Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 122

Thread: Trump Cancels Denmark Visit

  1. #71
    tWebber carpedm9587's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    12,601
    Amen (Given)
    26
    Amen (Received)
    1096
    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    I grant you aren't going that far - but you demonstrate an unrealistic confidence, at least in the post I quoted.
    OK - I went back and reread the post. I'm not seeing "confidence." I noted that I think a lot of people will be thinking about the last four years when they vote. I noted that his primary challengers had little hope of succeeding, and suggested one way in which they would likely succeed (challenge as an independent in the GE). Historically, such challenges have usually split the vote (at least to some degree) giving the victory to the opposite side. I doubt any of them is going to actually do that. So I don't see where you see "confidence."

    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    I think you aren't nearly selective enough. Look at the whole picture, yes - but know what parts are in the composition and which aren't.
    Yeah...we'll that's a sure formula for picking the data that will affirm my confirmation bias. No thanks - I think I will continue to look at the entire picture and all of the available data.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    Would that be the same 'fresh new idea' folks who are busily trying to shut down an anti-bigotry conference?


    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    The ones that have beaten people in the streets?
    As far as I know, none of these "fresh new faces" in our government have beaten anyone. Is there violence from the left and right in the streets? Absolutely - and it's all reprehensible. But let's not forget that every single death due to domestic terrorism in 2019 was perpetrated by a right-wing extremist, not a left wing one. As you move out to the extremes, the probability of violence increases. It's not a function of left/right, it's a function of degree of extremism. The data suggests that right wing extremism is far more out of control than left wing extremism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    The same ones that flee any real debate and shout down any dissent?


    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    The Tea Party even as misrepresented in the media was still better than that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    That would be correct - since the data you are relying on seems faulty to me. There is better evidence that moderates are leaving / being pushed out of the Democratic party - even some beginning to support Trump.
    The data I'm looking at is Trump's polling data for both job approval rating and election positions. It includes data from across the political polling spectrum. Even Rasmussin, notorious for their right-leaning slant on polls, has him under water. Then there is the growing economic news, showing that his tariffs are having a significant impact on his own base, and the degree to which they are beginning to ask themselves "why." Farm income down 12% in 2018. They are projected to rise 10% this year (if Trump's tariffs don't undermine the sector), which will still bring them in below 2017 numbers. Iowa land values have dropped 14% since 2014. In many of the states where Trump's strength is concentrated, his own base is not significantly benefiting from his programs and "gut" decisions. Indeed, numbers suggest that the modest gain the lower and middle classes saw from the "great tax cut" will be close to wiped out by increased costs due to tariffs. Since tariff's are a tax, it means the tax cut to these wage levels is basically erased by a tax increase few people talk about. Meanwhile, although unemployment has hit record lows (most of which was achieved under Obama, BTW), the 2.5M jobs cited for Mar 2018 through Mar 2019 appears to be about 500K too rich, and the average will be closer to 170K per month. Meanwhile, if we do encounter the recession many economists believe is coming, the fed has little wiggle room to cut rates (since they are still near the bottom) and there is little room to borrow further given the red ink being spilled by this administration, with a close to $1T deficit in a relatively healthy economy. Meanwhile, several of the indicators the Trump Administration was bragging about last September are showing downward trends since. Such trend lines are showing up in a wide array of economic data. Then there is the inverted yield curve, which I was amazed to hear Navarro deny was a stable predictor of recession (i.e., because it was only a flattened curve), when his own book said exactly the opposite.

    Sorry, Teal - the American people are not stupid. They can see when they are being conned - and I suspect a lot of them will know that in full measure by 11/3/2020.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    The Democrats are solidly insane - they are not unified, not even by their hatred of Trump.
    Wow... ... you really have gone off the deep end...

    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    The evidence actually favors the 'narrow squeak' - it wasn't - having been influenced by Google's bias - between 2 and 10 millions votes may have been influenced. So if you want to go with the popular vote - Clinton, without Google, might not have won anyway.
    What? Teal...votes are influenced by any number of factors, but where on earth you get evidence for this claim that "Google swung the election numbers" I have no clue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    Or you can look at it realistically - Trump's was a very sound win which should, but didn't, wake the Democratic Party to how much they are loosing the middle.
    Less than 100K votes in three states and failure to gain the popular vote is not a "solid win" by any measure I am familiar with.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    IF we use just the cross section of today - as if the election would be held tomorrow - there's no Democratic candidate with a realistic road to victory.
    The polls say otherwise.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    And honestly, all this recession talk is dangerous - if it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy, that's meat for Trump; if not, Trump can point to how the Dems want so badly to get him that they are HOPING to harm the middle and lower classes (Bill Maher has been giving him plenty of ammo here). Shy of a really major setback, you need the economy to be worse than it was under Obama for this to hurt Trump - and all those folks who finally found work aren't going to listen to 'maybe' from the Democrats.
    This is kind of cute. So Trump will win if the economy is good because presidents get credit for a good economy. But Trump will win if the economy is bad because Trump will blame the Democrats.

    And then you accuse me of irrational exuberance?
    Last edited by carpedm9587; 08-22-2019 at 02:20 PM.
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

  2. #72
    Professor KingsGambit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Triangle
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    10,398
    Amen (Given)
    1705
    Amen (Received)
    4558
    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    Denmark isn't a powerful ally - it just isn't. Rather than a gracious 'no, thanks' their PM decided to get snarky. No, he shouldn't have put up with that. There was no call for her to do that in the first place and in the second, whether she likes the guy or not, he is President of the United States and he didn't do anything wrong in simply asking.
    I think Trump forfeited the right to take umbrage to rude behavior (which this was not. He was the only one who behaved rudely by calling her "nasty") years ago. Seriously, I don't get your insistence on this point.
    "Technology has, in an enhanced way, given mockers a platform to set society on fire with polarizing speech. Internet culture privileges those whose insults are click bait." - Timothy Keller

  3. Amen Adrift, Charles amen'd this post.
  4. #73
    tWebber Teallaura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    In my house.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    14,523
    Amen (Given)
    8370
    Amen (Received)
    5362
    Quote Originally Posted by KingsGambit View Post
    I think Trump forfeited the right to take umbrage to rude behavior (which this was not. He was the only one who behaved rudely by calling her "nasty") years ago. Seriously, I don't get your insistence on this point.
    Under that logic, who hasn't?

    Whether he has the 'right' or not doesn't mean he didn't take umbrage - and he says he did so I'm going with yeah, that's what happened.

    Last edited by Teallaura; 08-22-2019 at 02:46 PM.

  5. #74
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    51,492
    Amen (Given)
    1090
    Amen (Received)
    18744
    Quote Originally Posted by DesertBerean View Post
    This is the second time I've heard this about Democrats and Obama. Where is this happening?
    A good piece here that I read at work at the WSJ but is behind a paywall at home: The 2020 Democrats Compete to Reject Barack Obama’s Legacy so the Puffington Host will have to do:

    Source: 2020 Democrats Face Deep Divide On Obama’s Legacy


    California Sen. Kamala Harris’ attack on former Vice President Joe Biden for decades ago opposing forced school busing as a way to combat segregation understandably dominated coverage of Thursday’s debate among 10 of the Democratic presidential candidates.

    But another moment revealed a different source of tension inside the Democratic Party, one that may play a significant role as the top contenders for its 2020 nomination seek to distinguish themselves from Biden: the legacy of the president he served as a loyal lieutenant, Barack Obama.

    NBC News moderator José Diaz-Balart prefaced a question about whether Biden would deport immigrants whose only offense was arriving in the U.S. without papers by noting that the “Obama-Biden administration deported more than 3 million Americans.”

    “President Obama I think did a heck of a job,” Biden shot back. “To compare him to what [President Donald Trump] is doing is absolutely ... immoral.” Biden went on to say that undocumented immigrants who have not committed a crime would not be “the focus of deportation.”

    Unlike Biden, Harris unequivocally committed to ruling out the deportation of individuals whose sole violation was entering the U.S. without documentation. And she did so by giving her version of how she broke with the Obama administration’s deportation policies during her tenure as California’s attorney general.

    “On this issue, I disagreed with my president, because the policy was to allow deportation of people who by [the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency’s] own definition were non-criminals,” she said.

    Harris’ comments were an exaggeration, at best. During a tumultuous fight over a “sanctuary state” law in California designed specifically to circumvent the Obama administration’s aggressive immigration policies, Harris was, to the lasting frustration of immigrants rights activists, unwilling to publicly advocate for the law.

    Still, the divergent responses reflect one of the defining cleavages in the Democratic primary field between candidates like Harris willing to take on Obama’s policies, those like Biden who plan to restore them, and variations in between.

    To be sure, candidates eager to break with Obama’s legacy must contend with his sky-high popularity among Democratic voters. A whopping 71% of Democrats said he was the best president of their lifetime in a July 2018 Pew poll. Obama had a 97% approval rating among Democrats in January 2018. And in a survey released in March of this year, the percentage of party members identifying themselves as “Obama Democrats” edged out those preferring the labels of liberal, moderate or conservative Democrat.

    “We are so scared to criticize Obama because he is a beloved figure,” said Irene Lin, who served in his Obama administration’s Departments of Agriculture and Housing and Urban Development and worked for his 2012 re-election effort.

    But Lin, who is not a fan of what she sees as Obama’s light-touch approach to corporate monopolies and big banks, suggested an alternative path: “You can separate the person from the policy. I love Barack Obama.”

    Post-Partisanship Meets The ‘Political Revolution’

    Broadly speaking, the Democratic presidential hopefuls’ approach to Obama and his legacy can be broken into three camps.

    On one side, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has been the most vocal and persistent critic of the former president ― including while Obama was in office. In 2011, as Obama pursued a fiscal “grand bargain” with Republicans that would cut Social Security benefits, Sanders went on the warpath against him. In comments to progressive radio talk show host Thom Hartmann’s radio show, Sanders said millions of Americans were “deeply disappointed in the president” and could not “believe how weak he has been,” before suggesting that Obama merited a primary challenge in 2012 (that didn’t happen).

    Sanders also has assailed Obama for his neglect of the Democratic Party at its grassroots levels. During an April 2018 event in Mississippi commemorating the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s assassination, Sanders said that “the business model ... of the Democratic Party for the last 15 years or so has been a failure.”

    “People sometimes don’t see that because there was a charismatic individual named Barack Obama,” Sanders said to notable silence. “But behind that reality, over the last 10 years, Democrats have lost about 1,000 seats in state legislatures all across this country.”

    Sanders’ divergence with Obama, however, is clearest not when he specifically mentions the former president but in framing his candidacy as a movement to overturn the “establishment politics and establishment economics” of both parties. The premise of his presidential campaigns, in 2016 and now again, is that money has corrupted politicians of all stripes, preventing the adoption of policies like Medicare for All and free college that a majority of the public supports.

    Where Obama saw transcending partisanship as the key to progress, Sanders focuses on replacing corporate influence with an empowered electorate.

    “Make no mistake about it, this struggle is not just about defeating Donald Trump,” Sanders declared at his campaign launch rally in Brooklyn in March. “This struggle is about taking on the incredibly powerful institutions that control the economic and political life of this country.”

    Sanders has undeniably pushed the boundaries of discourse with the Democratic Party to the left. The clearest example of this is on health care. Harris and three other senators in the 2020 race ― Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Kristen Gillibrand of New York and Cory Booker of New Jersey ― are all co-sponsors of Sanders’ “Medicare for All” bill. And in a sign of the issue’s growing resonance, the percentage of voters who support a single-payer health care system rose from 40% in 2000 to 56% today, according to a survey by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

    A narrow majority of Democratic voters ― 54% ― want the next president to continue Obama’s policies, according to a HuffPost/YouGov poll released in May. Nearly one-third of these voters ― 31% ― want a president who is more liberal than Obama; among those 35 or younger, that figure jumps to 45%.

    Sanders and other progressive contenders will try to tap into this rising demographic ― while also seeking to persuade the large swath of voters fond of Obama that policies that go well beyond what he tried to achieve aren’t necessarily a ding on his legacy.

    The ‘Obama-Biden Democrat’

    On the other side of the spectrum is Biden, who has cast himself as the next best thing to an Obama third term. Some of his biggest applause lines on the stump are when he waxes sentimental about “my friend Barack,” celebrating his partnership with an “incredible president.”

    Unlike most of his rivals in the primary field, Biden insists that if Trump is denied re-election, history will regard his presidency as an “aberration,” rather than the culmination of structural forces roiling U.S. politics for decades beforehand.

    Indeed, Biden is running on a return to the normalcy of the Obama era, which he casts as a period of moderate policies and bipartisanship. In a speech in Hampton, New Hampshire, in mid-May, Biden said he wanted to “restore the soul of the nation.”

    Later on, he suggested that the country didn’t need to look that far back for inspiration. “Speaking of Barack, I think he didn’t get nearly the kind of credit ― he was one heck of a president, a man of integrity, honor, decency,” Biden said, drawing sustained applause.

    “There’s a yearning that we can get past this intense partisan polarization and warfare that has intensified under Trump,” said Jim Kessler, policy chief of the business-friendly Democratic think tank Third Way and a former aide to Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). “Not that the Obama time was not polarized ― it certainly was ― but there was an attempt to not be.”

    But even Biden has made his peace with some more popular elements of the party’s leftward shift since Obama’s departure from the White House. He now supports a federal minimum wage of $15, which Obama never endorsed, and the creation of an option to buy into Medicare, a version of which Obama supported as a candidate before jettisoning it as president.

    Biden was skeptical of pursuing what became one of the hallmarks of Obama’s tenure ― the 2010 passage of the Affordable Care Act ― but he now claims it as one of the proudest moments of his service in the Obama administration. In proposing ways to improve the ACA, including the creation of a Medicare buy-in, Biden nonetheless admits that the law failed to provide universal coverage or provide affordable care for millions of people who have insurance.

    “We’ve got to finish the job on health care,” Biden said in a speech to Democrats in Manchester in mid-May.

    That kind of incremental vision is in keeping with Obama’s approach, in Kessler’s view. “The Obama legacy was never meant to be a static thing,” he said. “Democrats are always moving forward and trying to be right for the particular time we’re in.”

    ‘The Last Democratic President Of The Reagan Era’

    In the space between the two, other candidates like Harris, Booker, Warren and former Rep. Beto O’Rourke of Texas have found ways to question the outcomes of the Obama era ― without being seen to attack Obama or his legacy.

    South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg has perhaps been the most direct among them when he told The New York Times podcast “The Argument” that “being to the left of Obama doesn’t make you extremely progressive. Remember he was the last Democratic president of the Reagan era,” constrained by political dynamics that no longer apply.

    Warren also has not shied away from drawing policy differences with Obama, while refraining from criticizing him explicitly. Her positioning is striking, however, since it offers a stark contrast with much of her political career.

    From the moment she was appointed as Congress’ overseer of the bank bailout funds in 2009, Warren made clear she thought the Obama administration was too cozy with Wall Street. As a senator during Obama’s second term, she adhered to that stance as she sank the nomination of investment banker Antonio Weiss for a top Treasury job and joined with Sanders in opposing the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal.

    But when HuffPost asked Warren which of Obama’s policy decisions she blamed for contributing to the Democrats’ historic losses of federal and state legislative seats under his watch, she declined to directly answer. Without naming Obama or any of his policies though, she managed to issue a broad indictment of Democratic messaging in recent years.

    “For far too long, we have not gotten out and made the case for investing not in the top, but investing in the rest of America. We make that case, I believe we’re going to win in 2020, and that’s up and down” the ballot, she said.

    Warren’s approach has won her praise from unexpected quarters. Asked whether criticism he directs at Sanders for veering too way to the left of Obama extended to Warren, Third Way’s Kessler, who blasted her in the pages of The Wall Street Journal in December 2013, replied, “She’s running an excellent campaign.”

    Other candidates have laid out ambitious environmental plans that go well beyond anything Obama proposed. O’Rourke would place a moratorium on oil and gas drilling on federal lands ― drilling that Obama encouraged. And Washington Gov. Jay Inslee wants to launch a massive green infrastructure program, far more ambitious than the carbon pricing and regulatory approach Obama favored.

    Some candidates have already tacitly acknowledged that shaking Biden free from his lead in the polls might require gently taking on the Obama legacy that helps buoy him. Without mentioning either Obama or Biden, Booker has added a section to his stump speech that asks voters to look beyond a restoration of the pre-Trump status quo.

    “If you want somebody to run for president and the only thing you want is to beat Donald Trump — well, I can beat Donald Trump, but I’m telling you that that’s the wrong measure,” he told a crowd in Berlin, New Hampshire, earlier this month.

    “We all should be demanding so much more, because the problems of the (state’s rural) north country, the problems of Newark, New Jersey ― so many of our challenges were going on well before Donald Trump was president of the United States,” he said.



    Source

    © Copyright Original Source



    [*The article continues at the link above*]


    Another behind a paywall, this time the WaPo: Joe Biden wants opponents to stop attacking the Obama's record
    Last edited by rogue06; 08-22-2019 at 02:34 PM.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" -- starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)

  6. Amen Teallaura amen'd this post.
  7. #75
    tWebber Teallaura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    In my house.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    14,523
    Amen (Given)
    8370
    Amen (Received)
    5362
    Quote Originally Posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    OK - I went back and reread the post. I'm not seeing "confidence." I noted that I think a lot of people will be thinking about the last four years when they vote. I noted that his primary challengers had little hope of succeeding, and suggested one way in which they would likely succeed (challenge as an independent in the GE). Historically, such challenges have usually split the vote (at least to some degree) giving the victory to the opposite side. I doubt any of them is going to actually do that. So I don't see where you see "confidence."
    Then you evidently didn't read the rest of the post you just made!



    Yeah...we'll that's a sure formula for picking the data that will affirm my confirmation bias. No thanks - I think I will continue to look at the entire picture and all of the available data.
    Oh lookie - a squirrel. Relevant data is what matters - 'all available' is just weeds.

    Evidently the news isn't 'relevant data'.



    As far as I know, none of these "fresh new faces" in our government have beaten anyone. Is there violence from the left and right in the streets? Absolutely - and it's all reprehensible. But let's not forget that every single death due to domestic terrorism in 2019 was perpetrated by a right-wing extremist, not a left wing one. As you move out to the extremes, the probability of violence increases. It's not a function of left/right, it's a function of degree of extremism. The data suggests that right wing extremism is far more out of control than left wing extremism.
    Then you aren't paying very close attention to just how radical part of your party has become - and how much your candidates are pandering to them.


    I know you have a computer so it's your own fault if you're not paying attention.


    Oh cute - but you aren't that stupid so no.



    The data I'm looking at is Trump's polling data for both job approval rating and election positions. It includes data from across the political polling spectrum. Even Rasmussin, notorious for their right-leaning slant on polls, has him under water. Then there is the growing economic news, showing that his tariffs are having a significant impact on his own base, and the degree to which they are beginning to ask themselves "why." Farm income down 12% in 2018. They are projected to rise 10% this year (if Trump's tariffs don't undermine the sector), which will still bring them in below 2017 numbers. Iowa land values have dropped 14% since 2014. In many of the states where Trump's strength is concentrated, his own base is not significantly benefiting from his programs and "gut" decisions. Indeed, numbers suggest that the modest gain the lower and middle classes saw from the "great tax cut" will be close to wiped out by increased costs due to tariffs. Since tariff's are a tax, it means the tax cut to these wage levels is basically erased by a tax increase few people talk about. Meanwhile, although unemployment has hit record lows (most of which was achieved under Obama, BTW), the 2.5M jobs cited for Mar 2018 through Mar 2019 appears to be about 500K too rich, and the average will be closer to 170K per month. Meanwhile, if we do encounter the recession many economists believe is coming, the fed has little wiggle room to cut rates (since they are still near the bottom) and there is little room to borrow further given the red ink being spilled by this administration, with a close to $1T deficit in a relatively healthy economy. Meanwhile, several of the indicators the Trump Administration was bragging about last September are showing downward trends since. Such trend lines are showing up in a wide array of economic data. Then there is the inverted yield curve, which I was amazed to hear Navarro deny was a stable predictor of recession (i.e., because it was only a flattened curve), when his own book said exactly the opposite.
    It's TOO EARLY - polling data at this point are nothing but weeds.

    Trends are useful - but you actually can't use cross sections to predict the future. This is bad analysis - yeah, everyone does it but it's still bad.

    There is some useful data - but you're looking at the wrong stuff. Don't care if his approval rating is low - it's a bad metric and hasn't stopped Congress in forty years - and probably not any president since Carter and I wouldn't swear to Carter (Reagan was a much better candidate just as Clinton was up against Bush Sr)

    Sorry, Teal - the American people are not stupid. They can see when they are being conned - and I suspect a lot of them will know that in full measure by 11/3/2020.
    No, they aren't - which is very bad news for the Democrats. Get nose out of the racing sheets and look at how badly the horse is limping.


    Wow... ... you really have gone off the deep end...
    Translation: Dang she's right - gotta dodge!



    What? Teal...votes are influenced by any number of factors, but where on earth you get evidence for this claim that "Google swung the election numbers" I have no clue.
    Good grief - you really DON'T watch news AT ALL, do you? Clinton herself referenced it - trying to defend herself by calling a Harvard professor's peer reviewed paper 'debunked' despite the fact that it hasn't been - and he's a Clinton supporter.



    Less than 100K votes in three states and failure to gain the popular vote is not a "solid win" by any measure I am familiar with.
    304 to 227 is a solid win - and it would have been 306 had Texas cast all its votes. And you knew perfectly good and well what I meant. Really are worried, huh?



    The polls say otherwise.
    Polls are too early to matter.



    This is kind of cute. So Trump will win if the economy is good because presidents get credit for a good economy. But Trump will win if the economy is bad because Trump will blame the Democrats.
    yep - because the media is setting it up that way in an attempt to cause a recession - or get clicks, one.

    And then you accuse me of irrational exuberance?
    Yup - I'm not dumb enough to say Trump will likely win where you keep arguing that he will likely lose. I'm just saying he would win if we held the election today. If the Democrats run a crappy candidate, all the polls in the world won't help them win. And all they have in their bloated field are lack luster candidates - exactly what they cannot afford. Democrats historically don't turn out unless motivated - four years of 'orange man bad' isn't going to provide the necessary momentum to get Millineal backsides off the couch.

  8. Amen Sparko, Cerebrum123 amen'd this post.
  9. #76
    Professor KingsGambit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Triangle
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    10,398
    Amen (Given)
    1705
    Amen (Received)
    4558
    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    Under that logic, who hasn't?
    Meh, I think people can be excused for blowing up every once in awhile if they normally keep an even keel. But I'm thinking more of workplace politics and my days of doing three people's work and then expressing mild frustration very rarely. I'm not very invested in this particular issue.
    "Technology has, in an enhanced way, given mockers a platform to set society on fire with polarizing speech. Internet culture privileges those whose insults are click bait." - Timothy Keller

  10. Amen Teallaura amen'd this post.
  11. #77
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    5,224
    Amen (Given)
    289
    Amen (Received)
    1542
    Quote Originally Posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Are you done modifying your post yet?

    I agree, a 12 year old might have difficulty distinguishing between the aptness of your and MM's characterizations of each other.
    12 year olds think they've accomplished something when they play sneaky games insulting people. Just like you.

    Jim

  12. Amen JimL amen'd this post.
  13. #78
    Must...have...caffeine One Bad Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Inside the beltway
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    20,951
    Amen (Given)
    6130
    Amen (Received)
    11751
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    12 year olds think they've accomplished something when they play sneaky games insulting people. Just like you.

    Jim
    I'm under no illusion that I'm accomplishing anything here. I really should put you on quick-scroll.
    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio

    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

  14. #79
    tWebber Teallaura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    In my house.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    14,523
    Amen (Given)
    8370
    Amen (Received)
    5362
    Quote Originally Posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    I'm under no illusion that I'm accomplishing anything here. I really should put you on quick-scroll.
    *emphasis mine

    We have that?

  15. #80
    Must...have...caffeine One Bad Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Inside the beltway
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    20,951
    Amen (Given)
    6130
    Amen (Received)
    11751
    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    *emphasis mine

    We have that?
    No. We have "ignore" - which I'm not supposed to do as a staff member. All I can do is try to not read his posts - hence, 'quick-scroll'.
    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio

    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •