mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest
Profile: Chazlee
User Name: Chazlee
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Gender: None Specified
Joined: Sunday, July 24, 2016
Last Visit: Saturday, February 2, 2019 1:21:29 PM
Number of Posts: 443
[0.04% of all post / 0.29 posts per day]
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: Repulseicans plan to kill medicare, social security and medicaid
Posted: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 12:53:42 PM
FounDit wrote:
I didn't bother to read any of this silliness. I was just struck by the name give to Republicans. It seems we now have another two parties in our system:
Repulseicans and Democrazies. LOL.

At times, both names seem to fit members of both parties.
Topic: Repulseicans plan to kill medicare, social security and medicaid
Posted: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 12:44:35 PM
Romany wrote:
Chazlee -

Coming on the heels of your post about negative comments, must admit it gave me a bit of a jolt to be judged as having a " grasp of history...".

However, as you will see, I'm not American. The only thing I knew about American politics pre-2016 was that there were two parties who took turn and turn about. If prompted I might perhaps have been able to recall they were called the Democrats & the Republicans.I certainly wouldn't have known which presidents represented which. (Still don't any further back that Bush.)

So no, living outside the USA, I've never heard any of your politicians or Presidents use the language, the childish taunts, the anti-social epithets, or the threats to stomp all over an opponants face with football studs(!!!), that are amongst the things that go zinging round the world in a constant stream now. I can't believe that the things people in the White House said were ever as blatantly truth-free, vindictive, and dangerous as they are now - America could simply not have held its place in the world had they been so.

Obviously there's been drama and reprehensible episodes and bad behaviour. In every government in the world. But had the current morally bankrupt & pathetically juvenile rhetoric been going on to this degree for a "very long time" the world would be a very different place!

I was not trying to insult you, and to keep things civil, I apologize if that happened. I did think you were an American, and your comment that the name calling so prevalent in today's society was "started when a man who called women 'dogs', and who called the people who worked for him "Lyin'" Whatsit" or "Low IQ" Thingummy, was chosen to represent the USA," was clearly referring to Trump. Thus, my comment to you was based on what you had written, and my mistaken believe about where you were born.

While it is obvious that Trump uses language in a way that others may not have been done so blatantly in the past, (his comments about women, etc), still it has been documented that other American politicians have also said equally horrible things, racist, sexist, and at times vulgar, about people and groups in the USA. The fact that when Trump says such things he uses more crude language, and others often “tidy” up their comments which make them seem not as bad, really makes no difference if the message is the same. So, when someone gets upset at Trump’s vulgar words, while not feeling the same way about others who clearly share his point of view but say things in a different or “nicer” way, it reveals the person to be a hypocrite. (I am not saying this about you).

Your obvious anger at Oscar D. Grouch’s one word attack upon the word “Republicans” seems extreme. It seemed to me that by clearly referencing what Trump has said when you were commenting about a post from Oscar you were trying to show how Trump has had an influence upon how many people are now expressing themselves. I do not believe this to be the case, and that is why I wrote my response to you that people have been making comments like Oscar did for far longer than Trump has been in office. Again, the only difference,IMO, is that we now have the internet which ensures that more people can read and hear publicly and quickly what people have been saying among themselves for a long, long time.


Topic: Repulseicans plan to kill medicare, social security and medicaid
Posted: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 10:59:59 AM
Not that Oscar D. Grouch needs me to defend the title but it seems like some people here are focusing on the word used rather than getting into a discussion about the content of the post. Why is that happening? When I first read the post, perhaps I was not reading closely but I just thought it was spelling error. Then, after reading people's responses to it, I still don't think it was important at all. (Perhaps that is because I am a person who has been guilty of using labels against people I do not like, such as Trump, which I am trying to change).

Honestly, some of you seem to be making a giant mountain out of a molehill, and perhaps the word does not even rise to the level of a molehill. It is admirable that people in the political forum here are trying to raise the level of discourse, but it seems like Oscar D. Grouch should not be made to feel like it was a horrible thing to use that word. As we all know, emotions can become heated when the discussion involves politics, and I felt Oscar was quite upset when the post was written. Yet, I enjoy reading posts in which people take a position and express how they truly feel, even when they may use words, at times, which are offensive to others. (I am not saying this just because I have used language, in the past, which upset others. In other words, I own up to my past comments, and I know I was clearly wrong at times to write things which were less than kind toward others on this site. Having said all that, I will never apologize for any unkind things I have said about Trump, since what I said was true).

This is a political forum. While repeated inappropriate and personal attacks upon members in this forum should not be excused, it should also not be turned into a place where people are afraid to say what is on their mind. Doing so would inhibit individuals from sharing their thoughts with others, and that would make this section of this site boring.

Finally, Romany you have a limited grasp of history if you really believe that negative or nasty comments coming from and spoken about political groups and leaders began with Trump's time in office. This has been going for a very long time, and will continue long after all of us are no longer on this planet. If anything is to blame, then it is the internet which gave everyone the chance to publicly say what in the past they would have only been able to say to people in the close proximity.

Let's give Oscar D. Grouch a break. After all, some people would agree that the word he used to describe Republicans describes them perfectly.


Topic: A big mistake some anti-Republican people are making.
Posted: Monday, October 22, 2018 11:10:31 PM
The recent news that Mitch McConnell was verbally harassed and had his food stolen while he was dining with his wife is very disturbing. This has been happening far too often in America, and people should stop engaging in this non-constructive type of behavior.

The idea that someone can be stopped from enjoying a meal at any restaurant in America simply because another person does not agree with that person's political viewpoint is reprehensible, and it does nothing to help the aggressors make others better understand or agree with their point of view. Actually, I think it has the opposite effect.

Mitch McConnell is a politician who is not helping America. Still, as an American, he has the right to live in America and not be personally confronted by angry and aggressive people when he is doing things many Americans enjoy doing on a daily basis. There are other more constructive ways people can use to express their displeasure with political leaders. Those who can't think of how to do that without acting in an anti-social way in which they bother and scare more people than just their intended target should be dealt with in the criminal justice system.

Topic: Will all Russians go to heaven?
Posted: Monday, October 22, 2018 3:24:45 AM
Wilmar (USA) wrote:
Heaven has nothing to do with nationality or politics.


If Trump heard you say that, what do you think his reaction would be? Do you think he would call Heaven a "sh_ _hole," because it doesn't have a secure "border," and lets in all types of people he hates?
Topic: Repulseicans plan to kill medicare, social security and medicaid
Posted: Monday, October 22, 2018 1:41:08 AM
[quote=Oscar D. Grouch]Republicans plan to kill medicare, social security and medicaid supposedly in order to pay for their massive tax cuts to the rich and their corporations and mounting national debt. But this was their plan all along. Anyone who wasn't too hungover or who didn't drink the Kool-Aid could see it coming. But it really won't work. It's just a way of deepening the societal divisions in our country. The rich will be richer. The poor will be poorer. The national debt will continue to mushroom out of control. These people also have the audacity to call themselves "conservatives." There's nothing conservative about them. The name is nothing short of Orwellian. The only thing they wish to conserve is their own power.

The most unfortunate thing is that many of the Americans who benefit the most from these programs are poor Republicans and they will cast a vote to support the very people who are attempting to hurt them. There are far too many videos available showing red-hat wearing Trump loving Americans who rail against government intrusion into their lives, and claim that Democrats spend too much money on social programs, while at the same time they admit they are often the recipients of some sort of government aid. One of the most famous of these people is the actor Graig T. Nelson, who told Glenn Beck in an interview that when he was a struggling actor nobody helped him out. Then he also said he had gotten food stamps and welfare at that time. Everyone should watch the 9 second clip below to get a first-hand look at the mentally of some people who have no idea what will happen to them if the Republican leaders get their way.

"I've been on welfare and food stamps. Anybody help me out? No."
Topic: Why Trump is going to lose in 2020.
Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2018 6:19:38 PM
progpen wrote:
It doesn't matter if the US deserves a better president and his election was not a fluke. The election ended the way it did because very complex computer algorithms calculated exactly how to gerrymander electorally significant sections of the US. From that, the GOP relied on voter suppression and caging to reduce the number of non GOP voters to a point that it has become a statistical improbability for the GOP to lose those electorally significant sections. He also won because the Democratic party leadership have not been able to play nicely with their own base.

His election was continuation of a natural progression over the past 30 years.

You're wrong. It does matter and the US deserves a better president than Trump. It is also a fluke that a proven con-artist like Trump would ultimately end up being elected president. It is a most strange statement for you to make that a person with Trump's background would lead to his becoming president due to "natural progression." I am not saying it was a fluke that a Republican won the election. However, how was it "natural progression" that Trump would win, and not another Republican? People who knew Trump when he was running claimed he wanted publicity for himself and his brand, but he really didn't want or think he would be elected. Thus, Trump, if he could ever be honest, would probably describe his win as a fluke as well.

If you want to put forth the idea that "complex computer algorithms" revealed how a Republican instead of a Democrat won, then that's possible. Yet, if you are claiming that those same "algorithms" predicted a win by a character like Trump, I would be interested in hearing more. Yet, I don't think you can produce any credible evidence which will prove that happened.

Topic: Why Trump is going to lose in 2020.
Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2018 8:47:21 AM
BobShilling wrote:
Ursus Minor wrote:
I remember before November 2016 Chazlee voluminously explained why Trump was going to lose the 2016 election.

Quite a lot of us knew then knew then that he didn't have a chance of winning.


It seems, unfortunately, that the situation hasn't changed much for some.

"Unfortunately," there are people who seem willing to give up and believe that Trump actually has a good chance, or any chance, to win in 2020. He doesn't. Not at all. He has done an awful job as president. Everyone knows that Pence is really running the country.

"Unfortunately," since Trump won the last election, some people have become frightened and they do not realize that his winning was a fluke. By the time the next election comes around, Trump is going to have to answer some tough questions about his time in office. At that time, he will scream about "Fake news," and "Hillary," and "Obama." His red hat wearing supporters will be interviewed and they will struggle to answer even the most basic questions about why Trump deserves to be reelected, just like they struggle to answer the most basic questions about almost every other question they are asked.

Fortunately, Trump is going to lose in 2020. He deserves to lose. America deserves a better president.


Topic: Why Trump is going to lose in 2020.
Posted: Monday, October 15, 2018 8:23:34 PM
BobShilling wrote:
Chazlee wrote:
Thus, while they may publicly say nothing against Trump, privately they will not be able to give support to a man who has lied to them, embarrassed them, and who clearly puts his own self-interests ahead of the country.

If they think supporting Trump will gain them votes, they'll support him.

I was not referring to elected officials. My post was about Republicans in general. Thus, those folks have have no votes to gain.

Mainstream Republicans have watched the man who leads their party alienate and anger our closest allies

Many of them don't give a damn about America's closest allies. They feel that these allies have been sponging off the USA for years.

You are mistaking the way Trump, and some of his most fanatical supporters feel/believe, with many more moderate Republicans. While I can understand why you have made such a mistake, it is a mistake nonetheless.

Women in particular harbor a deep dislike for Trump, and many of them are turning their back on the GOP,

That's true of many women (a lot of whom were not Republican anyway). There are still a lot of ordinary women who do support him. I don't understand this, but my lack of understanding does not affect things.

In my post, I was not referring to non-Republican women not voting for Trump. I was writing about women who are Republicans. Their disgust with Trump since being in office will result in them either not voting for him, or not voting at all. Trump has done nothing since being in office to win over Republican women voters, and he has actually continued to alienate many women in the GOP. Thus, that will prove to be a costly error for him.

Since Trump is not an intelligent man

For an unintelligent man, he has done pretty well at confounding some of his supposedly more intelligent opponents.

His being elected had nothing to do with intelligence. Among other factors, Trump got elected by appealing to that portion of the American public who liked his fiery rhetoric, and those people who liked the idea that an "outsider" i.e., (not a politician), could and would do a better job than the political "insiders" would do for them. Trump has always been a con-artist. He is good at reading people, even large groups of people, and saying things people want to hear. He is far more "slick" a person than Bill Clinton ever was or ever will be. If you want to label Trump as intelligent because he fooled a lot of people, then that is your choice. (It does seem as if he is intelligent enough to fool a self-described "leftwing Trump-loathing Brit" into believing he actually has a chance to be reelected into office for a 2nd time).

he does not realize how much he needs women to put him in office for a 2nd term.

He seems to have realised what he needed to do to get into office the first time.

I was writing about Trump's difficulty getting into office for a 2nd term. We all know what happened the first time. In 2020, things will be much more difficult for him, and women are going to play a big part in his not being reelected.

many more rational Republicans did not agree with his decision, and they voiced their displeasure with what they were reading about and watching on television.

Not a great many overall.

Well, I didn't count the number of people who spoke out against Trump on that issue, but since you seem to have that number and you know there were not a "great many overall," how about sharing it with others? Trump got attacked from all sides for his decision to separate parents and children from each other, and this decision is going to cost him Republican voters in 2020.

Why would anyone think that these same people would then then turn around and vote for Trump for a 2nd term?

Well, for starters they would be out of a job if he lost.

They will have a job if they cast a vote for another Republican who wins the election. They can simply work for another person. I think you are underestimating how much people who work for Trump personally do not like or trust the man. Their actions of hiding things from him is the best indication of what they really think about him.

Well, Trump is not going to win in in 2020. This is not merely wishful thinking.

I fear it is. We'll see what happens in the midterms. I fear that he is going to do a lot better than many of his opponents believe/hope. hope I'm wrong, but I'm not placing any bets.

Don't let your fears stop you from placing your bets. Go ahead and put your money down. Bet against Trump winning in 2020, and then sit back and collect your windfall.

Topic: Why Trump is going to lose in 2020.
Posted: Monday, October 15, 2018 10:32:11 AM
dennis j wrote:
I pray your head does not implode when President Trump is reelected.

Do you know if he plans to continue making money through the sale of those Chinese made red hats when he runs again? Does he plan to change the slogan on them if they are sold in the USA? Do you fear his tariffs will cause the price on them to rise?