America - The Official Thread

  • Thread starter ///M-Spec
  • 39,912 comments
  • 1,802,467 views
Great! Now I can't wait until Trump sticks it to those cheating bastards in Canada. Particularly the cheating auto industry bastards in Windsor, Ontario.
Yeah! It's high time they stop taking all the good looking strippers! Save some for detroit aye!
 
Call CNN and give them that correction. They are calling it a preliminary trade deal.
Yeah? CNN says a lot of things. An array of other outlets used the word "understanding", which is why I used the same word when correcting your post and indeed chose to correct your post in the first place.

Also:


You'd think I'd now better than to trust CNN as a source:lol:.
Indeed.

Thoroughly unsurprising response. *yawn*. You need to come up with better material.
I believe this is an attempt to pressure or shame another and their contributions to this forum even though their posts comply with the AUP. I suggest you withdraw this attempt to shame another and control their input here simply because you don't agree with them.
 
Yeah? CNN says a lot of things. An array of other outlets used the word "understanding", which is why I used the same word when correcting your post and indeed chose to correct your post in the first place.
Unfortunately I wasn't able to conduct an internet survey of the terminology used. I glanced at some of my usual suspects like CBC, BBC, CNN and they all called it either a deal or an agreement.

Thoroughly unsurprising response. *yawn*. You need to come up with better material.
 
Unfortunately I wasn't able to conduct an internet survey of the terminology used. I glanced at some of my usual suspects like CBC, BBC, CNN and they all called it either a deal or an agreement.
:odd:

You regularly seek news from a source that you don't trust?

And interestingly enough, it was in a simple search of news regarding a supposed deal between Trump and Mexico that I observerd numerous mentions of an "understanding".

Thoroughly unsurprising response. *yawn*. You need to come up with better material.
Doubling down on the digs? Classy.

Meanwhile, in Total Drama Island America, Trump has been refusing to acknowledge any mentions of Senator McCain as well as putting the flags at the White House at full-mast a mere two days after the Senator's passing.

One would think that McCain's passing would warrant at least a bit more respect...
One would think, but one would also think an individual occupying the office of the president wouldn't be so thoroughly contemptible. Don't forget this is the same asshat that suggested the same man's heroic actions in service to his country and fellow servicemen during war didn't warrant him being considered a war hero.

I think Trump resented McCain's interest in bipartisanship, as he feels it's his responsibility to tear down any efforts of the sort and feed a culture of adversarial politics.


Tit for tat really.
And what was the tat that warranted a tit response? The notion that you regularly engage in behavior that you condemn when it's directed at you?
 
My understanding was that the flag was raised back in accordance with White House guidelines; I think it was something like a Senator gets 2 days?

I believe it should be longer personally, but at the same time, this seems like there was a more logical explanation than maybe some believing Trump himself decided 2 days was enough.
Slight change of subject, but it would appear that an actress at the forefront of the #MeToo campaign is in a bit of trouble over the apparent fact that she has had a sexual relationship with a minor (i.e. statutory rape). Yesterday the actress issued a strenuous denial of the claims but these have already apparently been contradicted by the emergence of what looks like a selfie of the two of them in bed (oops) as well as screen captures of text messages that allegedly show her admitting to a friend that there was a sexual relationship. It's all a bit sleazy, but the implications for the #MeToo movement are pretty huge. In this particular case, it seems like both are blaming the other for instigating the alleged 'interaction', but it does beg the question of how much "trauma" either one could really have experienced when, as it would appear, they were quite happy about what they were doing with each other at the time. (For the record, the (male) 'victim' was 17 at the time of the alleged 'assault', which is below the legal age of consent in California.)
She knew him since he was a child, according to the reports; she played his mother in a movie and that's how they met. There's a rumor she'd had interest in him for years.

I find the most saddening is that Bourdain got dragged into this. According to her, she went to Anthony for help and he supposedly told her that he would pay for the hush money to make the kid go away. This has to be a devastating thing for his family to hear since the actress is already blamed for his suicide being that she was spotted with another man shortly before so.
 
What would a trade understanding mean? All I think now is everyone understands how NAFTA works (screwing the average worker in Mexico, US & Canada)
 
:odd:

You regularly seek news from a source that you don't trust?
I don't trust any single source for news, no. If I'm interested in a story I always check several sources to get different perspectives. Whichever one I choose to use as a link is the one that happens to be on the screen at the time.
And what was the tat that warranted a tit response? The notion that you regularly engage in behavior that you condemn when it's directed at you?
I responded to a parody of my own post with the effort I thought it deserved. Another copy paste. Tit for tat.

What would a trade understanding mean? All I think now is everyone understands how NAFTA works (screwing the average worker in Mexico, US & Canada)
It means they've verbally agreed on the rough outlines but haven't hammered out all the fine details and nothing is signed or legal as of yet. It's good news of course as I'm sure there were many predicted or even wished that Trump and the Mexican President elect would be at each other's throats.
 
Thoroughly unsurprising response. *yawn*. You need to come up with better material.

I, on the other hand, am constantly surprised by Johnnypenso's responses. The vast majority of Canadians, including conservatives, have been united in their condemnation of Trumps' bullying rhetoric on trade.

"Canada’s Conservatives continue to support the Prime Minister’s efforts to make the case for free trade. Divisive rhetoric and personal attacks from the US administration are clearly unhelpful."
— Andrew Scheer (@AndrewScheer) June 10, 2018


"We will stand shoulder to shoulder with the Prime Minister and the people of Canada. My number one goal is to protect jobs in Ontario, starting with my unwavering support for our steel and aluminum workers."
— Doug Ford (@fordnation) June 10, 2018


"Most people don't know " that Windsor, Ontario, is the location of Fiat Chrysler, the largest manufacturing facility in Canada, that the auto industry directly employs over 140,000 Canadians & that vehicles were Canada's second largest export, accounting for $44.9 billion in exports in 2015. Most people don't know that ... but as JohnnyP (allegedly) lives in Windsor, Ontario, he surely DOES know that. So, yes, I find it surprising when Mr.P constantly acts as an enthusiastic cheerleader for Trump at every opportunity.
 
My understanding was that the flag was raised back in accordance with White House guidelines; I think it was something like a Senator gets 2 days?
I am just learning this here?

I watched ABC's World News Tonight. To hear them tell it, Trump raised it. No mention of there being any protocol.
 
I, on the other hand, am constantly surprised by Johnnypenso's responses. The vast majority of Canadians, including conservatives, have been united in their condemnation of Trumps' bullying rhetoric on trade.

"Canada’s Conservatives continue to support the Prime Minister’s efforts to make the case for free trade. Divisive rhetoric and personal attacks from the US administration are clearly unhelpful."
— Andrew Scheer (@AndrewScheer) June 10, 2018


"We will stand shoulder to shoulder with the Prime Minister and the people of Canada. My number one goal is to protect jobs in Ontario, starting with my unwavering support for our steel and aluminum workers."
— Doug Ford (@fordnation) June 10, 2018


"Most people don't know " that Windsor, Ontario, is the location of Fiat Chrysler, the largest manufacturing facility in Canada, that the auto industry directly employs over 140,000 Canadians & that vehicles were Canada's second largest export, accounting for $44.9 billion in exports in 2015. Most people don't know that ... but as JohnnyP (allegedly) lives in Windsor, Ontario, he surely DOES know that. So, yes, I find it surprising when Mr.P constantly acts as an enthusiastic cheerleader for Trump at every opportunity.
I don't support Trump as a human being, he's overall rather despicable in that department, but I am in favour of tax cuts, better, freer trade deals, eliminating bad and punitive tax policy on corporations, strong borders, low unemployment, high GDP growth, exploding stock markets, reigning in the North Koreans, sanctioning Iran into revolution, coercing Europe into more financial support for their collective defense etc. I don't pay much attention to the rhetoric on any side of the political aisle other than for comic relief.

Since you brought it up, I already have contingency plans in case Trudeau mucks up what should be a slam dunk trade agreement, worse comes to worse and Chrysler decides to move the van plant to Mexico. It won't be a walk in the park but I'll get by just the same. A strong American economy benefits Canada immensely so it's only natural that I root for American economic success, it's up to Trudeau to see beyond his nose and get the deal done. I doubt even he can mess this one up but I'm not nearly as confident as I would have been had the great Stephen Harper still been at the reigns. If only he were prettier.
 
Last edited:
John McCain's farewell letter in full:

My fellow Americans, whom I have gratefully served for sixty years, and especially my fellow Arizonans,

Thank you for the privilege of serving you and for the rewarding life that service in uniform and in public office has allowed me to lead. I have tried to serve our country honourably. I have made mistakes, but I hope my love for America will be weighed favorably against them.

I have often observed that I am the luckiest person on earth. I feel that way even now as I prepare for the end of my life. I have loved my life, all of it. I have had experiences, adventures and friendships enough for ten satisfying lives, and I am so thankful. Like most people, I have regrets. But I would not trade a day of my life, in good or bad times, for the best day of anyone else's.

I owe that satisfaction to the love of my family. No man ever had a more loving wife or children he was prouder of than I am of mine. And I owe it to America. To be connected to America's causes — liberty, equal justice, respect for the dignity of all people — brings happiness more sublime than life's fleeting pleasures. Our identities and sense of worth are not circumscribed but enlarged by serving good causes bigger than ourselves.

Fellow Americans — that association has meant more to me than any other. I lived and died a proud American. We are citizens of the world's greatest republic, a nation of ideals, not blood and soil. We are blessed and are a blessing to humanity when we uphold and advance those ideals at home and in the world. We have helped liberate more people from tyranny and poverty than ever before in history. We have acquired great wealth and power in the process.

We weaken our greatness when we confuse our patriotism with tribal rivalries that have sown resentment and hatred and violence in all the corners of the globe. We weaken it when we hide behind walls, rather than tear them down, when we doubt the power of our ideals, rather than trust them to be the great force for change they have always been.

We are three-hundred-and-twenty-five million opinionated, vociferous individuals. We argue and compete and sometimes even vilify each other in our raucous public debates. But we have always had so much more in common with each other than in disagreement. If only we remember that and give each other the benefit of the presumption that we all love our country we will get through these challenging times. We will come through them stronger than before. We always do.

Ten years ago, I had the privilege to concede defeat in the election for president. I want to end my farewell to you with the heartfelt faith in Americans that I felt so powerfully that evening.

I feel it powerfully still.

Do not despair of our present difficulties but believe always in the promise and greatness of America, because nothing is inevitable here. Americans never quit. We never surrender. We never hide from history. We make history.

Farewell, fellow Americans. God bless you, and God bless America.
 
I don't trust any single source for news, no.
Euhm...great? I can see that response being relevant had the cited assertion alluded to you not trusting just CNN, but it didn't.

If I'm interested in a story I always check several sources to get different perspectives.
As do I, but I don't check sources I don't trust.

Whichever one I choose to use as a link is the one that happens to be on the screen at the time.
Yeeeeaaahh...you uh, you took that a step too far, and now it seems like you're offering a rebuttal to a non-existent accusation of cherrypicking--"The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

I am just learning this here?

I watched ABC's World News Tonight. To hear them tell it, Trump raised it. No mention of there being any protocol.
http://www.welovedc.com/2010/03/30/dc-mythbusting-white-house-flag/

Other flag facts: the President and the governors of states are the only ones allowed to order flags flown at half-staff, though flags are to be flown at half staff automatically in certain cases (30 days for the death of a president, 10 days for the death of a vice-president, 2 days for the death of a member of Congress).
That said, it was Trump who disregarded protocol and ordered the flag to be flown at full height, it was Trump who crumbled under the weight of the American Legion and it was Trump who ordered the flag to once again be flown at half-staff...so it would seem the apparent claim made by ABC's World News Tonight wasn't incorrect.
 
I don't trust any single source for news, no. If I'm interested in a story I always check several sources to get different perspectives. Whichever one I choose to use as a link is the one that happens to be on the screen at the time.
I responded to a parody of my own post with the effort I thought it deserved. Another copy paste. Tit for tat.

It means they've verbally agreed on the rough outlines but haven't hammered out all the fine details and nothing is signed or legal as of yet. It's good news of course as I'm sure there were many predicted or even wished that Trump and the Mexican President elect would be at each other's throats.

Why would they be at each other’s throats? Just because Trump speaks hate all the time doesn’t mean we have to hate back.
 
Why would they be at each other’s throats? Just because Trump speaks hate all the time doesn’t mean we have to hate back.
One is an upredictable blowhard who claims to support free market capitalism and the other is an avowed socialist for starters. There's been a lot of shots over the bow on the border issue with Mexico, illegal immigration etc. and I recall some in the press quite gleeful that the new Mexican President would be the fascist in his place. For example, there was a delightful article in Rolling Stone that painted Trump as a xenophobic fascist and Lopez Obrador as a sort of level headed, socialist loving, Robin Hood for the people, . Thankfully cooler heads prevailed and a trade deal is imminent if all goes well.
 

Breitbart is hardly objective news is it? It has posted various, already debunked, conspiracy theories in the past. They thought Pizzagate was real.

I highly recommend to stop reading the website as a real news outlet.

I personally keep having trouble to understand how people use outlets like inforwars and breitbart as their primary source of news. I dont have any problem with people interested in "theories". And totally understand that. (I used to believe the moonlanding was staged) But what really is hard to undertand is that some people believe everything that is written or said by far right outlets to be fact. There just isnt any common sense in it. An attorney "within the orbit of the Clinton family" (whatever that means) with a vague connection to the Trump Tower meeting?? Come on!

Edit: added personal opinions.
 
Last edited:

I really over all this Russia stuff. I skimmed the article since I take anything Breitbart says with a pinch of salt. But are they basically saying everyone met with Russia?

Honestly, it really doesn't surprise me since both Trump and Clinton were some of the least trustworthy people to run for office I could think of. Picking between those two was like picking between getting cancer or gets AIDS (never mind there were third-party candidates that were akin to getting a mild cold).

====

In other news, Trump is back on the attack against tech giants because it seems like he further believes he should control the economy in a socialist fashion.

https://www.businessinsider.com/don...zon-and-facebook-may-be-very-antitrust-2018-8

Let companies be companies. All three came up with ideas that worked well and made a killing off of them, why should they be punished for that? I don't like monopolies, but I don't think the government really needs to intervene to break them up. Eventually, someone will come along with a better idea and dethrone one of them from the top mark. Or, the more likely situation, one of the companies will make a bad investment and lose a ton of money.
 
Even if the Breitbart report is accurate I'm not sure how a guy whose wife was a Clinton aide turning up to possibly two meetings with Russian fixers at Trump Tower is evidence that Trump didn't collude with them as well. It's one of his buildings.

You could see it as an indication that Clinton and the Dems are as bad or worse than Trump for doing so, but I think you'd need to be viewing this through pretty skewed glasses in order to do so.
 
Even if the Breitbart report is accurate I'm not sure how a guy whose wife was a Clinton aide turning up to possibly two meetings with Russian fixers at Trump Tower is evidence that Trump didn't collude with them as well. It's one of his buildings.

You could see it as an indication that Clinton and the Dems are as bad or worse than Trump for doing so, but I think you'd need to be viewing this through pretty skewed glasses in order to do so.

That is what both far left en far right media do. They put out related stories to deflect from the main story.
 
Even if the Breitbart report is accurate I'm not sure how a guy whose wife was a Clinton aide turning up to possibly two meetings with Russian fixers at Trump Tower is evidence that Trump didn't collude with them as well. It's one of his buildings.

You could see it as an indication that Clinton and the Dems are as bad or worse than Trump for doing so, but I think you'd need to be viewing this through pretty skewed glasses in order to do so.
I didn't say it clears him. Hell he and his son admitted they were looking for dirt.
I just found it interesting both parties were doing their dirty deeds in the same place...
 
I didn't say it clears him. Hell he and his son admitted they were looking for dirt.
I just found it interesting both parties were doing their dirty deeds in the same place...
Concidering that they were looking for dirt on Clinton, she was already involved in the meeting as the victim/target. Breitbart probably is trying to create a narrative (conspiracy theory) that Clinton set up that meeting to entrap the Trump's, so that the President can be portrayed as an innocent victim:banghead:
 
Concidering that they were looking for dirt on Clinton, she was already involved in the meeting as the victim/target. Breitbart probably is trying to create a narrative (conspiracy theory) that Clinton set up that meeting to entrap the Trump's.:banghead:
I look at it as Russia screwing both sides. It's about time someone points out the DNC is dirty too. CNN would never post this. I'm not a Russia meddling denier. But I don't believe they hacked our voting system either. There is plenty of proof they bought ads and had fake pages. That's not hacking, that's the stupidity of the American people. What America has done in international elections...
 
I look at it as Russia screwing both sides. It's about time someone points out the DNC is dirty too. CNN would never post this. I'm not a Russia meddling denier. But I don't believe they hacked our voting system either. There is plenty of proof they bought ads and had fake pages. That's not hacking, that's the stupidity of the American people. What America has done in international elections...

I think people keep trying to point out the DNC is trash too. They clearly fixed the primaries for Clinton to win, leaving Sanders without the nomination. I'm not sure why it's being ignored. I'm guessing it's money since that seems like a good answer for everything.

Also, it just furthers my belief that Trump and Clinton were in cahoots throughout the election.
 
Back