Identifying the Enemy

[Mountaineer]

Comments here prove up the very old saying of "liking dogs more than people"....on both sides, as stench surrounds every skunk.
Good luck, America......few are really doing the work to smooth out the rough road we are on.
Too many appear to own an interest in car repair businesses.

[MNTonester]

Trump does not actually care about you or your rights. He's lying through his teeth to get what he wants (there are those sociopathic tendencies showing through). He's not a question mark. It's well known that Trump will change is "stance" (if you can call such flimsy beliefs as such) will change based on the benefit for him, and he's narcissistic enough to believe people are too dumb to notice (there's some evidence that he could be right). He knows nothing of work or the life most of us (us as in the middle class) live because he never has worked. He was given millions of dollars in liquid funds and even more in assets without ever working. Nor does he care to understand and truly empathize with our struggles.

He will most certainly try to pass laws that only benefit the very rich and corporations. And it is likely that he will destroy diplomatic relations.

Substitute Hussein Obomba for the reality that is here right now

[cjhills]

Research?? Are you kidding me? Did you see Them Give the same speech side by side? It is not the plagiarism that counts. Nobody cares. It is the denial and thinking that people are to dumb to believe it that makes you wonder. Well, I guess some people are. CNN did not make that up anyone who has a eight year memory know they stole it.....Cj

[Ouzel]

I’m presuming all you proud conservatives are in sync with the Republican platform approved yesterday that would pull the United States out of the international climate accord, open national forests to logging, declare coal a “clean energy resource”, and do away with the EPA. It’s not enough that you don’t want to pay taxes, or think that poverty is a personal choice between accepting government handouts or hard work, or that you would limit abortions despite the fact that bringing more unwanted children into a world who’s population has doubled since 1960 is a really bad idea, or that you think having an AR-15 available for every household in America or in the hands of every whack job is a good idea, now you would foster a full scale assault on our environment, our home, and the only available planet for life in the foreseeable future, and which is now undeniably heating up due to man’s burning of fossil fuels. You’re pretty sick bunch. And hunters, no less!

[nikegundog]

Looks like someone needs to go hug a tree.

[Mountaineer]

I’m presuming all you proud conservatives are in sync with the Republican platform approved yesterday that would pull the United States out of the international climate accord, open national forests to logging, declare coal a “clean energy resource”, and do away with the EPA. It’s not enough that you don’t want to pay taxes, or think that poverty is a personal choice between accepting government handouts or hard work, or that you would limit abortions despite the fact that bringing more unwanted children into a world who’s population has doubled since 1960 is a really bad idea, or that you think having an AR-15 available for every household in America or in the hands of every whack job is a good idea, now you would foster a full scale assault on our environment, our home, and the only available planet for life in the foreseeable future, and which is now undeniably heating up due to man’s burning of fossil fuels. You’re pretty sick bunch. And hunters, no less!

Depending upon the very individual particulars of America's wide range of National Forests, from specie to slope and on...the forests should be logged(in individual manners and perscriptions) as a way(in some cases)to bring diversity in timber age class which, of course, brings health to the forest and it's critters as a whole. It is a shame that appears to be an unknown reality to you and that generalizations come so easy to your keyboard.
More folks should really read Aldo Leopold....with a tighter eye.
Coal, again of course, needs a focus apart from a simple NO and, the EPA should be less of an agendized agency.
No need to comment on the climate cycling....Tinfoil is moderately inexpensive....too bad that.

While I would not willingly link myself with the foulness exhibited by either party or a word like Conservative or Liberal....sometimes, one simply must hold one's nose in the voting booth and a tenuous link is thus established.....would that were not so.
Paying taxes is thought by most adults to be a sound idea.....how the tax money generated is spent tho, is part of the problem.
Poverty is often multi-generational in origin and continuation and not as much a choice as it is the result of making poor choices. Sometimes, it is aided by even poorer decisions on the part of politicos seeking and seeking to keep the security of a guaranteed voting block.
I do think AR frame stuff is silly but the Walter Mittys love 'em and the idea of fighting evil-doers on the streets or in guvmint.
Views on children are often strongest by those already born.....there is some math to be done there.

[ezzy333]

I’m presuming all you proud conservatives are in sync with the Republican platform approved yesterday that would pull the United States out of the international climate accord, open national forests to logging, declare coal a “clean energy resource”, and do away with the EPA. It’s not enough that you don’t want to pay taxes, or think that poverty is a personal choice between accepting government handouts or hard work, or that you would limit abortions despite the fact that bringing more unwanted children into a world who’s population has doubled since 1960 is a really bad idea, or that you think having an AR-15 available for every household in America or in the hands of every whack job is a good idea, now you would foster a full scale assault on our environment, our home, and the only available planet for life in the foreseeable future, and which is now undeniably heating up due to man’s burning of fossil fuels. You’re pretty sick bunch. And hunters, no less!

Depending upon the very individual particulars of America's wide range of National Forests, from specie to slope and on...the forests should be logged(in individual manners and perscriptions) as a way(in some cases)to bring diversity in timber age class which, of course, brings health to the forest and it's critters as a whole. It is a shame that appears to be an unknown reality to you and that generalizations come so easy to your keyboard.
More folks should really read Aldo Leopold....with a tighter eye.
Coal, again of course, needs a focus apart from a simple NO and, the EPA should be less of an agendized agency.
No need to comment on the climate cycling....Tinfoil is moderately inexpensive....too bad that.

While I would not willingly link myself with the foulness exhibited by either party or a word like Conservative or Liberal....sometimes, one simply must hold one's nose in the voting booth and a tenuous link is thus established.....would that were not so.
Paying taxes is thought by most adults to be a sound idea.....how the tax money generated is spent tho, is part of the problem.
Poverty is often multi-generational in origin and continuation and not as much a choice as it is the result of making poor choices. Sometimes, it is aided by even poorer decisions on the part of politicos seeking and seeking to keep the security of a guaranteed voting block.
I do think AR frame stuff is silly but the Walter Mittys love 'em and the idea of fighting evil-doers on the streets or in guvmint.
Views on children are often strongest by those already born.....there is some math to be done there.

Good job with your post. I find it interesting conversing with people who have different thought than I do but it is hard and normally a waste of time answering someone that is just repeating gibberish that comes directly from an organization with an agenda that hs little to do with facts. But you did it well but probably to little learning by the poster.

[mnaj_springer]

Ezzy, you making that statement is incredible. There are organizations with agendas on both sides. Ouzel isn't the only one who may have drank the kool-aid.

[ezzy333]

Ezzy, you making that statement is incredible. There are organizations with agendas on both sides. Ouzel isn't the only one who may have drank the kool-aid.

Probably not but at least none of them have posted. I can only judge what I see and not what anyone else is thinking.

[DougB]

So at his very worst, he might be as bad as Hillary? My understanding is that he was given a million bucks to start with, and he's done ok with that, without having to resort to taking millions upon millions from Muslim dictators and human rights abusers through a "charitable foundation". She's done little to display any empathy for anyone, other than to stoke the fires of racism and class warfare in order to divide and conquer, and she's an avowed enemy of gun rights - no question mark there. She's proven to be a dishonest, greedy leftist who'll stop at nothing to obtain power.

Her hope is that those on the left will look past her lies and corruption. (There's evidence they will.)

He started with about $200,000,000 from dear old Dad.

In this case, he inherited control and eventually one-quarter ownership of a family organization worth about $200 million in 1974, and invested heavily in Manhattan. Back in 1974, $200 million was worth something: close to $800 million in today’s money.

I do not want Hillery, but if you want corrupt, greedy, dishonest, vindictive behavior, The Donald does lead the pack.
What he calls the "deal" is actually screwing his business partners. As he has taken multiple positions on everything, he has to have lied about one set of positions. He is documented at using high priced legal talent to screw over an architect who had worked for him and avoiding paying the contracted fees for work done and used.(greed), and if you want vindictive, try disagreeing with him.

sent a bill. It wasn’t paid," states Tesoro, who accuses Trump Organization representatives of "bullying" him into accepting a significantly reduced fee – just over a third of what the firm had billed.
"I didn’t feel that I had a lot of choice but to accept their low-ball offer. I had already paid out that money. That was money gone. That was just absorbed by me personally," Tesoro says.
The firm then sent that invoice. "And it wasn't paid."
Tesoro recounts visiting Trump, who said, "I really don’t think I should pay any more because I spent too much on this building.”

http://archinect.com/news/article/14995 ... d-by-trump

I don't think either candidate understands the job description. Congress makes laws and controls the money. The SCOTUS decides on what is legal. Both candidates make promises they can not keep. Even the ranking GOP politicians don't want the Donald. They don't want to work with him. Obama wasn't able to get much accomplished due to congress not working with him. The same will happen to Hillery or Donald. And as congress is elected, the Donald can not fire them. He will have to learn how to work with them.

Racism i s also the Donalds stance. The fence. Banning Muslims. What else can you call it.. The Donald is a greedy dishonest egoist who will stop at nothing to gain power.. But obviously people hear what they want and overlook the rest that he said.

The only reason Hillery has a hope is that she is running against Trump, and ironically, the only reason Trump has a shot is he is running against Hillery. We need a leader, but apparently the people who are capable of running our country are smart enough to stay out of politics.

Choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil. Polls show that the majority of voters want someone else to run.

[Max2]

Doug B I do feel for the Dem's who have no one to vote for.

[ezzy333]

Racism i s also the Donalds stance. The fence. Banning Muslims. What else can you call it.. The Donald is a greedy dishonest egoist who will stop at nothing to gain power.. But obviously people hear what they want and overlook the rest that he said.

Some of might call it common sense, He never said he would ban Muslims but rather ban hem till thy were vetted. Sure hope someone will do it. And what is wrong with a wall when you have a border that you can't protect any other way that passes the humane qualifications o so many. Both ae exactly what you do for your own property and think it is fine. he is not my pick of candidates personally but he sure is saying the right things. Sounds to me like some don't like how he says it much more than what he says but then that has always been the case so we have elections to see who wins.

[cjhills]

Racism i s also the Donalds stance. The fence. Banning Muslims. What else can you call it.. The Donald is a greedy dishonest egoist who will stop at nothing to gain power.. But obviously people hear what they want and overlook the rest that he said.

Some of might call it common sense, He never said he would ban Muslims but rather ban hem till thy were vetted. Sure hope someone will do it. And what is wrong with a wall when you have a border that you can't protect any other way that passes the humane qualifications o so many. Both ae exactly what you do for your own property and think it is fine. he is not my pick of candidates personally but he sure is saying the right things. Sounds to me like some don't like how he says it much more than what he says but then that has always been the case so we have elections to see who wins.

Some might call it common sense. Most would not. Actually, he did say he would put a ban all Muslims. Nothing about vetting. He did have to back down on that. He did say Hussein Was right to kill suspected terrorists, no trial, Just kill them who cares how many innocent people go along with them.
If you remember your history lessons religious persecution was one of the main reasons this country was founded and other leaders have advocated killing off everybody who disagrees with them.
How do you think building a wall will stop illegals? Do you really believe, as Mister Pence said just last Sunday, that
Mexico will pay for it? How many guards will it take to protect your wall.
I fence my Property to keep my stock at home, not to keep my neighbors out. If there is a disagreement we work it out
Glad I am not your neighbor.
If what Trump is saying are the right things we are in trouble......................Cj

[shags]

Hillary is a rascist!!!
“I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in,” Clinton said “and I do think that you have to control your borders.”

[ezzy333]

Racism i s also the Donalds stance. The fence. Banning Muslims. What else can you call it.. The Donald is a greedy dishonest egoist who will stop at nothing to gain power.. But obviously people hear what they want and overlook the rest that he said.

Some of might call it common sense, He never said he would ban Muslims but rather ban hem till thy were vetted. Sure hope someone will do it. And what is wrong with a wall when you have a border that you can't protect any other way that passes the humane qualifications o so many. Both ae exactly what you do for your own property and think it is fine. he is not my pick of candidates personally but he sure is saying the right things. Sounds to me like some don't like how he says it much more than what he says but then that has always been the case so we have elections to see who wins.

Some might call it common sense. Most would not. Actually, he did say he would put a ban all Muslims. Nothing about vetting. He did have to back down on that. He did say Hussein Was right to kill suspected terrorists, no trial, Just kill them who cares how many innocent people go along with them.
If you remember your history lessons religious persecution was one of the main reasons this country was founded and other leaders have advocated killing off everybody who disagrees with them.
How do you think building a wall will stop illegals? Do you really believe, as Mister Pence said just last Sunday, that
Mexico will pay for it? How many guards will it take to protect your wall.
I fence my Property to keep my stock at home, not to keep my neighbors out. If there is a disagreement we work it out

You opened up a whole new concept of a wall when you explain yours only work one way. Sure would be a disaster if you bought a one way wall and put it in backwards. Again, common sense might lead one to believe walls work both ways. And by the way I was watching and listening when Trump made the original statements about banning Muslims and you are wrong and that could easily lead to being dead wrong. Something you never hear mentioned is the Democrats actually passed a law banning Iranians and it is still on the books. Always funny how the same situation comes up again and the side that passed it before will now be against it. Both parties are guilty of it but often the voters forget and try to convince the world how right they are and how absolutely stupid the other side is. Nice though as it gives you something to write about.
Glad I am not your neighbor.
If what Trump is saying are the right things we are in trouble......................Cj

[DougB]

You want to control the southern border, make hiring an undocumented person a jailable offense and put a few business owners and executives behind bars. The illegals come in for work. At the height of our depression, we had a net outflow of illegal immigrants. They had no jobs there, so they went home. Interesting that when the economy is running flat out, we have no problem with cheap labor. Notice that the jobs the illegals get are the hot dirty ones or the repetitive boring ones that the natural born Murican won't take willingly or aren't qualified for.

The President can not arbitrarily build a wall. It takes money, and no, the Mexican govt has no intention of paying for a 50 ft concrete wall. Our highways are behind in repairs and the Donald wants to use the worlds supply of concrete to build a wall that won't work. A 50 ft wall might make it more difficult, but these people coming in try to cross desert at night carrying a couple of gallons of water. They may discover ladders and ropes, shovels to tunnel under, boats to get around, or drug carrying airplanes may get retested. Or the rich folk will get them them work visas to mow their lawns.

Doug B I do feel for the Dem's who have no one to vote for.

I really wonder about those who see the Donald as a capable president. The GOP leadership can barely stomach him. Hillary would be capable, but I disagree with her policies , her ties to Wall Street are solid and she appears to stay bought once she sells out, and I don't like hereditary rulers . Neither seems interested in the Constitution, and I don't know if the Donald ever read it. Both want to be autocratic, and that won't sit well with congress or the general population.

It's a simple reality that both of this year's Presidential candidates are unpopular. Clinton's favorability is 39/54, and Trump is even worse off at 35/58. This has given rise to the 'Giant Meteor for President' movement, and we find that the Meteor would poll at 13%- far more support than the third party candidates actually on the ballot- with Clinton at 43% and Trump at 38%.

Voters of all persuasions share one sentiment, however. Six in 10 Republicans, Democrats and independents say they are not looking forward to the next few months of the campaign.

As an aside: The cheap shots at Trumps wife are uncalled for. Comparing her to Mrs Obama are not fair. Michelle is a highly educated, extremely intelligent experienced lawyer and public speaker who has lived with the world issues first hand for 7 years now. Mrs. Trump is a fashion model, and probably a nice likable person who was thrown into the deep end. Her speech writers should be fired.

[Timewise65]

Trump does not actually care about you or your rights. He's lying through his teeth to get what he wants (there are those sociopathic tendencies showing through). He's not a question mark. It's well known that Trump will change is "stance" (if you can call such flimsy beliefs as such) will change based on the benefit for him, and he's narcissistic enough to believe people are too dumb to notice (there's some evidence that he could be right). He knows nothing of work or the life most of us (us as in the middle class) live because he never has worked. He was given millions of dollars in liquid funds and even more in assets without ever working. Nor does he care to understand and truly empathize with our struggles.

He will most certainly try to pass laws that only benefit the very rich and corporations. And it is likely that he will destroy diplomatic relations.

Trump was not my first choice, but that had nothing to do with his character, personal wealth, honesty, or any of the babble you post! I just preferred folks that were more conservative than Trump is. But now that he is the Republican nominee I completely support him and anyone that does not, is welling to give up this country to more Socialism, not to mention loss of the 2nd Amendment as the Supreme Court is taken over by Socialist Idealists for the next 40+ years.

More importantly, you have a lot to say about Trump, but provide no facts our sources.....CNN maybe?

And since you must have 'flunked' Civics in school.....Presidents cannot make laws! All the can do is approve laws coming out of Congress! Even Obama's executive orders are not laws! and would not hold up in court...!

[ezzy333]

You want to control the southern border, make hiring an undocumented person a jailable offense and put a few business owners and executives behind bars. The illegals come in for work. At the height of our depression, we had a net outflow of illegal immigrants. They had no jobs there, so they went home. Interesting that when the economy is running flat out, we have no problem with cheap labor. Notice that the jobs the illegals get are the hot dirty ones or the repetitive boring ones that the natural born Murican won't take willingly or aren't qualified for.

The President can not arbitrarily build a wall. It takes money, and no, the Mexican govt has no intention of paying for a 50 ft concrete wall. Our highways are behind in repairs and the Donald wants to use the worlds supply of concrete to build a wall that won't work. A 50 ft wall might make it more difficult, but these people coming in try to cross desert at night carrying a couple of gallons of water. They may discover ladders and ropes, shovels to tunnel under, boats to get around, or drug carrying airplanes may get retested. Or the rich folk will get them them work visas to mow their lawns.

Doug B I do feel for the Dem's who have no one to vote for.

I really wonder about those who see the Donald as a capable president. The GOP leadership can barely stomach him. Hillary would be capable, but I disagree with her policies , her ties to Wall Street are solid and she appears to stay bought once she sells out, and I don't like hereditary rulers . Neither seems interested in the Constitution, and I don't know if the Donald ever read it. Both want to be autocratic, and that won't sit well with congress or the general population.

It's a simple reality that both of this year's Presidential candidates are unpopular. Clinton's favorability is 39/54, and Trump is even worse off at 35/58. This has given rise to the 'Giant Meteor for President' movement, and we find that the Meteor would poll at 13%- far more support than the third party candidates actually on the ballot- with Clinton at 43% and Trump at 38%.

Voters of all persuasions share one sentiment, however. Six in 10 Republicans, Democrats and independents say they are not looking forward to the next few months of the campaign.

As an aside: The cheap shots at Trumps wife are uncalled for. Comparing her to Mrs Obama are not fair. Michelle is a highly educated, extremely intelligent experienced lawyer and public speaker who has lived with the world issues first hand for 7 years now. Mrs. Trump is a fashion model, and probably a nice likable person who was thrown into the deep end. Her speech writers should be fired.

A couple points, GOP leadership not being able to stomach Trump may just be one of his better qualities, And the illustrious Michelle is not a licensed lawyer since she was disbarred.

[shags]

More importantly, you have a lot to say about Trump, but provide no facts our sources.....CNN maybe?

Well now ya done it...get ready to be bombarded by HuffPo, MSNBC, Mother Jones, and Yahoo News

[mask]

What qualities does Clinton have that would make her a good president? They escape me so maybe someone can help me out. Shags there are definitely some yahoos posting on here but in the overall what they are trying to preach doesn't amount to much.

[nikegundog]

And the illustrious Michelle is not a licensed lawyer since she was disbarred.

Ezzy, care to cite a source, other than Faux News. :roll:

[natel24]

I am neither a republican nor a democrat. i find myself siding with both parties on different issues. I let the issue decide with whom i agree and not solely "where my party stands". However it does makes voting rather hard. I am an outdoorsman and a union member, those two things alone try and split my affiliation with either party. I believe this country would be in much better shape if the elected were less concerned with where their party stands and do what seems right instead. More bipartisanship would help this country i believe. With that being said, the only thing i really planned on saying before i began typing was, out of how many million americans are in this country these two are the best we could come up with. Thats ridiculous and sorry as heck.

[cjhills]

And the illustrious Michelle is not a licensed lawyer since she was disbarred.

Ezzy, care to cite a source, other than Faux News. :roll:

Ezzy:
The More You write the sillier you sound.........................Cj

[Ouzel]

Yes, Hillary's a problem, but take a few minutes to read this article in the New Yorker about Donald Trump from the viewpoint of the person (as a ghostwriter) who wrote Trump's "The Art of the Deal". It will make your skin crawl. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/ ... -tells-all

[Timewise65]

More importantly, you have a lot to say about Trump, but provide no facts our sources.....CNN maybe?

Well now ya done it...get ready to be bombarded by HuffPo, MSNBC, Mother Jones, and Yahoo News

Shags....you almost got me on that one......but. HuffPo, MSNBC, Mother Jones, Yahoo and CNN all work for the same guy (Sorros) and use the same script out of "rule for radicals" by Saul Alinsky!

[birddogger]

And the illustrious Michelle is not a licensed lawyer since she was disbarred.

Ezzy, care to cite a source, other than Faux News. :roll:

Ezzy:
The More You write the sillier you sound.........................Cj

I am not aware myself, but I am willing to bet that Ezzy has the facts before he posts. As far as referring to Fox news as "Faux" news is absolutely ridiculous and laughable. Until a few years ago, we had a very limited number of news sources and most were biased toward the left. Now, we have numerous choices of news that we can listen to or watch and some of them actually present both sides, such as Fox, and the left hates it,because they have had a monopoly on it for so many years. Fox news would have not lasted 6 months if they were reporting things other than facts, unlike some on the left such as Dan Rather. The left claim to support free speech, however, that is only if you agree with them, if you don't, they will resort to calling you names and do anything they can to try and shut you up!!!

Charlie

[Timewise65]

I am neither a republican nor a democrat. i find myself siding with both parties on different issues. I let the issue decide with whom i agree and not solely "where my party stands". However it does makes voting rather hard. I am an outdoorsman and a union member, those two things alone try and split my affiliation with either party. I believe this country would be in much better shape if the elected were less concerned with where their party stands and do what seems right instead. More bipartisanship would help this country i believe. With that being said, the only thing i really planned on saying before i began typing was, out of how many million americans are in this country these two are the best we could come up with. Thats ridiculous and sorry as heck.

Nate24...You make a good post. Many are like you regarding this election, and using issues is a good way to make up your mind. Provided you truly get the position of each candidate on critical issues that you care about. As I try to fact find on key issues, I frequently find more fiction than fact a bit of media smoke and mirrors. At times I find focusing on what each candidate has actually done or not done that I can verify and they cannot deny, helps me also pick a side.

That all being said, I can tell you that the Coal Miners in West Virginia and Pennsylvania are big Trump supporter because Obama is openly destroying the coal business because of the Environmentalist Lobby! (e.g. all US Coal fired power plants have the scrubbers that completely clean omissions from Coal Burning! And those scrubbers then provide a substance called Carbon Black that is a primary ingredient in making rubber). Hillary, has openly said she will shut down the coal industry....and those are Union Jobs being lost for pure political reasons! Do your own research you will find this to be true.

I ACTUALLY STARTED OUT HERE TO GIVE YOU MY PERSPECTIVE ON THESE CANDIDATES.....BUT I RAN INTO A DOCUMENT WHICH PRETTY MUCH SEALED THE DEAL FOR ME....CHECK THIS OUT, IF IS ALL FACTUAL....I CANNOT VOTE FOR SOMEONE WHO IS CONSTANTLY LYING TO THE PEOPLE WHO ELECTED HER....

Hillary’s Undeniable Lies: (look these up)

1. Sniper Fire during the campaign in 2008 she claimed that she came under sniper fire at the airport in Bosnia during the 90’s. Never happened!
2. Immigrant Grandparents – She claimed “all of her Grandparents came over” as immigrants, in fact only one did!
3. Sir Edmond Hillary – She claimed to be named after Sir Edmond Hillary who gained notoriety by being the first to climb Mt. Everest. Too bad, she was 6 years old, when SHE made his climb, no one knew of him prior to his climb.
4. Marines – She claimed to have been turned down by the Marines in 1975, in fact never happened!
5. Secret Emails – She claimed her email set up was perfectly legal even though the documents she signed when she became Secretary of State, clearly outlines this was illegal. This fact was also discussed during her initial job orientation.
6. Benghazi – she told the media and the parents that the cause for the Benghazi attacks was a video on the internet. Which she knew not to be true!
7. Secretary Clinton emphasized the famous Situation Room Bin Laden photo captured her reacting to the helicopter crash. In actuality, Secretary Clinton said “early spring allergic coughs”, not the helicopter crash, are responsible for her reaction in the photo.
8. In response to questions about her tenure at State, Hillary Clinton claimed that there was “a long list” of her accomplishments. Given multiple chances, Secretary Clinton has been unable to name a “marquee” or “proudest” achievement from her four years as Secretary of State.

I am trying to find something like this for Trump............he is a billionaire, He is an outsider with no political experience, he is not conservative enough, he is not a Republican, he is in his 3rd marriage, some of the 100's of companies that he has owned declared bankruptcy, he is brash, he is not PC, ......that's about it that I can verify...but none in my mind disqualify him.....

Maybe others can add some verifiable facts that we should consider about Trump....!

[ezzy333]

And the illustrious Michelle is not a licensed lawyer since she was disbarred.

Ezzy, care to cite a source, other than Faux News. :roll:

Ezzy:
The More You write the sillier you sound.........................Cj

CJ, you are right. I overstated the whole thing. I should have just said both she and Obama voluntarily gave up their licenses. Bill and Hillary lost theirs. Surrendering your license is often a method of being disbarred but I do not know that is the case with Michelle as it was reported back at the time she was a Jesse Jackson recommendation and as such she couldn't be fired even though she did no real work. But she did become friends with Valerie Jarret and they were moved to the University of Chicago board so they could go through her to get money from the state senator Barak Obama. When Barak was elected to the US senate her salary was increased to over 300,000 a year for a job without the requirement to produce. However, she didn't like the hours and didn't want to work as a lAWYER so she turned her license in. At the time this happened the court actually held the license and it would take court action for her to ever get it back. When Barak surrendered his I believe he went on retired status and that too presents a lot more to ever get it back. So, though I am not sure they did it to prevent disciplinary action, it is a common cause for doing it. Bottom line is neither has a license to practice law in IL and as far as I am aware that is the only state they ever held a license in though neither really used it.

Am I still on your stupid list? I can write more if I am.

Ezzy

[shags]

Both the Obamas requested that their licenses be made inactive and they are able to reactivate them if they choose to do so.

[Mountaineer]

Yes, Hillary's a problem, but take a few minutes to read this article in the New Yorker about Donald Trump from the viewpoint of the person (as a ghostwriter) who wrote Trump's "The Art of the Deal". It will make your skin crawl. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/ ... -tells-all

One does pick what to believe and to sift out the lumpy exaggerations...on any side.
Glad you moved on from the National Forest angle.
Well realized, well done.

Both Obamas give me the shiverin' willies but I suspect their law license deal is a non-starter....compared to their view of America, which is the real issue.

[shags]

More importantly, you have a lot to say about Trump, but provide no facts our sources.....CNN maybe?

Well now ya done it...get ready to be bombarded by HuffPo, MSNBC, Mother Jones, and Yahoo News

Shags....you almost got me on that one......but. HuffPo, MSNBC, Mother Jones, Yahoo and CNN all work for the same guy (Sorros) and use the same script out of "rule for radicals" by Saul Alinsky!

Speaking of Soros...http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/20/soros-la ... yptr=yahoo

How long before we see this implimented here by his lapdogs on the Left?

[cjhills]

Ezzy:
I never said "stupid"'' Silly. yes. I am sure you are not stupid. That is why I cannot see how you could support a candidate who is more liberal than conservative.
Now we are all supposed to believe every thing you write? Well I guess your name is red........Cj

[birddogger]

Trump would not be my first choice and I don't know what kind of president he would make, however, I do know what kind of president Hillary would make, she has already shown her true colors over many years and she is a total lying, corrupt and deceiving disaster. And would fight tooth and nail to ban all firearms, not to mention not having the ability or desire to protect our country against terrorists, which she even refuses to identify them as who they really are. She only wants to demonize the instruments they use [guns]. Actually, IMO, she should already be in jail, but it seems when it is all said and done, the Clinton's are untouchable. Anyway, on election day, I will be voting for Trump!!

Charlie

[DougB]

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/the-ob ... -licenses/

But the claim that the Obamas “surrendered” their licenses to avoid ethics charges has no basis in fact. Neither of the Obamas has any public record of discipline or pending proceedings against them, according to the online public registration records of the ARDC. We also confirmed that with Grogan, who said that the Obamas were “never the subject of any public disciplinary proceedings.”

In addition, prior to June 5, 2012, the Obamas would have been required to pay an annual fee of $289 (now $342), and take classes to satisfy the state’s Minimum Continuing Legal Education requirement, in order to keep their licenses active. Lawyers on retirement status, however, don’t have to pay an annual fee or take classes. And lawyers on inactive status also don’t have to take classes, but they do have to pay an annual fee of $105.

Surrendering or going as retired saves money, a very conservative attitude to take.

[ezzy333]

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/the-ob ... -licenses/

But the claim that the Obamas “surrendered” their licenses to avoid ethics charges has no basis in fact. Neither of the Obamas has any public record of discipline or pending proceedings against them, according to the online public registration records of the ARDC. We also confirmed that with Grogan, who said that the Obamas were “never the subject of any public disciplinary proceedings.”

In addition, prior to June 5, 2012, the Obamas would have been required to pay an annual fee of $289 (now $342), and take classes to satisfy the state’s Minimum Continuing Legal Education requirement, in order to keep their licenses active. Lawyers on retirement status, however, don’t have to pay an annual fee or take classes. And lawyers on inactive status also don’t have to take classes, but they do have to pay an annual fee of $105.

Surrendering or going as retired saves money, a very conservative attitude to take.

Not spending your own money tends to be a liberal idea more than a conservative.

[cjhills]

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/the-ob ... -licenses/

But the claim that the Obamas “surrendered” their licenses to avoid ethics charges has no basis in fact. Neither of the Obamas has any public record of discipline or pending proceedings against them, according to the online public registration records of the ARDC. We also confirmed that with Grogan, who said that the Obamas were “never the subject of any public disciplinary proceedings.”

In addition, prior to June 5, 2012, the Obamas would have been required to pay an annual fee of $289 (now $342), and take classes to satisfy the state’s Minimum Continuing Legal Education requirement, in order to keep their licenses active. Lawyers on retirement status, however, don’t have to pay an annual fee or take classes. And lawyers on inactive status also don’t have to take classes, but they do have to pay an annual fee of $105.

Surrendering or going as retired saves money, a very conservative attitude to take.

Ezzy:
Is this wrong. Where are your facts to backup your insinuations on the Obama's licenses.
You also might notice that after denying the plagiarism all day yesterday, They decided to admit it today and found a scapegoat. Surprise!!!!! surprise!!!!!!!
Charlie: Do you still think Ezzy has anything to support his insinuations.
The GNC is now about trying to assassinate Hillary Clinton is this what your party believes in. One Trump advisor is being investigated for his threats. Hanging and Firing squads are Pretty Radical. In these violent times do think advocating more violence is the way to go. This is Trump's Convention ran the way he wants it. Does that tell you anything.........................Cj

[Timewise65]

All,
what Obama and Michelle did regarding their law credentials is as Hillary would say, "At this point what difference does it make"

Unless,
Hillary gets elected.....then one of them at least, will be on the Supreme Court for the rest of our natural lives.....

Have a nice evening!

[Ouzel]

Yes, Hillary's a problem, but take a few minutes to read this article in the New Yorker about Donald Trump from the viewpoint of the person (as a ghostwriter) who wrote Trump's "The Art of the Deal". It will make your skin crawl. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/ ... -tells-all

One does pick what to believe and to sift out the lumpy exaggerations...on any side.
Glad you moved on from the National Forest angle.
Well realized, well done.

Let me guess Mountaineer .... you didn't bother to read the article, did you? If you did, what do you think of it?

[ezzy333]

CJ, you just can't let anything go. I insinuated nothing, made a statement that she was disbarred and even corrected that to read it was voluntary. The reason I used disbarred is that was the procedure when she surrendered her license but that has been changed now to allow what they call inactive. However her's is still held in the court system and will be till she wants to get it back and at that time it will have to be acted on to get it reinstated. Since then, with the inactive category they can be reinstated on request as I understand it. At the time this all happened she was under ire for her role on the board of the hospital but had no official job. But there was never any official action so her record is clear. And that happens often as is not indicative of innocence or guilt

Sure hope that clears up your problem of thinking someone is insinuating when they are being very straight forward. However, I do admit the difference in modern procedures compared to back when this all took place is probably unknown to many people today.

[cjhills]

CJ, you just can't let anything go. I insinuated nothing, made a statement that she was disbarred and even corrected that to read it was voluntary. The reason I used disbarred is that was the procedure when she surrendered her license but that has been changed now to allow what they call inactive. However her's is still held in the court system and will be till she wants to get it back and at that time it will have to be acted on to get it reinstated. Since then, with the inactive category they can be reinstated on request as I understand it. At the time this all happened she was under ire for her role on the board of the hospital but had no official job. But there was never any official action so her record is clear. And that happens often as is not indicative of innocence or guilt

Sure hope that clears up your problem of thinking someone is insinuating when they are being very straight forward. However, I do admit the difference in modern procedures compared to back when this all took place is probably unknown to many people today.

We still only have your word......Cj

[Max2]

Yes, Hillary's a problem, but take a few minutes to read this article in the New Yorker about Donald Trump from the viewpoint of the person (as a ghostwriter) who wrote Trump's "The Art of the Deal". It will make your skin crawl. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/ ... -tells-all

One does pick what to believe and to sift out the lumpy exaggerations...on any side.
Glad you moved on from the National Forest angle.
Well realized, well done.

Let me guess Mountaineer .... you didn't bother to read the article, did you? If you did, what do you think of it?

I read it and I also took note of the other anti-trump info posted at the end of the article.

Still Trump for me

[shags]

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/the-ob ... -licenses/

But the claim that the Obamas “surrendered” their licenses to avoid ethics charges has no basis in fact. Neither of the Obamas has any public record of discipline or pending proceedings against them, according to the online public registration records of the ARDC. We also confirmed that with Grogan, who said that the Obamas were “never the subject of any public disciplinary proceedings.”

In addition, prior to June 5, 2012, the Obamas would have been required to pay an annual fee of $289 (now $342), and take classes to satisfy the state’s Minimum Continuing Legal Education requirement, in order to keep their licenses active. Lawyers on retirement status, however, don’t have to pay an annual fee or take classes. And lawyers on inactive status also don’t have to take classes, but they do have to pay an annual fee of $105.

Surrendering or going as retired saves money, a very conservative attitude to take.[/quot
Ezzy:
Is this wrong. Where are your facts to backup your insinuations on the Obama's licenses.
You also might notice that after denying the plagiarism all day yesterday, They decided to admit it today and found a scapegoat. Surprise!!!!! surprise!!!!!!!
Charlie: Do you still think Ezzy has anything to support his insinuations.
The GNC is now about trying to assassinate Hillary Clinton is this what your party believes in. One Trump advisor is being investigated for his threats. Hanging and Firing squads are Pretty Radical. In these violent times do think advocating more violence is the way to go. This is Trump's Convention ran the way he wants it. Does that tell you anything.........................Cj

Snopes is your friend. Use it.

All this howling over mistakes and missteps by an amateur campaign. My goodness. But about Clinton's slush fund foundation, lies about practically everything she's involved with, her misuse of email and carelessness with national security, her lies to this nation about the attacks in Benghazi, bimbo squads, calling handicapped children "f'n retards", her support of BLM in the face of the murders of LEOs, well...."What difference at this point does it make?"

[Mountaineer]

Let me guess Mountaineer .... you didn't bother to read the article, did you? If you did, what do you think of it?

I did read the article tho it would not be my favorite source for what is labeled as news......but, one keeps an open mind and I also read Grit at one time.
Schwartz's words in the article struck me most as one who willingly molds himself to the paycheck of the moment .....you want 'x'? then by the lord harry, Schwartz is your writer.
One sees that with some "writers" penning stuff for Shooting Sportsman and the like rags.
Pretty common....not impressed with the fella in any way...he did a job and, is doing one again.

I do suspect Trump has an ego(oh, my God, really?), does like publicity, does shake hands with an outcome in mind and more.....all of which actually would make him a fair fit for a politico. However, he would have to work more on the PC fawning....so popular with all politicos and, likely, most NewYorker-type readers.
I would have preferred another fella or fella-ette on the ballot but I also do not see the world crumbling under Trump...what pieces are left to crumble after Obama, of course.
I do believe that Mrs Clinton and her hubby...he of the crooked finger waved in America's face...are much more character bereft than Trump and his family. Too much Clinton history easily illustrates that reality.
One does not really vote for the lesser evil as the saying goes...one votes, imho, for stopping the slide downward of America, a slide which has become steeper than a horse's face in the last seven years.

Again, well done on abandoning the national forest gambit.....you really are sadly lacking all 'round there.
Do the best you can today....it won't come by again.

[ezzy333]

Let me guess Mountaineer .... you didn't bother to read the article, did you? If you did, what do you think of it?

I did read the article tho it would not be my favorite source for what is labeled as news......but, one keeps an open mind and I also read Grit at one time.
Schwartz's words in the article struck me most as one who willingly molds himself to the paycheck of the moment .....you want 'x'? then by the lord harry, Schwartz is your writer.
One sees that with some "writers" penning stuff for Shooting Sportsman and the like rags.
Pretty common....not impressed with the fella in any way...he did a job and, is doing one again.

I do suspect Trump has an ego(oh, my God, really?), does like publicity, does shake hands with an outcome in mind and more.....all of which actually would make him a fair fit for a politico. However, he would have to work more on the PC fawning....so popular with all politicos and, likely, most NewYorker-type readers.
I would have preferred another fella or fella-ette on the ballot but I also do not see the world crumbling under Trump...what pieces are left to crumble after Obama, of course.
I do believe that Mrs Clinton and her hubby...he of the crooked finger waved in America's face...are much more character bereft than Trump and his family. Too much Clinton history easily illustrates that reality.
One does not really vote for the lesser evil as the saying goes...one votes, imho, for stopping the slide downward of America, a slide which has become steeper than a horse's face in the last seven years.

Again, well done on abandoning the national forest gambit.....you really are sadly lacking all 'round there.
Do the best you can today....it won't come by again.

It is quite telling that everyone is nit-picking Trump without a single reason to vote for Hillary. Like many of you , Trump isn't my favorite though he is probably exactly what we need if you are serious about fixing DC by getting rid of the crowd who has lived there for many years now. I will also take the heat for my opinion that there never was a reason to vote for Obama and the same is true of Hillary. Forrest Gump has more to offer than either. Also have to admit I am conservative so both parties have left me in the past and I am prepared for 4 more years with Trump if that is what it takes to cleanup DC.

I think we will find out that the people who are smart enough to know what and how people will perform once elected are the ones that are smart enough to know what our climate will do in the future. We are so lucky to have so many folks with that ability that are willing to teach us.

[Ouzel]

Sure hope that clears up your problem of thinking someone is insinuating when they are being very straight forward. However, I do admit the difference in modern procedures compared to back when this all took place is probably unknown to many people today.

Actually, Ezzzy, to openly say that a lawyer was disbarred is a very serious accusation. It's the same as falsely stating that someone's medical license was revoked do to egregious clinical or felonious behavior. You could be forgiven had it been an honest mistake but you would have to be a bit more contrite in your response had that been the case. A proper honorable response would have been something like, "I am very sorry for making that error. I regret it and I stand corrected." Instead, you merely said you "overstated". There's is a difference and I think you know it well.

Depending upon the very individual particulars of America's wide range of National Forests, from specie to slope and on...the forests should be logged(in individual manners and perscriptions) as a way(in some cases)to bring diversity in timber age class which, of course, brings health to the forest and it's critters as a whole. It is a shame that appears to be an unknown reality to you and that generalizations come so easy to your keyboard.
More folks should really read Aldo Leopold....with a tighter eye.

.

Mountaineer, my view is that decisions regarding forestry practices should be left with the professionals in the Forrest Service and not politicians. To have the Republican platform declare a desire to do one or the other is truly inappropriate. As far as the swipe about Aldo Leopold goes, he was a frequent visitor in my home growing up and I am very versed in his writings.

[shags]

Sure hope that clears up your problem of thinking someone is insinuating when they are being very straight forward. However, I do admit the difference in modern procedures compared to back when this all took place is probably unknown to many people today.

Actually, Ezzzy, to openly say that a lawyer was disbarred is a very serious accusation. It's the same as falsely stating that someone's medical license was revoked do to egregious clinical or felonious behavior. You could be forgiven had it been an honest mistake but you would have to be a bit more contrite in your response had that been the case. A proper honorable response would have been something like, "I am very sorry for making that error. I regret it and I stand corrected." Instead, you merely said you "overstated". There's is a difference and I think you know it well.

OMG, drama much?
Get over it already.

[Mountaineer]

Depending upon the very individual particulars of America's wide range of National Forests, from specie to slope and on...the forests should be logged(in individual manners and perscriptions) as a way(in some cases)to bring diversity in timber age class which, of course, brings health to the forest and it's critters as a whole. It is a shame that appears to be an unknown reality to you and that generalizations come so easy to your keyboard.
More folks should really read Aldo Leopold....with a tighter eye.

.

Mountaineer, my view is that decisions regarding forestry practices should be left with the professionals in the Forrest Service and not politicians. To have the Republican platform declare a desire to do one or the other is truly inappropriate. As far as the swipe about Aldo Leopold goes, he was a frequent visitor in my home growing up and I am very versed in his writings.

Nice try....Good shot but no coal, as they say in SW Pa.

"open national forests to logging" (you chirp that like it is a bad thing) should be on everyone's lips.....we know it would unlikely to be ever found in a democrats(small d) platform so, if the Republicans wish to list it...good on them....hope they mean it.
The early successional % on much of the eastern NFs is indeed indicative of a dying forest.
Follow appropriate harvest measures, practices and regulation (and agreed to allowable harvest numbers listed on the NF review plans) tho and all will be fine.
Well, not fine as there is not the mill capacity or demand to ever allow for a truly healthy % of ES.
Actually, NFs have moldered under both parties(1% or so of the allowed harvest is often the most achieved) as they each have caved to idiotic obstructionists such as the SELC....but, one can hope that any positive mention indicates progress.
Fingers crossed.

Reread Leopold, slowly.....your verse-ness is slipping.
Your true face was exhibited in each of your posts.
Quite honestly, the NFs are too important to be used as false political fodder against a politico....which is why your post was sad.
Consider doing better or picking a different horse to ride against...whomever.

[ezzy333]

Sure hope that clears up your problem of thinking someone is insinuating when they are being very straight forward. However, I do admit the difference in modern procedures compared to back when this all took place is probably unknown to many people today.

Actually, Ezzzy, to openly say that a lawyer was disbarred is a very serious accusation. It's the same as falsely stating that someone's medical license was revoked do to egregious clinical or felonious behavior. You could be forgiven had it been an honest mistake but you would have to be a bit more contrite in your response had that been the case. A proper honorable response would have been something like, "I am very sorry for making that error. I regret it and I stand corrected." Instead, you merely said you "overstated". There's is a difference and I think you know it well.

OMG, drama much?
Get over it already.

What is the penalty for contrite? Does that make Hillary unelectable? Do you think my life is in jeopardy?

[nikegundog]

Contrite or dishonest? I guess there is no penalty for lying, I just don't see what purpose it serves. Nothing wrong with a good political debate based on truths.

[Ouzel]

Your responses are what I expected: diversion of the question, expounding on irrelevant matter, attacking me, and, most notably, pretending to understand Leopold's philosophy about political parties involving themselves in natural resource management. My grandkids can debate better.