't find any doctors under 50 who still support him. (My state only gave Hillary 27.5% of the vote.) Some doctors near retirement still support Trump, but nobody young seems to.

Must be a small sample size or people not being open about supporting him. There are plenty of people of all ages that support him. Most of the doctors I know support him regardless of age.

 

[Precedexed Out]

so you chose Mr. big water, ocean water instead ? ... sorry I still can't believe he's your president. WTF could you not find someone with his politics but who has an IQ > 80

Like it or not, he is our president. Just like Obama was our president.

Enough with the ignorant IQ or Trump is stupid cheap shots. If Trump has an IQ below 80 and he out did Hillary, what does that say about Hillary or any other democratic candidate? Couldn't the DNC found someone better? Without a doubt, they could have.

Results don't lie. Trump is among the most successful businessman in the world and he was elected president against seemingly all odds. Very few gave him a chance. Huffington post said they would cover him in the entertainment section because they didn't consider his candidacy serious. Disagree with about issues, but taking cheap shots about IQ is rather stupid. The way Trump said what many Americans were thinking was brilliant. Hillary was a terrible candidate, but I don't take cheap shots at her IQ. No doubt she is intelligent. I will always wonder why she did the dishonest things while being Secretary of State. If she would have kept a clean record, things could be very different. Although, we should remember Obama basically threw her under the bus and she is a Clinton, after all.

A Note About Our Coverage Of Donald Trump's 'Campaign' | HuffPost

 

[chessknt]

Trump was lucky. He invested heavily in real estate in the right area with a large anounr of money that wasnt his. He has had plenty of other failed businesses but his wealth (assuming he has any since we have no idea what his finances actually look like) is from his real estate. You could say the same thing about anyone who invested in bitcoin 6 years ago.

I would also echo the above sentiment that the only people in healthcare I've seen support him are va nurses over 50. He has chosen to wallow in the mud instead of rise to the position of his office and has not earned my respect. Arguing about how his predecessors or opponents behaved has no bearing on what he should be doing right now--instead he seems hellbent on driving us to a civil war by never missing an opportunity to try and divide us further.

 

[WholeLottaGame7]

A) I'll never understand why poor Middle Americans think a rich Northeasterner gives a rat's @ss about how well off they are. If he cared about lower/middle class Americans, he wouldn't hire immigrants to work at his estates, and he would pay Americans when they do work for him instead of avoiding paying them and/or suing them.

2) Even assuming there was no collusion, Russia clearly wanted Trump to win. So you have to ask yourself, why did they want Trump to win? If you think Russia truly wants to #MAGA, I have a couple bridges to sell you.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Trump was lucky. He invested heavily in real estate in the right area with a large anounr of money that wasnt his. He has had plenty of other failed businesses but his wealth (assuming he has any since we have no idea what his finances actually look like) is from his real estate. You could say the same thing about anyone who invested in bitcoin 6 years ago.

I would also echo the above sentiment that the only people in healthcare I've seen support him are va nurses over 50. He has chosen to wallow in the mud instead of rise to the position of his office and has not earned my respect. Arguing about how his predecessors or opponents behaved has no bearing on what he should be doing right now--instead he seems hellbent on driving us to a civil war by never missing an opportunity to try and divide us further.

Trump got elected because he tells things like they are, no BS or political correctness. I appreciate that although it may not always sound presidential. Isn't any aspect of any business venture luck? That doesn't account for everything. The fact he won a presidential election by seeing through all the BS and taking on the media was brilliant. He orchestrated a masterful campaign.

I'll take Trump's speeches and communication any day over Obama (yawn) speeches where he apologized for American exceptionalism and led front behind.

 

[Precedexed Out]

A) I'll never understand why poor Middle Americans think a rich Northeasterner gives a rat's @ss about how well off they are. If he cared about lower/middle class Americans, he wouldn't hire immigrants to work at his estates, and he would pay Americans when they do work for him instead of avoiding paying them and/or suing them.

2) Even assuming there was no collusion, Russia clearly wanted Trump to win. So you have to ask yourself, why did they want Trump to win? If you think Russia truly wants to #MAGA, I have a couple bridges to sell you.

1) I'll never understand why anyone would think Hillary will help poor America. She is about as disconnected from the realities of lower class America as it gets. She doesn't give a damn about anyone unless they are funneling money into the Clinton Foundation. With the Clintons, money is the only way to get their attention. Also, I'll never understand why the poor inner cities are entirely democratic and have been for decades. How long do you have to let democratic leadership leave you in poverty before you vote for someone else?

2) Who cares what Russia wanted? There was no collusion. Every country has some interest in every election and there is nothing wrong with that. The US is certainly no stranger to overthrowing governments or influencing foreign elections. Now all the sudden, because Trump won, we are suddenly going crazy about it. Enough excuses.

 

[Gas you down]

Of course we can talk badly about Trump. If he could call Obama a secret Muslim Kenyan, we can say whatever we want about the guy currently in the hot seat. He’s an racist con artist that’s lost it as he’s gotten older. Go watch old interviews, his ability to communicate coherently has really gone downhill in the last ten years.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Of course we can talk badly about Trump. If he could call Obama a secret Muslim Kenyan, we can say whatever we want about the guy currently in the hot seat. He’s an racist con artist that’s lost it as he’s gotten older. Go watch old interviews, his ability to communicate coherently has really gone downhill in the last ten years.

His ability communicate with the citizens of this country is highly effect, as clearly evidenced by his November 8 win. Disagreeing with his ideas is fine, but taking cheap shots like calling him "racist" or questioning his ability to communicate coherently is ridiculous.

 

[Onefellswoop87]

His ability communicate with the citizens of this country is highly effect, as clearly evidenced by his November 8 win. Disagreeing with his ideas is fine, but taking cheap shots like calling him "racist" or questioning his ability to communicate coherently is ridiculous.

Why is his declaring Obama wasn’t born in this country anything but racist?

 

[PainDrain]

His ability communicate with the citizens of this country is highly effect, as clearly evidenced by his November 8 win. Disagreeing with his ideas is fine, but taking cheap shots like calling him "racist" or questioning his ability to communicate coherently is ridiculous.

Are you kidding? He sounds like someone who has the beginnings of dementia. Seriously some of the terms he uses and his grammar are very unusual.

 

[WholeLottaGame7]

1) I'll never understand why anyone would think Hillary will help poor America. She is about as disconnected from the realities of lower class America as it gets. She doesn't give a damn about anyone unless they are funneling money into the Clinton Foundation. With the Clintons, money is the only way to get their attention. Also, I'll never understand why the poor inner cities are entirely democratic and have been for decades. How long do you have to let democratic leadership leave you in poverty before you vote for someone else?

2) Who cares what Russia wanted? There was no collusion. Every country has some interest in every election and there is nothing wrong with that. The US is certainly no stranger to overthrowing governments or influencing foreign elections. Now all the sudden, because Trump won, we are suddenly going crazy about it. Enough excuses.

I'm sorry, did I stutter? Did I say anything about Hillary helping poor America?

I intentionally made my first statement applicable to both candidates to illustrate the similarities between the two, but I can understand if those kinds of subtleties are difficult to pick up since it's not in Russian.

I also never claimed that America is the paragon of virtue and righteousness. I care about who Russia supports, because I don't believe Russia has our best interests in mind. Russia backing Trump is almost enough in and of itself to make me wish he hadn't been elected, regardless of all the other crazy he has going on. Just like if I was an Iraqi, I would not appreciate American involvement because I don't think America has Iraq's best interest in mind.

And here, just to show I'm a nice guy, I'll save you some trouble and craft your response to this post: "Something something Trump won something something!"

 

[facted]

Are you kidding? He sounds like someone who has the beginnings of dementia. Seriously some of the terms he uses and his grammar are very unusual.

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure his speech pattern and simplistic speech is one of the main reasons he won. A lot of middle america "relates" to him because of this.

Luckily, I rarely watch his speeches, but anytime I catch a glimpse or read a transcript I'm just amazed at how non-sensical he is. His speech is literally 4th grade meets schizophrenic word salad with flight of ideas. Outside of prepared remarks, his comments literally make no sense whatsoever.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Why is his declaring Obama wasn’t born in this country anything but racist?

Because if you're not born in this country you can't be president. According to the liberal platform, you are racist by definition if you oppose immigration or basically any liberal ideology. Not everything is racist, unless you're a far left liberal.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Are you kidding? He sounds like someone who has the beginnings of dementia. Seriously some of the terms he uses and his grammar are very unusual.

Great, more people in this profession diagnosing based off of video and CNN commentators. A real embarrassment to our profession. I thought you were supposed to meet someone before you diagnosed them.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure his speech pattern and simplistic speech is one of the main reasons he won. A lot of middle america "relates" to him because of this.

Luckily, I rarely watch his speeches, but anytime I catch a glimpse or read a transcript I'm just amazed at how non-sensical he is. His speech is literally 4th grade meets schizophrenic word salad with flight of ideas. Outside of prepared remarks, his comments literally make no sense whatsoever.

Simplistic speech, you mean a president who talks to the American people instead of at them or above them? Americans were tired of being lectured for eight years by Obama.

Or it could be due to the fact that you don't agree with his politics so anything he says is by default "4th grade meets schizophrenic word salad with flight of ideas." Did you ever have a psychiatry rotation to actually understand what "flight of ideas" means?

 

[Precedexed Out]

I'm sorry, did I stutter? Did I say anything about Hillary helping poor America?

I intentionally made my first statement applicable to both candidates to illustrate the similarities between the two, but I can understand if those kinds of subtleties are difficult to pick up since it's not in Russian.

I also never claimed that America is the paragon of virtue and righteousness. I care about who Russia supports, because I don't believe Russia has our best interests in mind. Russia backing Trump is almost enough in and of itself to make me wish he hadn't been elected, regardless of all the other crazy he has going on. Just like if I was an Iraqi, I would not appreciate American involvement because I don't think America has Iraq's best interest in mind."

And here, just to show I'm a nice guy, I'll save you some trouble and craft your response to this post: "Something something Trump won something something!"

How did your first statement apply to both candidates when you stated "he" multiple times? Here is a refresher of your post: "I'll never understand why poor Middle Americans think a rich Northeasterner gives a rat's @ss about how well off they are. If he cared about lower/middle class Americans, he wouldn't hire immigrants to work at his estates, and he would pay Americans when they do work for him instead of avoiding paying them and/or suing them.

Yes, you were trying to misrepresent what you previously stated. Yes, you did stutter.

Hey Einstein, I got news for you, no country has our best interests in mind, duh!! Before Trump took office, even the US didn't put US interests first. America first, that is what Trump says and believes. He also said recently at the UN that every country should feel the same way. Take care of yourself first. He orchestrated a bold, clear, concise, and effective speech at the UN which is why most of the media barely covered it. Russia would have preferred if Hillary won, Putin pushed Obama around and could have had his way with Hillary for at least four more years. Hillary helped Russia out tremendously with uranium. Oh wait, sorry, I should stay quiet about that, I forgot it doesn't fit with your narrative.

 

[GA8314]

Side issues like the NFL? The elite are definitely laughing while the president is getting huffy with football players. NFL definitely qualifies as opium of the masses....perpetuated by the elite to placate idiots and keep them out of trouble on Sundays. I could never understand how people get so excited about football. Who gives a s***?

Yes. I would agree with you here. I think the issue isn't the NFL, per se however, but rather a perception of disrespecting the flag. I understand both sides and support freedom of expression and speech even when I disagree personally.

 

[Onefellswoop87]

Because if you're not born in this country you can't be president. According to the liberal platform, you are racist by definition if you oppose immigration or basically any liberal ideology. Not everything is racist, unless you're a far left liberal.

Yeah, I understand the qualifications to be president.

But never before have we had a group declare for years that a current white president was born in a predominantly white foreign county, like Obama was rallied against. And when Obama finally caved a showed his short form birth certificate, that wasn’t good enough and Trump wanted more. He said he people in Hawaii finding the truth! We just had to wait. He had it but wasn’t ready to release it. Where’d that go? Either Obama fooled us in the most elaborate way as a Kenyan born with a top secret clearance of the highest level that even tricked the intelligence community. Or it was a travesty against Obama that Americans didn’t believe this former US Senator was an illegitimate POTUS - and I’m sure that’s purely coincidental that he was the first black POTUS.

Did you want to see Bush’s or Clinton’s birth certificate? Or you didn’t have any concern of their country of birth? Before Trump released his, did you have any concern of his county of birth? If not, why? What’s the only variable that’s changed? Sounds like race to me.

 

[GravelRider]

Yes. I would agree with you here. I think the issue isn't the NFL, per se however, but rather a perception of disrespecting the flag. I understand both sides and support freedom of expression and speech even when I disagree personally.

Daily challenge: Explain the reverence for the American flag and the defense of displays of the Confederate flag in one sentence.

 

[pgg]

Daily challenge: Explain the reverence for the American flag and the defense of displays of the Confederate flag in one sentence.

I don’t need a whole sentence; two words will suffice.

Cognitive dissonance.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Yeah, I understand the qualifications to be president.

But never before have we had a group declare for years that a current white president was born in a predominantly white foreign county, like Obama was rallied against. And when Obama finally caved a showed his short form birth certificate, that wasn’t good enough and Trump wanted more. He said he people in Hawaii finding the truth! We just had to wait. He had it but wasn’t ready to release it. Where’d that go? Either Obama fooled us in the most elaborate way as a Kenyan born with a top secret clearance of the highest level that even tricked the intelligence community. Or it was a travesty against Obama that Americans didn’t believe this former US Senator was an illegitimate POTUS - and I’m sure that’s purely coincidental that he was the first black POTUS.

Did you want to see Bush’s or Clinton’s birth certificate? Or you didn’t have any concern of their country of birth? Before Trump released his, did you have any concern of his county of birth? If not, why? What’s the only variable that’s changed? Sounds like race to me.

If he would have shown his birth certificate immediately, it never would have been an issue. It seems a little suspicious to avoid revealing such a simple document for so long. It had nothing to do with race. Trump raised the same type of issue with Ted Cruz. Cruz is white, but lets ignore that because it doesn't fit the "everything Trump does is racist" narrative. Given Obama's history of being outside the US during a portion of his childhood and a Kenyan father, this request isn't unreasonable. Also, contrary to the first black president narrative, Obama's mother Ann Dunham was white. Obama is as much white as he is black (want to ignore that too?).

 

[facted]

If he would have shown his birth certificate immediately, it never would have been an issue. It seems a little suspicious to avoid revealing such a simple document for so long. It had nothing to do with race. Trump raised the same type of issue with Ted Cruz. Cruz is white, but lets ignore that because it doesn't fit the "everything Trump does is racist" narrative. Given Obama's history of being outside the US during a portion of his childhood and a Kenyan father, this request isn't unreasonable. Also, contrary to the first black president narrative, Obama's mother Ann Dunham was white. Obama is as much white as he is black (want to ignore that too?).

Wow, you really are racist.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Wow, you really are racist.

Typical liberal response, can't formulate a logical argument so play the race card.

Are you suggesting we can only question the birth place of non-black presidential candidates? Pointing out the FACT that Obama is as much white as black is also racist?

 

[CommonMan]

After all the taxes that an individual pays throughout their life, you should get taxed for dying? I think this estate tax is stupid. I know farmers and small business owners that experience great financial difficulties or distress because of the so called "wealth." Government taxes and taxes and taxes, enough is enough.

Look at the big picture, if in a capitalistic society if there is not a artificial barrier set up eventually all the wealth will be controlled by very few. A much better system would be no income taxes but a 100% estate tax. Why should some people be born into enormous wealth and not have to accomplish anything in life. Imagine this. One giant medical corporation, controls all medical schools all hospitals all doctors all pharmaceuticals. Do you rally want that?

 

[facted]

Typical liberal response, can't formulate a logical argument so play the race card.

Um, no. I know my well though out, reasoned responses will bounce right off of you and be shot down as "liberal" propaganda (even though I'm not liberal), so I don't even try. There is absolutely no point in online discussions with people like yourself. Instead, I just point out the obvious and move along.