Trump's Lies

PkrBum wrote:You're really good at proving my points... lol. Keep up the good work Vlad.

PkrBum wrote:Yet the Obama and admin lies never caused a blip on your radar... odd.



Just kidding... not odd at all... lol.




http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/statements/byruling/false/

PkrBum wrote:It's highly unlikely that politico gathered all of Obama's lies... but I've give you that trump might lie more. Yet you only seen offended by one of them. Why? His personality was well known prior to being elected. I'll assume that those that voted for him accepted that. Is that what you did for Obama?

del.capslock wrote:

PkrBum wrote:It's highly unlikely that politico gathered all of Obama's lies... but I've give you that trump might lie more. Yet you only seen offended by one of them. Why? His personality was well known prior to being elected. I'll assume that those that voted for him accepted that. Is that what you did for Obama?

Do you not know the difference between Politico and Politifact?

Aha! That explains a lot. No wonder your opinions are so childish, you're not ready for grown-up media.

Back to the children's table, little boy, you're annoying the adults.

PkrBum wrote:

del.capslock wrote:

PkrBum wrote:It's highly unlikely that politico gathered all of Obama's lies... but I've give you that trump might lie more. Yet you only seen offended by one of them. Why? His personality was well known prior to being elected. I'll assume that those that voted for him accepted that. Is that what you did for Obama?

Do you not know the difference between Politico and Politifact?

Aha! That explains a lot. No wonder your opinions are so childish, you're not ready for grown-up media.

Back to the children's table, little boy, you're annoying the adults.

What a tiny little mind. I hope your joy over a mistake lasts all night.

Wordslinger wrote:

Again you make no sense at all.  You imply that if one is  a fan of Obama that person should be punished for not being "fair" to Trump, and vice versa.  

I'll be glad to educate  you since you are so obviously challenged by the two party concept under which we elect our leaders.  Of course if someone likes
Trump than Obama's the enemy, right.  And it works the other way around too.

I don't worship at Obama's shrine, but as a national leader, compared to the Pussy Grabber with the dead rat on his head, we at least had elegance, emotional control, and dignity.  

With Trump, every moment he keeps his thumb off the nuclear war and total world destruction button, is all good.  

You expect us to respect Trump because he and his Russian friends stole the presidency, and to treat his tweets as executive pronouncements deserving of fair judgement.

And you sir, are totally fucking insane too.

Wordslinger wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

del.capslock wrote:

PkrBum wrote:It's highly unlikely that politico gathered all of Obama's lies... but I've give you that trump might lie more. Yet you only seen offended by one of them. Why? His personality was well known prior to being elected. I'll assume that those that voted for him accepted that. Is that what you did for Obama?

Do you not know the difference between Politico and Politifact?

Aha! That explains a lot. No wonder your opinions are so childish, you're not ready for grown-up media.

Back to the children's table, little boy, you're annoying the adults.

What a tiny little mind. I hope your joy over a mistake lasts all night.

Again you make no sense at all.  You imply that if one is  a fan of Obama that person should be punished for not being "fair" to Trump, and vice versa.  

I'll be glad to educate  you since you are so obviously challenged by the two party concept under which we elect our leaders.  Of course if someone likes
Trump than Obama's the enemy, right.  And it works the other way around too.

I don't worship at Obama's shrine, but as a national leader, compared to the Pussy Grabber with the dead rat on his head, we at least had elegance, emotional control, and dignity.  

With Trump, every moment he keeps his thumb off the nuclear war and total world destruction button, is all good.  

You expect us to respect Trump because he and his Russian friends stole the presidency, and to treat his tweets as executive pronouncements deserving of fair judgement.

And you sir, are totally fucking insane too.

PkrBum wrote:
Obama was a fucking wimp... completely overmatched... run over by nearly every deal and negotiation. Easily the worst negotiator potus ever. I wouldn't let him by a used car for me. The rest of your word vomit is just stupid. Elegant? Lmao... ok clown. Comrades are so damn easy.

PkrBum wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

del.capslock wrote:

PkrBum wrote:It's highly unlikely that politico gathered all of Obama's lies... but I've give you that trump might lie more. Yet you only seen offended by one of them. Why? His personality was well known prior to being elected. I'll assume that those that voted for him accepted that. Is that what you did for Obama?

Do you not know the difference between Politico and Politifact?

Aha! That explains a lot. No wonder your opinions are so childish, you're not ready for grown-up media.

Back to the children's table, little boy, you're annoying the adults.

What a tiny little mind. I hope your joy over a mistake lasts all night.

Again you make no sense at all.  You imply that if one is  a fan of Obama that person should be punished for not being "fair" to Trump, and vice versa.  

I'll be glad to educate  you since you are so obviously challenged by the two party concept under which we elect our leaders.  Of course if someone likes
Trump than Obama's the enemy, right.  And it works the other way around too.

I don't worship at Obama's shrine, but as a national leader, compared to the Pussy Grabber with the dead rat on his head, we at least had elegance, emotional control, and dignity.  

With Trump, every moment he keeps his thumb off the nuclear war and total world destruction button, is all good.  

You expect us to respect Trump because he and his Russian friends stole the presidency, and to treat his tweets as executive pronouncements deserving of fair judgement.

And you sir, are totally fucking insane too.

Obama was a fucking wimp... completely overmatched... run over by nearly every deal and negotiation. Easily the worst negotiator potus ever. I wouldn't let him by a used car for me. The rest of your word vomit is just stupid. Elegant? Lmao... ok clown. Comrades are so damn easy.

PkrBum wrote:It's highly unlikely that politico gathered all of Obama's lies... but I've give you that trump might lie more.

Politifact was the reference you brought up. I used exactly the same time period as nearly as possible, to compare the two presidents. Yes, I'm sure in both cases they did not gather all the lies. Given the list posted by the NYT's we can see that this is certainly the case with Trump.


Yet you only seen offended by one of them. Why?
A bit of exaggeration to make a point is one thing and would be accepted by most people as being part of the job of president. However, the problem with our current leader is that his lies are so frequent and obviously false that his behavior is bringing his general honesty into question around the world. Leaders are wondering if he/we can be counted on in times of crises. His lies have risen to the level of concern that undermines the office of president itself. That has never been the case with any past president.

His personality was well known prior to being elected. I'll assume that those that voted for him accepted that. Is that what you did for Obama?

PkrBum wrote:I don't hate him at all. Trying to assign that to me is simply a tactic to ignore my criticism.

del.capslock wrote:

PkrBum wrote:I don't hate him at all. Trying to assign that to me is simply a tactic to ignore my criticism.

Racists are so ashamed of their philosophy they refuse to admit they hold those views outside of a KKK meeting.

Ignorant hillbillies are easy...                      lol.

othershoe1030 wrote:Inspired by the president's unfortunate Tweet this morning...Many in congress posted words to the effect: Just stop it!

It would be nice to see posts here defending positions (on both sides) without resorting to name calling, which does not add to the point being made. I know just posting this will not change anything, just venting.

del.capslock wrote:

othershoe1030 wrote:Inspired by the president's unfortunate Tweet this morning...Many in congress posted words to the effect: Just stop it!

It would be nice to see posts here defending positions (on both sides) without resorting to name calling, which does not add to the point being made. I know just posting this will not change anything, just venting.

It would be nice if there was ONE poster offering intelligent commentary from the right, but there's not. There are plenty of great editorialists like Bill Kristol and George Will who offer smart, cogent conservative opinions. Instead, on this section, the right posts stuff like this:

Obama was a fucking wimp... completely overmatched... run over by nearly every deal and negotiation. Easily the worst negotiator potus ever. I wouldn't let him by a used car for me. The rest of your word vomit is just stupid. Elegant? Lmao... ok clown. Comrades are so damn easy.

Or:

Or the leftist ruling elite... like podesta and the obamacaid architects... lol.

They couldn't accomplish anything without the useful idiots.

Thank you for your contribution Vladimir.


That's inherently insulting and provocative rhetoric and there's absolutely no point in responding to it with a logical, thoughtful argument. When people post stuff like that they're beyond reason--the only useful response is to post insults to infuriate them further.

What's your suggestion? What do you think--up in your ivory tower--an appropriate response to repeated posts of "Comrades are easy...     lol" should be? This is an internet politics forum after all--half the point is the clever riposte.

As James Carville put it "You have to have sharp elbows if you want to change something."

PkrBum wrote:

del.capslock wrote:

PkrBum wrote:I don't hate him at all. Trying to assign that to me is simply a tactic to ignore my criticism.

Racists are so ashamed of their philosophy they refuse to admit they hold those views outside of a KKK meeting.

Ignorant hillbillies are easy...                      lol.

My children are mixed...  as were my marriages... duh. I like and think all ethnicities are beautiful... I'm actually more attracted to other cultures than my own. Growing up with Hispanic friends, gfs, and first wife was amazing. They are so close and show it so easily... I've lived my family life like that sense. You're just a goober... unable to really listen because you're too busy talking or thinking of what to say next. I do have bias towards YOUR type... I'm sorry but i can't help that. So fuck off... i ignore you most of the time.

Vikingwoman wrote:Now what's his point in doing this?

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/time-asks-donald-trump-s-golf-clubs-remove-phony-magazine-n777546

del.capslock wrote:

othershoe1030 wrote:Inspired by the president's unfortunate Tweet this morning...Many in congress posted words to the effect: Just stop it!

It would be nice to see posts here defending positions (on both sides) without resorting to name calling, which does not add to the point being made. I know just posting this will not change anything, just venting.

It would be nice if there was ONE poster offering intelligent commentary from the right, but there's not. There are plenty of great editorialists like Bill Kristol and George Will who offer smart, cogent conservative opinions. Instead, on this section, the right posts stuff like this:

Obama was a fucking wimp... completely overmatched... run over by nearly every deal and negotiation. Easily the worst negotiator potus ever. I wouldn't let him by a used car for me. The rest of your word vomit is just stupid. Elegant? Lmao... ok clown. Comrades are so damn easy.

Or:

Or the leftist ruling elite... like podesta and the obamacaid architects... lol.

They couldn't accomplish anything without the useful idiots.

Thank you for your contribution Vladimir.


That's inherently insulting and provocative rhetoric and there's absolutely no point in responding to it with a logical, thoughtful argument. When people post stuff like that they're beyond reason--the only useful response is to post insults to infuriate them further.

What's your suggestion? What do you think--up in your ivory tower--an appropriate response to repeated posts of "Comrades are easy...     lol" should be? This is an internet politics forum after all--half the point is the clever riposte.

As James Carville put it "You have to have sharp elbows if you want to change something."

othershoe1030 wrote:
I don't mind sharp elbows or daggers in the heart or whatever. I have laughed out loud many times at some of the creative and well deserved names (especially) those on the right fringe have been called.

I just think it reduces the power of any point we make by including a "hillbilly this or a f-wad that" to the response. How does naming the other guy make our response more valid? It does not. However, I admit, sainthood notwithstanding, that MANY times I have written some well deserved name calling into my answers and then deleted them. It was cathartic at any rate.

I find the Comrade tag stupid, too stupid to even be insulting, so uninformed and childish.

If they had a good point to make they could make it without Trying to Insult us. My dad had a joke that went something like this: There was a preacher who would write in the margin of his sermon WEAK POINT, YELL LOUD. Or to this topic, weak point and add an insult? Please keep it up though because we do need some comic relief from this Putrid and Disgusting Excuse for a President that we are cursed to have in office.

del.capslock wrote:His intent is to solely provoke not to make a reasoned argument.

RealLindaL wrote:

del.capslock wrote:His intent is to solely provoke not to make a reasoned argument.

But it's not solely to provoke, I don't believe.  Don't discount also the strong need some have to assert their superiority even when it's all nothing but one big web of self-delusional talking points.

del.capslock wrote:

RealLindaL wrote:

del.capslock wrote:His intent is to solely provoke not to make a reasoned argument.

But it's not solely to provoke, I don't believe.  Don't discount also the strong need some have to assert their superiority even when it's all nothing but one big web of self-delusional talking points.

Good point, that might very well be part of it. Masking insecurity or inferiority  might be a component as well. It's probably more complicated than just provocation.