Deficit now up to $984B.  We are mortgaging our economic future for an inflated sense of short term well being.  dRumph is no conservative.  He's a profligate spendthrift of other peoples' money.   Economically illiterate, impetuous and irresponsible.  And yet his loyal minions think he walks on water.  Sad.

PH

purplehaze posted:

Deficit now up to $984B.  We are mortgaging our economic future for an inflated sense of short term well being.  dRumph is no conservative.  He's a profligate spendthrift of other peoples' money.   Economically illiterate, impetuous and irresponsible.  And yet his loyal minions think he walks on water.  Sad.

PH

The Democrats were pasted with the name "Tax and Spend." The Republicans are "Don't tax and spend anyway."
The deficit went down during the Clinton administration. Went up during the George W. Bush administration. Not sure about the Obama administration.  But now, it's through the roof. 

Some deficit is ok. But it is way too large now, and getting larger. 

 

 

 

 

 

irwin posted:
Not sure about the Obama administration.  But now, it's through the roof. 

It was high, over a trillion for the first few years.  Keep in mind that this was during a severe recession.  After things began to settle down, it varied in the 400-700M range.  It's normal for government to throw money at a bad economy.  It's irresponsible to have a trillion dollar deficit when things are going reasonably well.

PH

 

winetarelli posted:

It isn’t that I’m sad he’s dead. I’m just pissed this is going to help Trump politically. Hopefully, he’ll say something so monumentally idiotic in the next few days to undo good will without actually making things worse. 

I hope to hear some corroborating evidence about the details.  I wouldn’t put any worth on whatever he says.

Wondering if Trump abandoned the Kurds in norther Syria as a quid pro quo for Turkish support for the raid on al-Baghdadi?  

In other words, did the Turks say to Trump that they'd let him use their air space and perhaps other resources if he pulled out of northern Syria and let the Turks go after the Kurds there?

If so, it was a very steep price to pay, undoubtedly much too steep in the longer term due to the negative impact on America's relationship with international partners and its overall global credibility.  

Am I the only one offended by Downstream Wine’s Philippe Melka and his partners offering me 3-750ml bottles and one magnum of Zinfandel blend in a wood box for $995?  No disrespect to Zinfandel but in what universe is a 750 ml bottle of Zinfandel blend worth the equivalent of $200 a bottle?  Post-apocalypse?  In 100 years when average daytime winter temperatures in Canada are 35C?  Needless to say, you can have my wood box.

Guitarguy_1963 posted:

Am I the only one offended by Downstream Wine’s Philippe Melka and his partners offering me 3-750ml bottles and one magnum of Zinfandel blend in a wood box for $995?  No disrespect to Zinfandel but in what universe is a 750 ml bottle of Zinfandel blend worth the equivalent of $200 a bottle?  Post-apocalypse?  In 100 years when average daytime winter temperatures in Canada are 35C?  Needless to say, you can have my wood box.

I would be too busy laughing at the offer to be offended by it!

patespo1 posted:

On the day 45 announces the leader of ISIS is dead, he is loudly booed at the Nats game.  Pretty telling

Fox didn't acknowledge the boos.  They acknowledge every other Bronx cheer.  There was also a Impeach Trump banner that was rolled out in the right field stands.  Awesome.  It was taken down eventually.

doubled posted:
patespo1 posted:

On the day 45 announces the leader of ISIS is dead, he is loudly booed at the Nats game.  Pretty telling

Fox didn't acknowledge the boos.  They acknowledge every other Bronx cheer.  There was also a Impeach Trump banner that was rolled out in the right field stands.  Awesome.  It was taken down eventually.

Also chants of lock him up.

thistlintom posted:

Good riddance to al Baghdadi.  Nice to see the successful operation take out this thug and coward

Bravo!  Guess we'll find out who the next thug will be and can't call on the Kurds to find him.

Reminds me of the tax cut victory two years ago.  Yay DEFICIT and higher taxes for me.

The Old Man posted:
thistlintom posted:

Good riddance to al Baghdadi.  Nice to see the successful operation take out this thug and coward

A draft-dodging coward, who mocks prisoner of war heroes, calling out another coward. Quite a guy!

The Pentagon today said they had no information on the report by the president of Baghdadi’s temperament at the time of his death. 

The habitual lying POS coward in the White House literally shits hyperbole on a daily basis. 

Hailing winetarelli:

W+A asked if I would reach out to you and offer an olive branch. I agreed and also am here to apologize. During these sickening times we need to all join together with once purpose in mind: To Make America Normal Again. Just as with our nominees, there should be as little in-fighting as possible.

W+A also told me that we actually share many views and experiences not just at the political level. The only thing you are lacking is my cynical misanthropy. My advice is to stay away from that and you'll probably be happier in life.

The Old Man posted:

Hailing winetarelli:

W+A asked if I would reach out to you and offer an olive branch. I agreed and also am here to apologize. During these sickening times we need to all join together with once purpose in mind: To Make America Normal Again. Just as with our nominees, there should be as little in-fighting as possible.

W+A also told me that we actually share many views and experiences not just at the political level. The only thing you are lacking is my cynical misanthropy. My advice is to stay away from that and you'll probably be happier in life.

Well...

 I haven’t checked in for a couple of days, but I absolutely accept your apology and olives. I fucking love olives.

It certainly seemed as though our values align. 

Sadly, I have a little cynical misanthropy in me, as well.  I don’t see how one could not, these days.

We sane ones must stick together.  

Democrats are making a mockery of the impeachment process.  Instead of following protocol from previous impeachment processes, they are continuing to have private testimonies and control the entire process, including the information that they wish to divulge to the public.  If they want to go forward with the impeachment process, it should be done in the public and Republicans should have equal rights for testimonies.  This is setting new protocols for impeachments, which will become more likely to occur in the future.

thistlintom posted:

Democrats are making a mockery of the impeachment process.  Instead of following protocol from previous impeachment processes, they are continuing to have private testimonies and control the entire process, including the information that they wish to divulge to the public.  If they want to go forward with the impeachment process, it should be done in the public and Republicans should have equal rights for testimonies.  This is setting new protocols for impeachments, which will become more likely to occur in the future.

Wrong,  House Democrats are following the very rules and protocol established by Republicans.  Get your facts straight.  This is an impeachment inquiry, which is the normal buildup towards the actual impeachment process.  

Impeachment inquiries will only happen when there’s a reason for them to occur (the proverbial “where there’s smoke, there’s fire”).  Putin’s Bitch and his band of dummies have provided ample proof that his actions (not just the phone call with Zelensky) towards the Ukraine require thorough investigation.  

If Putin’s Bitch did nothing wrong, then he should shut his KFChole and let the process play out.  Some chucklehead named Lindsey Graham has gone on record and said that during a prior impeachment inquiry/process........

thistlintom posted:

Democrats are making a mockery of the impeachment process.  Instead of following protocol from previous impeachment processes, they are continuing to have private testimonies and control the entire process, including the information that they wish to divulge to the public.  If they want to go forward with the impeachment process, it should be done in the public and Republicans should have equal rights for testimonies.  This is setting new protocols for impeachments, which will become more likely to occur in the future.

Oh, the pearl clutching.

thistlintom posted:

Democrats are making a mockery of the impeachment process.  Instead of following protocol from previous impeachment processes, they are continuing to have private testimonies and control the entire process, including the information that they wish to divulge to the public.  If they want to go forward with the impeachment process, it should be done in the public and Republicans should have equal rights for testimonies.  This is setting new protocols for impeachments, which will become more likely to occur in the future.

Sorry, Tom, but some of your statements above are disingenuous at best, as the current process seems to following protocol from previous impeachments, given that closed door hearings were held in both Clinton and Nixon impeachments, the former of course run and controlled by Republicans.   And the hearings will become public once the initial information is gathered.  Do you really think the members of the committees would not/not turn the hearings into a circus of over-the-top statements and performances if the hearings were public?

Also, both sides are leaking info from the hearings, as we saw yesterday with Republicans trumpeting Morrison's statement that he heard nothing worthy of impeachment on the call.  But most of the so-called leaks came in fact from publicly-released opening statements of those appearing before the committees.

If you want to talk of some making a mockery of the process, how about those Republicans storming the hearings, and the fact that many of them were in fact members of the committees and so entitled to attend every one?  And if you want to talk breaking protocol, how about those Republicans bringing cell phones into a secure hearing room and taking recordings there?

I respect your efforts to keep your posts civil and constructive in discussions here but you are way off the mark pointing the finger at the Democrats for doing pretty much exactly what has been done in the Clinton impeachment process.  If I am missing something please let me know.

 

 

 

 

thistlintom posted:

Democrats are making a mockery of the impeachment process.  Instead of following protocol from previous impeachment processes, they are continuing to have private testimonies and control the entire process, including the information that they wish to divulge to the public.  If they want to go forward with the impeachment process, it should be done in the public and Republicans should have equal rights for testimonies.  This is setting new protocols for impeachments, which will become more likely to occur in the future.

What? The protocol has been followed, period. The committee taking depositions has members from both parties with 48% being republicans. These hearings are always closed and members only. Always have been. Where in the world are you getting your wrong information?

If the vote of the committee is to proceed, then the process moves forward as it is now doing. 

Please get your facts right. 

 

First of all, the impeachment process is given to the House, not the Speaker.  Therefore the impeachment inquiry prior to the formal vote was improper.  The inquiry is supposed to be done by the Judiciary committee, not the Intelligence committee, which would have provided more due process for the Republicans.

In prior impeachment inquiries, both sides met and agreed to the process, this did not happen this time.  During the secretive meetings, the Republicans will continue to be limited in its rights.  During the open process, in past impeachments, both sides have the right to subpoena and question witnesses.   In this process, the Republicans are not guaranteed these rights and are not given the same procedural rights as with previous impeachment inquiries.

There is also no guarantee that previous transcripts and information from the secret hearings would be made fully available to the public  The resolution empowers Schiff to disclose information but it is up to the discretion of Schiff of what will be made available. Why should anyone trust Schiff when he has lied about meeting with the whistleblower and made up the conversation between Trump and Zelensky?

thistlintom posted:

First of all, the impeachment process is given to the House, not the Speaker.  Therefore the impeachment inquiry prior to the formal vote was improper.  The inquiry is supposed to be done by the Judiciary committee, not the Intelligence committee, which would have provided more due process for the Republicans.

In prior impeachment inquiries, both sides met and agreed to the process, this did not happen this time.  During the secretive meetings, the Republicans will continue to be limited in its rights.  During the open process, in past impeachments, both sides have the right to subpoena and question witnesses.   In this process, the Republicans are not guaranteed these rights and are not given the same procedural rights as with previous impeachment inquiries.

There is also no guarantee that previous transcripts and information from the secret hearings would be made fully available to the public  The resolution empowers Schiff to disclose information but it is up to the discretion of Schiff of what will be made available. Why should anyone trust Schiff when he has lied about meeting with the whistleblower and made up the conversation between Trump and Zelensky?

Tom, the process you just described above is almost exactly the process used for Clinton.  The Dems had the right to subpoena witnesses but only with the agreement of the Republican committee chair, just like now, in reverse.  No guarantees then, none now.  And while in previous impeachments both sides met and "agreed", the dominant party still controlled the process, just like today.  In any case, do you really think the Republicans would have agreed to anything that facilitated an impeachment process?  Really??!! The Republicans have been questioning the witnesses in the hearings to date and will no doubt do so in the open hearings to come.  As for the hearings being "secretive", again, the reason for this has been explained and it is exactly what happened in previous impeachment processes.

And what difference does it make which committees undertake the hearings?  As it happens there are currently three doing so, combined they include 48 Republicans?  If you are making a technical point, fine, but your original point was that the Dems were making a mockery of the process.  If that's all you got it's a pretty thin argument.

As for Schiff lying and making stuff up, well, given the daily dozen lies Trump tells, it's hard to get too worked up about that.  Especially now that several witnesses, highly respected career public servants all, several personally recruited by Pompeo, including a Purple Heart winner  have testified that key information was left out of the so-called "perfect transcript, every comma, etc. etc." which proves the infamous quid pro quo, 

I'm surprised and disappointed that someone like you, whose posts here. as I said above, I appreciate and respect, would get so worked up about the points you are making about the process when it is clear to everyone not a Republican that Trump endangered not just Ukraine's security but America's as well by further empowering Russia and Putin by holding back sales of military equipment.  And, of course, breaching his oath to uphold the constitution by putting his personal interests ahead of the country's. 

Add Reply

Likes (0)
×
×
×
×