Thakkar
-
Posts
5,756 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Events
Forums
Downloads
Quizzes
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by Thakkar
-
-
3 minutes ago, attrayant said:
And now Trump complains that Mueller can't run an impartial investigation because of his conflicts of interest.
It's got to be dementia. That's the only explanation that makes sense.
If you are making any sense of what's going on with this sh!tshow, you must be smoking something good and I'd like to be your friend so you'd share it with me. Please.
T
-
2 minutes ago, MrPatrickThai said:
What makes you think I wouldn't read? I agree with you. It's the ignorant Yanks that annoy me, the ones that voted for the Bushes, believed Saddam Hussein was evil, and don't know how the Yanks set up Gadaffi, who was innocent etc.
Without sounding like an apologist for Qaddafi, you are right: he was set up. That's why there is no hope of Kim Jong Un giving up his nuclear weapons thus making the world more dangerous, not less.
You read to the end?? You are a braver man than I, Gunga Din because, like James Joyce, I couldn't possibly have been reading what I was writing.
T
-
2 minutes ago, MrPatrickThai said:
How can you say what Bush did was not as bad as Trump. Bush should be in jail. Bloosy hypocrites. Those war crimes were beyond words and they whole world is still paying for it. Yet a few ignoramuses in the USA just are sore losers and not giving Trump a fair go. Trump is a saint compared to past presidents.
As to "Bush should be in jail" —no arguments from me. He should.
A lot of the same people who publicly supported Bush (and now sheepishly avoid talking about him) are loudly supporting Trump. Bush isn't president today. Trump is, so he is the current clear and present danger because of his constant lying, erratic behavior, seemingly short attention span, idiotic public utterances, disregard for protocol, suspected ties to the kremlin, constant threats to the press, nepotism, conflicts of interest, gross inexperience, seeming unwillingness to learn, short memory, and I could go on and on but you've probably stopped reading by now because Trump supporters don't want to face the facts am I still typing I think I should stop as no doubt you really have stopped reading and I'm just trailing along as Trump does...
T
-
1 minute ago, MrPatrickThai said:30 minutes ago, simple1 said:
Also paying the price well into the future. Look up "The one area where Trump has been wildly successful"; plus of course Trump's ongoing attacks on Federal appointees not towing the line with putting his personal interests first with recent criticism of Sessions and others.
Of course Bush never put the interests of his family's oil business first when invading an innocent Middle Eastern country. What are Americans so forgetful?
No worries, Bush is in there on the worst list. Only Trump has surpassed him by being bigly worser in some respects. While embarrasses himself (and America), and while many in this WH are running around like headless chickens, some in Trump's team are quietly "getting things done" (if you know what I mean), like the anti-environmentalist Scot Pruit of the EPA
T
-
Jennifer Hayden (@Scout_Finch) Here's Donald Trump desperately trying to get Vlad's attention at the G20 dinner.If you look at the gif, Trump is pointing to Vlad, then to himself and doing a hand gesture, as if to say "want me to give you a handjob?"--It's all good. Who are we to stand in the way of true love? Vlad could be Trump's fourth partner in life and come live in the WH.T -
53 minutes ago, dave_boo said:
For some clarity on the concept of probabilities: sometimes, the horse paying sixty to one, wins. Such are the vagaries of races.
T
-
2 hours ago, bill014 said:
Why does the press ALWAYS negatively report? Why not say, 7 out of 8 voters are still happy with Trump??
Because journalism is about what is newsworthy, and the newsworthy thing here is that it took Trump just 6 months to lose his margin of victory, since he won by a mere 80k votes in 3 states. This is important to note because it points to what the republicans in congress face in 2018 if they continue to stick by Trump. If these numbers get even slightly worse, Republicans facing tight races might be looking to distance themselves from Trump in the next six months to save their own skins.
It's not the journalists' job to make anyone feel better by emphasizing: hey, cheer up, you've still got some friends.
T
-
23 minutes ago, iReason said:
Trump Rages at Jeff Sessions in New York Times Interview
"WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump told The New York Times in an interview Wednesday that he never would have appointed Jeff Sessions as attorney general had he known Sessions would recuse himself from overseeing the Russia investigation."
"In an extraordinary denouncement of one of his earliest backers in Washington, Trump said Sessions' decision to recuse himself from all matters related to Russia was "very unfair to the president."
"He lobbed similar conflict of interest charges at acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, and accused former FBI Director James Comey of briefing him on a dossier of unverified, incriminating information in an effort to gain leverage over the soon-to-be president."
The occupier of the White House publicly disparages his own team.
He still doesn't get it.
They don't work for him.
They do not owe him their loyalty.
He is deep in the bunker.
Image of the United States indeed.
Sad state of affairs...
Sessions recused himself because there was a clear conflict of interest. When Trump publicly criticizes Sessions for doing the right thing, the message he is sending—from the highest office in the land—is that public servants should do the wrong thing, if that's what he wants them to do, regardless of the law.
He still doesn't understand what public service means. It's ALWAYS all about him, and what *he* wants.
T
-
10 minutes ago, CutiePi said:
So he likes fellow alpha males and not those precious European and Canadian leaders (and I highly doubt Merkel or May are his ideal conversation partners either)...can you blame him.
Yes, international relations is all about alpha male bonding. It's just like a collage fraternity—drink a few beers, smoke some joints, talk about girls, and...exchange test cheat sheets.
T
-
G20 wait staff know what Trump and Putin talked about.
-
21 minutes ago, snoop1130 said:
"There was no secret second meeting."
"...they were colluding in plain sight."
Trump isn't being accused by credible people as having a "secret meeting" but of having an "undisclosed meeting" in the sense that he did not inform the national security people or the state dept people of the contents of the hour long conversation, as would be normal procedure.
It's hard to believe that it was an entire hour of "pleasantries" as Trump said (he also said it was "15 minutes"—another lie). These are two world leaders—we're not talking about Kramer and Newman (Seinfeld reference) shooting the breeze in the park.
But with Trump, you never know; it could've been an hour of shooting the breeze. Sometimes it looks like the guy doesn't seem to realize he is The President.
T
-
10 hours ago, Dave67 said:
How about we take out the cost of liberating your country from the Nazis
How about paying India back—the economic rape of which helped finance Britain's wars?
India isn't asking for the money back because that was all settled, partly in the form of letting bygones be bygones.
The current issue isn't about the past but about future commitments that Britain signed on to as a member. Britain aren't being kicked out. They are leaving of their own accord and against the wishes of the others. Therefore their commitments stand.
The figure the Europeans are bandying about is likely too large, that's par for the course for negotiations.
T
-
5 hours ago, Jingthing said:
There was a recent line of questioning from McCain related to the trump-Russia investigation that many people found incoherent and bizarre. Really out of character for McCain. People were gossiping, time to retire, McCain. I wonder if that was a symptom of his disease.
I never wanted him to be president, but the country would be much better off if more republicans were as independent minded as he has been.
While he hasn't been as bad as most republican lawmakers, that's a pretty low bar.
he talks the good talk about listening to your voters and all that, but when it comes to crunch time, he votes with the rest of the corporatist lawmakers unless he's sure his opposing vote won't change the outcome. There was a time when he really was a maverick and voted for what was best for his constituents, but that was a very, very long time ago
He certainly doesn't deserve brain cancer and my heart goes out to him on that front. He also doesn't deserve the unearned plaudits he's been getting.
T
-
3 hours ago, Skywalker69 said:
Of topic maybe but he was in that meeting with Trump jr.
REVEALED: Manafort was $17 million in debt to pro-Russian interests before joining Trump’s campaign
Financial documents reveal that Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort was millions of dollars in debt to “pro-Russian interests” by the time he joined the president’s campaign last spring.
Look, just because he borrowed money from the Russians doesn't mean he's indebted to them.
Well alright even if he's indebted to them, it's not like his (and the entire Trump campaign's) sole input into the RNC platform was to demand a Russia-friendly watering down of support for the Ukrainian government, was it?
T
-
5 minutes ago, Ace of Pop said:
Are Prejudices all Bad.?.The Lefty Liberals seem to call anyone with Family Values prejudiced these days.?
Only when attempts are made to impose one group's family values on everyone else.
T
-
15 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:
When HRC was First Lady, she worked long hours (together with many of the people involved; insurers, doctors, pharma, etc) putting together a workable Health Care system, and Republicans shot it down before they even read one word of her proposal.
On a side note, remember how Republicans were aghast, appalled and apoplectic about an "unelected relative of the president" getting involved in policy?
I guess they're ok with it (times two) now that it's one of their own, huh.
T
-
5 hours ago, Lowryder said:
"The White House official did not say how long the second meeting took place or what was discussed"
How could he even know what was discussed?
Trump: "Time to extract me outta there, boss. They're gettin' close, man"
And then Putin spent the next hour talking him down and telling him what a great spy he is and reminding him of the PeePee tape, ending with a stern, "now get back to your post, soldier!"
T
-
11 minutes ago, heybruce said:
I'll reply to your long post with a short one: Healthcare in the US is 17.6% of the economy, about 3.25 trillion dollars. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/health-costs-how-the-us-compares-with-other-countries/
If we could get healthcare expenditures down to 9.5% of GDP, the OECD average, it would save US consumers, and the US economy, about 1.5 trillion dollars a year. The savings would be more than all US government discretionary spending, and yes, that's including military spending. https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/112th-congress-2011-2012/graphic/budgetinfographic0.pdf
Is it fair that healthy taxpayers subsidize healthcare for the unhealthy? Arguably not. Is it fair that childless taxpayers subsidize the education of other people's children? Arguably not. However we need to focus less on what's fair, or satisfies some people's philosophical ideals, and more on what works.
The single payer system that most of the rich world uses works much better than what the US uses; it delivers better results for far less money. Let's stop stupidly arguing about fairness or socialism vs free market and go with what has been shown to work.
??
I would further state that an entire population relieved of anxiety about their healthcare becomes immediately more productive, which is good for the entire economy. People will not wait for catastrophic illness before seeing a doctor also means a generally less sickly population—another plus for productiveity, not to mention general well-being. Less anxiety about keeping a hated job just for the healthcare. Greater job mobility and geographic mobility (because healthcare will be national) also means a more efficient economy.
-
14 hours ago, webfact said:
President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin held a second, previously undisclosed conversation[...]
The two leaders held a formal two-hour bilateral meeting on July 7 in which Trump later said Putin denied allegations that he directed efforts to meddle in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
The White House official did not say how long the second meeting took place or what was discussed.
"Patriotic Americans are calling for a total and complete shutdown of Trumps entering the Whitehouse until our country's representatives can figure out what the H is going on..."
T
-
2 hours ago, cameraman888 said:
How about toss all the Russian nationals out of America if they retaliate for getting Trump in as president. If the Russians are not dual citizens and they are on a tourist visa, expel them.
But then there will be no one left for little Donny and his cohorts to meet with? You *know* he has trouble making new friends.
T
-
57 minutes ago, Wilsonandson said:
WHAT AN OUTRAGE!!
Thise shoes don't match the outfit at all.
T
-
12 hours ago, Boon Mee said:
Witch Hunt pure and simple.
More like Wretch Hunt.
T
-
7 hours ago, tonray said:
Trumpsters advocate destruction because they have no real plans or ideas on how to properly govern. Destroying what exists is a whole lot easier than architecting a future all can prosper in.
Trumpcare collapsed because Republicans cannot govern, and the reason they cannot govern is because they are purely ideological and their ideology is incompatible with how things work in the real world.
This is a good piece:
In truth, it was never possible to reconcile public standards for a humane health-care system with conservative ideology. In a pure market system, access to medical care will be unaffordable for a huge share of the public. Giving them access to quality care means mobilizing government power to redistribute resources, either through direct tax and transfers or through regulations that raise costs for the healthy and lower them for the sick. Obamacare uses both methods, and both are utterly repugnant and unacceptable to movement conservatives. That commitment to abstract anti-government dogma, without any concern for the practical impact, is the quality that makes the Republican Party unlike right-of-center governing parties in any other democracy. In no other country would a conservative party develop a plan for health care that every major industry stakeholder calls completely unworkable.
The Republicans control the House, Senate, and White House, and cannot pass health insurance legislation. One can argue about why this is so, but I think Jonathan Chait above nails it: they can’t square their anti-government dogma with the need for the government to play a role in any humane health care system
T
-
9 hours ago, tonray said:
The Health Care revamp was all about 2018 and election promises than providing solutions. If the boobs would have just worked with the other side, all they need is less than 60% of each side of the aisle, leaving the extremists on both parties in the cold, where they should be. Centrist policy for all of America not just 50% of it is the way forward.
That makes sense.
sadly, this wasn't really about healthcare at all, despite the name and despite the collateral damage to healthcare. It was about funding even more tax cuts with money saved from slashing Medicaid and dressing it all up as repeal and replace.
T
Image of the United States has plunged under Trump, survey shows
in World News
Posted
Trump's image is now so bad, the best his supporters can do is compare him favorably with War Criminal president Bush. I gues his campaign slogan will be:
TRUMP 2020
(not as bad as Bush!)
T