The Rose Garden and White House happenings: Listening to voters’ concerns
Bub, you skipped over DDE.
I don’t believe there have been allegations re sexual improprieties said about Nixon, but along came Watergate....
I did miss it, though it was subtle.
mtierney said:
Bub, you skipped over DDE.
I don’t believe there have been allegations re sexual improprieties said about Nixon, but along came Watergate....
Meanwhile, our President is up at 4:00 this morning ranting ignorant nonsense.
"Gun free zones are proven targets of killers."
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/969178931369783296
nohero said:
Meanwhile, our President is up at 4:00 this morning ranting ignorant nonsense.
"Gun free zones are proven targets of killers."
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/969178931369783296
Then they should remove gun restrictions from the White House, the halls of Congress and all federal buildings.
And CPAC conventions.
BG9 said:
nohero said:
Meanwhile, our President is up at 4:00 this morning ranting ignorant nonsense.
"Gun free zones are proven targets of killers."
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/969178931369783296
Then they should remove gun restrictions from the White House, the halls of Congress and all federal buildings.
can someone explain to me just when the honorific “Mrs” take on a negative connotation here on MOL?
I didn't mean it in a negative way when I used it earlier.
mtierney said:
can someone explain to me just when the honorific “Mrs” take on a negative connotation here on MOL?
I don't know about anyone else, but earlier in this thread I was asked to use "Mrs." instead of "Ms." by Mrs. MTierney.
nohero said:
nohero said:
By the way, it's wrong to use a picture of Pope Francis, as Ms. MTierney has, to support her statement that it would be a good idea to cut the Palestinians out of any consideration of this issue.mtierney said:Fine, Mrs. MTierney. It's still wrong to use a picture of Pope Francis to support your statement that it would be a good idea to cut the Palestinians out of any consideration of the issue.
Nohero, it has been “Mrs” for 63 years. The picture of the Pope at the wall expresses to me great sadness and, as such, I thought it appropriate in this context.
mtierney said:
can someone explain to me just when the honorific “Mrs” take on a negative connotation here on MOL?
Can you explain to me how, as a woman, you can support a man who has been credibly accused of sexual assault by dozens of women?
perhaps I am just sensitive to the usual crowd mentality toward me here.
If I misread the intent, I Hope you might understand my reaction to perceived insult.
Klinker said:mtierney said: can someone explain to me just when the honorific “Mrs” take on a negative connotation here on MOL?Can you explain to me how, as a woman, you can support a man who has been credibly accused of sexual assault by dozens of women?
And then......
mtierney said:
perhaps I am just sensitive to the usual crowd mentality toward me here.
Is that a "no"?
I’ve just been expecting more serious discussion of the Hope Hicks resignation. Obviously, in vain.
Plus, ethics appear to be a generally loose issue in the Trump cabinet...
mtierney said:
can someone explain to me just when the honorific “Mrs” take on a negative connotation here on MOL?
Beats me. I have no problem with the Mrs honorific when someone requests it be used.
Carl Icahn sold $30 million in stock of a company "heavily dependent on steel" (a crane company) last week last week, just before Trump announced his trade war with the dastardly Canadians.
The company is down 6% this week.
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-ichan-steel-imports-cf7deb8beaf0/
dave23 said:
Carl Icahn sold $30 million in stock of a company "heavily dependent on steel" (a crane company) last week last week, just before Trump announced his trade war with the dastardly Canadians.
The company is down 6% this week.
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-ichan-steel-imports-cf7deb8beaf0/
I will say my prayers for Mr Icahn.
As to the 'dastardly Canadians' you are putting the cart before the horse.Trump spoke of a trade war but he never filled in the blanks, which I believe was on purpose.
He can now simply 'carve out' the Canadians, our foremost provider of steel, and exempt them from paying the tariff, for whatever good reason he wants to put forth.
BCC said:
I will say my prayers for Mr Icahn.
As to the 'dastardly Canadians' you are putting the cart before the horse.Trump spoke of a trade war but he never filled in the blanks, which I believe was on purpose.
He can now simply 'carve out' the Canadians, our foremost provider of steel, and exempt them from paying the tariff, for whatever good reason he wants to put forth.
No cart, no horse. Just going based on what Trump said, which was that no country should be exempted.
dave23 said:
BCC said:
I will say my prayers for Mr Icahn.
As to the 'dastardly Canadians' you are putting the cart before the horse.Trump spoke of a trade war but he never filled in the blanks, which I believe was on purpose.
He can now simply 'carve out' the Canadians, our foremost provider of steel, and exempt them from paying the tariff, for whatever good reason he wants to put forth.
No cart, no horse. Just going based on what Trump said, which was that no country should be exempted.
The Canadians seem to be having a little trouble with that. Notice what Ms Freeland said. She said “Should they” not 'when they'.
''Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland called the tariffs “absolutely unacceptable.”
“It is entirely inappropriate to view any trade with Canada as a national security threat to the United States,” she said. “Should restrictions be imposed on Canadian steel and aluminum products, Canada will take responsive measures to defend its trade interests and workers.”
Is it possible she is having a hard time believing that what Donald is saying today he will still be saying tomorrow. After all he is known for not speaking out of both sides of his mouth.
Yes, I was responding to what Trump proposed, not parsing what he might say or do in the future.
dave23 said:
Yes, I was responding to what Trump said, not parsing what he might say in the future.
Seemed to?
You will excuse me if I find it hard to believe you take Trump at his word. I doubt there are very many on MOL who do.
BCC said:
Seemed to?
https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2018-03-02/trump-aluminum-steel-tariffs-seemed-to-apply-to-all-countries-us-commerce-secretary
You will excuse me if I find it hard to believe you take Trump at his word. I doubt there are very many on MOL who do.
Is parsing what Wilbur Ross parsed about what Trump said as fun as it looks?
No, I don't take Trump at word. I was simply posting about his monumentally stupid idea.
As you said: "After all he is known for not speaking out of both sides of his mouth." Or something like that, right?
Trump should be immune to criticism when he says stuff,because he's always lying. Thank goodness our president is such a liar.
dave23 said:
BCC said:
Seemed to?
https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2018-03-02/trump-aluminum-steel-tariffs-seemed-to-apply-to-all-countries-us-commerce-secretary
You will excuse me if I find it hard to believe you take Trump at his word. I doubt there are very many on MOL who do.
Is parsing what Wilbur Ross parsed about what Trump said as fun as it looks?
No, I don't take Trump at word. I was simply posting about his monumentally stupid idea.
As you said: "After all he is known for not speaking out of both sides of his mouth." Or something like that, right?
Don't take him at his at his word?
'No cart, no horse. Just going based on what Trump said, which was that no country should be exempted.'
No parsing, just what you wrote
dave23 said:
BCC said:
Seemed to?
https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2018-03-02/trump-aluminum-steel-tariffs-seemed-to-apply-to-all-countries-us-commerce-secretary
You will excuse me if I find it hard to believe you take Trump at his word. I doubt there are very many on MOL who do.
Is parsing what Wilbur Ross parsed about what Trump said as fun as it looks?
No, I don't take Trump at word. I was simply posting about his monumentally stupid idea.
As you said: "After all he is known for not speaking out of both sides of his mouth." Or something like that, right?
You don't have to parse Wilbur. You just have to recognize he himself wasn't sure what Trump said
And again
'Yes, I was responding to what Trump proposed, not parsing what he might say or do in the future.'
Only you would take a comment about Carl Icahn's apparent insider trading and respond with 6 posts slicing a side comment into particles for no apparent purpose other than to aggravate.
that's our BCC!
dave23 said:
Only you would take a comment about Carl Icahn's apparent insider trading and respond with 6 posts slicing a side comment into particles for no apparent purpose other than to aggravate.
dave23 said:
Only you would take a comment about Carl Icahn's apparent insider trading and respond with 6 posts slicing a side comment into particles for no apparent purpose other than to aggravate.
I don't generally like to play the "what if" game. But in this case I'm letting my imagination go and consider what would be said, and how the pundits would be treating this if a Hillary Clinton associate had a chat with her and then immediately dumped a bunch of stock right before it tanked based on her policy announcement.
Remember the days when that stuff used to rile people up? Now when that kind of thing comes out, it's just another Friday. Good times!
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
For Sale
-
2007 Honda Fit $4,400
More info
Garage Sales
-
House Contents Sale Sale Date: May 18, 2024
More info
This is for Mtierney in particular but for AJC and other Trumpists as well. Can you tell me something you disagree with in this letter?
https://www.facebook.com/OccupyDemocrats/photos/a.347907068635687.81180.346937065399354/1957715430988168/?type=3&theater