...and that helped how exactly?
Meanwhile Trump accomplished the fillowimg in less than a year:
http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/11/4621979/
Post by DesertWonderer2 »
...and that helped how exactly?
Have you truly investigated that list on your own? It took me less than 10 seconds to find errors.DesertWonderer2 wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 9:39 am...and that helped how exactly?
Meanwhile Trump accomplished the fillowimg in less than a year:
http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/11/4621979/
I've been reading in Alma lately.simpleton wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 8:43 amI am curios if you really believe the above statement/paragraph or are you being sarcastic.....Gage wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 8:17 am Your post is very misleading. You are complaining about government surveillance and your freedom? The government "spies" on international calls, texts and emails to folks in foreign nations that want to come here and blow innocent civilians to pieces. So unless you are emailing a guy in Syria or Yemen, I dont think your privacy will be compromised. Now back to posting what you ate for breakfast on Facebook.
Post by DesertWonderer2 »
So when you say there are errors on this list, are you saying that in your opinion they are not accomplishments or that the items listed by an unaffiliated organization did not ocurr (ie they lied about them)?Silver wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 9:41 amHave you truly investigated that list on your own? It took me less than 10 seconds to find errors.DesertWonderer2 wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 9:39 am...and that helped how exactly?
Meanwhile Trump accomplished the fillowimg in less than a year:
http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/11/4621979/
When Trump sent missiles into Syria and killed innocent people that same liberal media praised him.Gage wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 10:09 am Never said I trusted our government, never said they were not all crooked. Just tired of listening to all the Trump bashing. Everything is Trumps fault. Everything is the Republican party's fault. Liberal media will not cover one good thing he has done for this country since he was sworn in. But they will pick apart every "racist, "hateful" "bigoted" comment he makes.
Joseph Smith (and the subsequent prophets) taught that we should vote for good people. He didn't say vote for a partially bad person so a really bad person won't get elected.DesertWonderer2 wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 10:04 amSo when you say there are errors on this list, are you saying that in your opinion they are not accomplishments or that the items listed by an unaffiliated organization did not ocurr (ie they lied about them)?Silver wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 9:41 amHave you truly investigated that list on your own? It took me less than 10 seconds to find errors.DesertWonderer2 wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 9:39 am...and that helped how exactly?
Meanwhile Trump accomplished the fillowimg in less than a year:
http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/11/4621979/
Let’s say you are correct; that there are errors on this list. What percent are errors? 5, 10, 50%? Ok, bc you obviously have an unreasonable disdain toward Trump, let’s say 50% of the list is in errorr. Fine. Trump ONLY made 85 significant accomplishments in less than a year essentially with both parties against him—Not too shabby.
I guarentee that Darell Castle couldnt have done better.
Just so I’m clear, who did you vote for silver? Hillary?Silver wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 10:21 amJoseph Smith (and the subsequent prophets) taught that we should vote for good people. He didn't say vote for a partially bad person so a really bad person won't get elected.DesertWonderer2 wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 10:04 amSo when you say there are errors on this list, are you saying that in your opinion they are not accomplishments or that the items listed by an unaffiliated organization did not ocurr (ie they lied about them)?Silver wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 9:41 amHave you truly investigated that list on your own? It took me less than 10 seconds to find errors.DesertWonderer2 wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 9:39 am
...and that helped how exactly?
Meanwhile Trump accomplished the fillowimg in less than a year:
http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/11/4621979/
Let’s say you are correct; that there are errors on this list. What percent are errors? 5, 10, 50%? Ok, bc you obviously have an unreasonable disdain toward Trump, let’s say 50% of the list is in errorr. Fine. Trump ONLY made 85 significant accomplishments in less than a year essentially with both parties against him—Not too shabby.
I guarentee that Darell Castle couldnt have done better.
I have no problem at all with spying on our enemy's either but it seems that is the excuse to in turn spy on Americans in spite of needing a warrant..Gage wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 9:08 amsimpleton wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 8:43 amI am curios if you really believe the above statement/paragraph or are you being sarcastic.....Gage wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 8:17 am Your post is very misleading. You are complaining about government surveillance and your freedom? The government "spies" on international calls, texts and emails to folks in foreign nations that want to come here and blow innocent civilians to pieces. So unless you are emailing a guy in Syria or Yemen, I dont think your privacy will be compromised. Now back to posting what you ate for breakfast on Facebook.
I believe some of it. A court order is still needed to spy on Americans, again, the law was intended to keep Americans safe and foreigners who want to harm Americans exposed. I have no problem with the NSA spying on foreigners in and out of the US.
No, as I wrote in the 3rd post of this thread, Darrell Castle.capctr wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 10:57 amJust so I’m clear, who did you vote for silver? Hillary?Silver wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 10:21 amJoseph Smith (and the subsequent prophets) taught that we should vote for good people. He didn't say vote for a partially bad person so a really bad person won't get elected.DesertWonderer2 wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 10:04 amSo when you say there are errors on this list, are you saying that in your opinion they are not accomplishments or that the items listed by an unaffiliated organization did not ocurr (ie they lied about them)?
Let’s say you are correct; that there are errors on this list. What percent are errors? 5, 10, 50%? Ok, bc you obviously have an unreasonable disdain toward Trump, let’s say 50% of the list is in errorr. Fine. Trump ONLY made 85 significant accomplishments in less than a year essentially with both parties against him—Not too shabby.
I guarentee that Darell Castle couldnt have done better.
Silver wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 10:20 amWhen Trump sent missiles into Syria and killed innocent people that same liberal media praised him.Gage wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 10:09 am Never said I trusted our government, never said they were not all crooked. Just tired of listening to all the Trump bashing. Everything is Trumps fault. Everything is the Republican party's fault. Liberal media will not cover one good thing he has done for this country since he was sworn in. But they will pick apart every "racist, "hateful" "bigoted" comment he makes.
I never said that everything is the Republican Party's fault. Of course, the Democrats are to blame as well. The real issue is that Americans got lazy and stopped caring who they sent to Washington. Something like 95% of all incumbents are re-elected each time so the same scoundrels just stay in DC and make things worse. The solution can only be to stop voting for the traitors in both parties. You should read the thread called Ether's Avenue.
Is it bashing if it's true? If you are tired of reading the news I share about Trump's lies and betrayals, you can put me on ignore.
DesertWonderer2 wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 9:39 am...and that helped how exactly? It gave the janitor something to do by taking out the many, many ballots in the trash.
Meanwhile Trump accomplished the fillowimg in less than a year:
http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/11/4621979/
Oh Yeah, ME TOO!! hahaha Never ever say Hillary, even if you did!Silver wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 12:26 pmNo, as I wrote in the 3rd post of this thread, Darrell Castle.capctr wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 10:57 amJust so I’m clear, who did you vote for silver? Hillary?Silver wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 10:21 amJoseph Smith (and the subsequent prophets) taught that we should vote for good people. He didn't say vote for a partially bad person so a really bad person won't get elected.DesertWonderer2 wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 10:04 am
So when you say there are errors on this list, are you saying that in your opinion they are not accomplishments or that the items listed by an unaffiliated organization did not ocurr (ie they lied about them)?
Let’s say you are correct; that there are errors on this list. What percent are errors? 5, 10, 50%? Ok, bc you obviously have an unreasonable disdain toward Trump, let’s say 50% of the list is in errorr. Fine. Trump ONLY made 85 significant accomplishments in less than a year essentially with both parties against him—Not too shabby.
I guarentee that Darell Castle couldnt have done better.
It's true we need to reduce spending, however, there is a real reduction in taxes that is offset by higher revenues from increased growth and productivity incentives. The main cause of our debt was boondoggle spending by Barack Obama. Now that republicans are in office, the democrats are acting like they care a lot about the debt, which does enormous good in reducing spending.Silver wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 5:38 am
I know you're sincere, but you are mistaken. On taxes, if there is no accompanying reduction in spending (and there's not) the country only goes deeper in debt. Why doesn't $20+ trillion in admitted national debt bother everyone? You are a debt slave and you think a minor tax cut is going to make things better?
Even with corporate tax cuts, the wealthy will reap the greatest gains. Why? Because the wealthy now own most of the shares of the large corporations. (The top 10% of American households, as defined by total wealth, now own 84% of all stocks in 2016, according to a recent paper by NYU economist Edward N. Wolff. http://time.com/money/5054009/stock-own ... t-richest/ ) The lower and middle classes have been squeezed so tightly that their homes are the asset class with the most value -- if they still own one.
You also need to reconsider your support of Gorsuch. His first act as a Supreme was to sentence a man to death in Arkansas who was clearly undeserving of the execution. Gorsuch grew up in Washington, DC, with a mother who was a US congresswoman and an EPA (EPA!) director. Gorsuch has been eating on your dime for a long time. Just because that has become the norm, doesn't mean it's right. To call Gorsuch a conservative is to redefine the very meaning of that word.
So did you change your mind, or is that too painful for you?
Oh, I see. You're just another Republican voter who doesn't care about people dying unjustly at the hands of government. The casual way you dismissed the death of the resident of Arkansas is duly noted.TheSnail wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 6:44 pmIt's true we need to reduce spending, however, there is a real reduction in taxes that is offset by higher revenues from increased growth and productivity incentives. The main cause of our debt was boondoggle spending by Barack Obama. Now that republicans are in office, the democrats are acting like they care a lot about the debt, which does enormous good in reducing spending.Silver wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 5:38 am
I know you're sincere, but you are mistaken. On taxes, if there is no accompanying reduction in spending (and there's not) the country only goes deeper in debt. Why doesn't $20+ trillion in admitted national debt bother everyone? You are a debt slave and you think a minor tax cut is going to make things better?
Even with corporate tax cuts, the wealthy will reap the greatest gains. Why? Because the wealthy now own most of the shares of the large corporations. (The top 10% of American households, as defined by total wealth, now own 84% of all stocks in 2016, according to a recent paper by NYU economist Edward N. Wolff. http://time.com/money/5054009/stock-own ... t-richest/ ) The lower and middle classes have been squeezed so tightly that their homes are the asset class with the most value -- if they still own one.
You also need to reconsider your support of Gorsuch. His first act as a Supreme was to sentence a man to death in Arkansas who was clearly undeserving of the execution. Gorsuch grew up in Washington, DC, with a mother who was a US congresswoman and an EPA (EPA!) director. Gorsuch has been eating on your dime for a long time. Just because that has become the norm, doesn't mean it's right. To call Gorsuch a conservative is to redefine the very meaning of that word.
So did you change your mind, or is that too painful for you?
So, even though there aren't budget cuts, spending has gone down dramatically, because Trump is a better and more caring president than Obama. And republicans get held accountable on the debt by thier base and by democrats.
I'm not familiar with that particular decision, however, I know that Gorsuch is a defender of the constitution, and Hillary would have appointed someone to destroy it. I don't care who he was raised by, but what he does. Let me remind you that Abraham was raised by a wicked father.
I'm not saying that republicans are great. I'm saying that turning the gov over to democrats would have been terrible.
Let me know when my choice is republicans vs awesome candidates, and I'll gladly vote against republicans.
Meanwhile those who do not care if democrats are in office will stand idly by while our constitution is destroyed.
I don't know the details of that case. I know the federal gov hurts a lot of people, and they will hurt even more if we lose the supreme court. That's the second time you've attacked me personally, and I still think it's because your argument losses on the facts.Silver wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 9:32 pmOh, I see. You're just another Republican voter who doesn't care about people dying unjustly at the hands of government. The casual way you dismissed the death of the resident of Arkansas is duly noted.TheSnail wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 6:44 pmIt's true we need to reduce spending, however, there is a real reduction in taxes that is offset by higher revenues from increased growth and productivity incentives. The main cause of our debt was boondoggle spending by Barack Obama. Now that republicans are in office, the democrats are acting like they care a lot about the debt, which does enormous good in reducing spending.Silver wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 5:38 am
I know you're sincere, but you are mistaken. On taxes, if there is no accompanying reduction in spending (and there's not) the country only goes deeper in debt. Why doesn't $20+ trillion in admitted national debt bother everyone? You are a debt slave and you think a minor tax cut is going to make things better?
Even with corporate tax cuts, the wealthy will reap the greatest gains. Why? Because the wealthy now own most of the shares of the large corporations. (The top 10% of American households, as defined by total wealth, now own 84% of all stocks in 2016, according to a recent paper by NYU economist Edward N. Wolff. http://time.com/money/5054009/stock-own ... t-richest/ ) The lower and middle classes have been squeezed so tightly that their homes are the asset class with the most value -- if they still own one.
You also need to reconsider your support of Gorsuch. His first act as a Supreme was to sentence a man to death in Arkansas who was clearly undeserving of the execution. Gorsuch grew up in Washington, DC, with a mother who was a US congresswoman and an EPA (EPA!) director. Gorsuch has been eating on your dime for a long time. Just because that has become the norm, doesn't mean it's right. To call Gorsuch a conservative is to redefine the very meaning of that word.
So did you change your mind, or is that too painful for you?
So, even though there aren't budget cuts, spending has gone down dramatically, because Trump is a better and more caring president than Obama. And republicans get held accountable on the debt by thier base and by democrats.
I'm not familiar with that particular decision, however, I know that Gorsuch is a defender of the constitution, and Hillary would have appointed someone to destroy it. I don't care who he was raised by, but what he does. Let me remind you that Abraham was raised by a wicked father.
I'm not saying that republicans are great. I'm saying that turning the gov over to democrats would have been terrible.
Let me know when my choice is republicans vs awesome candidates, and I'll gladly vote against republicans.
Meanwhile those who do not care if democrats are in office will stand idly by while our constitution is destroyed.
Your use of the worn out old false dichotomy about Dems gaining in office is also noted. Joseph Smith didn't teach us to vote for the louse who could beat a Democrat. He and subsequent modern prophets have told us to vote for good people. I'll follow the prophets before I vote for a lying pervert like Trump.
No, the Republicans are almost entirely bereft of goodwill and love of country. If you voted for a Republican in the last presidential you vote for evil.TheSnail wrote: ↑January 14th, 2018, 1:03 pmI don't know the details of that case. I know the federal gov hurts a lot of people, and they will hurt even more if we lose the supreme court. That's the second time you've attacked me personally, and I still think it's because your argument losses on the facts.Silver wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 9:32 pmOh, I see. You're just another Republican voter who doesn't care about people dying unjustly at the hands of government. The casual way you dismissed the death of the resident of Arkansas is duly noted.TheSnail wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 6:44 pmIt's true we need to reduce spending, however, there is a real reduction in taxes that is offset by higher revenues from increased growth and productivity incentives. The main cause of our debt was boondoggle spending by Barack Obama. Now that republicans are in office, the democrats are acting like they care a lot about the debt, which does enormous good in reducing spending.Silver wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 5:38 am
I know you're sincere, but you are mistaken. On taxes, if there is no accompanying reduction in spending (and there's not) the country only goes deeper in debt. Why doesn't $20+ trillion in admitted national debt bother everyone? You are a debt slave and you think a minor tax cut is going to make things better?
Even with corporate tax cuts, the wealthy will reap the greatest gains. Why? Because the wealthy now own most of the shares of the large corporations. (The top 10% of American households, as defined by total wealth, now own 84% of all stocks in 2016, according to a recent paper by NYU economist Edward N. Wolff. http://time.com/money/5054009/stock-own ... t-richest/ ) The lower and middle classes have been squeezed so tightly that their homes are the asset class with the most value -- if they still own one.
You also need to reconsider your support of Gorsuch. His first act as a Supreme was to sentence a man to death in Arkansas who was clearly undeserving of the execution. Gorsuch grew up in Washington, DC, with a mother who was a US congresswoman and an EPA (EPA!) director. Gorsuch has been eating on your dime for a long time. Just because that has become the norm, doesn't mean it's right. To call Gorsuch a conservative is to redefine the very meaning of that word.
So did you change your mind, or is that too painful for you?
So, even though there aren't budget cuts, spending has gone down dramatically, because Trump is a better and more caring president than Obama. And republicans get held accountable on the debt by thier base and by democrats.
I'm not familiar with that particular decision, however, I know that Gorsuch is a defender of the constitution, and Hillary would have appointed someone to destroy it. I don't care who he was raised by, but what he does. Let me remind you that Abraham was raised by a wicked father.
I'm not saying that republicans are great. I'm saying that turning the gov over to democrats would have been terrible.
Let me know when my choice is republicans vs awesome candidates, and I'll gladly vote against republicans.
Meanwhile those who do not care if democrats are in office will stand idly by while our constitution is destroyed.
Your use of the worn out old false dichotomy about Dems gaining in office is also noted. Joseph Smith didn't teach us to vote for the louse who could beat a Democrat. He and subsequent modern prophets have told us to vote for good people. I'll follow the prophets before I vote for a lying pervert like Trump.
It's not a false dichotomy. Your choice for president truly was trump or Hillary, and you abstained. Your candidate wasn't even a remote possibility.
I did vote for a good man in the primary, and I voted for the best available man in the election.
Post by Craig Johnson »
Post by Craig Johnson »
Some people on this forum are virtually addicted to black-and-white thinking (bifurcation logical error) and sweeping generalizations (another logical error), and yes, their errors seems to be highly charged w/emotion and accusatory cathect. You will see this approach again, and again, and then again.Craig Johnson wrote: ↑February 2nd, 2018, 11:24 am . . . . I would like to nicely tell you that you have what we used to call "thinking errors" in the field in which I used to work. It is likely that you are somewhat emotional instead of cold and calculating about the truth. There is the possibility that you are devious, but I am not certain that is what you are being. Dealing with issues like this I strongly recommend discarding all emotion. Your emotions are important, but in politics emotions generally ruin the day.
Post by Craig Johnson »
Post by nightlight »
Post by BeNotDeceived »
The title of this thread, is indeed only one prime example, of how politics brings animosity to the fore. Or 4 as in 2024 when the moon shadow doth again cross our beloved homeland. Fulfillment of the Hancock Prophecy, likely begins at this time of heightened tensions, best described as a subsequent selection.larsenb wrote: ↑February 3rd, 2018, 2:04 amSome people on this forum are virtually addicted to black-and-white thinking (bifurcation logical error) and sweeping generalizations (another logical error), and yes, their errors seems to be highly charged w/emotion and accusatory cathect. You will see this approach again, and again, and then again.Craig Johnson wrote: ↑February 2nd, 2018, 11:24 am . . . . I would like to nicely tell you that you have what we used to call "thinking errors" in the field in which I used to work. It is likely that you are somewhat emotional instead of cold and calculating about the truth. There is the possibility that you are devious, but I am not certain that is what you are being. Dealing with issues like this I strongly recommend discarding all emotion. Your emotions are important, but in politics emotions generally ruin the day.
LDSFreedomForum.com and its admin / moderators do not necessarily agree with all content posted by users of this forum.
The views and content on this site reflect only the opinions and teachings of the authors of the respective content contained herein.