Disco? wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:
If you're not black you have to give up that name. We have to have SOME standards around here.
Are you a Disco?
Worse, he actually likes disco.
Disco? wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:
If you're not black you have to give up that name. We have to have SOME standards around here.
Are you a Disco?
Worse, he actually likes disco.
DiscoGary wrote:
Count Chocula wrote:
Anddd now I've had to register my username because the serial name-stealer has hit me as well. The giveaway should have been that I very rarely compliment anyone on here.
Aw, C'mon. You're a closeted DiscoGary Fan Club member! Admit it.
I'll admit that I respect your commitment to your opinions, and that while I don't agree with many of them, I recognize that you arrive at them using a logical process. At least most of the time.
Is that good enough?
Arthur P. Fonz wrote:
Let's let trump fail if he's going to, and he might. I don't know. He hasn't had a chance yet..
Time travel much? The election was in 2016. It's 2018. He's "had a chance."
Arthur P. Fonz wrote:
Hillary has been a failed legislator. Move on
Who? It was so long ago it doesn't matter.
During her time in the Senate, which overlapped exactly with George W. Bush’s time in the White House, she voted the way he wanted 252 times and opposed his wishes 259 times – meaning she supported the Republican president 49 percent of the time. Only 11 fellow Democratic senators who participated in a majority of the Bush era’s presidential support votes – which CQ Roll Call defines as roll calls where the president’s views were clearly expressed in advance – bucked the Republican president more often than Clinton did.
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
Arthur P. Fonz wrote:
Let's let trump fail if he's going to, and he might. I don't know. He hasn't had a chance yet..
Time travel much? The election was in 2016. It's 2018. He's "had a chance."
Arthur P. Fonz wrote:
Hillary has been a failed legislator. Move on
Who? It was so long ago it doesn't matter.
During her time in the Senate, which overlapped exactly with George W. Bush’s time in the White House, she voted the way he wanted 252 times and opposed his wishes 259 times – meaning she supported the Republican president 49 percent of the time. Only 11 fellow Democratic senators who participated in a majority of the Bush era’s presidential support votes – which CQ Roll Call defines as roll calls where the president’s views were clearly expressed in advance – bucked the Republican president more often than Clinton did.
To be fair, the quoted post is from before Trump's inauguration. I've been having the same issue where the thread reloads and goes back to the first page sometimes.
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
Arthur P. Fonz wrote:
Let's let trump fail if he's going to, and he might. I don't know. He hasn't had a chance yet..
Time travel much? The election was in 2016. It's 2018. He's "had a chance."
Arthur P. Fonz wrote:
Hillary has been a failed legislator. Move on
Who? It was so long ago it doesn't matter.
During her time in the Senate, which overlapped exactly with George W. Bush’s time in the White House, she voted the way he wanted 252 times and opposed his wishes 259 times – meaning she supported the Republican president 49 percent of the time. Only 11 fellow Democratic senators who participated in a majority of the Bush era’s presidential support votes – which CQ Roll Call defines as roll calls where the president’s views were clearly expressed in advance – bucked the Republican president more often than Clinton did.
Facts only serve to melt the peabrains of Trump supporters.
Count Chocula wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:
Aw, C'mon. You're a closeted DiscoGary Fan Club member! Admit it.
I'll admit that I respect your commitment to your opinions, and that while I don't agree with many of them, I recognize that you arrive at them using a logical process. At least most of the time.
Is that good enough?
Look for your autographed DiscoGary Fan Club Member t-shirt in the mail!
^^^Name stealer.
It's amazing that you respect any person(s) that had the lack of moral fiber to seize the reins of power in the U.S., do so with the knowing assistance of a hostile foreign power, plunder the economy, strip all the environmental protections, espouse racist views, foment racial disharmony in the nation, brazenly allow their own families and their wealthy friends to loot the country of its riches all the while flipping the bird to the proletariat that got them into power. Perhaps you will lose a modicum of that respect when tRump is impeached and he and members of the tRump Crime Family are sentenced and incarcerated (and, where appropriate, executed pursuant to 18 U.S. Code 2381 ).
But until then, you gotta respect the swagger.
DiscoGary wrote:
Wow. I go away for a week and this place slides into complete chaos.
I was wrong about Trump's poll numbers dropping as a result of his surrender on the omnibus bill. I owe the DiscoGary Fan Club members an explanation or at least some excuses, so here goes.
First, most Trump supporters aren't ideologues like I am, so they won't be as offended as I was by his betrayal. Trump supporters are blaming the eReps in Congress, rather than their guy. They still hope Trump will fight, but I think the leash just got a lot shorter.
Second, there are rumors that Trump may use the money he got in the military portion of the bill to build the wall. If so, then that would mean that he DID get something out of it. Those rumors might be offsetting the bad feelings.
Third, the Stormy Daniels scandal is HELPING Trump, because Trump supporters can see the clear hypocrisy of leftists attacking Trump's affairs while they excused Bill and his enabler Hillary. Trump supporters are REALLY tired of hypocrisy and double standards coming from the left and will ignore everything else to fight that.
So those are my excuses. Truth is I let my own disappointment cloud my assessment of the situation.
We may not agree on things, but I appreciate when you post comments like this.
It will be interesting to see if Trump can redirect DOD funding. My simple understanding is that is Congress' role to fund the DOD and direct it to work on a list of projects. I don't have a clue if the intricacies of Executive powers over the military include the ability to spend their money, but, it seems like he will lose that one too. I could be totally wrong.
Count Chocula wrote:
Anddd now I've had to register my username because the serial name-stealer has hit me as well. The giveaway should have been that I very rarely compliment anyone on here.
The most likely name thief is jamin. Hardloper is also likely. It is very odd but the two of them coordinate the trolling they do on LRC. It's like they are sitting together, trolling together. So bigly odd.
There was a bigly lull in hostile posts when Jamin ran his sub-15:00 5000 recently. Obviously he was warming up and cooling down. Nice race, but get yourself to a therapist now!
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
It will be interesting to see if Trump can redirect DOD funding. My simple understanding is that is Congress' role to fund the DOD and direct it to work on a list of projects. I don't have a clue if the intricacies of Executive powers over the military include the ability to spend their money, but, it seems like he will lose that one too. I could be totally wrong.
Trump cannot do what he demanded. He needs congressional approval to redirect expenditures: military or otherwise. And enough congressional republicans will not agree to give him what he demands.
DiscoGary wrote:
the clear hypocrisy of leftists attacking Trump's affairs while they excused Bill and his enabler Hillary. Trump supporters are REALLY tired of hypocrisy and double standards coming from the left and will ignore everything else to fight that.
All the time the Right spent trying to find something to impeach Clinton on and the best they could do was some moral objection. Now another guy with even more obvious "moral failing" is sacrosanct. Crazy.
Gary,
How does the budget-busting Republican Congress play on the Right?
Count Chocula wrote:
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
It was too good to be true. I posted before seeing Chocula's newly registered handle.
Haha hey, I'm pretty sure we must have agreed on at least one thing in the past. Even if it was just "I hope you stay safe from Hurricane Irma."
True. While we are agreeing, I always preferred Count Chocula over Cocoa Puffs.
Island trump wrote:
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
It will be interesting to see if Trump can redirect DOD funding. My simple understanding is that is Congress' role to fund the DOD and direct it to work on a list of projects. I don't have a clue if the intricacies of Executive powers over the military include the ability to spend their money, but, it seems like he will lose that one too. I could be totally wrong.
Trump cannot do what he demanded. He needs congressional approval to redirect expenditures: military or otherwise. And enough congressional republicans will not agree to give him what he demands.
I'm not so optimistic about the Senate.
It's obvious Trump can't pay attention long enough to make any progress on his beloved wall/fence/tribute to himself.
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
Island trump wrote:
Trump cannot do what he demanded. He needs congressional approval to redirect expenditures: military or otherwise. And enough congressional republicans will not agree to give him what he demands.
I'm not so optimistic about the Senate.
It's obvious Trump can't pay attention long enough to make any progress on his beloved wall/fence/tribute to himself.
He needs 60 senate votes to change a budget. Only congress can change budgets. Trump cannot.
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:
the clear hypocrisy of leftists attacking Trump's affairs while they excused Bill and his enabler Hillary. Trump supporters are REALLY tired of hypocrisy and double standards coming from the left and will ignore everything else to fight that.
All the time the Right spent trying to find something to impeach Clinton on and the best they could do was some moral objection. Now another guy with even more obvious "moral failing" is sacrosanct. Crazy.
Gary,
How does the budget-busting Republican Congress play on the Right?
You either don't remember or never knew what happened during the Clinton admin, and I'm not taking the time to fill you in.
Apparently the budget surrender of Republicans will not cost them as much as I though it would, or as much as it should. This Omnibus runs out right before the election so hopefully we'll go into the election with a giant budget battle and a government shutdown. If that happens, then the current surrender won't matter, but it should.
“I think I could have a very good relationship with President Putin,” Trump said. “There is also a great possibility that that won't happen. Who knows, OK?”
Trump loses every hand in a card game.
DiscoGary wrote:
Apparently the budget surrender of Republicans
I'm not understanding. Republicans control both houses, wailing and moaning about budget excess under Obama, then break the bank. Who surrendered what?
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
“I think I could have a very good relationship with President Putin,” Trump said. “There is also a great possibility that that won't happen. Who knows, OK?”
Trump loses every hand in a card game.
Trump cheats at everything. He would force the other players to show him their cards during the play. Even then he would likely several/most hands.