Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 46 minutes ago, Peter said: Now the assertion that China is a front for North Korea is plausible but perhaps unproven. Peter, LOL... Perhaps?!! That's the point of front organizations. That's why they exist in the first place. The moment you prove it, they are no longer good fronts. Don't ever go into the contraband business. I have a feeling you would suck at it. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 44 minutes ago, Peter 'I don't know how to do links' Taylor said: A local Wisconsin newspaper has Cruz ten points ahead Link? Link. Quote Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) has a clear lead over real estate magnate Donald Drumpf in the Republican primary contest in Wisconsin, according to a Marquette University poll released Wednesday. The poll showed support for Cruz at 40 percent, followed by Drumpf at 30 percent and Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) at 21 percent. For Cruz and Drumpf, this constitutes a total reversal from the previous Marquette poll conducted in late February, which showed Drumpf beating Cruz by 30 percent to 19 percent. Political humourist Ann Coulter on Trump's retweet featuring Heidi Cruz: "Our candidate is mental. Do you realize our candidate is mental? It's like constantly having to bail out your sixteen year old son from prison." Blink. Did I mention that sixty-six percent of voters believe Ted Cruz is a serial adulterer? There was a POLL, Peter. I just don't understand why you don't believe the voters. "@Don_Vito_08: "A picture is worth a thousand words" @realDonaldTrump #LyingTed #NeverCruz @MELANIATRUMP pic.twitter.com/5bvVEwMVF8"— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 24, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 4 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: IT HAPPENED TO ME: I Was Born Without a Vagina Hole (This is fun. ) Shall I go on? There's more... Michael Does this mean that she has to vote for Evita by absentee ballot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 32 minutes ago, william.scherk said: 1 hour ago, Peter 'I don't know how to do links' Taylor said: A local Wisconsin newspaper has Cruz ten points ahead Link? Link. Quote Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) has a clear lead over real estate magnate Donald Drumpf in the Republican primary contest in Wisconsin, according to a Marquette University poll released Wednesday. The poll showed support for Cruz at 40 percent, followed by Drumpf at 30 percent and Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) at 21 percent. For Cruz and Drumpf, this constitutes a total reversal from the previous Marquette poll conducted in late February, which showed Drumpf beating Cruz by 30 percent to 19 percent. Nobody, but nobody is reporting on the sample size of this poll. So I dug and found it on the Marquette Law School site (see here). They polled 471 registered Republican voters who said they would vote in the upcoming primary. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 On March 26, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Robert, I disagree. I think they would be corrupt, but not necessarily fools. Michael Michael, Here is why anyone who tried to keep a truthful story about extramarital affairs on the part of Ted Cruz out of the media would be a complete fool. Ted Cruz is not a Democrat. Ted's last name is not Clinton. Already ABC, CBS, and NBC have given much more air time to the Enquirer story in one week than they've given to the political uses of the Internal Revenue Service in two years. They didn't go looking for evidence of an extramarital affair by John Edwards... but the prospect of a Ted Cruz extramarital affair must have them salivating. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 16 hours ago, Jon Letendre said: She lied about what happened. "I almost fell to the ground..." There should be no charges for anyone. Nothing happened. Jon, What did Trump say afterward? What did Lewandowski say afterward? Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 21 minutes ago, Robert Campbell said: What did Trump say afterward? What did Lewandowski say afterward? ??? Do you mean, what did Trump and Lewandowski say after Fields wasn't assaulted? My understanding is that they didn't say anything, since they were not aware that anything had allegedly happened, or that Fields was going to make the false accusation. J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Thanks for the link William. Sometimes I don’t link because I just read it on the net or I just heard it on the news, or I want to abbreviate the words in the link, or I just don’t like to link. I forget how anyway. William wrote about Cruz cheating: There was a POLL, Peter. I just don't understand why you don't believe the voters. end quote So, does that count as the official vote? Election not needed? I will not be disgusted until he is proven to be disgusting. And I thought Ann Coulter was a fan of Trump too but she calls him a 16 year old. Is that quote real? William quoted about Cruz in Wisconsin: The poll showed support for Cruz at 40 percent, followed by Drumpf at 30 percent and Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) at 21 percent. end quote I see the subtlety. Kasich is the only one who needs an (R) by his name and Trump is a Nazi. So, do the folks in the Klondike like Cruz? What bigots you are, you hosers. Just because Cruz was born in our northern territory of Canadia, you guys want more votes in the election than The Mariana’s or Guam. And BC wants to become a state. Sheesh. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 1 hour ago, Robert Campbell said: They didn't go looking for evidence of an extramarital affair by John Edwards... Robert, Wasn't it the National Enquirer that broke that one? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 (edited) 54 minutes ago, Jonathan said: ??? Do you mean, what did Trump and Lewandowski say after Fields wasn't assaulted? My understanding is that they didn't say anything, since they were not aware that anything had allegedly happened, or that Fields was going to make the false accusation. J Jonathan, The information isn't hard to find. March 10: Hope Hicks, spokeswoman for Trump, "The accusation ... is entirely false. […] not a single camera or reporter of more than 100 in attendance captured the alleged incident." "This individual has never met Corey [Lewandowski}, nor had the only reporter [Ben Terris, Washington Post] who supposedly identified him." Hicks also denounced Fields for claiming she had been hit with a baton by NYPD officers during an Occupy demonstration. (There happens to be photographic evidence, but no matter). Lewandowski reeled off a string of tweets on March 10. Michelle Fields an "attention seeker" not a reporter. She had falsely claimed that Allen West groped her. "We're calling bullshit on Michelle Fields." March 11, Lewandowski to Fields: "you are totally delusional. I never touched you. As a matter of fact, I have never even met you." Donald Trump to CNN, March 11: Trump claimed he didn't see anything, or hear about it afterward. "That was, in my opinion, made up. Everybody said nothing happened. Perhaps she made the story up. I think that's what happened." More from The Donald here: http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/11/politics/donald-trump-breitbart-reporter-michelle-fields-corey-lewandowski/ Robert Edited March 30, 2016 by Robert Campbell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Nobody, but nobody is reporting on the sample size of this poll. So I dug and found it on the Marquette Law School site (see here). They polled 471 registered Republican voters who said they would vote in the upcoming primary. Michael Michael, Marquette polls have fairly small samples. If you'd been following the Scott Walker story (for instance, the recall election that he faced, winning by a bigger margin than when he'd been elected the first time), you'd have known this. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 (edited) 6 hours ago, Jonathan said: Having said the above, I like the blowback. I like the fact that Trump is fighting back, and matching his tactics to his opponents/accusers/smearers. I have very little doubt that Lewandowski made at least gentle if not somewhat firm contact with Fields in trying to remove her from being where she wasn't supposed to be, and perhaps stopping her from physically impeding Trump while pestering him. But it's quite clear that she wasn't assaulted or abused, and possibly may have done more to Trump than Lewandowski did to her. Jonathan, Trump initially denied noticing Michelle Fields at all, having any contact with her, or noticing Lewandowski or anyone else in his entourage having any contact with her. (See previous post.) So much for the harm she inflicted upon him. Lewandowski denied ever encountering Fields at all, and claimed she'd made it all up. If you feel your opponents are lying about you, and keeping bad actors in their employ just to make life rougher for you, what's fighting back? Lying about them with greater insistence than you think they've been using against you? Keeping worse actors in your employ to outdo the bad actors they have in their employ? Robert Edited March 30, 2016 by Robert Campbell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 8 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: You just can't make some things up. From the Gateway Pundit: MORE LIES=> Michelle Fields Said Corey Lewandowski Used “TEETH” and “FIST” in Police Report Michelle Fields didn't tell a reporter that. She told the POLICE that. There's a scan of the incident report in the link above. All I can think of is it must be a wild party in her head. I mean, how did she think she was going to get away with that? Even with the videos that were available when she filed the report, can anyone imagine Corey biting her? Slugging her? This was a police report, not a sex scene out of Atlas Shrugged. Dayaamm! Michelle Fields should write fiction. Seriously. btw - Trump himself was the one who supplied the overhead video that shows what really happened. Michael Michael, Some other folks here have no idea what Trump and Lewandowski initially said about the Fields incident. See my post above. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: They polled 471 registered Republican voters. A lot of pollsters do that. And the good ones publish the margins-of-error, the sampling and interview procedure. And the better ones have a track record of being within a margin of accuracy. 538 gives this outfit a B overall. Link? The link was in the story Glad you did some digging for what interested you, even if we have to guess why it interested you ... Polls are polls are polls, you have said at one point, I believe. Or as you say all too often, "In other words." In other words you find the Marquette Law School poll perfectly acceptable for what it is. In other words, you believe Trump will probably be shut out of Wisconsin and you don't think it matters. In other words ... so what? There is always the leftist cartel at Real Clear Politics. Maybe someone needs to dig around in there are find a rumour that George Soros is funding the secret shenanigans. Or something about Ted Cruz's Night With Gipsy Whores. That one has legs. Ugly and scrawny legs, but legs. I figure Trump blew his three radio interviews (not just the Sykes one) for Wisconsin radio, that the Lady Vote for Mr Trump is shrinking, and that he will blame somebody for 'stealing' the race. Or something. China! Ted Cruz's mad and ugly wife! Melania's good taste in men. Ivanka! China! Head-choppers. Polls! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 (edited) 8 hours ago, Jon Letendre said: My favorite part last night was, "But is that Presidential?" Trump: "I'll tell you what's Presidential, victory. Victory is Presidential. Jon, If Trump alienates every female Republican, what are his chances of enjoying presidentiality? Robert Edited March 30, 2016 by Robert Campbell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Robert, Wasn't it the National Enquirer that broke that one? Michael Yes. Possibly Gary Hart also, Not sure about Monica. A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Nice endorsement for Trump. Quote In what may be Donald Trump’s biggest endorsement so far in his race for the presidency, the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC) has officially thrown its support to the Republican front-runner as the next president of the United States. https://t.co/FuU7gHwldf NBPC Endorsement “Mr Trump will take on special interest and embrace ideas of rank and file border patrol agents” — ShennaFox (@nd hennaFoxMusic) March 30, 2016 And their reason... Quote The announcement — which marks the first time the agency has endorsed a presidential candidate during the primary season — came in letter form and represents the will of its 17,000 border patrol members. Trump has promised to give more authority to the agents on the ground rather than allow bureaucrats and politicians to control the country’s border from Washington, D.C. “Mr. Trump will take on special interests and embrace the ideas of rank-and-file Border Patrol agents rather than listening to the management yes-men who say whatever they are programmed to say. This is a refreshing change that we have not seen before – and may never see again,” wrote Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council. A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 (edited) NEW Trump to @msnbc: "there has to be some form of punishment" for women who have abortions but he has yet to determine what that should be. — Ali Vitali (@alivitali) March 30, 2016 Like a bolus of swamp gas, some media memes rise and belch and seemingly propagate as with the dire miasmas of lore. A site I just discovered purports to track and rank these kinds of boluses or memes as they gain height, erupt, degas and subside into the swamp. This is a screenshot of the top left front page of http://www.memeorandum.com/ I certainly want someone punished for crimes. Mistakes were made. In other words ... Edited March 30, 2016 by william.scherk I am inviting participants to the Symposium: Abortion Ladies: How to Punish The Right: Is Waterboarding Feminist enough for the Bitches? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Robert, Wasn't it the National Enquirer that broke that one? Michael Michael, My point was that the legacy media didn't want to touch the John Edwards story even after the Enquirer broke it. Hardly the case with the Ted Cruz story. Robert Edited March 30, 2016 by Robert Campbell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 "legacy media" ... interesting, Robert. Your phrase? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 1 hour ago, Robert Campbell said: My point was that the legacy media didn't want to touch the John Edwards story even after the Enquirer broke it. Hardly the case with the Ted Cruz story. Robert, So the National Enquirer brought down John Edwards all by itself without any contribution from the "legacy media"? Wow. I'm impressed. That tabloid is a lot more powerful than I imagined. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 1 hour ago, william.scherk said: Like a bolus of swamp gas, some media memes rise and belch and seemingly propagate as with the dire miasmas of lore. A site I just discovered purports to track and rank these kinds of boluses or memes as they gain height, erupt, degas and subside into the swamp. William, (yawn) The gotcha warriors are going nuts with this. But it will be another flash in the pan. Why? Because the real thing these SJWs should concentrate on--the thing that might actually damage Trump--is that he wants to make abortion illegal. Instead, they are playing gotcha because he wants people who break the law to be punished. Well, duh... You can't make this stuff up. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 They already corrected it. He means the Dr., or, provider which is basically the Cruz position. A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 7 minutes ago, Selene said: They already corrected it. He means the Dr., or, provider which is basically the Cruz position. Adam, I just saw it (from the NYT). Donald Trump, Abortion Foe, Eyes ‘Punishment’ for Women, Then Recants By Maggie Haberman March 30, 2016 New York Times A quote from that article is too funny: Haberman said: Donald J. Trump, pressed Wednesday on his support for a ban on abortion and what it would mean in practice, said that “there has to be some form of punishment” for women who have abortions. Less than three hours later, Mr. Trump revised himself, issuing a written statement saying that such a ban would criminalize only those performing the procedure, not the women getting abortions. “The woman is a victim in this case, as is the life in her womb,” he said. The revision may have set a land-speed record for a recanting of a controversial political pronouncement... You can almost see the SJW Gotcha Crew bitching, "Come on! You didn't even let us squeeze any juice out of that poorly worded statement. It's unfair to say what you mean so soon after." Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 4 hours ago, Robert Campbell said: Jonathan, Trump initially denied noticing Michelle Fields at all, having any contact with her, or noticing Lewandowski or anyone else in his entourage having any contact with her. (See previous post.) So much for the harm she inflicted upon him. Yes, Trump hadn't even noticed Fields. He's approached by hundreds of reporters a day. It's not at all hard to believe that he doesn't remember each and every encounter. Same with Lewandowski. I don't doubt that either didn't remember their brief encounter with Fields. As for the harm that she inflicted upon Trump, I think you're missing the point. There was no harm, just as there was no harm inflicted upon her. She was gently prevented from continuing to pester Trump. There's no change of expression on her face -- no wince or grimace -- at the moment that Lewandowski apparently steers her away from Trump. No change whatsover. In fact, as she continues to follow the entourage, she appears to have a slight smile. (I'm reminded of Rainman's Serious Injury List: "Number 18 in 1988: Charlie Babbitt squeezed and pulled and hurt my neck in 1988.") Trump's statement that Fields hurt him was meant in jest. He has said that his arm still hurts from when she grabbed him, that it's never been the same (and then laughed). But the reality is that he didn't even remember her until reviewing the videos and seeing that she had touched his arm. Get it? He's saying that if the gentle treatment that she got from Lewandowski is battery, then so is the gentle physical contact that Trump got from her. Quote Lewandowski denied ever encountering Fields at all, and claimed she'd made it all up. The incident was something that is so common and minor that it's completely reasonable that anyone in the same situation would not remember it. And she did make it up. She was gently guided away from being where she wasn't supposed to be. She portrayed it as having been almost dragged or thrown to the ground. Put yourself in a similar situation. Let's say that you're trying to get through a crowd and you bump into a few people. Later, one of them claims that you elbowed her in the face, gave her a bloody nose, and spat on her. What would your response be? Knowing that what she claimed never happened, you'd probably say that it never happened and that she was making it up, no? Quote If you feel your opponents are lying about you, and keeping bad actors in their employ just to make life rougher for you, what's fighting back? What are you talking about? Who is the bad actor? Trump is not keeping bad actors in his employ, but rejecting false accusations made against someone whom he believes to be a good actor. Quote Lying about them with greater insistence than you think they've been using against you? No one is advocating lying. What I'm applauding is Trump's not caving in to a false media narrative. I'm glad that he's not throwing anyone under the bus. And when I said that I like the fact that he's fighting back using their tactics to his advantage, what I meant was that he is phrasing the issue by accepting, for the sake of argument, their own ethics and standards of judgment and condemnation. He's saying "That's assault and battery? Oh, okay, then I was also assaulted and battered. By your own standards, you attacked me first." It's a sort of reductio ad absurdum. Quote Keeping worse actors in your employ to outdo the bad actors they have in their employ? No. The idea is to keep good actors rather than throw them under the bus when they're falsely accused. J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now