192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 01:21 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
@Olivier5,
Not necessary to threaten all Americans with your nuclear capabilities. Fact of the matter is, the US has nukes all around the world. How is France going to destroy all our bases?


We also have many bases in England. Will France attack England too? LOL
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 01:24 pm
@Debra Law,
Quote:

Debra Law wrote:

McGentrix wrote:

The issue was that he used it for every single speech. Without it his "uh"s became distracting. It appeared that he was incapable of giving a speech without it.


Obama's allegedly distracting "uh" vs. Trump's long-winded convoluted word salads that reporters throughout the world find nearly impossible to translate ....

which of the two is more egregious?


It's not only "word salad" that makes Trump's speech value-less. He provides no specifics on how he's going to accomplish what he claims he will do. Republicans love what Trump says, but they are empty words with no value until he provides the details.
layman
 
  0  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 01:24 pm
Quote:
Democrats plot protest for Trump’s speech to Congress

House Democrats are rallying behind a plan to make President Trump’s first speech to Congress as uncomfortable as possible by inviting guests they say will suffer under new White House policies.

Some liberals are also eyeing another form of protest during the speech: When Trump walks down the center aisle of the House chamber on the way to the dais, they’re hoping no Democrats scramble to get in the picture for the traditional handshake.

“We have to have a higher standard,” Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-Ill.) said.

“For sure I will not be nearby,” Rep. Filemon Vela (D-Texas) echoed.


http://thehill.com/homenews/house/317473-democrats-plot-protest-for-trumps-speech-to-congress

Nice try, cheese-eaters.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 01:32 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Here's Trump's speech analysis.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-speech-analysis-20170301-story.html
layman
 
  0  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 01:38 pm
@cicerone imposter,
From who, Al? Let's see here....

Quote:
By Cathleen Decker Contact Reporter
Twitter: @cathleendecker


Well, now, aint that special, eh?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 01:40 pm
@layman,
Who is Cathleen Decker, and what is her credentials?

Quote:
Cathleen Decker‏
Verified account 
@cathleendecker
Follow

More
More than a chicken in every pot, Trump was promising a whole flock. Analysis of last night's speech


Retweets
20
Likes
36

7:16 AM - 1 Mar 2017 from Long Beach, CA
6 replies
20 retweets
36 likes

Reply
6
Retweet
20

Like
36


Alfonso Cummings‏ @acummings292 3h
3 hours ago
More
@cathleendecker @PaulBegala @latimes one speech does not make anyone a good President... the proof is in your actions
0 replies
0 retweets
1 like

Reply

Retweet

Like
1

Elaina Evans‏ @stlseven 4h
4 hours ago
More
@cathleendecker @PaulBegala once again Don “The Con-man” Trump proves how gullible people r. Grandma said, “actions speak louder than words"
0 replies
0 retweets
1 like

Reply

Retweet

Like
1
layman
 
  0  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 01:43 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Who is Cathleen Decker, and what is her credentials?


You tell me, eh?
layman
 
  0  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 01:47 pm
@cicerone imposter,
She lives in Los Angeles. What's that tell ya?

Quote:
“It's a scientific fact that if you stay in California you lose one point of your IQ every month.” (Harry Truman)
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 01:48 pm
@layman,
Just did: a damn good reporter.
layman
 
  0  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 01:54 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Just did: a damn good reporter.


Heh, a "reporter" who calls the American people "gullible" and who calls Trump a "con man," eh?

Not the least bit surprised to see that's your idea of a "reporter."

Thing is, there's no "reporting" in the article you cite, to speak of.

It's (highly biased) opinion, that's all.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 01:59 pm
@layman,
Proof of how uninformed and gullible Americans are.
http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2012/07/03/chart-proof-of-how-uninformed-americans-are-no-wonder-theyre-so-gullible/
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  3  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 01:59 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Just saying: IF the US nukes France, THEN France nukes the US. Both nations go near instinct. End of story.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 02:03 pm
@Olivier5,
This is also a "if" scenario. You're the one bringing up silly ideas about Frances nuclear capabilities.
Quote:
@Olivier5,
France may have enough nukes to wipe out 95% of the US, but we have SAC bases all around the world including England. Who will you attack first?
0 Replies


Quote:
How many nuclear warheads does the US have?
70,000
It is estimated that, since 1945, the United States produced more than 70,000 nuclear warheads, which is more than all other nuclear weapon states combined.
Nuclear weapons and the United States - Wikipedia, the ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_the_United_States


Quote:
France and weapons of mass destruction
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
France

First nuclear weapon test
February 13, 1960
First fusion weapon test
August 23, 1968
Last nuclear test
January 27, 1996
Largest yield test
2.6 Mt (August 20, 1968)
Total tests
210
Peak stockpile
540 (in 1992)
Current stockpile (usable and not)
300 warheads (2016)[1][2]
Current strategic arsenal
290 usable warheads (2016)[1][2] (methods of delivery include ICBMs, Bombers, and SLBMs)[1]
Cumulative strategic arsenal in megatonnage
~51.6[3]
Maximum missile range
>10,000 km/6,000 mi (M51 SLBM)
NPT party
Yes (1992, one of five recognized powers)
Weapons of mass destruction

By type
BiologicalChemicalNuclearRadiological
By country
AlbaniaAlgeriaArgentinaAustraliaBrazilBulgariaCanadaChinaEgyptFranceGermanyIndiaIranIraqIsraelJapanLibyaMexicoMyanmarNetherlandsNorth KoreaPakistanPhilippinesPolandRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaSouth AfricaSouth KoreaSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanUkraineUnited KingdomUnited States
Proliferation
ChemicalNuclearMissiles
Treaties
List of treaties
Book Category
vte
Nuclear weapons

Background
HistoryWarfareWinterWorkersArms raceDesignTestingEthicsEffectsDeliveryEspionageProliferationArsenalsTerrorismOpposition
Nuclear-armed states
NPT recognized
United StatesRussiaUnited KingdomFranceChina
Others
IndiaIsrael (undeclared)PakistanNorth Korea
Former
South Africa
vte
France is one of the five "Nuclear Weapons States" under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, but is not known to possess or develop any chemical or biological weapons.[4][5] France was the fourth country to test an independently developed nuclear weapon in 1960, under the government of Charles de Gaulle. The French military is currently thought to retain a weapons stockpile of around 300 operational nuclear warheads, making it the third-largest in the world, speaking in terms of warheads, not megatons.[6] The weapons are part of the national Force de frappe, developed in the late 1950s and 1960s to give France the ability to distance itself from NATO while having a means of nuclear deterrence under sovereign control.
Olivier5
 
  2  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 02:10 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I did not bring this up. Layman did. He said Trump could nuke France. I said France would nuke the US, then.

Edit: That's nuclear deterence for you.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 02:12 pm
@Olivier5,
Silly talk.
blatham
 
  2  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 02:15 pm
Quote:
McGentrix wrote:

The issue was that [Obama] used [a teleprompter] for every single speech. Without it his "uh"s became distracting. It appeared that he was incapable of giving a speech without it.


As I noted in my post, the derogations of Obama from the right for using a teleprompter began in early 2009. It wasn't as a consequence of some long history of speeches nor some unique use of the device.

0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  3  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 02:15 pm
@cicerone imposter,
It's not silly, it's true. It's called nuclear deterrence. You just made the exact same argument in the reverse. ("if France nukes US, then US nukes France")
blatham
 
  2  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 02:18 pm
There's a 14 minute podcast interview at The Nation with Jane Mayer on the role of the Koch operation during the last election and the relationship between that operation and the Trump administration. Listen to it. It's impoportant.
https://www.thenation.com/article/jane-mayer-dark-money-and-donald-trump/

blatham
 
  4  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 02:39 pm
Integrity and honesty - a shining example.
Quote:
Last Friday, the president told CPAC that “fake news” outlets like CNN “shouldn’t be allowed to use sources unless they use somebody’s name.” Four days later, he instructed CNN to quote him as a “senior administration official.”
NYMag
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  0  
Wed 1 Mar, 2017 03:20 pm
@blatham,
You do realize that Hillary took in more dark money than Trump did. Of course while not a US citizen, you were still a Hillary supporter. Why the anger over dark money now? Would you raise these same questions about Hillary's dark money if she had won? Nope, swept under the table is where your anger would be. More echo chamber...
0 Replies
 
 

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 0.45 seconds on 09/29/2024 at 06:25:29