America this week, what the hell?

[TeamLord]

yes, absolutely. if that is what that company has earned. the government has no business mucking about in the free market. and it should not have anything to do with private business. they absolutely need to be able to succeed OR fail on their own.


im a joke because I want them to be held accountable?

I am a small business owner. There will be no one bailing me out if I so choose to run my business poorly and it fails. There will be no one saving my employee's jobs if I so choose to run my business poorly and it fails. I am the one that will be held accountable if my business fails. ME. That is the free market my friends. That is how business should work in this country! I work incredibly hard so that my business will continue to thrive. The government has no right spending OUR tax dollars on whatever business they so choose to bail out! All private businesses should be treated equally- NO BAIL OUTS.

 

[hikenbike]

yes, absolutely. if that is what that company has earned. the government has no business mucking about in the free market. and it should not have anything to do with private business. they absolutely need to be able to succeed OR fail on their own.


im a joke because I want them to be held accountable?

No, you're not a joke and I shouldn't have said that (so I apologize to not just you but ALL) but to trivialize and simplify it as you do is indicating you have no idea of the sheer scope of the problem that was at hand and the excruciating repercussions there would have been had government assistance not been provided. Again, it was an unprecedented situation that required our government go down a road they knew (and told us) they didn't want to go down, but essentially had to.

And yet Mr Trump claims to restore "law and order" so his BIG government approach to assist local, state, and federal law enforcement should be quite a plan to hear about and a sight to behold. Not that he got that specific (nor does he ever get specific since that would require thinking and likely conflict with other things he says) about how he plans to restore law in our wild west nation. Never realizing he is insulting all in all levels of law enforcement who do an amazing job every day.

 

[RunninInGA]

No, you're not a joke and I shouldn't have said that (so I apologize to not just you but ALL) but to trivialize and simplify it as you do is indicating you have no idea of the sheer scope of the problem that was at hand and the excruciating repercussions there would have been had government assistance not been provided. Again, it was an unprecedented situation that required our government go down a road they knew (and told us) they didn't want to go down, but essentially had to.

And yet Mr Trump claims to restore "law and order" so his BIG government approach to assist local, state, and federal law enforcement should be quite a plan to hear about and a sight to behold. Not that he got that specific (nor does he ever get specific since that would require thinking and likely conflict with other things he says) about how he plans to restore law in our wild west nation. Never realizing he is insulting all in all levels of law enforcement who do an amazing job every day.

Wait a minute now - let's be honest with ourselves. The exact same could have been said about Obama 7.5 years ago...and even here recently. Isn't it a little disingenuous to say them now that it isn't your particular brand of politics touting the generalities?

 

[hikenbike]

Wait a minute now - let's be honest with ourselves. The exact same could have been said about Obama 7.5 years ago...and even here recently. Isn't it a little disingenuous to say them now that it isn't your particular brand of politics touting the generalities?

Well of course......Obama, Clinton, liberals, and dems or whatever else you want to call them are already SUPPOSED to be about BIG gov't and thus all the criticism from GOP'ers..........thats why I'm pointing to (and enjoying) watching the liberal orange-faced "Republican" candidate subscribe to the same BIG gov't agenda. I'm sure he's got the "best" people ready to figure it all out.

 

[ndcent]

Another marine mom booed at Pence rally.

Air Force Mother Confronts Mike Pence Over Donald Trump's 'Disrespect' ? Gets Booed - NBC News

 

[Thefishguy77]

Another marine mom booed at Pence rally.



Air Force Mother Confronts Mike Pence Over Donald Trump's 'Disrespect' ? Gets Booed - NBC News

I am not trying to be confrontational. So please don't take this that way. Could you provide a link of trump disrespecting the military to give the link you provided some context. Most all my friends both active and retired favor trump over others. So I am curious to see the context of the disrespect.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Thefishguy77]

So what I can find is a shot at McCain who is a snitch and a bit*h as far as I'm concerned. There was a comment about war crimes that I can't find in context. So I can't comment on it. And a comment about one family and the DNC that spoke out against him. The war crimes comment could go either way. Could be he is implying that our soldiers commit them willingly. Or he could be saying that they would be following orders despite what may or may not be considered a war crime. Any other majors I am
Missing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[nevada]

No, you're not a joke and I shouldn't have said that (so I apologize to not just you but ALL) but to trivialize and simplify it as you do is indicating you have no idea of the sheer scope of the problem that was at hand and the excruciating repercussions there would have been had government assistance not been provided. Again, it was an unprecedented situation that required our government go down a road they knew (and told us) they didn't want to go down, but essentially had to.

at what point do we draw the line? why let the government dictate what business is allowed to fail?
if they can do that, they can also say who will be allowed to be successful.

what if walmart were in the same position, do we let the government prop them up?

a free market needs to be just that. I expect if it weren't for the governments involvement, those companies wouldn't have been in that position in the first place.

they have proven themselves over many times, they cannot do anything successfully. how the hell is it we keep letting them get involved with business? and some(such as yourself) advocate for them to do just that.

 

[ndcent]

I am not trying to be confrontational. So please don't take this that way. Could you provide a link of trump disrespecting the military to give the link you provided some context. Most all my friends both active and retired favor trump over others. So I am curious to see the context of the disrespect.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The back and forth with the Khans is particularly disrespectful. I suppose this is subjective and a protracted discussion as to why would certainly obfuscate the point and I'm not interested in that.

It's interesting your military friends prefer Trump over others. Hell I'd take a taxidermy opossum over Hillary, but I still have a hard time wrapping my head around the idea active and retired military would support his five time differed silver spoon candidacy. Even the VFW is calling out Trump for being out of bounds on the Khan thing. In his defense, I guess he does have a Purple Heart now, remarking "I always wanted to get the Purple Heart. This was much easier." Though I've always been under the interpretation that no one actually WANTS a Purple Heart, maybe he had it confused with the Medal of Honor or a Cartier broach.

 

[Thefishguy77]

Most of my friends are scared shitless of Hillary. They know trump is a liberal but Hillary is completely power driven and has no issue ignoring mistakes made. Benghazi is one of their sticking points. Not the night of the attack itself. But the 200 ish emails begging for security in the days leading up to the attack. They were just ignored and put on a back burner. Most believe if she will ignore an embassy with civilians who will get name recognition she will completely ignore military in need of help.

Most of my friends and myself included believe you should have to have some sort of military service to run for president. If your going to order men to war you should at least know what it's like to put on the uniform. Was Kennedy our last true vet? Yea the Bushes kinda.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gunslinger-13]

The back and forth with the Khans is particularly disrespectful. I suppose this is subjective and a protracted discussion as to why would certainly obfuscate the point and I'm not interested in that.

It's interesting your military friends prefer Trump over others. Hell I'd take a taxidermy opossum over Hillary, but I still have a hard time wrapping my head around the idea active and retired military would support his five time differed silver spoon candidacy. Even the VFW is calling out Trump for being out of bounds on the Khan thing. In his defense, I guess he does have a Purple Heart now, remarking "I always wanted to get the Purple Heart. This was much easier." Though I've always been under the interpretation that no one actually WANTS a Purple Heart, maybe he had it confused with the Medal of Honor or a Cartier broach.

Trumps reaction to Khan was stupid and disgraceful- he put his foot in his mouth big time.

But not quite as stupid and disgraceful as Kahn himself using the death of his son as political cache against Trump in the first place. That's pretty morbid and sick. Very disrespectful to his own son.

 

[-JD-]

Trumps reaction to Khan was stupid and disgraceful- he put his foot in his mouth big time.

But not quite as stupid and disgraceful as Kahn himself using the death of his son as political cache against Trump in the first place. That's pretty morbid and sick. Very disrespectful to his own son.

Just remember Trumps comments about Muslim's came first....

So IMO it was him who first disrespected their son, as a parent with a dead child I'm sure they see that as 'very disrespectful'.

 

[hikenbike]

at what point do we draw the line? why let the government dictate what business is allowed to fail?
if they can do that, they can also say who will be allowed to be successful.

what if walmart were in the same position, do we let the government prop them up?

a free market needs to be just that. I expect if it weren't for the governments involvement, those companies wouldn't have been in that position in the first place.

they have proven themselves over many times, they cannot do anything successfully. how the hell is it we keep letting them get involved with business? and some(such as yourself) advocate for them to do just that.

In as a unique a case as we had back during the bailout, yes. In general, absolutely not. So no, I don't at all advocate for it.....and I said that.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Thefishguy77]

Any parent using their lost child as a political token is disgraceful. Just because trump was disgraceful doesn't make it any better for them to act the same.

And was it any more or less disgraceful than when questioned about the men who gave their lives protecting those in Benghazi that the state department ignored when Hillary said what difference does it make regarding those young men that gave their all defending Americans. So who's is the lesser of evils. I don't know?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gunslinger-13]

Just remember Trumps comments about Muslim's came first....

So IMO it was him who first disrespected their son, as a parent with a dead child I'm sure they see that as 'very disrespectful'.

Kahn could have said a million things about Trumps position on Muslims without using his dead son as political fodder.

Using his son in that way was disrespectful and disgraceful on so many levels.

 

[-JD-]

To each their own I guess. I would think that as a parent you would want your child's death to mean something that may affect positive change in the world. Especially when the presidential candidate is advocating a policy that could exclude people like their son from being part of the country he was willing to die for.

Personally I think telling someone how they can or cannot respond to the death of their child is also quite disrespectful.
Also, I'm not entirely convinced that the "outrage" over them talking about their son's death as a means of affecting policy change isn't in itself political posturing from the right.

 

[ndcent]

Humayun Kahn was a hero and a patriot. His parents using his heroic service eight years after his death to make a point about how big a piece of shit Trump is I don't find particularly disgraceful, but that's great deflection as is the dead horse of Benghazi.

It's hilarious (read pathetic) conservatives pound away incessantly about Benghazi but never the dozens of American lives lost in forgiven embassies under the Bush administration. It's also quite miraculous (read ironic) they conveniently forget the GOP when gaining control of the house in 2011 began seeking cutting hundreds of millions of dollars in embassy security.

Conservatives love to stammer on about "personal responsibility" until it's time to actually have some.

 

[Thefishguy77]

Humayun Kahn was a hero and a patriot. His parents using his heroic service eight years after his death to make a point about how big a piece of shit Trump is I don't find particularly disgraceful, but that's great deflection as is the dead horse of Benghazi.



It's hilarious (read pathetic) conservatives pound away incessantly about Benghazi but never the dozens of American lives lost in forgiven embassies under the Bush administration. It's also quite miraculous (read ironic) they conveniently forget the GOP when gaining control of the house in 2011 began seeking cutting hundreds of millions of dollars in embassy security.



Conservatives love to stammer on about "personal responsibility" until it's time to actually have some.

I agree with much of what you said. But I disagree with the term conservative. There are very few conservatives in federally elected office at the moment. There are also very few democrats at the moment. It is a big bloated progressive group. As a group they are doing their best to keep us divided as a people. This is the only thing allowing them to maintain power. The NRA say they want to take your guns. (Hillary actually does). Most others campaign on it but understand it's virtually impossible). The left say they want to control your bodies and get in your womb. A few on the right want. To ban abortion. But. Most realize that this would be a terrible idea as we would end up with back alley clinics and many sick and graciously injured women with probably a high number of fatalities. So this is just a campaign slogan for them. It's sad that we all believe this rhetoric. If we all sat down and talked amongst ourselves we would make far better decisions vs letting the progressives keep us divided.

Don't flame me for this till you at least do some research. Take the tea party. In the first few weeks to about 8 weeks after it gained traction it was not a "right wing" group. It was founded of Americans that were sick of government taking advantage of them. There were democrats, republicans, independents all talking with each other. If you follow the timeline you can see a big push by the politicians through the media to divide it. The left said they are a bunch of gun toting redneck that want in your womb. The right said they want to take your guns and make you drive econo box cars. And the the independents said screw it and left. For a brief time we were all talking and it scared the sh*t out of the power to be. There was talk of term limits. Cutting pay for politicians and many other great ideas.

I have to go cook dinner so this is an incomplete thought but I think the meaning is clear.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ThorInc]

Does anyone get the impression that Trump wants to win POTUS but is not really interested in doing the actual job? It's a serious question.....his "positions" are all over the place.

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[Thefishguy77]

Does anyone get the impression that Trump wants to win POTUS but is not really interested in doing the actual job? It's a serious question.....his "positions" are all over the place.

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk

I think you just described all the major candidates I have seen run in the last 3-4 POTUS cycles. The office of the president is to uphold the constitution and listen to the people and defend the country. Obama and Bush have failed miserably at both. Clinton and George H. W weren't much better. But all came out much more wealthy than when they entered office.

Most of the candidates that would make good choices won't ever get a chance. Sad day


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk