Bold n Brash

[Dene]

I liked his speech, though I can imagine that the ex-presidents squirmed a bit.
Trump was true to himself and his message. You can't deny that the man has guts.
Quite refreshing in light of the years of empty talk....on both sides.

But....what really matters to me are not his words but what he SIGNS.

Time to get to work and...
make America first!!

-Greg

[Alan Baker]

And have you seen the pictures of the empty stands?

[Moderate]

Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:

The Democrat Legislatures boycotted. I saw the empty heads of the
Dems who showed up..
--

[Alan Baker]

68 legislators could make a visible difference, doofus?

[Moderate]

You are wrong. It visibly showed a complete lack of character.
--

[Alan Baker]

Goalpost shift noted.

[recscub...@huntzinger.com]

It was pretty good, although with caveats (of course). For example:

"For many decades we’ve enriched foreign industry at the expense of American
industry, subsidized the armies of other countries while allowing for the very
sad depletion of our military."

NYT's annotated comment on this section was:

"Corporate profits have reached record heights in recent years. The biggest
American companies have benefited enormously from globalization. It's the
workers who have suffered."

So the question comes back to if the undertone here is that there will need
to thus be a law to compel American corporations to share their wealth with
their own workers...so how's that not an anti-capitalistic form of socialism
that's being promoted?


-hh

[MNMikeW]

recscub...@huntzinger.com wrote:
> It was pretty good, although with caveats (of course). For example:
>
> "For many decades we’ve enriched foreign industry at the expense of American
> industry, subsidized the armies of other countries while allowing for the very
> sad depletion of our military."
>
> NYT's annotated comment on this section was:

No, what you really mean is the NYT's liberal spin on this section was:

[Alan Baker]

On 2017-01-20 11:11 AM, MNMikeW wrote:
> recscub...@huntzinger.com wrote:
>> It was pretty good, although with caveats (of course). For example:
>>
>> "For many decades we’ve enriched foreign industry at the expense of
>> American
>> industry, subsidized the armies of other countries while allowing
>> for the very
>> sad depletion of our military."
>>
>> NYT's annotated comment on this section was:
>
> No, what you really mean is the NYT's liberal spin on this section was:
>>
>> "Corporate profits have reached record heights in recent years. The
>> biggest
>> American companies have benefited enormously from globalization. It's the
>> workers who have suffered."

Is that spin or facts, Mikey?

[Dene]

- show quoted text -

You are wrong. It visibly showed a complete lack of character.

IT's trolling. You were wasting your time trying to reason with this liar.

-Greg

[Dene]

---------------

Glad you like the speech. Hopefully corporations are going to get hit....with a return to America and higher wages or paying the taxman at the border. Hopefully they will choose the former.

-Greg

[Alan Baker]

What do you want to be it never happens?

[Moderate]

Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:
>>
>

> What do you want to be it never happens?
>

I want to be you never happened.
--

[Alan Baker]

We can't always get what we want...

[Moderate]

Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:
> On 2017-01-20 12:55 PM, Moderate wrote:
>> Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:
>>>>
>>>
>>> What do you want to be it never happens?
>>>
>>
>> I want to be you never happened.
>>
>
> We can't always get what we want...
>

I got what I want.
--

[Alan Baker]

On 2017-01-20 1:07 PM, Moderate wrote:
> Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:
>> On 2017-01-20 12:55 PM, Moderate wrote:
>>> Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What do you want to be it never happens?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I want to be you never happened.
>>>
>>
>> We can't always get what we want...
>>
>
> I got what I want.
>

You don't actually know that yet...

[recscub...@huntzinger.com]

Greg wrote:
> -hh wrote:
>> [....]

>>So the question comes back to if the undertone here is that there will need
>> to thus be a law to compel American corporations to share their wealth with
>> their own workers...so how's that not an anti-capitalistic form of socialism
>> that's being promoted?
>
>

> Glad you like the speech. Hopefully corporations are going to get hit....with a
> return to America and higher wages or paying the taxman at the border.
> Hopefully they will choose the former.

Easy to say ... but just how can that be done? For example, I pointed out
that one possible way is essentially forced socialism. What other specific
means are there as alternatives? Preferably less socialistic in nature.

FWIW, another could be to set an example by raising the pay of Fed workers.
After all, the independent compensation review board has been saying for years
that there's a pretty big gap short of private industry (I'll have to look up the specifics).
Going on a Fed hiring campaign to compete with private industry for talent and
supply+demand --> private industry will have to raise pay to attract/retain talent.
But with what's been said, I doubt this one is on his plate, even within just DoD.

-hh

[John B.]

It was the worst inauguration speech I've ever heard -- poorly written,
full of platitudes, belligerent and loaded with ridiculous assertions.
Our schools are so bad that students "have been deprived of all knowledge"?
"American carnage"? It was the same alarmist, hateful shit he said over
and over during the campaign and the America he described bears no
resemblance to the real thing. If I didn't know better, I'd have
thought he was talking about El Salvador.

[John B.]

They won't. They'll just move to other low-wage countries. Hitting a
particular company with a border tax violates U.S. law and WTO rules.

[John B.]

On Friday, January 20, 2017 at 4:07:16 PM UTC-5, Moderate wrote:
> Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:
> > On 2017-01-20 12:55 PM, Moderate wrote:
> >> Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> What do you want to be it never happens?
> >>>
> >>
> >> I want to be you never happened.
> >>
> >
> > We can't always get what we want...
> >
>
> I got what I want.
> --

You got what you deserve.

[Moderate]

"John B." <john...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

Thank you.
--

[Moderate]

recscub...@huntzinger.com Wrote in message:

>
> Easy to say ... but just how can that be done? For example, I pointed out
> that one possible way is essentially forced socialism. What other specific
> means are there as alternatives? Preferably less socialistic in nature.
>
> FWIW, another could be to set an example by raising the pay of Fed workers.
> After all, the independent compensation review board has been saying for years
> that there's a pretty big gap short of private industry (I'll have to look up the specifics).
> Going on a Fed hiring campaign to compete with private industry for talent and
> supply+demand --> private industry will have to raise pay to attract/retain talent.
> But with what's been said, I doubt this one is on his plate, even within just DoD.
>
> -hh
>

Forced socialism? Nobody sees that as a path to prosperity.
Especially Trump.
--

[Moderate]

"John B." <john...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>

> They won't. They'll just move to other low-wage countries. Hitting a
> particular company with a border tax violates U.S. law and WTO rules.
>

Cite.
--

[Moderate]

"John B." <john...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>

> It was the worst inauguration speech I've ever heard -- poorly written,
> full of platitudes, belligerent and loaded with ridiculous assertions.
> Our schools are so bad that students "have been deprived of all knowledge"?
> "American carnage"? It was the same alarmist, hateful shit he said over
> and over during the campaign and the America he described bears no
> resemblance to the real thing. If I didn't know better, I'd have
> thought he was talking about El Salvador.
>

His honesty was refreshing. At times he sounded like Bernie
Sanders without the crazy.


--

[Dene]

hn B.

- show quoted text -

It was the worst inauguration speech I've ever heard -- poorly written,
full of platitudes, belligerent and loaded with ridiculous assertions.
Our schools are so bad that students "have been deprived of all knowledge"?
"American carnage"? It was the same alarmist, hateful shit he said over
and over during the campaign and the America he described bears no
resemblance to the real thing. If I didn't know better, I'd have
thought he was talking about El Salvador.

-------------

So what would've satisfied you? Emphasis on transsexual bathrooms, social justice, income re-distribution, being the policeman of the world, free healthcare, corporate evil.

How about children, if they're lucky enough not to be aborted?

I think eight years of that is sufficient.

-Greg

[Dene]

His honesty was refreshing. At times he sounded like Bernie
Sanders without the crazy.

---------------

Good point. I probably have watched every inaugural speech and can't remember hardly anything from them. This speech I will remember.

Interesting times we live in.

-Greg

[John B.]

Oh, you want a cite? I posted that in April 2011. I can't believe
you don't remember.

[Carbon]

On 01/20/2017 12:47 PM, Dene wrote:

> I liked his speech, though I can imagine that the ex-presidents squirmed
> a bit. Trump was true to himself and his message. You can't deny that
> the man has guts. Quite refreshing in light of the years of empty
> talk....on both sides.
>
> But....what really matters to me are not his words but what he SIGNS.
>
> Time to get to work and... make America first!!

You should enjoy your irrational exuberance. The reality will set in soon
enough.

[John B.]

Corporate evil? That's Trump's stock and trade. I had the
quixotic hope that he would adopt a conciliatory tone and
not lash out at the people he's going to have to work with
for the next four years (if he lasts that long). I hoped
he wouldn't continue to describe the US as a hellish
place with criminal gangs roaming the streets and
terrifying decent people, high unemployment, millions
of jobs lost to free trade agreements. None of that is
even close to being true.

[Alan Baker]

You don't seem to have a problem with the corporate welfare state...

[Alan Baker]

On 2017-01-20 4:52 PM, Dene wrote:
>
> His honesty was refreshing. At times he sounded like Bernie Sanders
> without the crazy.
>
> ---------------
>
> Good point. I probably have watched every inaugural speech and can't
> remember hardly anything from them. This speech I will remember.

Bullshit.

>
> Interesting times we live in.

That's a Chinese curse...

[Moderate]

"John B." <john...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
> On Friday, January 20, 2017 at 7:25:21 PM UTC-5, Moderate wrote:
>> "John B." <john...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>> >
>> > They won't. They'll just move to other low-wage countries. Hitting a
>> > particular company with a border tax violates U.S. law and WTO rules.
>> >
>>
>> Cite.
>> --
>
> Oh, you want a cite? I posted that in April 2011. I can't believe
> you don't remember.
>

I don't ask for cites, because I don't know the answer. I ask to
catch liars.


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d9d8ad2e-61e9-11de-9e03-00144feabdc0.ht
ml?ft_site=falcon&desktop=true#axzz4WM86SRzv
--

[Moderate]

"John B." <john...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

> On Friday, January 20, 2017 at 7:49:52 PM UTC-5, Dene wrote:
>> hn B.
>> - show quoted text -
>> It was the worst inauguration speech I've ever heard -- poorly written,
>> full of platitudes, belligerent and loaded with ridiculous assertions.
>> Our schools are so bad that students "have been deprived of all knowledge"?
>> "American carnage"? It was the same alarmist, hateful shit he said over
>> and over during the campaign and the America he described bears no
>> resemblance to the real thing. If I didn't know better, I'd have
>> thought he was talking about El Salvador.
>>
>> -------------
>>
>> So what would've satisfied you? Emphasis on transsexual bathrooms, social justice, income re-distribution, being the policeman of the world, free healthcare, corporate evil.
>>
>> How about children, if they're lucky enough not to be aborted?
>>
>> I think eight years of that is sufficient.
>>
>> -Greg
>
> Corporate evil? That's Trump's stock and trade.

Fish on!

I had the
> quixotic hope that he would adopt a conciliatory tone and
> not lash out at the people he's going to have to work with
> for the next four years (if he lasts that long). I hoped
> he wouldn't continue to describe the US as a hellish
> place with criminal gangs roaming the streets and
> terrifying decent people, high unemployment, millions
> of jobs lost to free trade agreements. None of that is
> even close to being true.
>
>

--

[Moderate]

Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:

I don't? Based on what?
--

[Dene]

--------------

Been to Chicago lately?

[Carbon]

On 01/20/2017 03:16 PM, Dene wrote:

> Glad you like the speech. Hopefully corporations are going to get
> hit....with a return to America and higher wages or paying the taxman at
> the border. Hopefully they will choose the former.

Uh, no. With his Narcissistic Personality Disorder, Trump is not capable
of caring about anyone but himself. Corporations are not going to get hit.
In fact, they're the ones best able to line Trump's pockets so they'll be
able to do whatever they want. Obviously this will not be in the best
interest of most Americans, so it will be a matter of time before the
pitchforks come out and he gets hounded out of office.

[Carbon]

On 01/20/2017 07:52 PM, Dene wrote:

> Good point. I probably have watched every inaugural speech and can't
> remember hardly anything from them. This speech I will remember.
>
> Interesting times we live in.

If the speech contained coherent thoughts it wasn't written by Trump.

[Alan Baker]

I've heard that some of it was cribbed...

...from the Batman villain "Bane"'s speech the movie.

:-)

[Dene]

-----////

Yeah.....that makes sense. A billionaire needing more millions.

God forbid a sense of patriotism is involved.

-Greg

[Dene]

Let me guess...you didn't bother hearing it first hand or at least read the text.

-Greg

[Dene]

In 100 days, Trump's approval poll will be over 50%. I offered you a bet but you didn't take it.

-Greg

[recscub...@huntzinger.com]

Gosh, it was pointed out...

"Easy to say ... but just how can that be done?"

...and lots of posts - but all dodging a simple question.


-hh

[Carbon]

On 01/20/2017 10:02 PM, Dene wrote:
>> On 01/20/2017 03:16 PM, Dene wrote:
>>
>>> Glad you like the speech. Hopefully corporations are going to get
>>> hit....with a return to America and higher wages or paying the taxman
>>> at the border. Hopefully they will choose the former.
>>
>> Uh, no. With his Narcissistic Personality Disorder, Trump is not
>> capable of caring about anyone but himself. Corporations are not going
>> to get hit. In fact, they're the ones best able to line Trump's pockets
>> so they'll be able to do whatever they want. Obviously this will not be
>> in the best interest of most Americans, so it will be a matter of time
>> before the pitchforks come out and he gets hounded out of office.
>

> Yeah.....that makes sense. A billionaire needing more millions.
>
> God forbid a sense of patriotism is involved.

Patriotism! That is hilarious.

[Carbon]

I wouldn't have watched it even if I didn't work for a living. I
understand the con job going on, so Trump schtick is pretty boring.

[Alan Baker]

When did you offer it?

Let's see the post.

[Alan Baker]

Assuming he's actually a billionaire.

You DO realize that that might just be more of his bullshit, right?

[Carbon]

On 01/21/2017 01:07 AM, Alan Baker wrote:
>> On 2017-01-20 7:02 PM, Dene wrote:
>>> On 01/20/2017 03:16 PM, Dene wrote:
>>>
>>>> Glad you like the speech. Hopefully corporations are going to get
>>>> hit....with a return to America and higher wages or paying the taxman
>>>> at the border. Hopefully they will choose the former.
>>>
>>> Uh, no. With his Narcissistic Personality Disorder, Trump is not
>>> capable of caring about anyone but himself. Corporations are not going
>>> to get hit. In fact, they're the ones best able to line Trump's
>>> pockets so they'll be able to do whatever they want. Obviously this
>>> will not be in the best interest of most Americans, so it will be a
>>> matter of time before the pitchforks come out and he gets hounded out
>>> of office.
>>

>> Yeah.....that makes sense. A billionaire needing more millions.
>
> Assuming he's actually a billionaire.
>
> You DO realize that that might just be more of his bullshit, right?

The thing with Trump, he's (allegedly) a billionaire like new NBA players
are millionaires--all flash and gold toilet seats. So yeah, Trump has a
757, but it's 25 years old. He bought it used and had the interior
reskinned, kind of like what you would do with an old car when you can't
afford a new one.

Because, trust me, if Trump could afford a new jet he would be holding
press conferences on the damned thing bragging about how every single
feature was the latest and the greatest and the best. If someone were to
ask Trump why he has such an old plane he would have a total melt down.

Trump's weaknesses are so obvious that he's going to be played like a
violin by every crooked lobbyist and pol in Washington.

[Dene]

The thing with Trump, he's (allegedly) a billionaire like new NBA players
are millionaires--all flash and gold toilet seats. So yeah, Trump has a
757, but it's 25 years old. He bought it used and had the interior
reskinned, kind of like what you would do with an old car when you can't
afford a new one.

Because, trust me, if Trump could afford a new jet he would be holding
press conferences on the damned thing bragging about how every single
feature was the latest and the greatest and the best. If someone were to
ask Trump why he has such an old plane he would have a total melt down.

Trump's weaknesses are so obvious that he's going to be played like a
violin by every crooked lobbyist and pol in Washington.

-------------

According to wiki, he has a net worth of 4.3 billion. Even if it was just a billion, it makes no sense that he became president to grease his pockets.

-Greg

[Alan Baker]

And how do you know he even has just a billion?

Answer: you don't.

[John B.]

That's all you've got?

[John B.]

He did write it, according to Sean Spicer. That's why it was full of
lies.

[Carbon]

On 01/21/2017 01:20 PM, Dene wrote:

>> The thing with Trump, he's (allegedly) a billionaire like new NBA
>> players are millionaires--all flash and gold toilet seats. So yeah,
>> Trump has a 757, but it's 25 years old. He bought it used and had the
>> interior reskinned, kind of like what you would do with an old car when
>> you can't afford a new one.
>>
>> Because, trust me, if Trump could afford a new jet he would be holding
>> press conferences on the damned thing bragging about how every single
>> feature was the latest and the greatest and the best. If someone were
>> to ask Trump why he has such an old plane he would have a total melt
>> down.
>>
>> Trump's weaknesses are so obvious that he's going to be played like a
>> violin by every crooked lobbyist and pol in Washington.
>

> According to wiki, he has a net worth of 4.3 billion. Even if it was
> just a billion, it makes no sense that he became president to grease his
> pockets.

Trump gave up trying to be a legitimate businessman a long time ago. Now
he gets by licensing his name to the suckers.

[MNMikeW]

John B. wrote:

>
> It was the worst inauguration speech I've ever heard -- poorly written,
> full of platitudes, belligerent and loaded with ridiculous assertions.
> Our schools are so bad that students "have been deprived of all knowledge"?
> "American carnage"? It was the same alarmist, hateful shit he said over
> and over during the campaign and the America he described bears no
> resemblance to the real thing. If I didn't know better, I'd have
> thought he was talking about El Salvador.
>

He didn't mention himself 60 times like Obama loves to do.

[MNMikeW]

Where Boingboing again?

[MNMikeW]

John B. wrote:
I hoped
> he wouldn't continue to describe the US as a hellish
> place with criminal gangs roaming the streets and
> terrifying decent people,

Chicago says hi.

[MNMikeW]

He's lying again.

[MNMikeW]

Carbon wrote:
> On 01/20/2017 12:47 PM, Dene wrote:
>
>> I liked his speech, though I can imagine that the ex-presidents squirmed
>> a bit. Trump was true to himself and his message. You can't deny that
>> the man has guts. Quite refreshing in light of the years of empty
>> talk....on both sides.
>>
>> But....what really matters to me are not his words but what he SIGNS.
>>
>> Time to get to work and... make America first!!
>
> You should enjoy your irrational exuberance. The reality will set in soon
> enough.
>

#butthurt

[John B.]

That's one place.

[MNMikeW]

Detroit says hi.

[BobbyK]

He didn't have the time.

[BobbyK]

Chicago is the U.S.?

[Dene]

The Blue Wall says hi too!

-Greg

[BobbyK]

On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 09:22:14 -0800 (PST), Dene <gds...@aol.com>
wrote:

Are you actually saying that you think that the U.S. is how Trump
described it? A hellish place? I don't know about Arizona but Texas
isn't.

Try to be reasonable once in a while.

[Moderate]

BobbyK <bkn...@Conramp.net> Wrote in message:

> Are you actually saying that you think that the U.S. is how Trump
> described it? A hellish place? I don't know about Arizona but Texas
> isn't.
>
> Try to be reasonable once in a while.
>

Texas is run by Republicans.
--

[Dene]

The Blue Wall voted for Trump....right. Why?

Is it not because of crime in the urban areas and closed factories and dying towns across the Midwest?

You have a more "reasonable" answer, give it to me. BTW...neither Texas nor Az. ever had bastions of factories....but both states have significant issues with illegals. Correct? Perhaps it's "reasonable" to assume that border protection is a big deal to our states...and a key reason why Trump got their votes.

California voted for HRC, because half the damn state is on the public dole. There is your 3 million votes. Had California been important in terms of the electoral equation, Trump would have campaigned there.

-Greg

[Alan Baker]

Cite...

[Alan Baker]

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70hIxu4WCmM>