Kut's Trump Approval Thread #1 (Starts Out at 100%)

[Dddrees]

Because the organization is apolitical, just as they said in their statement. #RESIST #BecauseBecauseTrump is political (to the extreme, btw). Standing invitation the the sitting president is apolitical.

Somehow I agree even though it makes no, some, no, some sense. LOL

 

[Alpo]

You're still IN DENIAL and haven't acknowledged it, hence you have 12 steps to take.

Just say "I'm Alpo and I'm in denial of the election." We'll all say hello, clap, then you'll just have 11 to go.

OK. I yield the math point. You are correct.

As to the last election, just because I can't believe that we allowed 2 of the most corrupt people in the USA to be nominated for the presidency is not denial. I know we did it. I just can't believe it.

What I do believe is that we are on the path to our own destruction. The 2016 election will likely be measured by any historians that survive as the tipping point.

 

[Alpo]

Younger Bear knows.....

[video=youtube;5R6wK1VWH1k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5R6wK1VWH1k[/video]

How do you say: "BUT OBAMA!!!", in Apache? Good movie.

 

[indiucky]

How do you say: "BUT OBAMA!!!", in Apache?

I don't know how to say "but" in Apache but Obama is "He Who Reads Words From Screen" in Apache....

 

[Alpo]

 

[PaulF]

Love of himself and his properties, maybe. I don't think God is in that man's life.

People may not remember this, but I was always vocally doubtful of Obama's religious faith. I have been an "overt" atheist for over 30 years, and I think I have developed pretty reliable "atheist radar". I can't know what's in his heart, but he certainly displays a number of atheist "tells".

I get get the same feeling about Trump. I view him as our second atheist president. His displays of "faith" read like performances to me.

Thats one one of the reasons I have a strong dislike for the man...I loathe phonies.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

OK. I yield the math point. You are correct.

As to the last election, just because I can't believe that we allowed 2 of the most corrupt people in the USA to be nominated for the presidency is not denial. I know we did it. I just can't believe it.

I'm with you there, brother. I do believe that Trump was the SECOND worst candidate for President ever.

What I do believe is that we are on the path to our own destruction. The 2016 election will likely be measured by any historians that survive as the tipping point.

I'm an optimist. I believe the people in the middle, as well as those on the right and left who aren't bat shi+ crazy fanatics will realize and reject the ugly nastiness of both sides and we'll return to a time when open debate, without name calling and demonization, returns. But, like I said, I'm an optimist.

Pax.

 

[Alpo]

Amen.

 

[Dddrees]

Repeal failed and the Master Dealmaker failed as well. So how much of this is Trump's fault? After all he had been saying for the longest time Healthcare is easy.

Now the best thing he has to say is that others are to blame and he wants Obamacare to implode.

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDona...4?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet

 

[Dddrees]

The Boy Scouts Official Appology with regards to Trump's speech.

From the Chief: Our Perspective on the Presidential Visit - Scouting Wire : Scouting Wire

 

[KLB]

The Boy Scouts Official Appology with regards to Trump's speech.

From the Chief: Our Perspective on the Presidential Visit - Scouting Wire : Scouting Wire

They never should have had to apologize for anything. They didn't do anything.

The ones that need to apologize are the whiners that made such a big deal of the whole thing.

 

[Dddrees]

They never should have had to apologize for anything. They didn't do anything.

The ones that need to apologize are the whiners that made such a big deal of the whole thing.

That's one way to look at it.

However in the end that wasn't the conclusion they came too.

However mild Trump was and he was mild considering what he's usually like, he just tends to do things which infuriate people. He just gives his critics to much ammo.

 

[KLB]

That's one way to look at it.

However in the end that wasn't the conclusion they came too.

However mild Trump was and he was mild considering what he's usually like, he just tends to do things which infuriate people. He just gives his critics to much ammo.

And why do you think they came to that conclusion? Could it be because "dozens" of people were offended and the media blew the whole thing up like it was something terrible?

I have to say though, they did a good job of not over apologizing.

 

[jamil]

The Boy Scouts Official Appology with regards to Trump's speech.

From the Chief: Our Perspective on the Presidential Visit - Scouting Wire : Scouting Wire

Being forced to apologize to an angry mob is more a condemnation of the angry mob than the thing they're apologizing for.

 

[jamil]

That's one way to look at it.

However in the end that wasn't the conclusion they came too.

However mild Trump was and he was mild considering what he's usually like, he just tends to do things which infuriate people. He just gives his critics to much ammo.

I don't really have an opinion one way or other on Trump's speech. Do you have a link to the entire speech? I'm not really interested enough to google it myself but if you put a link here maybe it's worth clicking.

 

[Dddrees]

And why do you think they came to that conclusion? Could it be because "dozens" of people were offended and the media blew the whole thing up like it was something terrible?

I have to say though, they did a good job of not over apologizing.

Very possibly, and as I said I think Trump makes this way too easy.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

And why do you think they came to that conclusion? Could it be because "dozens" of people were offended and the media blew the whole thing up like it was something terrible?

I have to say though, they did a good job of not over apologizing.

Lol, yes, that is true... it basically says if you support scouting with your time or money, and you were offended, we apologize.

 

[Kutnupe14]

So anybody have a reason why the President hasn't signed the Russian sanctions bill? What is this day 3?

 

[Libertarian01]

So anybody have a reason why the President hasn't signed the Russian sanctions bill? What is this day 3?

I would VETO that thing - today! As far as I know, and correct me if I am wrong, no committee nor court of law has determined that Russia has broken any formal law and/or treaty. As such, we have no solid ground upon which to stand to apply sanctions with.

This idea of sanctions is knee-jerk pandering to the mob of Hillary supporters that keep whining about their "victory" being stolen from them. Sheesh. President Trump didn't win so much as she lost - Hillary LOST Michigan; Hillary LOST Pennsylvania; Hillary LOST Wisconsin. So now all of her supporters cannot fathom that their anointed by the media candidate lost.

All that said, sanctions may(?) be appropriate when and if an investigative body comes out with a clear cut finding of fact that their involvement #1) did happen, and; #2) did violate some law and/or treaty.

Until then, VETOs away...

But that's just me.

Regards,

Doug

 

[Kutnupe14]

I would VETO that thing - today! As far as I know, and correct me if I am wrong, no committee nor court of law has determined that Russia has broken any formal law and/or treaty. As such, we have no solid ground upon which to stand to apply sanctions with.

This idea of sanctions is knee-jerk pandering to the mob of Hillary supporters that keep whining about their "victory" being stolen from them. Sheesh. President Trump didn't win so much as she lost - Hillary LOST Michigan; Hillary LOST Pennsylvania; Hillary LOST Wisconsin. So now all of her supporters cannot fathom that their anointed by the media candidate lost.

All that said, sanctions may(?) be appropriate when and if an investigative body comes out with a clear cut finding of fact that their involvement #1) did happen, and; #2) did violate some law and/or treaty.

Until then, VETOs away...

But that's just me.

Regards,

Doug

Neverminding the fact that Russia has invaded Ukraine, and our current sanctions currently have not persuaded them to withdraw (which some would say would justify MORE sanctions), and their continued support of Syria.... North Korea is sanctioned currently, and the US wishes to impose more sanctions with this bill. North Korea isn't a participant to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, so to be ideologically consistent, shouldn't you also oppose sanctions against them?

Going back to Russia, you say this is a knee-jerk response to placate Clinton supporters. I would remind you that the House passed the bill 419-3, and in the Senate 98-2. I think its a tough sell to call such a convincing vote, from both houses, as pandering.... and begs the question, "pandering for what reason?"