I just had time to read the responses on my dinner break, but I wanted to reply to Wall about what his ideals that were posted to KC in post #21.
The only poster that is left or left leaning that came into this thread is you, and third. Thirds post is actually not argumentative and on point with the topic. Usually those posts are contradictory of what was posted. So that leaves you, we were talking amongst ourselves on a topic that is non offensive and not directed towards any other poster
Can you take your own advice then? It seems you just cant help yourself when a group talks about stuff that you don't agree with. Where in the site rules does it say a poster cant have topics or discussions that don't line up with the ideals of a biased moderator. Is this Covers.com or is it Wallstreetsmancave.com
this is a perfect example of when someone of authority get power and it goes right to their head
4
I just had time to read the responses on my dinner break, but I wanted to reply to Wall about what his ideals that were posted to KC in post #21.
The only poster that is left or left leaning that came into this thread is you, and third. Thirds post is actually not argumentative and on point with the topic. Usually those posts are contradictory of what was posted. So that leaves you, we were talking amongst ourselves on a topic that is non offensive and not directed towards any other poster
Can you take your own advice then? It seems you just cant help yourself when a group talks about stuff that you don't agree with. Where in the site rules does it say a poster cant have topics or discussions that don't line up with the ideals of a biased moderator. Is this Covers.com or is it Wallstreetsmancave.com
this is a perfect example of when someone of authority get power and it goes right to their head
with hope that Wall wakes up on the right side of the bed on Friday(meaning not the wrong side of the bed) I wanted to put an iconic phase to start this post.
Does "what has been" (the past) work to "unburden" "what can be" (the future), or is "what has been" a possible burden on "what can be" ??
now that's some deep thoughts, usually Spock is the one who drops these, but this is a one off here. No one can steal that thunder!!
Can be is, by what unburdened has been what - Yoda
This is every president elect's problem. They have to exist in the context of what has come before, but that doesn't mean that context must be a burden, it might just be useful information. We can learn from history without being dragged down by it.
Just to note, in post #1 I did address the current inflation with the new budget spending, it's up 40% from last fiscal year or 242 billion in the same time period as last fiscal year spending. Look at the post man, it literally says that government lacks brain power or is ignorant to balance. Most would argue that it's both those points, so don't get cranky and tag this as partisan because I said the Left doesn't agree with these spending cuts when that is 100% fact
I am just a student with economists so if you want to check mate, be humble for shit's sake
1
"What can be, unburdened by what has been"
with hope that Wall wakes up on the right side of the bed on Friday(meaning not the wrong side of the bed) I wanted to put an iconic phase to start this post.
Does "what has been" (the past) work to "unburden" "what can be" (the future), or is "what has been" a possible burden on "what can be" ??
now that's some deep thoughts, usually Spock is the one who drops these, but this is a one off here. No one can steal that thunder!!
Can be is, by what unburdened has been what - Yoda
This is every president elect's problem. They have to exist in the context of what has come before, but that doesn't mean that context must be a burden, it might just be useful information. We can learn from history without being dragged down by it.
Just to note, in post #1 I did address the current inflation with the new budget spending, it's up 40% from last fiscal year or 242 billion in the same time period as last fiscal year spending. Look at the post man, it literally says that government lacks brain power or is ignorant to balance. Most would argue that it's both those points, so don't get cranky and tag this as partisan because I said the Left doesn't agree with these spending cuts when that is 100% fact
I am just a student with economists so if you want to check mate, be humble for shit's sake
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2: MSN - Dec 12 Dumbass racist & fascist supporter Marjorie Taylor Greene repeats her claim that Democrats are "pedophiles" typical of maga racists like her to say something so stupid
before its deleted BTW
1
Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964:
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2: MSN - Dec 12 Dumbass racist & fascist supporter Marjorie Taylor Greene repeats her claim that Democrats are "pedophiles" typical of maga racists like her to say something so stupid
How would you go about 0increasing taxes and what would you cut spending on if you were the govt? ..
Tax cuts account for roughly half of federal budget deficits. Allowing Trump unnecessary tax cuts to expire is recommended by congress budget office. Without numerous tax cuts, past projections show there would have been sufficient tax revenue to cover unexpected emergencies in the future. US tax rates are dangerously low when compared to other countries. But the most painless way to increase tax revenue is through economic growth.
History of other countries reveal that spending cuts don't work as well as tax increases. Risk of not really saving money in the long term if disadvantages exceed advantages. For example, premature dismantling of pandemic response team before 2020. Significant savings can only come from trimming big departments. So better to mandate a percentage cut from all departments instead of eliminating small departments.
1
Quote Originally Posted by BigGame90:
How would you go about 0increasing taxes and what would you cut spending on if you were the govt? ..
Tax cuts account for roughly half of federal budget deficits. Allowing Trump unnecessary tax cuts to expire is recommended by congress budget office. Without numerous tax cuts, past projections show there would have been sufficient tax revenue to cover unexpected emergencies in the future. US tax rates are dangerously low when compared to other countries. But the most painless way to increase tax revenue is through economic growth.
History of other countries reveal that spending cuts don't work as well as tax increases. Risk of not really saving money in the long term if disadvantages exceed advantages. For example, premature dismantling of pandemic response team before 2020. Significant savings can only come from trimming big departments. So better to mandate a percentage cut from all departments instead of eliminating small departments.
Quote Originally Posted by BigGame90: How would you go about 0increasing taxes and what would you cut spending on if you were the govt? .. Tax cuts account for roughly half of federal budget deficits. Allowing Trump unnecessary tax cuts to expire is recommended by congress budget office. Without numerous tax cuts, past projections show there would have been sufficient tax revenue to cover unexpected emergencies in the future. US tax rates are dangerously low when compared to other countries. But the most painless way to increase tax revenue is through economic growth. History of other countries reveal that spending cuts don't work as well as tax increases. Risk of not really saving money in the long term if disadvantages exceed advantages. For example, premature dismantling of pandemic response team before 2020. Significant savings can only come from trimming big departments. So better to mandate a percentage cut from all departments instead of eliminating small departments.
2
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
Quote Originally Posted by BigGame90: How would you go about 0increasing taxes and what would you cut spending on if you were the govt? .. Tax cuts account for roughly half of federal budget deficits. Allowing Trump unnecessary tax cuts to expire is recommended by congress budget office. Without numerous tax cuts, past projections show there would have been sufficient tax revenue to cover unexpected emergencies in the future. US tax rates are dangerously low when compared to other countries. But the most painless way to increase tax revenue is through economic growth. History of other countries reveal that spending cuts don't work as well as tax increases. Risk of not really saving money in the long term if disadvantages exceed advantages. For example, premature dismantling of pandemic response team before 2020. Significant savings can only come from trimming big departments. So better to mandate a percentage cut from all departments instead of eliminating small departments.
Quote Originally Posted by BigGame90: How would you go about 0increasing taxes and what would you cut spending on if you were the govt? .. Tax cuts account for roughly half of federal budget deficits. Allowing Trump unnecessary tax cuts to expire is recommended by congress budget office. Without numerous tax cuts, past projections show there would have been sufficient tax revenue to cover unexpected emergencies in the future. US tax rates are dangerously low when compared to other countries. But the most painless way to increase tax revenue is through economic growth. History of other countries reveal that spending cuts don't work as well as tax increases. Risk of not really saving money in the long term if disadvantages exceed advantages. For example, premature dismantling of pandemic response team before 2020. Significant savings can only come from trimming big departments. So better to mandate a percentage cut from all departments instead of eliminating small departments.
Dementia Joe has the fix........he's gonna auction off all "The Wall" materials for pennies.
2
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
Quote Originally Posted by BigGame90: How would you go about 0increasing taxes and what would you cut spending on if you were the govt? .. Tax cuts account for roughly half of federal budget deficits. Allowing Trump unnecessary tax cuts to expire is recommended by congress budget office. Without numerous tax cuts, past projections show there would have been sufficient tax revenue to cover unexpected emergencies in the future. US tax rates are dangerously low when compared to other countries. But the most painless way to increase tax revenue is through economic growth. History of other countries reveal that spending cuts don't work as well as tax increases. Risk of not really saving money in the long term if disadvantages exceed advantages. For example, premature dismantling of pandemic response team before 2020. Significant savings can only come from trimming big departments. So better to mandate a percentage cut from all departments instead of eliminating small departments.
Dementia Joe has the fix........he's gonna auction off all "The Wall" materials for pennies.
@soup-can Problem is you make it partisan and when you do that there is absolutely zero value you are adding and in fact you take away from the purpose of this forum and site. The deficit is not about Biden or the evil liberal left because it is congress who passes spending bills and it is congress that can stop spending even if the POTUS is a nasty evil leftist socialist. Congress made this deficit, congress has made all the deficits through all the decades of their increases, for you to try and make it out that this deficit is worse and that it is because of Biden and the left is stupid it really is just flat out stupid, it is also combative it adds no value and is a total waste of time. I could easily suggest that the deficits under Trump were a multiple more harmful and destructive than those under Biden and I have plenty of logic to support it. Trump had ZIRP where the interest on debt was slashed and is nothing like the interest the government now pays. Did your partisan analysis do a comparison of interest payments from Trump vs Biden? Did the analysis take into consideration the global inflation we are facing or that the pandemic impacted spending? The pandemic was not Biden, inflation is not Biden. Inflation is in every country in the world and some countries it is far worse but funny how partisan lackeys want to act like the entire cause of inflation is Biden and the left. Its a waste of time making partisan threads that are not rooted in logic or fact and do not give the proper and accurate full information on a topic. That is why certain threads get tossed out, when a thread is nothing but partisan throw up it serves no purpose. The idea of this forum is not to fight with the other party it is not to try and antagonize other members or tear down a political party for entertainment. Why not try to engage in real conversation instead of this sad sack poor me stuff so you can have open range target practice on the evil left members here? Are you really just not interested in conversation just to kick the left? If so please leave and do not continue posting here, go find some ultra right wing hula party reddit group and live your best life there...this is not the place for trashy partisan nonsense.
So I am interested in what those large number of Trump fans have to say about our awful fiscal performance since he has been in office and when will he and the GOP be held accountable?
Trump would love nothing more than to get negative rates and start up the 100 year bond, soak this country in TRILLIONS of debt and leave to resume golfing.
SURE WAS PARTISAN THEN.
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
@soup-can Problem is you make it partisan and when you do that there is absolutely zero value you are adding and in fact you take away from the purpose of this forum and site. The deficit is not about Biden or the evil liberal left because it is congress who passes spending bills and it is congress that can stop spending even if the POTUS is a nasty evil leftist socialist. Congress made this deficit, congress has made all the deficits through all the decades of their increases, for you to try and make it out that this deficit is worse and that it is because of Biden and the left is stupid it really is just flat out stupid, it is also combative it adds no value and is a total waste of time. I could easily suggest that the deficits under Trump were a multiple more harmful and destructive than those under Biden and I have plenty of logic to support it. Trump had ZIRP where the interest on debt was slashed and is nothing like the interest the government now pays. Did your partisan analysis do a comparison of interest payments from Trump vs Biden? Did the analysis take into consideration the global inflation we are facing or that the pandemic impacted spending? The pandemic was not Biden, inflation is not Biden. Inflation is in every country in the world and some countries it is far worse but funny how partisan lackeys want to act like the entire cause of inflation is Biden and the left. Its a waste of time making partisan threads that are not rooted in logic or fact and do not give the proper and accurate full information on a topic. That is why certain threads get tossed out, when a thread is nothing but partisan throw up it serves no purpose. The idea of this forum is not to fight with the other party it is not to try and antagonize other members or tear down a political party for entertainment. Why not try to engage in real conversation instead of this sad sack poor me stuff so you can have open range target practice on the evil left members here? Are you really just not interested in conversation just to kick the left? If so please leave and do not continue posting here, go find some ultra right wing hula party reddit group and live your best life there...this is not the place for trashy partisan nonsense.
So I am interested in what those large number of Trump fans have to say about our awful fiscal performance since he has been in office and when will he and the GOP be held accountable?
Trump would love nothing more than to get negative rates and start up the 100 year bond, soak this country in TRILLIONS of debt and leave to resume golfing.
When you can answer this simple question, I will leave it alone.....until then, you are what perception says you are. Like it or not, you have made your bed and now must lie in it.
1. "Value added in a post"
Who determines what is "value" and what determines if it really is "valuable" information.
Simple question, should be a simple answer for you without having to write four paragraphs on your imaginary "moral superiority" over why you personally don't like my interaction in this cesspool sub.
America First
1
@wallstreetcappers
When you can answer this simple question, I will leave it alone.....until then, you are what perception says you are. Like it or not, you have made your bed and now must lie in it.
1. "Value added in a post"
Who determines what is "value" and what determines if it really is "valuable" information.
Simple question, should be a simple answer for you without having to write four paragraphs on your imaginary "moral superiority" over why you personally don't like my interaction in this cesspool sub.
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers: A message like this really is not educating anyone or giving insight. Instead of complaining about the left again via this message why not go into depth about what caused the increase, what changed what happened. Since congress pushes spending not a political party alone the CORRECT thread is not about LEFT rather about reckless spending from congress. Regarding Musk, the only single way I would ever respect this sham those two want to pull is if Musk gives up two things and gives one thing...gives up federal freebies from elec cars, that is one and number two is gives up the sham carbon credits he gets to hoard because his company is grouped in with the gas engine based category even though his company is NOT in the same classification. Tesla is the biggest scam company in this country, Elon scams left and right from fed freebies to carbon credits to having massive ops in China and being able to function back and forth with ZERO tariffs or penalties. On the give up space he should agree to tariffs and also have his SpaceX company billed for carbon credits usage since his rockets create MASSIVE pollution and his company is a private profit entity. So will Musk put his big fat butt on the line in order to properly and fairly be involved with government cuts? Of course not, he is a corporate schmuck just like all the others and the way his company only survives off credits and carbon trading is an enormous theft which taxpayers foot and he has personally profited BILLIONS for the opportunity. So in other words he gets stuff done.
In other words he is a corporatist scammer who has no place in government. He has a multitude of conflicts of interest and has no place making any commentary about government spending, same goes for swami the hedge hog.
1
Quote Originally Posted by unplucked_gem:
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers: A message like this really is not educating anyone or giving insight. Instead of complaining about the left again via this message why not go into depth about what caused the increase, what changed what happened. Since congress pushes spending not a political party alone the CORRECT thread is not about LEFT rather about reckless spending from congress. Regarding Musk, the only single way I would ever respect this sham those two want to pull is if Musk gives up two things and gives one thing...gives up federal freebies from elec cars, that is one and number two is gives up the sham carbon credits he gets to hoard because his company is grouped in with the gas engine based category even though his company is NOT in the same classification. Tesla is the biggest scam company in this country, Elon scams left and right from fed freebies to carbon credits to having massive ops in China and being able to function back and forth with ZERO tariffs or penalties. On the give up space he should agree to tariffs and also have his SpaceX company billed for carbon credits usage since his rockets create MASSIVE pollution and his company is a private profit entity. So will Musk put his big fat butt on the line in order to properly and fairly be involved with government cuts? Of course not, he is a corporate schmuck just like all the others and the way his company only survives off credits and carbon trading is an enormous theft which taxpayers foot and he has personally profited BILLIONS for the opportunity. So in other words he gets stuff done.
In other words he is a corporatist scammer who has no place in government. He has a multitude of conflicts of interest and has no place making any commentary about government spending, same goes for swami the hedge hog.
We already went down this path and your negative antagonistic approach means there is no possibility for discussion. You know the answer to your question, for you it is a PARTISAN complaint, that we all know. Your mind works in left and right so you have the answer you feel is accurate. It is not accurate but you have the answer you have crafted so why do we go back and forth? You with partisan whining and personal digs at me, me pointing at the site guidelines and reasonable discussion protocol then you running and hiding in your partisan dog house to bark at me again.
You know my answer, Ive said it many times, I know your partisan retort as you have said it many times. What else is there but your condescending rhetoric towards me?
2
@kcblitzkrieg
We already went down this path and your negative antagonistic approach means there is no possibility for discussion. You know the answer to your question, for you it is a PARTISAN complaint, that we all know. Your mind works in left and right so you have the answer you feel is accurate. It is not accurate but you have the answer you have crafted so why do we go back and forth? You with partisan whining and personal digs at me, me pointing at the site guidelines and reasonable discussion protocol then you running and hiding in your partisan dog house to bark at me again.
You know my answer, Ive said it many times, I know your partisan retort as you have said it many times. What else is there but your condescending rhetoric towards me?
The phrase has a different meaning than I guess the two of you understand and that is quite OK actually.
I certainly do not understand the different meaning. Just thought it was funny because I assumed it was a simple autocorrect or just a mixup of phrases.
So, what did you think it meant if you meant it exactly the way it came out?
0
@wallstreetcappers
The phrase has a different meaning than I guess the two of you understand and that is quite OK actually.
I certainly do not understand the different meaning. Just thought it was funny because I assumed it was a simple autocorrect or just a mixup of phrases.
So, what did you think it meant if you meant it exactly the way it came out?
Oh contraire mujere I would never back down from discussing a point even from someone antagonistic and petty like you are. You cannot even control your anger and temper it is flying off the pages here because you think one persons actions or posts or threads validate yours or those you agree with and you use tilted logic to defend your breaking the rules because someone else posts things and that makes it ok for you to as well.
LMAO there you go again putting emotions into the equation when there is no emotion coming from my side. “anger and temper flying off the page”. Ho lee sheet. Where do you get this from? You must be baiting me here as I’m on record this site is for entertainment purposes only and we are all just words typed on a screen. This is not real life and I do not treat it as such, you may and that is fine, it is your right and livelihood to do so. I wont’ get in your way on that. Similarly to when you try to put words into others’ mouths or act like you know 100% what someone else is thinking or what they meant. If someone can’t properly articulate or explain their thinking then it is not your job to jump in and defend them with your own thoughts and opinions, as you did the other day with reference to the “pep talk” thread you mentioned. It’s a bunch of horse manure. You don’t know anything about what someone else is thinking or feeling. That is called conjecture buddy and unless you can read minds then that is what you are guilty of. You want to bring up past occurrences but you still can’t show me how I’m “breaking the rules”. I posted the rules & guidelines page for you and asked to show me where I am in violation. Nope couldn’t pull that one off successfully could you huh.
America First
0
@wallstreetcappers
Oh contraire mujere I would never back down from discussing a point even from someone antagonistic and petty like you are. You cannot even control your anger and temper it is flying off the pages here because you think one persons actions or posts or threads validate yours or those you agree with and you use tilted logic to defend your breaking the rules because someone else posts things and that makes it ok for you to as well.
LMAO there you go again putting emotions into the equation when there is no emotion coming from my side. “anger and temper flying off the page”. Ho lee sheet. Where do you get this from? You must be baiting me here as I’m on record this site is for entertainment purposes only and we are all just words typed on a screen. This is not real life and I do not treat it as such, you may and that is fine, it is your right and livelihood to do so. I wont’ get in your way on that. Similarly to when you try to put words into others’ mouths or act like you know 100% what someone else is thinking or what they meant. If someone can’t properly articulate or explain their thinking then it is not your job to jump in and defend them with your own thoughts and opinions, as you did the other day with reference to the “pep talk” thread you mentioned. It’s a bunch of horse manure. You don’t know anything about what someone else is thinking or feeling. That is called conjecture buddy and unless you can read minds then that is what you are guilty of. You want to bring up past occurrences but you still can’t show me how I’m “breaking the rules”. I posted the rules & guidelines page for you and asked to show me where I am in violation. Nope couldn’t pull that one off successfully could you huh.
You told me that you did not need a pep talk when I explained the answer (again) to your complaint the other day. Oh I am the last the very last person on this site to step away from a hot topic but the problem is we have done this so many times and I bring every single thing to the center of the discussion, to the rules and guidelines of the site and you cannot refute it you rationalize it from what someone else did or does and that will never stick with me or the site. Your words threads comments stalking attacking combative content is yours alone not related to anyone else but you. That is the answer there is no other answer. The biggest problem you have and cannot get over even though we have discussed it to death is that one group here discusses topics and they talk amongst themselves over and over, that annoys the pants off you and you feel that validates your posts and actions. The problem is they are not breaking the rules in doing this where you are breaking the rules when you turn your words and anger and attacks and stalking to a member directly.
Whoa nelly (Keith Jackson voice) now the slander is coming out huh, something personal hit a little too close to home?? “stalking” that is a big accusation on this site. I’d like to see some documentation of this alleged misdeed as you have NEVER accused me of this in the past and we all know this site keeps the receipts. Again, as I’ve been on record many times, I pose question & comments sometimes to provoke answers. This is not “antagonistic” in nature but if you are someone of low IQ who gets taken advantage of mentally on a regular basis, I could see how a bleeding heart mod could feel sorry for one of this individuals. Generally when there is some BS someone says or replies to with lies / inaccuracies I call it out. If there is a topic at hand that requires some outside the box thinking I may pose an unorthodox way of questioning it. Other times I’ll just go right out and say it. I am encouraging further discussion is all without simply answering. Again, not against the “rules”. Have I “baited” low IQ posters in the past to put themselves in the Box? Well not directly, my intention is not ever to get someone Boxed, that does not entertain or interest me as I’d rather them engage me but like I’ve said before, I can’t control other usernames and if they can’t control their emotions and play by the rules of the site then that is out of my hands.
America First
0
You told me that you did not need a pep talk when I explained the answer (again) to your complaint the other day. Oh I am the last the very last person on this site to step away from a hot topic but the problem is we have done this so many times and I bring every single thing to the center of the discussion, to the rules and guidelines of the site and you cannot refute it you rationalize it from what someone else did or does and that will never stick with me or the site. Your words threads comments stalking attacking combative content is yours alone not related to anyone else but you. That is the answer there is no other answer. The biggest problem you have and cannot get over even though we have discussed it to death is that one group here discusses topics and they talk amongst themselves over and over, that annoys the pants off you and you feel that validates your posts and actions. The problem is they are not breaking the rules in doing this where you are breaking the rules when you turn your words and anger and attacks and stalking to a member directly.
Whoa nelly (Keith Jackson voice) now the slander is coming out huh, something personal hit a little too close to home?? “stalking” that is a big accusation on this site. I’d like to see some documentation of this alleged misdeed as you have NEVER accused me of this in the past and we all know this site keeps the receipts. Again, as I’ve been on record many times, I pose question & comments sometimes to provoke answers. This is not “antagonistic” in nature but if you are someone of low IQ who gets taken advantage of mentally on a regular basis, I could see how a bleeding heart mod could feel sorry for one of this individuals. Generally when there is some BS someone says or replies to with lies / inaccuracies I call it out. If there is a topic at hand that requires some outside the box thinking I may pose an unorthodox way of questioning it. Other times I’ll just go right out and say it. I am encouraging further discussion is all without simply answering. Again, not against the “rules”. Have I “baited” low IQ posters in the past to put themselves in the Box? Well not directly, my intention is not ever to get someone Boxed, that does not entertain or interest me as I’d rather them engage me but like I’ve said before, I can’t control other usernames and if they can’t control their emotions and play by the rules of the site then that is out of my hands.
That group does not engage with YOU and slander, abuse, attack, belittle, antagonize YOU as a member directly...and in the end THAT is the most important aspect of this conversation. Your side and you directly seem unable to co-exist with the other group and just ignore them and let them have their threads and their comments and their group...just them and not you. That is why I suggested to you and to most all of your other similar buddies that this forum is not suited for what you are seeking and that you should avoid posting here since you cannot do so and not break the rules member to member.
Ive also said that to some on the other side and the difference is that those people got it and decided to avoid those threads and people who make it difficult for them and stopped breaking the rules and guidelines in the process.
Its cute seeing you try to suggest I wont discuss a topic, in this case I did again but you told me you did not need a pep talk and frankly again you will not listen anyway you are stuck on your mindset and agenda and you rationalize using inaccurate and flawed thinking so why should you even suggest we should discuss this again?
Step away from the issues and avoid those members and threads that bother you and if it is that difficult just go find a reddit forum that fits your needs and let it out there!
I am fine with your categorizing of the “groupings”. I see no reason to argue with your logic in this regard. This conversation isn’t about anyone else other than yourself though. I haven’t responded directly to any of your posts for a long time. You have though decided to attack me on several occasions without merit and all I can do is defend myself. Funny thing is from all the real topic discussions over these years, you and I agree on a vast majority of viewpoints. You just don’t like personally how I present things sometimes and apparently now you have made it your personal mission to seek me out. Perhaps I should just ignore you, that would be the pertinent thing to do moving forward if we aren’t going to find common ground here.
How about this, you forget about answering the one question I posed and I’ll leave it alone. When in the future, you go on one of your holier than though moral superiority crusades I will vouch to stay out of it (as long as it isn't me you are attacking). Perhaps we just aren’t meant to be, which saddens me a bit as there are many topics that I am passionate about that you share and often we are two of the only ones speaking the truth to them. US government debt responsibilities, the Federal Reserve, US international relations; specifically with regards to Urkaine and the Middle East, are just to name a few. Perhaps we can olive branch it in the future, perhaps not, I will leave that up to you sir. Either way, I will continue to exercise my rights as just another username all under the written rules and guidelines of this website.
America First
0
That group does not engage with YOU and slander, abuse, attack, belittle, antagonize YOU as a member directly...and in the end THAT is the most important aspect of this conversation. Your side and you directly seem unable to co-exist with the other group and just ignore them and let them have their threads and their comments and their group...just them and not you. That is why I suggested to you and to most all of your other similar buddies that this forum is not suited for what you are seeking and that you should avoid posting here since you cannot do so and not break the rules member to member.
Ive also said that to some on the other side and the difference is that those people got it and decided to avoid those threads and people who make it difficult for them and stopped breaking the rules and guidelines in the process.
Its cute seeing you try to suggest I wont discuss a topic, in this case I did again but you told me you did not need a pep talk and frankly again you will not listen anyway you are stuck on your mindset and agenda and you rationalize using inaccurate and flawed thinking so why should you even suggest we should discuss this again?
Step away from the issues and avoid those members and threads that bother you and if it is that difficult just go find a reddit forum that fits your needs and let it out there!
I am fine with your categorizing of the “groupings”. I see no reason to argue with your logic in this regard. This conversation isn’t about anyone else other than yourself though. I haven’t responded directly to any of your posts for a long time. You have though decided to attack me on several occasions without merit and all I can do is defend myself. Funny thing is from all the real topic discussions over these years, you and I agree on a vast majority of viewpoints. You just don’t like personally how I present things sometimes and apparently now you have made it your personal mission to seek me out. Perhaps I should just ignore you, that would be the pertinent thing to do moving forward if we aren’t going to find common ground here.
How about this, you forget about answering the one question I posed and I’ll leave it alone. When in the future, you go on one of your holier than though moral superiority crusades I will vouch to stay out of it (as long as it isn't me you are attacking). Perhaps we just aren’t meant to be, which saddens me a bit as there are many topics that I am passionate about that you share and often we are two of the only ones speaking the truth to them. US government debt responsibilities, the Federal Reserve, US international relations; specifically with regards to Urkaine and the Middle East, are just to name a few. Perhaps we can olive branch it in the future, perhaps not, I will leave that up to you sir. Either way, I will continue to exercise my rights as just another username all under the written rules and guidelines of this website.
You repeating the same phrase that I do not answer the one question when yes I have answered it numerous times does not make it so.
I dont care what side or group you belong to, the site welcomes everyone as long as MEMBER TO MEMBER you can follow what has been asked. That is the base core requirement and then there are content restrictions and limits but I dont think I have to spell it out for you in depth, the content issues are pretty cut and dry.
The issue I have with you is member to member, that you are not able to respectfully co-exist with others here and it turns into a member to member issue. I dont see any on the other side OR me using the phrases you have towards me in discussion...member to member. What purpose is there to call me a bleeding heart mod is this something that adds value or adds to conversation? Does insulting midnight as you do add value or add to conversation, is it respectful?
For all the droning that one group carries on and that annoys you, the one thing they do NOT do is member to member insults and direct personal attacks, I also do not see them trailing you around making remarks directed at you and yet your lot does this on a repeated, regular, extensive basis.
This area of the site is created to shuffle off content that serves no purpose outside of this section, there are no special rights you have as to combative posting or direct member to member confrontation. In fact if anything due to the derisive nature of this subject matter, the site needs to be EXTREMELY restrictive and tight on the expectations because these disagreements seep into other sections and cause issues..it happens quite regularly, we have to box or ban members who have animosity created in THIS forum and trail it into other areas, so the reality is that the fact we even allow ANY politics means the rules should be even more severe than they are now.
1
@kcblitzkrieg
You repeating the same phrase that I do not answer the one question when yes I have answered it numerous times does not make it so.
I dont care what side or group you belong to, the site welcomes everyone as long as MEMBER TO MEMBER you can follow what has been asked. That is the base core requirement and then there are content restrictions and limits but I dont think I have to spell it out for you in depth, the content issues are pretty cut and dry.
The issue I have with you is member to member, that you are not able to respectfully co-exist with others here and it turns into a member to member issue. I dont see any on the other side OR me using the phrases you have towards me in discussion...member to member. What purpose is there to call me a bleeding heart mod is this something that adds value or adds to conversation? Does insulting midnight as you do add value or add to conversation, is it respectful?
For all the droning that one group carries on and that annoys you, the one thing they do NOT do is member to member insults and direct personal attacks, I also do not see them trailing you around making remarks directed at you and yet your lot does this on a repeated, regular, extensive basis.
This area of the site is created to shuffle off content that serves no purpose outside of this section, there are no special rights you have as to combative posting or direct member to member confrontation. In fact if anything due to the derisive nature of this subject matter, the site needs to be EXTREMELY restrictive and tight on the expectations because these disagreements seep into other sections and cause issues..it happens quite regularly, we have to box or ban members who have animosity created in THIS forum and trail it into other areas, so the reality is that the fact we even allow ANY politics means the rules should be even more severe than they are now.
What does it reference? I tried to look it up and did not see it.
@StumpTownStu and I, two of the most literate guys on here, did not get the reference did you really expect @kcblitzkrieg to get it? He is also pretty sharp and unless it is some esoteric thing between you two -- I doubt he got it either.
I am sure @StumpTownStu is way up more on pop-culture stuff than I am and he did not seem to get it?
I have never seen you use it before. That is why I just assumed it was a slip-up or mix-up. We all do it and it can be funny.
0
@wallstreetcappers
What does it reference? I tried to look it up and did not see it.
@StumpTownStu and I, two of the most literate guys on here, did not get the reference did you really expect @kcblitzkrieg to get it? He is also pretty sharp and unless it is some esoteric thing between you two -- I doubt he got it either.
I am sure @StumpTownStu is way up more on pop-culture stuff than I am and he did not seem to get it?
I have never seen you use it before. That is why I just assumed it was a slip-up or mix-up. We all do it and it can be funny.
@Raiders22 Its an 80s reference, Ive used it before. Are you seeking an opp to cry foul again?
Nah. Not calling foul. I am not about calling foul about what I assumed was a weird autocorrect that I could not figure what else it could have been besides 'au contraire' alone.
0
@wallstreetcappers
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
@Raiders22 Its an 80s reference, Ive used it before. Are you seeking an opp to cry foul again?
Nah. Not calling foul. I am not about calling foul about what I assumed was a weird autocorrect that I could not figure what else it could have been besides 'au contraire' alone.
@StumpTownStu chirpy chirpers enter the scene how shocking. The phrase has a different meaning than I guess the two of you understand and that is quite OK actually.
Jesus you are combative. Chirpy chirpers? Just what is the other meaning? The gaslighting is insane with you. There is no other meaning. You're throwing around words you don't understand and you're too full of yourself to admit it.
TIME TO BRING BACK THE OBAMA CAGES!
1
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
@StumpTownStu chirpy chirpers enter the scene how shocking. The phrase has a different meaning than I guess the two of you understand and that is quite OK actually.
Jesus you are combative. Chirpy chirpers? Just what is the other meaning? The gaslighting is insane with you. There is no other meaning. You're throwing around words you don't understand and you're too full of yourself to admit it.
@wallstreetcappers What does it reference? I tried to look it up and did not see it. @StumpTownStu and I, two of the most literate guys on here, did not get the reference did you really expect @kcblitzkrieg to get it? He is also pretty sharp and unless it is some esoteric thing between you two -- I doubt he got it either. I am sure @StumpTownStu is way up more on pop-culture stuff than I am and he did not seem to get it? I have never seen you use it before. That is why I just assumed it was a slip-up or mix-up. We all do it and it can be funny.
I'm sure he has pocket pundits that confirm the validity of it's use. This is just a microcosm of how the left operates. While I hate the overuse of the term gaslighting, it is epitome of gaslighting.
TIME TO BRING BACK THE OBAMA CAGES!
0
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
@wallstreetcappers What does it reference? I tried to look it up and did not see it. @StumpTownStu and I, two of the most literate guys on here, did not get the reference did you really expect @kcblitzkrieg to get it? He is also pretty sharp and unless it is some esoteric thing between you two -- I doubt he got it either. I am sure @StumpTownStu is way up more on pop-culture stuff than I am and he did not seem to get it? I have never seen you use it before. That is why I just assumed it was a slip-up or mix-up. We all do it and it can be funny.
I'm sure he has pocket pundits that confirm the validity of it's use. This is just a microcosm of how the left operates. While I hate the overuse of the term gaslighting, it is epitome of gaslighting.
So what was the purpose for your reply then exactly? Was there something sincere or genuine and that was of high value in the reply or was it just another attempt from you to try and soil the mod again?
Dont try and hide your actions, just own them or better yet try and avoid the trailing complaining routine and look for ways to add positive value.
1
@StumpTownStu
So what was the purpose for your reply then exactly? Was there something sincere or genuine and that was of high value in the reply or was it just another attempt from you to try and soil the mod again?
Dont try and hide your actions, just own them or better yet try and avoid the trailing complaining routine and look for ways to add positive value.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
