gut;1852022 wrote:RENEWING a program is a conflict of interest? Should we not give residence to rich foreigners that want to invest here, or just boot them out and make up the taxes on backs of the middle class?

rocketalum;1852024 wrote:What I find frustrating is all the people taking a "nothing to see here" approach to Flynn, business ties, nepotism etc... would be flipping their collective shit if our current President had a 'D' after their name. This "team" mentality to politics is hypocritical nonsense. If there are two teams it's not D v R it's People v Government. As long as we continue to divide our team and root for someone on the other we will continue to go 0 for...

"If there has ever been a clarion call for vigilance and action against a threat to the very foundations of our democratic political system, this episode is it. I hope that the American people recognize the severity of this threat and that we collectively counter it before it further erodes the fabric of our democracy,"

"I have been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm that the FBI, as part of our counterintelligence mission, is investigating the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government — and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia's efforts.

sleeper;1852029 wrote:#MAGA

Yeah Spicer and the Trump team(and Fox News, no surprise) keep blaming Obama for Flynn. I'm not sure what more Obama could do; he fired Flynn, warned Trump the day after the election in person about Flynn, his AG warned Trump that he was compromised, etc. What more could Obama do?

QuakerOats;1852036 wrote:He's the greatest, no wonder he is getting $400k per speech from big Wall St. banks ............


The hypocrisy is immeasurable.

sleeper;1852031 wrote:-Sally Yates 5/8/17

Said under oath.

sleeper;1852038 wrote:There's no defending this incompetence other than to distract and obfuscate the investigation.

QuakerOats;1852047 wrote:Her judgment/opinion ........... just another wrong in an 8-year run of wrongs by the obama admin.

QuakerOats;1852048 wrote:Where were you for the last 8 years as the world was set on fire by the most inept administration in the history of the United States?

sleeper;1851995 wrote:Sorry but until the GOP actually does their job, via the will of their constituents, then they are complicit. Did you watch the Yates/Clapper hearing yesterday? The GOP is more concerned about leaks than election manipulation and potential coordination with a foreign power. The GOP is more concerned about Hillary's emails(still!) than why it took the Trump team 18 days to fire Flynn once he was compromised(fired Yates instead).

The GOP owns this. This is what the GOP supports; party over country. It's really quite sick.

O-Trap;1852051 wrote:I'm not saying the GOP isn't at fault for Trump. They nominated him.

I'm also not saying that they are behaving competently (I didn't see the hearing, but what you say wouldn't exactly surprise me.).

I'm saying that putting forth the notion that the only two options are either opposing Trump or putting party before country is a false dichotomy. One can genuinely like Trump, though I would oppose such a view.

I was also suggesting that calling him a "travesty infecting [the] Oval Office" is hyperbole. Yes, he's a terrible president. Yes, he won the election. Let's not try to make our case by sensationalism. Let's put on our big boy pants and engaged the topic with some sober rationalism instead, eh?

O-Trap;1852051 wrote:I'm not saying the GOP isn't at fault for Trump. They nominated him.

I'm also not saying that they are behaving competently (I didn't see the hearing, but what you say wouldn't exactly surprise me.).

I'm saying that putting forth the notion that the only two options are either opposing Trump or putting party before country is a false dichotomy. One can genuinely like Trump, though I would oppose such a view.

I was also suggesting that calling him a "travesty infecting [the] Oval Office" is hyperbole. Yes, he's a terrible president. Yes, he won the election. Let's not try to make our case by sensationalism. Let's put on our big boy pants and engaged the topic with some sober rationalism instead, eh?

sleeper;1852052 wrote:The sad reality is there no sensationalism in my posts. This is the reality. And the GOP and its voters have rubber stamped this incompetent, corrupt administration. It truly is party over country and its absolutely disgusting.

Heretic;1852053 wrote:When someone's gimmick is to be the left-wing QQ, the bolded is incapable of happening. The worrisome part, to me, is that he has to take his act to hilarious levels just to reach QQ's honest opinions.

A false dichotomy fallacy is not factual. In fact, it is the opposite, as demonstrated.

sleeper;1852061 wrote:When the overwhelming amount of Republicans still condone and support this radically corrupt administration, then it is not a false dichotomy. They are complicit with their latest action of a vote and further their now inaction in contributing positively to democracy.

This ends when Trump is removed from office along with his GOP cronies obfuscating the path to justice.

sleeper;1852061 wrote:When the overwhelming amount of Republicans still condone and support this radically corrupt administration, then it is not a false dichotomy.

sleeper;1852061 wrote:They are complicit with their latest action of a vote and further their now inaction in contributing positively to democracy.

This ends when Trump is removed from office along with his GOP cronies obfuscating the path to justice.

O-Trap;1852051 wrote:I'm not saying the GOP isn't at fault for Trump. They nominated him.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1852071 wrote:Are you ever going to explain your political 180? This new progressive you has been on the scene for a little while now and there's been no explanation as to how your political leanings changed so dramatically in such a short period of time. What brought it on? Really - I'm curious. Your schtick on here used to be the money-making, chick-banging bro who hated poor people. Now you've become a champion of the downtrodden that hates Trump and the GOP. There must be a story there.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1852071 wrote:Are you ever going to explain your political 180? This new progressive you has been on the scene for a little while now and there's been no explanation as to how your political leanings changed so dramatically in such a short period of time. What brought it on? Really - I'm curious. Your schtick on here used to be the money-making, chick-banging bro who hated poor people. Now you've become a champion of the downtrodden that hates Trump and the GOP. There must be a story there.

O-Trap;1852072 wrote:Um ... yes, it still is. You're assuming intent by leveling the accusation that they're necessarily doing so because they put party over country.

I already demonstrated that it was a false dichotomy by pointing out a third option. That necessarily makes it a false dichotomy along the same lines of 'W' saying that anyone who opposes the war is with the terrorists.





You can blame those who voted for someone for the ills brought about by his/her presidency. That's fine.

However, that still doesn't justify the tossing out of logical fallacies or hyperbole and then pretending that you're the one using facts.

sleeper;1852078 wrote:It's probably a number of things including living in DC, being surrounded by smart people that I respect, and the election of Trump. I still make plenty of money, still bang chicks, and still don't really like poor people. However, the reality is, I've gained EMPATHY for poor people. I also view the GOP becoming more and more radical and that moved me from being libertarian leaning/right leaning all the way "left" although I still consider myself a moderate.

I view Trump and those that elected Trump as the greatest threat in history to our Democracy and health of this country. These people are the new 'poor people' and I still pity them for being so downright ignorant and brainwashed.

Also, there is no schtick.

QuakerOats;1852073 wrote:Trump, as it turns out, is the only one who could have beaten Clinton, and did.

QuakerOats;1852073 wrote:Appears the GOP did the right thing, even if they weren't trying to.

sleeper;1852080 wrote:I am not interested in your semantics and philosophical approach to commentary. Let me know when you want to contribute positively to this conversation.