Search options (Page 32 of 58)

vern wrote:

Charles_F_Bell wrote:

It's not that Trump has always been right; it's that his political opposition of any Party has always been wrong.

A couple neglects to latch the bedroom door before engaging in vertical exercise, and their child walks in and sees everything.

GOP/DEM/LIB/GREEN/VERN : What an abuse of children! Why, we would never!

Trump: It's embarrassing, and one is regretful; mind your own effing business!

"A COUNTRY WITH NO BORDERS ISN'T A COUNTRY." 

That alone, spoken by no politician in the U.S. for generations, deserves him the Presidency.

You call that an argument/rebuttal? Geez. The blue stuff doesn't even make sense within any context of this discussion or possibly otherwise. And a country by definition has borders even if The Donald doesn't/can't see them.

This is exactly why Trump's opposition within any Party is always wrong. You're like drug addicts or psychopaths: whatever it is, deny, deny, deny. There are borders only if the administrative government forbids passage of every unauthorized person, so a statement that "The Donald doesn't see them" is some delusional allegation of an irrelevant charge.

vern wrote:

Building a wall around a country which serves no useful purpose is more of a prison than a natural border.

Whether by Rome or by China, walls worked for the purpose of establishing and maintaining borders so long as the concept that no unauthorized person may enter. Walls, and by "walls" it is meant any personal, physical, or electronic prevention, can only work if the concept of unauthorized person remains corresponding to reality, and only Trump as Presidential candidate is smart and sober enough to know that. The concept of open borders, that effectively there is or ought to be no unauthorized person to enter and reside in a sovereign nation, is to destroy that sovereign nation. International socialism either of the coercive kind (communism, anarcho-libertarianism) or the insidious kind (George Soros' Open Society and other sorts of collectivist anarchism), Islamic expansionist jihadism, in establishing caliphates regardless of nationality, or merely utilitarian expansion of a slave class has a vested interest in diminishing or destroying U.S. national sovereignty. And then there are the drug addicts, psychopaths, and the stupid like you who are delusional.

What would your wife or 19-year-old daughter say if you 'forbade' her to interview with Trump, or Clinton, or a charismatic governor or mayor?  Isn't the freedom to make choices (and thus mistakes) central to feminism?

I would hope my wife/daughter/sister were self-aware enough to avoid fascination with wealth and power, and to control the messages they put out in response to it,

vern wrote:

Charles F Bell wrote:

At which point, by action, the braggadocio, then and only then, becomes relevant.  But through the last 40 years of Trump's life, no such accusation ever came forward until three weeks before a Presidential election (and uncorroborated) - unlike for Bill Clinton, and, by the way, for Bill Cosby where all along through decades there had been some accusations of indecent conduct.

The assertion that nothing has shown up over the past 40 years until the current round being decried as politically motivated is simply incorrect as any reasonably competent research would show.

There is no research that anyone has competently accused Tump of sexual misconduct prior to this time when anyone can accuse him while shielded from suit for slander because of his candidacy..

vern wrote:

There is no defense for Trump or those who support him on this count. Take care. Vern

The defense is that he has not done anything wrong.

Can an employee in the Oval Office be considered a freely consenting partner?  What about Gennifer Flowers?

I think the contest should be physical.

vern wrote:

Since there seems to be quite a bit of discussion on site about genre and the attention each gets or doesn't get or even what is part and parcel to a particular genre, then perhaps a contest where one must pick three (3) genre from a list provided by Sol for the contest and incorporate elements of each within the story. Many, if not most, stories already contain elements of more than one genre, so such a contest might prove helpful to those who are reluctant to read or write a specific genre. You might even add the caveat (or not) that the author must denote (as a footnote) where/how in the story each genre is represented with the judge(s) to determine the effectiveness of each genre in the story along with the overall quality of the story. Too complicated? Well, it is a contest to hopefully decode the secret of writing a good story. Take care. Vern

Nice one Vern. Although I think there may already be an image that encompasses this suggestion in its entirety.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/or … cf3ef8.gif