Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,810 Year: 3,067/9,624 Month: 912/1,588 Week: 95/223 Day: 6/17 Hour: 2/1


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House The Trump Presidency

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Trump Presidency
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 1032 of 4573 (816604)
08-07-2017 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 1025 by Phat
08-07-2017 9:59 AM


Re: Trump's accomplishments
Read this article, Marc. (no, its not "fake news"...)
I agree it's not fake news, because it's not news at all. It's a liberal opinion piece. Lots of difference between liberal editorials and fake news. Liberal editorials are far less dangerous than fake news, because they don't really try to dishonestly hide where they're coming from. Fake news however, deliberately tries to twist and distort, to mislead viewers and readers who aren't very aware of what's going on, because they rely on few sources for their news.
A recent example (Saturday the 5th) of fake news came from the same place as your opinion piece, the NY Times, one of the best sources for both liberal opinion and fake news. This "news" report pulled out of thin air an idea that Pence and others are carefully planning how they will run for the presidency in 2020, because everyone knows that Trump will be a failed one term president. It can't be called a lie, because at Trump's age, there's always a reasonable chance he won't be able to run for a second term because of health reasons. And of course it's possible that his presidency could fail for any number of reasons, but that's no more likely than any past president. It's simply not news, when compared to other current events. It's just another attempt to mislead anyone watching who isn't paying as much attention as they should. Trump (and Pence) took exception to it of course, and ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT WITH DAVID MUIR carried the fake news further this evening, by saying Donald Trump LASHED OUT at the NY Times for this article. Their evening news often starts out by saying Trump LASHED OUT about something. Funny how Maxine Waters, Bernie Sanders, Al Gore, countless other loudmouth Democrats are never described as lashing out, no matter what they say, or how hysterically they say it.
Another example of fake news that I've described here before, is the way ABC news captioned Trump's description of Syria's dictator as having "crossed a lot of lines". The caption read,~Trump, "crossed a lot of lines"~ It was an obvious attempt to mislead anyone not paying close attention, making it look like someone was saying "Trump crossed a lot of lines" when the truth was that Trump was accusing Syria of crossing a lot of lines, which most anyone of any political view would agree with.
This type of fake news is going on all over the mainstream media every day, and it's all like the above, it's just slightly out of reach of being a bold-faced lie. It's how they get by with it. But they're not getting by with it very well, I heard the other day that only 18% of the population trusts the mainstream media to tell the truth.
But let's have a brief look at your opinion piece;
quote:
If there is one consistent thread through Mr. Trump’s political career, it is his overt connection to white resentment and white nationalism.
This type of accusation is largely meaningless, because it's just as easy to assert, and show opinions for, Obama's connection to black resentment and black nationalism. Or Mexican resentment etc.
quote:
Mr. Trump’s fixation on Barack Obama’s birth certificate gave him the white nationalist street cred that no other Republican candidate could match,
There was (and still is) a lot of time delay, secrecy, and dancing going on by Democrats concerning Obama's birth certificate. The Constitution clearly states that a president must be a natural born citizen, and a lot of people across the U.S. take that requirement seriously. As much as I like Ted Cruz, I for one don't think he was qualified to be president, since he was born in Canada. That Democrats thumb their nose at this Constitutional requirement by playing the race card against Trump is pretty amazing to a lot of people.
quote:
Like on Christmas morning, every day brings his supporters presents: travel bans against Muslims, Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids in Hispanic communities and brutal, family-gutting deportations,
Hearts bleed for family gutting illegal immigration deportation, but family gutting environmental regulations in coal country against U.S. citizens is just fine?
quote:
a crackdown on sanctuary cities,
What a honeyed term "sanctuary cities", for cities with local politicians who break federal law.
The evidence shows that many of Trumps so-called accomplishments are only playing to his base.
Like the NY Times only plays to it's base? Sorry, but Trump's base is far bigger than that of the NY Times. Trump's base knows something about world history, about the seriousness of $20 trillion in debt, about the threat of terrorism, North Korea, etc.
They also are stoking class hatred and rivalry in our country.
So you're saying you don't believe that the Obama administration did that? The Democrat advocation of the breaking of immigration laws doesn't do that? If so that's fine, we have to agree to disagree on it, and we'll see how things go in the 2018 mid-terms.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1025 by Phat, posted 08-07-2017 9:59 AM Phat has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 1033 of 4573 (816605)
08-07-2017 10:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1027 by NoNukes
08-07-2017 1:42 PM


Re: Trump's accomplishments
Accomplishments are apparently in the eye of the beholder.
That's true, I've seen lists of Obama'a "accomplishments in the past, and think about as much of them as everyone here thinks of this list. In both cases, the president is given credit for many things he had nothing to do with. In free markets, political leadership has nothing to do with much that goes on. However;
quote:
05. Consumer confidence highest since 2000 at index 125.6
08. Bids for border wall are well underway.
09. Pulled out of the lopsided 'Paris Accord'.
10. Keystone pipeline approved.
16. The Stock Market is at the highest ever In its history.
18. $89 Billion saved in regulation rollbacks.
There are more similar ones on this list - these are the kinds of things that ~ lessening government regulations ~ can accomplish, and these are the things Trump was elected to do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1027 by NoNukes, posted 08-07-2017 1:42 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1036 by NoNukes, posted 08-08-2017 6:59 AM marc9000 has replied
 Message 1037 by JonF, posted 08-08-2017 8:42 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 1034 of 4573 (816606)
08-07-2017 10:19 PM
Reply to: Message 1023 by Phat
08-06-2017 3:05 PM


Re: It's a hard life for little snowflakes.
By the way;
Trump really despises Obama. Personally, I think its because Obama will always be more popular among the people-at-large globally than Trump ever will.
Could that possibly be because many "people-at-large globally" dislike the U.S. and therefore dislike a president who they fear will increase U.S success?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1023 by Phat, posted 08-06-2017 3:05 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1035 by frako, posted 08-08-2017 4:45 AM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 1038 by Pressie, posted 08-08-2017 8:56 AM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 1044 of 4573 (816645)
08-08-2017 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 1036 by NoNukes
08-08-2017 6:59 AM


Re: Trump's accomplishments
I've already commented on most of these examples. Do you have any response?
It's an effort, but let me see what I can do.
05. Consumer confidence highest since 2000 at index 125.6 - continued trend from Obama era; not a plus since Trump has not implemented any economic policy to speak of
"To speak of" - let me speak of it a little bit. He's not a threat to implement new big government programs to anywhere near the extent that any of today's crop of Democrats would. So do you think consumer confidence would be the same today under a Hillary presidency?
What do you think is easier for someone who takes risks/creates jobs? Facing a Democrat administration with its unpredictable likelihood of new regulations on business, or facing a Republican administration that is more likely to let the economy work with less government interference, more predictable and slower changing free market trends, that allows him to plan for the future?
Consumer confidence wasn't anywhere near what it is today in 2009, the same 7+ month point in the Obama administration. Confidence increased during the Obama administration (with a Republican congress and senate) in spite of him, not because of him.
The Paris Accord did not obligate the US to do anything. The sole change is to make folk like you feel better.
What was its purpose then? To make Democrats feel better? Maybe because it was a small first step for more big government?
We're going to be mining a lot of coal that more and more people in the world simply do not want.
Coal isn't mined for no reason. If there's no demand, there is no supply. Free markets work really well in some cases.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1036 by NoNukes, posted 08-08-2017 6:59 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1048 by NoNukes, posted 08-08-2017 9:38 PM marc9000 has replied
 Message 1053 by JonF, posted 08-09-2017 11:21 AM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


(1)
Message 1045 of 4573 (816646)
08-08-2017 8:39 PM
Reply to: Message 1038 by Pressie
08-08-2017 8:56 AM


Re: It's a hard life for little snowflakes.
Or, like in my case, I used to see America as a beacon of hope.
Hope for what? What benefit to your country do you see from an Obama/Hillary presidency over a Trump presidency?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1038 by Pressie, posted 08-08-2017 8:56 AM Pressie has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


(1)
Message 1046 of 4573 (816647)
08-08-2017 8:49 PM
Reply to: Message 1039 by Phat
08-08-2017 11:41 AM


Re: Trump's accomplishments or the lack thereof
From your link;
quote:
The report concludes that even if humans immediately stopped emitting greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, the world would still feel at least an additional 0.50 degrees Fahrenheit (0.30 degrees Celsius) of warming over this century compared with today. The projected actual rise, scientists say, will be as much as 2 degrees Celsius.
So in the year 2100, the planet will be 2 degrees Celsius warmer. I'm very concerned. I wonder what the national debt will be by then?
What this means then, is no matter how much the EPA strips U.S. citizens of their liberty and money, climate change will continue, and those government officials and scientists who made those decisions will face no accountability for their actions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1039 by Phat, posted 08-08-2017 11:41 AM Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1054 by JonF, posted 08-09-2017 11:24 AM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 1058 by Taq, posted 08-09-2017 12:55 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


(1)
Message 1047 of 4573 (816648)
08-08-2017 9:02 PM
Reply to: Message 1040 by NoNukes
08-08-2017 5:49 PM


Re: Writing checks with your mouth, that your butt cannot cash..
Exactly what will the US do if North Korea makes more verbal threats or launches another missile?
I can't think of anyone I'd rather have than Trump as president if North Korea succeeds in destroying any part of the U.S. with a nuclear warhead. Except maybe Harry Truman. As a Democrat, Truman could handle the problem without the same news media frenzy that Trump would have to face.
But to answer your question, the U.S. military has some pretty pinpoint-accurate hardware that could possibly vaporize only a large enough area to make SURE the fat man doesn't survive. Would that make you sad?
North Korea made threats to the US as recently as yesterday. You can expect them to continue the rhetoric after which Trump will do what exactly? Post more insults to Twitter?
So you have nothing bad to say about Kim Jong Un? Most of the Democrat news media doesn't seem to have a problem with him either. This evening ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT WITH DAVID MUIR breathlessly reported that a new ABC poll shows that 60 some-odd percent of U.S. citizens are "uneasy" about Trumps ability to handle the North Korean threat. I guess the poll question was "are you uneasy about Trump's ability to deal with North Korea?" Whereas, if Obama/Hillary were president the question would have been worded differently. "Are you uneasy about the North Korean threat to the U.S.? Fake news marches on.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1040 by NoNukes, posted 08-08-2017 5:49 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1049 by NoNukes, posted 08-08-2017 9:41 PM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 1051 by NoNukes, posted 08-09-2017 12:14 AM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 1055 by JonF, posted 08-09-2017 11:28 AM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 1056 by JonF, posted 08-09-2017 11:32 AM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 1057 by Taq, posted 08-09-2017 11:33 AM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 1059 of 4573 (816715)
08-09-2017 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 1048 by NoNukes
08-08-2017 9:38 PM


Re: Trump's accomplishments
Consumer confidence is on the same trend it was on before Trump took office.
Wrong, it peaked in mid May at 97.7.
https://www.cnbc.com/...2017-us-consumer-sentiment-data.html
(that's from one of Trump's many enemies, CNBC, in case you want to poison the wells)
But you got 3 green dots!
marc9000 writes:
So do you think consumer confidence would be the same today under a Hillary presidency?
At some point, you are going to have to accept that Hilary is not the president.
I didn't think you'd answer the question. But I expected a better dance than that. But you got 3 green dots! I promise I'll work harder on accepting that Hillary isn't the president. (I love this place)
I know that you are not twelve years old. Surely you don't believe that such an action would have no negative consequences for us or our allies.
I remember what Reagan ordered done to Libya back in 1986, so I'd have to be over 12 years old. It worked well, we didn't have any more trouble with Libya after that. I'm a little too young to remember what Truman did to Japan in 1945. But we didn't have any more trouble with Japan after that.
The news media has predictably gone into a frenzy over Trump's "fire and fury" comments. I heard audio recordings of Jake Tapper today claiming that no U.S. president has ever issued such shocking threats before. Then I heard audio recordings of what Harry Truman said about Japan in 1945, before he ordered bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He was actually a little more harsh in his words than Trump was. But how could anyone expect Jake Tapper to know anything about U.S. history from 75 years ago?
Then I heard audio recordings from Bill Clinton during his presidency, and similar audio recordings from Obama during his presidency, both claiming that their peaceful negotiations with Iran and North Korea ASSURED us that neither country was any threat to develop nuclear weapons, because they promised not to. The ineptness of previous administrations is not Trump's fault.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1048 by NoNukes, posted 08-08-2017 9:38 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1062 by NoNukes, posted 08-09-2017 9:56 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 1060 of 4573 (816716)
08-09-2017 8:07 PM
Reply to: Message 1053 by JonF
08-09-2017 11:21 AM


Re: Trump's accomplishments
You expected us to do a line-by-line rebuttal but the same is just too much for you?
Why would I want to rebut something that I posted and basically approve of? AND YOU GOT A GREEN DOT hahahahahaha

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1053 by JonF, posted 08-09-2017 11:21 AM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1066 by JonF, posted 08-10-2017 8:35 AM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 1061 of 4573 (816717)
08-09-2017 8:13 PM
Reply to: Message 1050 by dwise1
08-08-2017 11:02 PM


Re: Writing checks with your mouth, that your butt cannot cash..
He should have talked with a veteran first before launching into that fantasy. Yes, we do have some ordinance that is very accurate. For example, there's the B-52. Still servicing long after retirement age and it still hits its target 100% of the time, the ground. Now, does the asset that we want to destroy happen to be where the bombs fall? We don't know; that depends on intelligence, on knowing where the targeted asset actually happens to be.
So as a master veteran, the B-52 is the extent of your knowledge of the current military capabilities? And all it can do is hit....the ground? And you got 5 green dots?
Add to that collateral damage. In every attack, especially in civilian environments, there is always collateral damage. How much collateral damage is acceptable in order to get that one single asset you are after? Take out an entire building that you think he's in? Take out an entire city that you think he's in? Blanket an entire country that you think he's in? And if he's hunkered down in a hardened shelter that can survive a blanket attack, how do you ensure that you still get him?
We can use our previous experiences with Japan in 45, and Libya in 1986. Do you have ANY IDEA what happened in those years?
Stupid civilians like marc9000 never get that far, but veterans do.
98 percent of Republican military veterans approve of Donald Trump: Poll - Washington Times
PLEASE KEEP POSTING - I LOVE THIS PLACE!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1050 by dwise1, posted 08-08-2017 11:02 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1065 by dwise1, posted 08-10-2017 3:48 AM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 1068 of 4573 (816760)
08-10-2017 7:31 PM
Reply to: Message 1057 by Taq
08-09-2017 11:33 AM


Re: Writing checks with your mouth, that your butt cannot cash..
If Trump shit in a bowl you would call it the most amazing chocolate ice cream ever made. The lack of objectivity among Trump supporters is probably the scariest part of the whole thing.
This is just another example of the pot calling the kettle black. Obama regularly filled bowls for 8 years, and his base winked and nodded the whole time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1057 by Taq, posted 08-09-2017 11:33 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1077 by Taq, posted 08-11-2017 3:31 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 1069 of 4573 (816761)
08-10-2017 7:35 PM
Reply to: Message 1062 by NoNukes
08-09-2017 9:56 PM


Re: Trump's accomplishments
The consumer confidence index was at 115 in December 2016. It was about 109 in November before the election.
In November before the election? There weren't many days in November before the election. Too bad you didn't list a source, we could check that out.
I'm at my thread limit for responding.
That's too bad, dwise1 came here late to help you out, now you abandon him when he needs you the most. Shame shame.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1062 by NoNukes, posted 08-09-2017 9:56 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1070 by JonF, posted 08-10-2017 7:39 PM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 1073 by NoNukes, posted 08-11-2017 12:34 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 1071 of 4573 (816763)
08-10-2017 7:46 PM
Reply to: Message 1066 by JonF
08-10-2017 8:35 AM


Re: Trump's accomplishments
You got quite a bit of your requested line-by-line rebuttal.
Only one small one from you however. Is the following, from another poster, what you would consider "quite a bit" of response?
quote:
Not an accomplishment.
Not an accomplishment
Not an accomplishment
Not an accomplishment
Not an accomplishment
This stuff does tend to run together when I'm facing a gang. If the "rebuttals" are obviously not worth discussing because of impossible-to-change worldviews, I tend to ignore them. I tend to do that when facing gangs. It doesn't violate forum rules.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1066 by JonF, posted 08-10-2017 8:35 AM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1075 by JonF, posted 08-11-2017 9:06 AM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 1072 of 4573 (816766)
08-10-2017 8:23 PM
Reply to: Message 1065 by dwise1
08-10-2017 3:48 AM


Re: Writing checks with your mouth, that your butt cannot cash..
marc9000, if you are such a fucking idiot, why do you even bother to post in public in order to demonstrate what a fucking idiot you are?
People don't get mad when lies are told about them, they get mad when the truth is told about them.
I post here to try to find out how the liberal mind works. I see this profanity laced rant of yours got a green dot from an administrator. The same administrator that bolted when I responded in a reasonable way to his previous post. I'm not very successful in my endeavor, because liberals can't seem to discuss much of anything without flying off the handle and getting all emotional when the time comes to rationally explain their position. I see it a lot from other sources too, when other conservatives are trying to find out what the liberal rationale is. Doesn't seem to be much hope for progress on it.
Do please state a synopsis of your service record.
I never claimed to have a service record. I don't think that makes me completely unqualified to take a look at military capabilities, or the history of military action. If you're such a better human than me because you're in the military, let me hasten to remind you that the previous president didn't have a military service record either.
Mine: USAF active duty, six years, Cold Warrior serving on a SAC base in the Northern Tier. US Navy Reserve (admittedly, the name did change part-way through my tenure), 29 years, retired CPO.
And in your previous post when you were referring to U.S. military capabilities, (my reference to precision targeting) you only mentioned the B-52, a unit that originated in the 1950's. You didn't mention the B-1, a unit that originated in the 1970's. A unit that does have better precision capabilities than the B-52. Were you trying to mislead your helpers here about U.S. military capabilities?
The scenario in question is the hunting down and elimination of the country's leader through military action.
Not necessarily the elimination of the country's leader, the pounding of him into submission, to get him to stop doing what he's doing. The scenario was EXACTLY the same with Japan in 1945, Libya in 1986, and Kim Jong Un in 2017.
Japan 1945. The country's leader was not hunted down and eliminated by military action. In the face of our nuclear arsenal (the wad we had completely shot by the time we had reached Nagasaki), Japan surrendered. Just what the fuck does that have to do with North Korea who has a nuclear response of its own?
Here's what it has to do with it - some gang members here, NoNukes I think, maybe you too, I'm not going to go back and check all the details of just what was said by whom - were claiming there would be all kinds of collateral damage, all kinds of new dangers of retaliation from North Korea and its MANY allies, if we do any type of military strike. If that didn't happen past recent U.S. military strikes that were similar to what this one would be, there's no reason to think it would for sure happen this time.
Libya 1986. Yes, the Gulf of Sidra Yacht Club ... the US Navy has informal patches for that evolution. Was Gaddafi ever a target of that assault? No. So then just what the fuck does that have to do with your blatherings?
Has Trump ever said that Kim Jong Un himself is a specific target of "fire and fury"? No he hasn't. So there's no difference in what Trump is contemplating doing now, versus what past presidents did.
I believe that we have already established that Republicans are brain-damaged.
Were you only surrounded by liberals the entire time you were in the service? Did you ever get into any political discussions with other military service people that were not liberals? It seems that you have not, you seem completely unhinged, as if you've never seen my type of opinions before. Do you really think I'm that unusual? Do you know who John Bolten is? Do you know who James Mattis is? Would you like to kill him? You should try to get out more. Watch Fox News every once in a while, Bolten is on there often. You'll get really mad, but you should be able to be at least somewhat more composed when you see someone like me on a message board later on.
If you want to respond to this, take a couple of days. Shoot some birds, find a frog and pull his legs off slowly. Then maybe when you respond, you won't sound like a middle school child that didn't get his ADHD medicine that morning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1065 by dwise1, posted 08-10-2017 3:48 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 1078 of 4573 (816833)
08-11-2017 8:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1075 by JonF
08-11-2017 9:06 AM


Re: Trump's accomplishments
Item by item as you asked us to do, please.
I'll do that soon, provided you do me one little favor. In my message 1069, NoNukes and I had this exchange;
NoNukes writes:
The consumer confidence index was at 115 in December 2016. It was about 109 in November before the election.
marc9000 writes:
In November before the election? There weren't many days in November before the election. Too bad you didn't list a source, we could check that out.
Then from his Message 1073
NoNukes writes:
Really? You cannot check this stuff out without my citing a source?
Since you asked...
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
The above is a link to the data on consumer confidence. There is an upward trend up until the beginning of this year. Said trend starting well before any elections. If consumer confidence is increasing now, it is only after a substantial downturn starting after Trump's election.
It's been a long hard week and I'm tired. Could you please show me on that link where it breaks down the consumer confidence from last November 1st thru the 7th, and then again from November 9th thru the 30th?
Shouldn't take you but a minute. Once you do that, I'll go over all those rebuttals line by line.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1075 by JonF, posted 08-11-2017 9:06 AM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1080 by NoNukes, posted 08-12-2017 12:06 AM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 1081 by JonF, posted 08-12-2017 9:02 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024