Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Full Members
  • Posts

    37441
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by TwiceHorn

  1. No. Recapture is based on a right to equal education financing found in the Texas Constitution that SCOTUS ruled does not exist in the US Constitution, as argued by "our own" Charles Alan Wright. Ironically, it was an attempt to equalize funding between property- and revenue-rich districts and property- and revenue-poor districts. Which is nice in theory, but in operation not so much. I'm not going to say that it's an example of why government always fucks up, but it is an example of what happens when you attempt too much "do-gooding" all at once. A more incremental change there would probably have been good. See, there's the benign conservative coming through.
  2. Nice try. Screw what the economists say, try this thought experiment. Trump wants tariffs instead of a tax raise to raise revenue and punish the Chinese. The cheapest goods in our economy right now are Chinese, so they basically set the floor for pricing for whatever goods Americans can buy. Regardless of who pays tariffs, his tariffs will raise the price of Chinese goods in the amount of the tariffs, 20% I think is the number he's throwing around. Because Chinese goods set the pricing floor where they compete, the cost of those goods to Americans will rise 20%. It might mean more people buy American, or Vietnamese, or Malaysian, or whatever, but the cost of goods will rise 20% and it won't go down until the tariffs are lifted. That, friendo, is 20% right out of your pocket, whether you are rich or poor, regardless of your earning. It's stupid, it will not help anything and it will cost you and me a shit ton. And Congress can't undo it. No one can. EDIT TO ADD: I address this one because "the economy" is a frequent incantation and because unlike most of the other complaints and Trump's "concepts of a plan" to address them, this is one he can implement all by himself.
  3. I find it more telling that he hasn't answered the questions put to him by Dbeasy and me, both former Republicans. Telling of what, I don't know.
  4. So, we're waiting on you to justify your pro-Trump opinions better than the drunks down at Shorty's. Not familiar with them myself, but you're not really doing a very good job. Count me in.
  5. Why is this funny to you? Are you not aware that his own longest-serving Chief of Staff reports that Trump was wholly ignorant of Hitler, and what was wrong with him and said he wanted generals like Hitler had, that is the ones that were so obedient they lost WWII for him when they weren't trying to kill him. John Kelly is not a Democrat and is a former USMC Major General. I tend to believe what he says. He's not the only one. And then yesterday Trump said the following: "If I don't win this election - and the Jewish people would really have a lot to do with that if that happens . . ."
  6. He's made more of an effort than most. But I guess he's being shouted down.
  7. I'm trying to question you, quite civilly I might add, to tease out why you think Trump is a good candidate or fit to lead what is still the greatest nation on earth. So far about all you've said is that you KNOW he's being persecuted by Democrats, without any evidence to prove that assertion. And that you'd like to see all the evidence on January 6, despite it all being out there, indicating that you don't believe what hours and hours of video show. Even if you are correct in that assessment, that doesn't qualify him to be President.
  8. I hate the motherfucker, but I am far from blind. In fact, it is what I see and hear that makes me hate him. I can state my reasons for violently disliking Trump and show you video and written evidence that he did or said the things that make me hate him. And, while I agree that he is a shit-talking pussy who is engaged in business, I don't think he ever stops talking shit and his word isn't worth a bucket of warm spit. I have no idea when to believe him and when not to, he utterly lacks credibility. In my OPINION, he's a complete, irredeemable asshole that is unfit to lead this country.
  9. Part of it was that he actually, astonishingly showed a bit of compassion by offering to help with the funeral. Then completely in-character, stiffed them.
  10. That seems strange. Not that I care that much about the ticket itself, but there are or used to be some collateral consequences to failure to maintain responsibility that would lead to DL suspension. Or maybe you mean on a hit and run, where it is only assumed they don't have insurance or proof thereof. That's understandable.
  11. It's not trolling, though. For whatever reason, stros121 seems to believe that somehow makes sense. The object of the thread and the moderation rules is to engage with a Trumpist and tease out their positions. And likely along the way demonstrate that those positions are counterfactual at worst and superstitious at best. Horn75 on the other hand is just trolling, talking utter bollocks.
  12. Carton said that the documents thing was nearly treason or treason. It clearly is not. When that definition in the Constitution was written, the only war was a "declared war" between two entities. Anything short of that was not "war" and couldn't be the source of treason. Similarly enemies meant opponents in a declared war. An insurrection, which fits January 6 better than war, and thus treason, was and is a separate crime.
  13. Can we stop this. Treason is treason. Nothing else is treason. It might be "treasonous" or better yet "traitorous," but it's not treason. Calling things treason that aren't treason is something Donald Trump would do. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.
  14. Well, you see, Trump is a shit talking pussy . . . . (but only some of the time).
  15. Well, it runs counter to the notion that right wing people who are willing to do something more than a drive-by own the libs post get shouted down. Although that does happen. People are trying to tease out the thinking that leads to Trump voting.
  16. And, an insight on prosecutors. They like to prosecute cases they can win and they like high-profile wins. Politics by and large go out the window when they can bring and win a high-profile case, whether the profile is that of the defendant or that of the crime. And, also, as indicated above, prosecutors tend to get pretty self-righteous about the crimes they prosecute. Whatever crime they're prosecuting at the moment, you can be relatively certain that the prosecutor believes it is a grave offense against humanity and the Gods are on his or her side.
  17. Trump defends himself by saying "lock her up" and calling for legal prosecution of his enemies and critics. No one else does that. We have had 45 other Presidents in almost 240 years of history and, never in that recorded history has a President or candidate publicly called for the prosecution of his enemies. Definitely Presidential qualities.
  18. Also, since you KNOW this, how do you know it? Hint, the answer to this question requires evidence. Not opinion. Not speculation. Not some dipshit from Fox, Newsmax, RSBN, or some YouTube channel that told you, but something that constitutes evidence, that tends to prove that a fact is more or less likely.
  19. Law enforcement authorities have prosecuted people that committed crimes. That is a fact. After the due process that everyone gets in this country, for better or worse, and then some, they have been convicted. And that means, by most American standards, that they are guilty of having committed crimes. Those are facts. Their motives in successfully prosecuting these criminals are unknowable. So, their motives are then a matter of belief or opinion. But, again, they are guilty of crimes by the standard American measure. So, what difference does it make? And, as a second matter, if there was pressure from Joe Biden or George Soros or whatever Democratic boogeyman you choose applied to the prosecutors that actually obtained the convictions, you'd think there would be some EVIDENCE of that. Just like there is EVIDENCE that Trump tried to get Sessions and Barr to prosecute his enemies, and they apparently declined to do so.
  20. What's incorrect about it? Do you not see that he is a petty, vengeful little man who can't take a personal slight?
  21. By that standard, a shitload of Britons, including actors, are actually Indian.
  22. Another thing, they have recently discovered or shown or however they do it that cats have much better long-term memories than previously believed, especially when it comes to self-preservation issues. I think most cat people have observed that someone who doesn't know how to approach or handle a cat often gets the cold shoulder in comparison with those who do. So, during the cat's socialization, it's probably important to keep your young? son from mishandling him or her and involve him in feeding and care. Not sure I'd go so far as to say that cats will only love you if you are the one that feeds them, but they do make that positive association.
×
×
  • Create New...