Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 1:55:03 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 8:59:29 GMT -5
He did it because he cares for this country. He doesn't stand to gain anything. Unlike Obama who had next to nothing when he started as president. geez already...can't u ever give it a rest already..the former have flown West...that era is over...for most of us it turned out just fine..eight years , left with records highs..not all of course but overall country survived nicely...now we start over...hopefully it will not be just as good but better...so why are u still living in the past? Time to grow up methinks... It's going to be Obama's fault for anything wrong, for the next eight years. Might as well prepare yourself for it.
|
|
dezailoooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 28, 2016 13:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 13,630
|
Post by dezailoooooo on Jan 21, 2017 9:43:44 GMT -5
So when Russia, China and us all tussle over N. Korea or something and the nukes start flying it'll be Obama's fault? not only that but when the bathrooms in the White House, living quarters, back up, need a good plunging...that too is Obamas fault according to some here...
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jan 21, 2017 10:20:35 GMT -5
So when Russia, China and us all tussle over N. Korea or something and the nukes start flying it'll be Obama's fault? Of course it is. He did not so anything during his last four years to prevent this mad man in North Korea, so now our new President has to solve the issue when it is meeting it's potentially worse scenerio.
|
|
dezailoooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 28, 2016 13:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 13,630
|
Post by dezailoooooo on Jan 21, 2017 10:51:48 GMT -5
So when Russia, China and us all tussle over N. Korea or something and the nukes start flying it'll be Obama's fault? Of course it is. He did not so anything during his last four years to prevent this mad man in North Korea, so now our new President has to solve the issue when it is meeting it's potentially worse scenerio. Your right...about six nucs would have done it..though good chance of Seoul getting one back..just over the border...don't forget Japan too..so we might have escaped ..unless one was smuggled in by ship..one of those container ships into one of our harbors..LA, Houston ..even NY..take the long way around...geez what the hell was Obama thinking by letting the large round one off the hook...Did u ever write him Value and make the suggestion during his eight years ..if not, possible your fault too..
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jan 21, 2017 10:56:12 GMT -5
Of course it is. He did not so anything during his last four years to prevent this mad man in North Korea, so now our new President has to solve the issue when it is meeting it's potentially worse scenerio. Your right...about six nucs would have done it..though good chance of Seoul getting one back..just over the border...don't forget Japan too..so we might have escaped ..unless one was smuggled in by ship..one of those container ships into one of our harbors..LA, Houston ..even NY..take the long way around...geez what the hell was Obama thinking by letting the large round one off the hook...Did u ever write him Value and make the suggestion during his eight years ..if not, possible your fault too.. Dez, Please understand although I did not use a smiley icon, I was being snarky with Dem. I would hope you never think I would be backing thermal nuclear war
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 1:55:03 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 11:38:55 GMT -5
So when Russia, China and us all tussle over N. Korea or something and the nukes start flying it'll be Obama's fault? Of course! He's the one who let it deteriorate into that type of situation over the last eight years. A Trump type of president would of nipped it in the bud, lessening the possibility.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 1:55:03 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 11:40:29 GMT -5
So when Russia, China and us all tussle over N. Korea or something and the nukes start flying it'll be Obama's fault? not only that but when the bathrooms in the White House, living quarters, back up, need a good plunging...that too is Obamas fault according to some here... Of course it is. He's been the one passing all that BS down the plumbing. Elsewhere too. (Humor)
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Jan 21, 2017 11:56:56 GMT -5
What do all you righties think Obama should have done with No. Korea?
I'm quite content knowing that if those fucks tried anything that really put another country in danger, a large portion of their country would become obsidian in 33 minutes.
|
|
dezailoooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 28, 2016 13:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 13,630
|
Post by dezailoooooo on Jan 21, 2017 11:57:56 GMT -5
" A Trump type of president would of nipped it in the bud, lessening the possibility."ok...mind suggesting how...take a few ideas is fine...
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 21, 2017 12:10:55 GMT -5
1) protests are not "general circumstances". peaceable assembly is often met with unspeakable violence. who is there to arrest the cops, under those circumstances? 2) you can also say that you are glad to see windows broken and stones thrown. what you are glad about, what i am glad about, it's meaningless. 3) i want the right to peaceably protest without having my head cracked open and without getting thrown in jail, thanks. if i can't have that, i will take getting arrested. People who break the law should be arrested and charged. I'm glad this happens to maintain the civil order. If you wish to protest a election result, vote for your candidate. That's your only avenue for change in an election. If your on the losing candidates side. Suck it up and move on. I fully agree that people who break the law are arrested, charged and convicted if proven guilty in a court of law. I fully disagree with the idea that peaceful, lawful protests should not take place. If you're one of the minority side of an election or any policy issue, focusing attention on your side of the issue is a worthwhile effort to change people's minds.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 1:55:03 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 12:16:37 GMT -5
People who break the law should be arrested and charged. I'm glad this happens to maintain the civil order. If you wish to protest a election result, vote for your candidate. That's your only avenue for change in an election. If your on the losing candidates side. Suck it up and move on. I fully agree that people who break the law are arrested, charged and convicted if proven guilty in a court of law. I fully disagree with the idea that peaceful, lawful protests should not take place. If you're one of the minority side of an election or any policy issue, focusing attention on your side of the issue is a worthwhile effort to change people's minds. I agree peaceful protests should take place also, with conditions. There was a peaceful protest that blocked a freeway in Portland not that long ago. They just stood in the road. It was the safety pin thing. An ambulance had to take a 45 minute alternate route to a hospital. A four year old girl lost her father due to the delay. I don't believe there was any media coverage of the death.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 1:55:03 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 12:20:14 GMT -5
" A Trump type of president would of nipped it in the bud, lessening the possibility."ok...mind suggesting how...take a few ideas is fine... We'll never know. I'm not big on hypotheticals. It's a strong versus weak kind of thing.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Jan 21, 2017 12:28:55 GMT -5
Or it means that the police are ignoring all but the most serious offenses. For example, a friend of mine went to a Trump rally in our laid back and relatively crime free town. The anti Trump protesters were throwing rocks and bottles, and there wasn't a single arrest that night. Intelligent v. knee jerk seems like a good thing to me. Arresting the serious offenders and not every one with a minor infraction seems a smart use of governmental resources. So, you're ok with 'peaceful' protestors throwing rocks and bottles at people and not getting arrested for it? Seriously?
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 21, 2017 12:51:27 GMT -5
... An ambulance had to take a 45 minute alternate route to a hospital. A four year old girl lost her father due to the delay. I don't believe there was any media coverage of the death. Here is why there but not have been media coverage of the death: Fact check: Social media rumors about Portland anti-Trump protestsAmbulance stuck in traffic with patient in need of medical care
Another common social media report brought to KGW’s attention involved claims that an ambulance carrying a patient in need of immediate medical care was caught up in one of the protests. An unverified Facebook post from the purported ambulance driver alleged that the patient had died in the vehicle because traffic was blocked.
The post has been widely shared on different platforms in the last week, with some KGW viewers alleging they’d heard that it happened in Portland.
On Tuesday, KGW reached out to multiple agencies, including the Portland Police Bureau, American Medical Response and Metro West Ambulance. None of the agencies had any report or record indicating this had actually happened. They determined it to be an unsubstantiated claim.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 21, 2017 12:53:47 GMT -5
Intelligent v. knee jerk seems like a good thing to me. Arresting the serious offenders and not every one with a minor infraction seems a smart use of governmental resources. So, you're ok with 'peaceful' protestors throwing rocks and bottles at people and not getting arrested for it? Seriously? You paying the bill for arresting them, housing them, charging them, taking them to court?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 1:55:03 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 12:55:37 GMT -5
... An ambulance had to take a 45 minute alternate route to a hospital. A four year old girl lost her father due to the delay. I don't believe there was any media coverage of the death. Here is why there but not have been media coverage of the death: Fact check: Social media rumors about Portland anti-Trump protestsAmbulance stuck in traffic with patient in need of medical care
Another common social media report brought to KGW’s attention involved claims that an ambulance carrying a patient in need of immediate medical care was caught up in one of the protests. An unverified Facebook post from the purported ambulance driver alleged that the patient had died in the vehicle because traffic was blocked.
The post has been widely shared on different platforms in the last week, with some KGW viewers alleging they’d heard that it happened in Portland.
On Tuesday, KGW reached out to multiple agencies, including the Portland Police Bureau, American Medical Response and Metro West Ambulance. None of the agencies had any report or record indicating this had actually happened. They determined it to be an unsubstantiated claim. As long as CBS did the checking, it's definitely an unsubstantiated claim. I hope they didn't have any Time/financial constraints restricting them from checking everywhere.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 1:55:03 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 12:56:39 GMT -5
So, you're ok with 'peaceful' protestors throwing rocks and bottles at people and not getting arrested for it? Seriously? You paying the bill for arresting them, housing them, charging them, taking them to court? It will be shared equally among all taxpayers. To maintain the civil peace.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 21, 2017 12:58:42 GMT -5
You paying the bill for arresting them, housing them, charging them, taking them to court? It will be shared equally among all taxpayers. To maintain the civil peace. Then I support not arresting them.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 1:55:03 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 13:01:18 GMT -5
It will be shared equally among all taxpayers. To maintain the civil peace. Then I support not arresting them.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 21, 2017 13:05:22 GMT -5
1) protests are not "general circumstances". peaceable assembly is often met with unspeakable violence. who is there to arrest the cops, under those circumstances? 2) you can also say that you are glad to see windows broken and stones thrown. what you are glad about, what i am glad about, it's meaningless. 3) i want the right to peaceably protest without having my head cracked open and without getting thrown in jail, thanks. if i can't have that, i will take getting arrested. People who break the law should be arrested and charged. I'm glad this happens to maintain the civil order. If you wish to protest a election result, vote for your candidate. That's your only avenue for change in an election. If your on the losing candidates side. Suck it up and move on. you will note that my original post in this thread and all responses have NOTHING to do with "breaking the law". you also seem to be missing my point. what if the government declares peaceable assembly "breaking the law". you going to like down like a lamb, or fight like a lion, D23? Neimoeller would be appalled at the tone of this conversation.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 21, 2017 13:07:20 GMT -5
unless you know the circumstances of the arrests, i don't know how you or anyone else can say they are glad. We have the right to peacefully protest...we do NOT have the right to riot...cause damage..hurt others especially law enforcement people...Fact is, if one is stupid enough to hurt or hit a member of the law enforcement community as they carry out their duties in keeping order , they should expect that they will be possible hurt and hit, and hit, and hit, and hit and hit,and hit back... of all the people to miss the point, i least expected you to be one of them. what if the people arrested were trying to get to their houses? what if they were swept up in mass arrests? until you know SPECIFICALLY what these people are being arrested for, i can't see any reason for being "glad" about it. disclaimer: i am not claiming to know anything about their circumstances. if they were arrested for violence or vandalism, then FINE. but i see no reason whatsoever to ASSUME that. i have been to far too many protests were people doing NOTHING were abused or arrested by law enforcement.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 1:55:03 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 13:10:11 GMT -5
People who break the law should be arrested and charged. I'm glad this happens to maintain the civil order. If you wish to protest a election result, vote for your candidate. That's your only avenue for change in an election. If your on the losing candidates side. Suck it up and move on. you will note that my original post in this thread and all responses have NOTHING to do with "breaking the law". you also seem to be missing my point. what if the government declares peaceable assembly "breaking the law". you going to like down like a lamb, or fight like a lion, D23?Neimoeller would be appalled at the tone of this conversation. See the second half of the bottom of my post box. (Thomas Paine)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 1:55:03 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 13:14:12 GMT -5
People who break the law should be arrested and charged. I'm glad this happens to maintain the civil order. If you wish to protest a election result, vote for your candidate. That's your only avenue for change in an election. If your on the losing candidates side. Suck it up and move on. you will note that my original post in this thread and all responses have NOTHING to do with "breaking the law". you also seem to be missing my point. what if the government declares peaceable assembly "breaking the law". you going to like down like a lamb, or fight like a lion, D23? Neimoeller would be appalled at the tone of this conversation. Bills made the post about arresting only the "serious" offenders. This is way too subjective as a standard. The standard is "follow the law" as far as I'm concerned.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 21, 2017 13:16:36 GMT -5
Intelligent v. knee jerk seems like a good thing to me. Arresting the serious offenders and not every one with a minor infraction seems a smart use of governmental resources. So, you're ok with 'peaceful' protestors throwing rocks and bottles at people and not getting arrested for it? Seriously? i am actually more on the fence with this than i probably should be. i generally ask if anyone was harmed. if nobody was harmed, what would the person be arrested FOR? disorderly conduct?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 1:55:03 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 13:17:22 GMT -5
We have the right to peacefully protest...we do NOT have the right to riot...cause damage..hurt others especially law enforcement people...Fact is, if one is stupid enough to hurt or hit a member of the law enforcement community as they carry out their duties in keeping order , they should expect that they will be possible hurt and hit, and hit, and hit, and hit and hit,and hit back... of all the people to miss the point, i least expected you to be one of them. what if the people arrested were trying to get to their houses? what if they were swept up in mass arrests? until you know SPECIFICALLY what these people are being arrested for, i can't see any reason for being "glad" about it. disclaimer: i am not claiming to know anything about their circumstances. if they were arrested for violence or vandalism, then FINE. but i see no reason whatsoever to ASSUME that. i have been to far too many protests were people doing NOTHING were abused or arrested by law enforcement. Depends what you mean by this. Can you clarify ?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 21, 2017 13:18:34 GMT -5
you will note that my original post in this thread and all responses have NOTHING to do with "breaking the law". you also seem to be missing my point. what if the government declares peaceable assembly "breaking the law". you going to like down like a lamb, or fight like a lion, D23? Neimoeller would be appalled at the tone of this conversation. Bills made the post about arresting only the "serious" offenders. no, he didn't. if he HAD, i would not have even responded. you must take me for a complete idiot if you think otherwise.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 1:55:03 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 13:19:43 GMT -5
So, you're ok with 'peaceful' protestors throwing rocks and bottles at people and not getting arrested for it? Seriously? i am actually more on the fence with this than i probably should be. i generally ask if anyone was harmed. if nobody was harmed, what would the person be arrested FOR? disorderly conduct? Physical harm, mental harm, financial harm? Can you clarify?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 1:55:03 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 13:20:37 GMT -5
Bills made the post about arresting only the "serious" offenders. no, he didn't. if he HAD, i would not have even responded. you must take me for a complete idiot if you think otherwise. 18 hours ago billisonboard said: Intelligent v. knee jerk seems like a good thing to me. Arresting the serious offenders and not every one with a minor infraction seems a smart use of governmental resources. You're an idiot?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 21, 2017 13:22:00 GMT -5
of all the people to miss the point, i least expected you to be one of them. what if the people arrested were trying to get to their houses? what if they were swept up in mass arrests? until you know SPECIFICALLY what these people are being arrested for, i can't see any reason for being "glad" about it. disclaimer: i am not claiming to know anything about their circumstances. if they were arrested for violence or vandalism, then FINE. but i see no reason whatsoever to ASSUME that. i have been to far too many protests were people doing NOTHING were abused or arrested by law enforcement. Depends what you mean by this. Can you clarify ? doing nothing illegal. peaceably assembling. not blocking traffic. not hurling bottles at police. not breaking windows. you need more clarity than that? i stand by what i said all through this thread, despite REPEATED grandstanding by folks that seem to think i am saying that people who cause harm should not be arrested. i said nothing of the kind, and the repeated nonsense to the contrary is just that. does it bring you comfort to dismiss the point? or do y'all just not understand it?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 21, 2017 13:25:28 GMT -5
i am actually more on the fence with this than i probably should be. i generally ask if anyone was harmed. if nobody was harmed, what would the person be arrested FOR? disorderly conduct? Physical harm, mental harm, financial harm? Can you clarify? in terms of protest, i would think physical or property harm. protests are mentally distressing by nature.
|
|