192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
layman
 
  -2  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 03:29 pm
@roger,
roger wrote:

Stephen Decatur, but it was more like: "My country, may she always be right, but right or wrong, she is always my country."


Yeah, that's the perv, thanks, Rog. According to wiki, anway, he said:

Quote:
Our country! In her intercourse with foreign nations, may she always be in the right; but our country, right or wrong.

This statement produced the famous slogan "My country, right or wrong!"
0 Replies
 
camlok
 
  0  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 03:29 pm
@layman,
Quote:
Yeah, loyalty is such a despicable trait, eh?


Everyone, with the slightest measure of common sense and human decency, knows that loyalty doesn't extend to supporting war crimes and terrorism, lying and other Nixonian/Bushian/Reaganian things.

We take it as noted that that isn't you, layman.
revelette1
 
  5  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 03:33 pm
@layman,
Quote:
Every employer is actually thrilled to hire a disloyal employee who will sell his trade secrets to competitors, and ****, ya know?


I don't normally like say stuff like this, but surely you are not as dense as you seem? The FBI should be loyal to the truth no matter if it goes against the president or not.

oralloy
 
  -2  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 03:35 pm
@revelette1,
revelette1 wrote:
Comey tried to just say, honest, but Trump had to add loyalty. Comey said it was possible the president and he understood "honest loyalty" differently. Comey decided not to push it further after the uncomfortable dinner.

So what?

Enough is enough. Outlaw the Democratic Party in America. Time to get rid of them and their vile witch hunts.
layman
 
  -1  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 03:36 pm
@camlok,
camlok wrote:

Everyone, with the slightest measure of common sense and human decency, knows that loyalty doesn't extend to supporting war crimes and terrorism, .


Exactly. Including Trump, who has said as much.
camlok
 
  -1  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 03:37 pm
@revelette1,
Quote:
The FBI should be loyal to the truth no matter if it goes against the president or not.


So should US citizens, Rev.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -1  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 03:37 pm
@glitterbag,
glitterbag wrote:

I can always depend on a few members to leave just the right number of words out to render their comments baffleloney. If there is a God, he is indeed good.


You mean like farmerman...yeah I agree.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -2  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 03:38 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Of course it was.

Layman delights in provocation and regularly brings in a healthy catch of foolish fish.


He brings them in??? I dont think so...they were always here.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -2  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 03:38 pm
@revelette1,
revelette1 wrote:


I don't normally like say stuff like this, but surely you are not as dense as you seem? The FBI should be loyal to the truth no matter if it goes against the president or not.


Yeah, and that's exactly what Trump said he wanted. He said it would be GOOD to know if anyone associated with his campaign colluded with russia. Didya miss that part, eh?

You couldn't possibly be THAT dense, right?

Surely you know what "honest" means.
camlok
 
  0  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 03:39 pm
@layman,
Quote:
Exactly. Including Trump, who has said as much.


You've shown in spades that parsing the English language is not your strong suit, layman. Combine that with your rank partisanship and you aren't to be trusted as far as a weak human could throw you.
giujohn
 
  -2  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 03:45 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

revelette1 wrote:
Comey tried to just say, honest, but Trump had to add loyalty. Comey said it was possible the president and he understood "honest loyalty" differently. Comey decided not to push it further after the uncomfortable dinner.

So what?

Enough is enough. Outlaw the Democratic Party in America. Time to get rid of them and their vile witch hunts.


I second the motion...they should be labeled a terroist organization.
0 Replies
 
camlok
 
  0  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 03:46 pm
@layman,
Quote:
Surely you know what "honest" means.


I'm sure that she'll be along soon to let you know.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -2  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 03:48 pm
@camlok,
camlok wrote:

you aren't to be trusted as far as a weak human could throw you.


Let's test that out, whaddaya say, Cammie-boy!?

Since you're a weak human being, come try to throw me, why doncha?

We'll see what happens.
camlok
 
  2  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 04:15 pm
@layman,
Quote:
Let's test that out, whaddaya say, Cammie-boy!?

Since you're a weak human being, come try to throw me, why doncha?

We'll see what happens.


Your troglodytic reaction/response doesn't surprise me in the least, layman.

It also confirms what I said about you in recent posts. Most notably, your poor grasp of English.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  -3  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 04:24 pm
@camlok,
Quote:

Quote:
I mean, like, let's say you had to make a choice between killing either:

1. One 97 year-old American, dying of cancer, or

2. One thousand newborn FOREIGN babies.

Only a damn commie would pick #1, eh?


I don't know, layman. Perhaps you should ask your good buddy, Finn.


The most common version of that kind of question goes like this: suppose you had a pistol with one cartridge (or an 18th-century flintlock pistol. And you could go back in history and pick one person to shoot to shoot through the head on the day that he was born so as to do maximum good for the human race... Who would that one person be?

If it had to be just one person, the only possible answer is Mohammed, you'd be talking about saving upwards of a half billion human lives over the course of 1400 years.

But there are several good candidates for such a choice and if you have a revolver with five or six cartridges and a time machine, your choices might include:

1. Mohammed, still by far number one in any such calculus.

2. Rachel Carson, who with the single insane act of banning the super pesticide DDT, is responsible for more than 100 million human deaths.

3. Chuck Darwin, whose quaint notion of viewing one's neighbor as a meat byproduct of random processes (rather than as a fellow child of God) is largely responsible for the two world wars.

4. An Lushan, the man chiefly responsible for the fall of the Chinese Tang Dynasty, which was probably an absolute high point of human civilization on earth. Military history books describe the An Lushan rebellion as one of the most destructive if not THE most destructive war in human history. That rebellion weakened the Dynasty to the point that it could not continue more than a few decades afterwards.

Aside from Rachel Carson, the other arch villains of the last century or thereabouts (Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse-tung...) don't even figure in the same ballpark as the four mentioned above. The only other guy who comes close is Genghis Khan and at least two of Genghis Khan's most destructive wars amounted to scores being settled in which the victims in some sense had it coming.

gungasnake
 
  -3  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 04:25 pm
Just a stray thought here, but Saddick Khan might not even register on a standard IQ test, that is, that might be like using a bathroom scale to try to weigh a butterfly.
layman
 
  -2  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 04:30 pm
@camlok,
camlok wrote:

In a 1906 essay about the Moro massacre in the Phillippines, which was not published until after his death, Twain criticized the military:


All's well that ends well, eh? Notwithstanding whatever bitches some people may have had over a century ago, the Fillipinos continue to LOVE the USA, as they have for many decades, and as even Wapo had to admit:

Quote:
The Philippines loves the United States.

In 2015, 92 percent of respondents in the Philippines said they had a favorable view of the United States; only 54 percent said they regarded China favorably. Filipinos' enthusiasm for the United States was considerably greater than attitudes in other traditional American allies in Asia, including Japan and South Korea. As one Manila-based newspaper put it in 2014, "Filipinos like the U.S. even more than the Americans do."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/10/22/forget-duterte-the-philippines-loves-the-u-s/

They got that right. An extremely large percentage of cheese-eaters like you, Cambo, actually HATE the USA.

Apparently these poor, ignorant Flips don't understand that they have always been brutally oppressed by the USA, like the cheese-eaters try to claim, eh?
maporsche
 
  4  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 04:40 pm
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:

Just a stray thought here, but Saddick Khan might not even register on a standard IQ test, that is, that might be like using a bathroom scale to try to weigh a butterfly.


Or using it to weigh a truck
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  5  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 04:43 pm
@layman,
layman says:
Quote:
They got that right. An extremely large percentage of cheese-eaters like you, Cambo, actually HATE the USA.


If camlock is, as many posters here suspect, JTT redux, he is Canadian, which would make him a poutine-eater, not a cheese-eaterAnd it is of course, the ****-eaters' mass delusion that the people they call cheese-eaters hate the US.
layman
 
  -2  
Wed 7 Jun, 2017 04:45 pm
@gungasnake,
Nothing wrong with killing newborn babies. Just ask any cheese-eater, eh? It's merely a late term abortion, that's all.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.44 seconds on 09/22/2024 at 08:24:47