– Liked her comment at the end on women.
– She skewered him on his taxes.
– Had to laugh at his comment about learning about minorities – “little while.”
– The birther argument was award winning for HRC.
– Iraq troop withdrawal was a point scored by her.
– Trump stiffing workers
– Trump: Profiling is not unconstitutional?
Warren the State Department system that her critics insist she should have been using INSTEAD was definitely hacked. While there is no evidence that her system actually was.
The question is why the House is so consumed with a theoretical risk when the reality was so much worse. http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/state-department-hack-worst-ever/
“Federal law enforcement, intelligence and congressional officials briefed on the investigation say the hack of the State email system is the “worst ever” cyberattack intrusion against a federal agency. The attackers who breached State are also believed to be behind hacks on the White House’s email system, and against several other federal agencies, the officials say.”
“Clinton private email use is that it was likely less secure than emailing within the State Department’s system. But the hack shows that State’s system has major security issues. The State system, investigators believe, was compromised in the past year, likely after Clinton left the State Department.
Last November, the State Department shut down its email system over a weekend to try to improve security and block the intruders.
At the time, the agency tried to send a re-assuring message that “activity of concern” by possible hackers only affected its unclassified email system.
But officials say that even a breach of the unclassified system poses major security risks, because sensitive information of value to foreign intelligence agencies is routinely shared in non-classified emails.”
Only 75% of Breitbart readers thought Trump won. When you have lost 25% of the alt-right/mouth breathers/kook-aid (sic) drinkers you are doing something wrong.
(and)
“Fox News – Pundits said Mr Trump had “struggled”, “never took control” and “failed to exploit” the issue around Mrs Clinton’s emails. “It helps to be prepared,” one writer told the Republican candidate.”
Lets say anyone who has gone long on Trump in the markets might want to consider laying off some of that or buying some shorts on the side.
[PLus like Trump I could say some bad stuff but like him will hold back because it wouldn’t be nice to suggest that he had post-nasal drip from all the coke he snorted before the debate, probably off the breast of some OTHER hooker. No that would be rude and un-called for. So I won’t go there.]
To a reasonable undecided voter it was a no brainer but Trump’s supporters are not reasonable or undecided. The real question is whether young people will recognize that their futures are likely to be vastly better if Hillary wins than if Trump does. The older voters who are unhappy with their lives want to blow everything up believing– wrongly– that their lives can not get worse. Young voters are not ready to throw in the towel but have not concluded just how important it is to their future and the country’s that Trump not become president. I hope that a lot of them got the message last night, but I will not hold my breath.
The problem is that there is a significant number of voters for whom the economy just hasn’t been working over the last xx years. Trump has a narrative explanation (bad trade deals bad politicians) and he says that he is different. And because these people are desperate, they are willing to take a chance on him. While Hillary needed to seem presidential without being bitchy (which she accomplished IMHO) to win over a good number of those desperate voters, Trump only needed to come across as “not dangerously unhinged.” which I think he managed.
No, that was the pre-debate CW. But it turns out that he also needed to come off as not a complete buffoon. He didn’t meet either challenge, in my opinion.
All the people who continue to comment everyday about Trump this or that are totally missing the much bigger and far more important picture of who said what in a tit for tat debate that actually and really never goes into any depth of any main issues and their root causes . Yesterday I shared a piece on the bio of Mr. George Soros with Bruce Webb and asked him to share it with all AB readers-bloggers because it totally explains the root cause to many of the problems we face as a society-nation today. Mr. Webb chose not to share the bio here for some reason but says he is a follower and believer of Soros ideals. You can see the bio for yourself from Mr. Steve Kroft at 60 minutes news. This piece alone explains why the DNC and HRC and Obama are so corrupt in principle and have blind eye leadership with their fake and phony shadow government. I hope Trump gets much tuffer with HRC next time as he should have last night rather than trying to be so politically correct as she is and ony talking about non issue of no real significance ….Remember is a corporation makes no proft, they pay no taxes. trump filed for bankruptcy several times so not taxes would be paid for those years. That is all trump as a brand is trying to hide as he uses OPM and the legal bankruptcy laws. This and the other pointed questions only to trump are mot the main issues the American people should be discussing or never gets dicsussed in any format….
i just wondered if some honest economists looked hard at Trump’s proposal to cut taxes on corporations to see if it could actually work. personally i don’t think it could, but i don’t know all that much. the “analyses” i hear are at the least too obviously politically motivated on the one hand, and too obviously ideologically motivated on the other hand, or just hand waving by the people who think economic “laws” are valid in the real world.
similarly i wonder if anyone, giving Trump the benefit of every possible doubt, could look at Trump’s claims about the mishandling of the Iraq adventure et seq and say that he has a point.
i didn’t like the debate much. neither candidate gave me any reason to hope for intelligent or decent policies if they won the election.
speaking as an older person, i wonder if i don’t detect a bit of racism (“ageism”) in your comment. i am not desperate and i am not undecided.
and while i think you are on pretty safe grounds calling other people unreasonable, you are on treacherous ground if you think of yourself as reasonable.
as for people getting the message about Trump, I wouldn’t hold my breath either. I think Jefferson thought that “educated” voters was not the point… education too easily means indoctrination or adherence to a “true belief.” he thought (i think) that if people just vote “where it hurts” the system will tend to correct itself. i think he may have been right, though at any given time nothing is going to be good enough that most of us will believe that anything has corrected itself, and some of us will be in great fear about what those demanding change will actually bring down on our heads.
Coberly, I am a 64 year old white male and in the distinct minority of that demographic who opposes Trump and therefore supports Hillary by default. I am highly educated with college and post graduate degrees, but have never completely lost touch with non college white males who I grew up with including many relatives. Some are simply racists to whom Trump is a Messiah. Others have some doubts about Trump but have been told by talk radio that every failure in their lives is due to Hillary Clinton and the “black guy” that the Democrats put in the White House. They are not really so stupid and ignorant to believe that Trump will improve their lot, but they are so angry with how their lives turned out they simply do not care. They truly feel “what the hell do I have to lose”. Actually quite a lot, but they do not get that. That group is balanced out by the black and Hispanic vote and perhaps a few more white women supporting Hillary than white men and leaving the deciding votes in the hands of the under 30 crowd. If they turnout for Hillary like they did for Obama she wins in a landslide and states like Georgia, Arizona and even Texas are in play. Right now the polls suggest they are flirting with Johnson and Stein or simply too unmotivated to make it to the polls, but they will have the most to lose if Trump wins because they have more of their lives ahead of them than me and my cohort. If that observation is ageism, I plead guilty. I just hate to see old angry white men screw things up for young people. I felt that is what they did in the 1960’s and 1970’s in this country when I was young and I see them potentially doing it again now that I am their age. The young can prevent that from happening but as someone who voted for Anderson in 1980 I know how young people can cast votes that make them feel good but which make no sense for the country or for their own futures
i screwed up my own life when i was young. as did most of my peers.
on the other hand i missed out on Vietnam which arguably was an old-guy screwup. (with lots of help from ambitious and willing young guys.)
your note addressed to me lacks the fault of your first note which i was complaining about not so much because you hurt my feelings as because you lose the vote of those old white guys by talking about them as though they were all the same, and all at fault, and of course as though “the young” were completely without blame .
one reason us old guys get the way we do is because of watching how badly young guys behave.
anyway, thanks for the reply. your second note sounded a good deal more thoughtful than the first. i don’t think it pays to think of people in vast generalizations, but it’s such an easy thing to fall into that maybe pointing it out to yourself from time to time will lead to some fresh thoughts.
It is fine with me that you have your own opinions on the candidates. That is certainly your right.
What I find repulsive, and indicative of a diseased mind, is your constant referral to processes and facts you obviously know nothing about.
You stated:
“as she is and ony talking about non issue of no real significance ….Remember is a corporation makes no proft, they pay no taxes. trump filed for bankruptcy several times so not taxes would be paid for those years.”
This demonstrates a stupidity that is so immense that I feel you have said something you know is ridiculously wrong, that I cannot imagine there is anyone does not know it is pure spin. And spin that only an imbecile would listen to. Which might be the average Trump voter.
No one, and I mean no one, is interested in the corporate tax returns of Trump. Maybe they should be, but they aren’t. And to suggest that he pays no income taxes because six(is that right?) of his corporations declared bankruptcy is beyond the pale.
It is his personal returns that people want to see. His personal income tax return has nothing to do with his corporations’ problems other than his income might(and neither you nor I know this) might have been changed by those corporations’ problems.
So which is it?
Are you so stupid you cannot figure this out, or are you so demented you think others cannot figure out these simple facts?
i don’t know if your “facts” are correct and Ryans are wrong, but the degree of personal insult here is not called for.
I think you would help make your own case if you moderated your contempt for the people you disagree with.
Even is some think I say it as one who shouldn’t. I do believe there is a difference. I can’t expect any one to agree with me, I can only suggest the possibility.
Coberly I agree in principle. But Ryan’s facts are in fact pure hooey. For example corporations do not pay tax on profits, they pay taxes on income. And some of the cash money drawn out by owners comes out pre-corporate tax and is taxable to the person as employee of the corporation. Trump could and by all accounts did pay himself and his other companies handsomely (for management fees etc) from corporations that might in that same year have been reorganized in bankruptcy. In fact it is perfectly possible for such an owner to structure the bankruptcy in ways that maintain his superior creditor position in bankruptcy. Because stockholders get wiped out or nearly even as holders of receivables from that company may not and as bondholders may not. In some cases they may have to take a haircut but are not in the same position as straight out stockholders.
Ryan has a tendency to swallow material whole from what I consider to be very doubtful sources and then vomit them forth. It is unclear which side he falls on my favorite trope “Fool or Knave” (where the Fool is unwitting while the Knave is lying, but often to the same effect on the listener).
That said I would not use “repulsive” or “depraved”. One because it doesn’t advance the overall argument. And two because Bill Ryan and I have a reasonably polite e-mail correspondence going on. But I am not going to condemn EMichael out of hand here.
i really do know nothing about bankruptcy law… in EMichaels world this demonstrates a stupidity so immense…. i tend to believe what you say because you are pretty reliable, and also because it agrees with my vague perception of things.
nor do I condemn EMichael, though i have noticed his (her?) over the top vituperation many times, including those directed at me… i assume because in reading something i said, she heard the echos of her own mind….
this last just pushed me to comment. not condemn. life is too short.
My original post said nothing directly or personally to EMiachel. So the personal attack to me represents the fact that I have many times commented hit a nerve that many at AB cannot rationalize or acknowledge or accept in any reasonable-professional manor. Therefore they release their pit bulls to counter in any possible way to remove the person or topic they disagree with a hateful -disgraceful rebuttal. In some parlance another or different opinion or view would be welcome even if not totally correct in technicality…As I have said my source was from the award winning program and reporter from 60 minutes new program ,Mr. Steve Kroft investigative reporting. I did not make this stuff up so please restrain your pit bulls on me because the facts do speak for themselves and cannot be swept under the rug as HRC and EMichael would like to be able to do….
Sometimes people do not fit into the overall environment of a place. No one has unleased the dogs of hell upon you, you have made your own hell by having an opinion conflicting with the majority of readers and commenters here. You definitely have a choice to make as to whether you can fit here or not. Bruce trashing a comment of yours is not done or taken lightly. This has nothing to do with the politics of the day either.
Bill read the following and understand why people are pissed at you jumping so hard on the Fool side of the Fool or Knave conundrum. You bit. Hard. So to us you bite. Hard. http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/oneevilhuman.asp
“Origins: The text reproduced above is the introductory section of an Internet-circulated version of a critical article about Hungarian-American business magnate George Soros. Although the piece has long been distributed with an introduction attributing authorship to CBS 60 Minutes correspondent Steve Kroft, he did not write any portion of it. The original was an article penned by Jim O’Neill and published on 15 September 2009 under the title “Soros: Republic Enemy #1.” (That original version drew its information from a variety of sources which are hyperlinked within the article itself.)
The confusion arose because the original quoted a few lines from Steve Kroft’s interview with George Soros for the 20 December 1998 broadcast of 60 Minutes, and somewhere along the line a reader mistook that as an indication Kroft was the author of the entire article. ”
Do your effing homework. And don’t accuse US of ignoring sources.
If you had actually written about the effects of bankruptcy law with no knowledge of that law, than I would have criticized you.
WR,
I attacked your incorrect babbling as either ignorance or an ignoring of the truth. You want to take that as a personal attack? I would suggest you take it as constructive criticism; learn some facts; and tell the truth.
I notice in your response you refuse to address your error(Trump, much?) and then make it worse by blaming your errors on 60 minutes and Steve Croft.
Kinda strange you include no link to this 60 minute conclusion. And I am certain that is the case because there is no way in the world the writers at 60 minutes are going to conflate corporate bankruptcies with personal taxes.
While you all conflate the premise of what I said in technicality . You all miss the bigger point and issue of what is really important ias to the 5 why’s and root causes of our many sociaty ills.Who is actually at the controls of the DNC and their philosophy and policies? Not Obama or HRC the phony fake leaders. This is not about me in any way nor should it be. I’m a nobody just as you all are. This is all about the oligarch (Soros) who has control of our government that you do not openly and objectively. want to talk about. This is the same stupid strategy that HRC and the MSNM is using when she will not discuss and real or any serious issues of the American people, only side bar issues about what Trump said or who he may have insulted many years ago. I’m sure that if one connects the dots that (you cannot) Obama was knowingly involved in many of the bad decisions that HRC made and would explain the off the record server,destruction of e-mails and many other illegal activities that he and she would not want to be tied to. These are by far more grievous and much more serious crimes that calling someone fat and ugly. But that is all you are worried about. Trump wants to take on Soros’s power and control of our government but not HRC or Obama. Too many at this blog cannot see the forest for the leaves because they want to believe that what they believe is right and refuse to look at the much bigger picture of what is really happening to our country…
You don’t know shit about Soros. You just think you do because you have linked to some plausible anti-semitic crap about him.
Cut through the rhetoric on Soros and it breaks into two pieces: one he gives money to Democrats, and two to the alt-right he is just the same filthy Jew banker Nazis like them have been ranting about for two centuries now.
The “bigger point” is that you have bit on Reichnut propaganda. BTW Trump LOVES billionaires, he has no reason or history in going after the finance types that after all fund his buildings. Or other people’s buildings with his name on them. You are delusional. And to that degree it is TOTALLY about you.
At least you could have stopped somewhere in “your rambling, incoherent response” and admitted, and apologized for, your totally incorrect comment on Trump’s personal income tax payments.
But doing so would probably have forced you to turn in your KK, err, Alt-R, err, trump card.
NOW she’s concerned about cyber hacking?
Bev:
– Liked her comment at the end on women.
– She skewered him on his taxes.
– Had to laugh at his comment about learning about minorities – “little while.”
– The birther argument was award winning for HRC.
– Iraq troop withdrawal was a point scored by her.
– Trump stiffing workers
– Trump: Profiling is not unconstitutional?
He was stumbling all over himself.
Warren the State Department system that her critics insist she should have been using INSTEAD was definitely hacked. While there is no evidence that her system actually was.
The question is why the House is so consumed with a theoretical risk when the reality was so much worse.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/state-department-hack-worst-ever/
“Federal law enforcement, intelligence and congressional officials briefed on the investigation say the hack of the State email system is the “worst ever” cyberattack intrusion against a federal agency. The attackers who breached State are also believed to be behind hacks on the White House’s email system, and against several other federal agencies, the officials say.”
“Clinton private email use is that it was likely less secure than emailing within the State Department’s system. But the hack shows that State’s system has major security issues. The State system, investigators believe, was compromised in the past year, likely after Clinton left the State Department.
Last November, the State Department shut down its email system over a weekend to try to improve security and block the intruders.
At the time, the agency tried to send a re-assuring message that “activity of concern” by possible hackers only affected its unclassified email system.
But officials say that even a breach of the unclassified system poses major security risks, because sensitive information of value to foreign intelligence agencies is routinely shared in non-classified emails.”
Trump: “I have got the best temperment!”
Inigo Montoya: “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
Now here is a left field number. via BBC
Only 75% of Breitbart readers thought Trump won. When you have lost 25% of the alt-right/mouth breathers/kook-aid (sic) drinkers you are doing something wrong.
(and)
“Fox News – Pundits said Mr Trump had “struggled”, “never took control” and “failed to exploit” the issue around Mrs Clinton’s emails. “It helps to be prepared,” one writer told the Republican candidate.”
Lets say anyone who has gone long on Trump in the markets might want to consider laying off some of that or buying some shorts on the side.
[PLus like Trump I could say some bad stuff but like him will hold back because it wouldn’t be nice to suggest that he had post-nasal drip from all the coke he snorted before the debate, probably off the breast of some OTHER hooker. No that would be rude and un-called for. So I won’t go there.]
To a reasonable undecided voter it was a no brainer but Trump’s supporters are not reasonable or undecided. The real question is whether young people will recognize that their futures are likely to be vastly better if Hillary wins than if Trump does. The older voters who are unhappy with their lives want to blow everything up believing– wrongly– that their lives can not get worse. Young voters are not ready to throw in the towel but have not concluded just how important it is to their future and the country’s that Trump not become president. I hope that a lot of them got the message last night, but I will not hold my breath.
Best line: Just listen to that.
The problem is that there is a significant number of voters for whom the economy just hasn’t been working over the last xx years. Trump has a narrative explanation (bad trade deals bad politicians) and he says that he is different. And because these people are desperate, they are willing to take a chance on him. While Hillary needed to seem presidential without being bitchy (which she accomplished IMHO) to win over a good number of those desperate voters, Trump only needed to come across as “not dangerously unhinged.” which I think he managed.
No, that was the pre-debate CW. But it turns out that he also needed to come off as not a complete buffoon. He didn’t meet either challenge, in my opinion.
All the people who continue to comment everyday about Trump this or that are totally missing the much bigger and far more important picture of who said what in a tit for tat debate that actually and really never goes into any depth of any main issues and their root causes . Yesterday I shared a piece on the bio of Mr. George Soros with Bruce Webb and asked him to share it with all AB readers-bloggers because it totally explains the root cause to many of the problems we face as a society-nation today. Mr. Webb chose not to share the bio here for some reason but says he is a follower and believer of Soros ideals. You can see the bio for yourself from Mr. Steve Kroft at 60 minutes news. This piece alone explains why the DNC and HRC and Obama are so corrupt in principle and have blind eye leadership with their fake and phony shadow government. I hope Trump gets much tuffer with HRC next time as he should have last night rather than trying to be so politically correct as she is and ony talking about non issue of no real significance ….Remember is a corporation makes no proft, they pay no taxes. trump filed for bankruptcy several times so not taxes would be paid for those years. That is all trump as a brand is trying to hide as he uses OPM and the legal bankruptcy laws. This and the other pointed questions only to trump are mot the main issues the American people should be discussing or never gets dicsussed in any format….
i just wondered if some honest economists looked hard at Trump’s proposal to cut taxes on corporations to see if it could actually work. personally i don’t think it could, but i don’t know all that much. the “analyses” i hear are at the least too obviously politically motivated on the one hand, and too obviously ideologically motivated on the other hand, or just hand waving by the people who think economic “laws” are valid in the real world.
similarly i wonder if anyone, giving Trump the benefit of every possible doubt, could look at Trump’s claims about the mishandling of the Iraq adventure et seq and say that he has a point.
i didn’t like the debate much. neither candidate gave me any reason to hope for intelligent or decent policies if they won the election.
Terry
speaking as an older person, i wonder if i don’t detect a bit of racism (“ageism”) in your comment. i am not desperate and i am not undecided.
and while i think you are on pretty safe grounds calling other people unreasonable, you are on treacherous ground if you think of yourself as reasonable.
as for people getting the message about Trump, I wouldn’t hold my breath either. I think Jefferson thought that “educated” voters was not the point… education too easily means indoctrination or adherence to a “true belief.” he thought (i think) that if people just vote “where it hurts” the system will tend to correct itself. i think he may have been right, though at any given time nothing is going to be good enough that most of us will believe that anything has corrected itself, and some of us will be in great fear about what those demanding change will actually bring down on our heads.
Coberly, I am a 64 year old white male and in the distinct minority of that demographic who opposes Trump and therefore supports Hillary by default. I am highly educated with college and post graduate degrees, but have never completely lost touch with non college white males who I grew up with including many relatives. Some are simply racists to whom Trump is a Messiah. Others have some doubts about Trump but have been told by talk radio that every failure in their lives is due to Hillary Clinton and the “black guy” that the Democrats put in the White House. They are not really so stupid and ignorant to believe that Trump will improve their lot, but they are so angry with how their lives turned out they simply do not care. They truly feel “what the hell do I have to lose”. Actually quite a lot, but they do not get that. That group is balanced out by the black and Hispanic vote and perhaps a few more white women supporting Hillary than white men and leaving the deciding votes in the hands of the under 30 crowd. If they turnout for Hillary like they did for Obama she wins in a landslide and states like Georgia, Arizona and even Texas are in play. Right now the polls suggest they are flirting with Johnson and Stein or simply too unmotivated to make it to the polls, but they will have the most to lose if Trump wins because they have more of their lives ahead of them than me and my cohort. If that observation is ageism, I plead guilty. I just hate to see old angry white men screw things up for young people. I felt that is what they did in the 1960’s and 1970’s in this country when I was young and I see them potentially doing it again now that I am their age. The young can prevent that from happening but as someone who voted for Anderson in 1980 I know how young people can cast votes that make them feel good but which make no sense for the country or for their own futures
Terry
i screwed up my own life when i was young. as did most of my peers.
on the other hand i missed out on Vietnam which arguably was an old-guy screwup. (with lots of help from ambitious and willing young guys.)
your note addressed to me lacks the fault of your first note which i was complaining about not so much because you hurt my feelings as because you lose the vote of those old white guys by talking about them as though they were all the same, and all at fault, and of course as though “the young” were completely without blame .
one reason us old guys get the way we do is because of watching how badly young guys behave.
anyway, thanks for the reply. your second note sounded a good deal more thoughtful than the first. i don’t think it pays to think of people in vast generalizations, but it’s such an easy thing to fall into that maybe pointing it out to yourself from time to time will lead to some fresh thoughts.
Mr. Ryan,
It is fine with me that you have your own opinions on the candidates. That is certainly your right.
What I find repulsive, and indicative of a diseased mind, is your constant referral to processes and facts you obviously know nothing about.
You stated:
“as she is and ony talking about non issue of no real significance ….Remember is a corporation makes no proft, they pay no taxes. trump filed for bankruptcy several times so not taxes would be paid for those years.”
This demonstrates a stupidity that is so immense that I feel you have said something you know is ridiculously wrong, that I cannot imagine there is anyone does not know it is pure spin. And spin that only an imbecile would listen to. Which might be the average Trump voter.
No one, and I mean no one, is interested in the corporate tax returns of Trump. Maybe they should be, but they aren’t. And to suggest that he pays no income taxes because six(is that right?) of his corporations declared bankruptcy is beyond the pale.
It is his personal returns that people want to see. His personal income tax return has nothing to do with his corporations’ problems other than his income might(and neither you nor I know this) might have been changed by those corporations’ problems.
So which is it?
Are you so stupid you cannot figure this out, or are you so demented you think others cannot figure out these simple facts?
Quite frankly, I think it is both.
EMichael
i don’t know if your “facts” are correct and Ryans are wrong, but the degree of personal insult here is not called for.
I think you would help make your own case if you moderated your contempt for the people you disagree with.
Even is some think I say it as one who shouldn’t. I do believe there is a difference. I can’t expect any one to agree with me, I can only suggest the possibility.
Coberly I agree in principle. But Ryan’s facts are in fact pure hooey. For example corporations do not pay tax on profits, they pay taxes on income. And some of the cash money drawn out by owners comes out pre-corporate tax and is taxable to the person as employee of the corporation. Trump could and by all accounts did pay himself and his other companies handsomely (for management fees etc) from corporations that might in that same year have been reorganized in bankruptcy. In fact it is perfectly possible for such an owner to structure the bankruptcy in ways that maintain his superior creditor position in bankruptcy. Because stockholders get wiped out or nearly even as holders of receivables from that company may not and as bondholders may not. In some cases they may have to take a haircut but are not in the same position as straight out stockholders.
Ryan has a tendency to swallow material whole from what I consider to be very doubtful sources and then vomit them forth. It is unclear which side he falls on my favorite trope “Fool or Knave” (where the Fool is unwitting while the Knave is lying, but often to the same effect on the listener).
That said I would not use “repulsive” or “depraved”. One because it doesn’t advance the overall argument. And two because Bill Ryan and I have a reasonably polite e-mail correspondence going on. But I am not going to condemn EMichael out of hand here.
And having read Bill’s response to all this I am afraid I had to consign it to the trash. Life too short.
Bruce:
Not sure what convinced Mr. Ryan the world is flat. Hopefully he comes back to the realization there is civilization out there.
“Fool or Knave” or “repulsive” or “depraved”
Seems synonymous to me.
Bruce has the advantage of a “polite e-mail correspondence” with Mr. Ryan that I do not have. I just have the hateful, fact free writings in here.
They are repulsive and depraved besides having no relation to truth.
Bruce
i really do know nothing about bankruptcy law… in EMichaels world this demonstrates a stupidity so immense…. i tend to believe what you say because you are pretty reliable, and also because it agrees with my vague perception of things.
nor do I condemn EMichael, though i have noticed his (her?) over the top vituperation many times, including those directed at me… i assume because in reading something i said, she heard the echos of her own mind….
this last just pushed me to comment. not condemn. life is too short.
My original post said nothing directly or personally to EMiachel. So the personal attack to me represents the fact that I have many times commented hit a nerve that many at AB cannot rationalize or acknowledge or accept in any reasonable-professional manor. Therefore they release their pit bulls to counter in any possible way to remove the person or topic they disagree with a hateful -disgraceful rebuttal. In some parlance another or different opinion or view would be welcome even if not totally correct in technicality…As I have said my source was from the award winning program and reporter from 60 minutes new program ,Mr. Steve Kroft investigative reporting. I did not make this stuff up so please restrain your pit bulls on me because the facts do speak for themselves and cannot be swept under the rug as HRC and EMichael would like to be able to do….
Sometimes people do not fit into the overall environment of a place. No one has unleased the dogs of hell upon you, you have made your own hell by having an opinion conflicting with the majority of readers and commenters here. You definitely have a choice to make as to whether you can fit here or not. Bruce trashing a comment of yours is not done or taken lightly. This has nothing to do with the politics of the day either.
Bill read the following and understand why people are pissed at you jumping so hard on the Fool side of the Fool or Knave conundrum. You bit. Hard. So to us you bite. Hard.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/oneevilhuman.asp
“Origins: The text reproduced above is the introductory section of an Internet-circulated version of a critical article about Hungarian-American business magnate George Soros. Although the piece has long been distributed with an introduction attributing authorship to CBS 60 Minutes correspondent Steve Kroft, he did not write any portion of it. The original was an article penned by Jim O’Neill and published on 15 September 2009 under the title “Soros: Republic Enemy #1.” (That original version drew its information from a variety of sources which are hyperlinked within the article itself.)
The confusion arose because the original quoted a few lines from Steve Kroft’s interview with George Soros for the 20 December 1998 broadcast of 60 Minutes, and somewhere along the line a reader mistook that as an indication Kroft was the author of the entire article. ”
Do your effing homework. And don’t accuse US of ignoring sources.
Seriously, Cob?
If you had actually written about the effects of bankruptcy law with no knowledge of that law, than I would have criticized you.
WR,
I attacked your incorrect babbling as either ignorance or an ignoring of the truth. You want to take that as a personal attack? I would suggest you take it as constructive criticism; learn some facts; and tell the truth.
I notice in your response you refuse to address your error(Trump, much?) and then make it worse by blaming your errors on 60 minutes and Steve Croft.
Kinda strange you include no link to this 60 minute conclusion. And I am certain that is the case because there is no way in the world the writers at 60 minutes are going to conflate corporate bankruptcies with personal taxes.
While you all conflate the premise of what I said in technicality . You all miss the bigger point and issue of what is really important ias to the 5 why’s and root causes of our many sociaty ills.Who is actually at the controls of the DNC and their philosophy and policies? Not Obama or HRC the phony fake leaders. This is not about me in any way nor should it be. I’m a nobody just as you all are. This is all about the oligarch (Soros) who has control of our government that you do not openly and objectively. want to talk about. This is the same stupid strategy that HRC and the MSNM is using when she will not discuss and real or any serious issues of the American people, only side bar issues about what Trump said or who he may have insulted many years ago. I’m sure that if one connects the dots that (you cannot) Obama was knowingly involved in many of the bad decisions that HRC made and would explain the off the record server,destruction of e-mails and many other illegal activities that he and she would not want to be tied to. These are by far more grievous and much more serious crimes that calling someone fat and ugly. But that is all you are worried about. Trump wants to take on Soros’s power and control of our government but not HRC or Obama. Too many at this blog cannot see the forest for the leaves because they want to believe that what they believe is right and refuse to look at the much bigger picture of what is really happening to our country…
You don’t know shit about Soros. You just think you do because you have linked to some plausible anti-semitic crap about him.
Cut through the rhetoric on Soros and it breaks into two pieces: one he gives money to Democrats, and two to the alt-right he is just the same filthy Jew banker Nazis like them have been ranting about for two centuries now.
The “bigger point” is that you have bit on Reichnut propaganda. BTW Trump LOVES billionaires, he has no reason or history in going after the finance types that after all fund his buildings. Or other people’s buildings with his name on them. You are delusional. And to that degree it is TOTALLY about you.
Geez,
At least you could have stopped somewhere in “your rambling, incoherent response” and admitted, and apologized for, your totally incorrect comment on Trump’s personal income tax payments.
But doing so would probably have forced you to turn in your KK, err, Alt-R, err, trump card.