Tamada,
I stand corrected. Post retracted.
Auto correct is a b#%h. Didn’t notice it.
Not gonna get over myself any time soon.
It’s a old dog/new trick kinda thing.
Z

President Trump is a far better leader than is being described here. It is understandable why some have a poor opinion of him as progressives, especially the media have been twisting the truth and fabricating lies nonstop. And they are not very shy about this and are often found bragging about their ultra-left bias.

For example: Nick Dudich, Audience Strategy Editor for NYT Video, Says the Times Slants Anti-Trump News to the Front Page, "Oh, we always do." Claims to Be "Gatekeeper" for New York Times Videos: "My imprint is on every video we do."
Worked for Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama Campaigns. Admits He Won't Be Objective, "That's why I'm here [at the NYT]."
Read the rest at https://breaking.projectveritas.com/NYTimes1.html

PAPA Z wrote: ↑

October 11, 2017, 4:04 am

Tamada,
I stand corrected. Post retracted.
Auto correct is a b#%h. Didn’t notice it.
Not gonna get over myself any time soon.
It’s a old dog/new trick kinda thing.
Z

No sweat Z and speaking as an old dog, there's absolutely nothing wrong with being an old dog. I can get arsey these days when I step on my own cock.

You made salient points coming from having front-row seats up there. Your view on the generational minefield that KJU is picking his way through while imperceptibly nudging his country towards their own flavor of communism that embraces a "Western economic concept" is insightful. Hell, it's worked for the other Communist pariahs of Vietnam and (work in progress pending) Cuba. It appears he has to assuage the remaining military gerontocracy that served under his forebears or risk being fed to the pigs. Just how many more 'campaign' medals does this guy have to hand out?!

Meanwhile, south of the border, the South Koreans do seem mostly indifferent towards the whole thing which has been wrought from years under the ebb and flow of threats from successive generations of Kims.

The following article made a bit more sense of why it appears that the Americans appear to fear war with North Korea more than South Koreans do. Note that in this context, 'fear' means that most Americans think that a war is more likely than most South Koreans do.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... im-jong-un

"In South Korea we’re scared but we’ve normalised the fear.We’re not indifferent to the threats from North Korea: the fear is so deep it prevents us showing any interest" claims Haeryun Kang, managing editor of English-language news outlet Korea Exposé.

I was unaware of the reverse censorship referred to where South Koreans cannot freely access information or internet from their northern kin. I always thought that controlling what your people see, hear and read was only the remit of the hermit kingdom.

"The “red scare” is still prevalent in political discourse, especially in the rhetoric of the conservatives, who adopt a more hardline approach to Pyongyang."

Ultimately, this current stand-off is ill-timed... not saying there's any good time to have a nuclear-tipped "high noon" moment but.

"The problem is the South Korean indifference comes at a time of global uncertainty. Donald Trump is an inconsistent president; China’s role is still suspiciously ambiguous; Moon Jae-in, the South Korean president, is trying to dramatically reverse his conservative predecessor’s policies. Meanwhile, Kim Jong-un’s regime has tested more missiles in the past six years than his forefathers did in six decades."

In that mix, there's a relatively new, liberal South Korean government trying to unpick the more hard-line policies of their conservative predecessor regarding North Korea. That sounds quite familiar but hey, that's democracy.

From another source: http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/839 ... e-and-fury

"South Korean president Moon Jae-in believes the best way to solve the North Korean nuclear crisis is engagement of the sort that two past liberal leaders used to win historic summits with Pyongyang."

Yes, the 'problem' never ever went away completely but progress and a local peace prevailed. A young, South Korean nurse said “I’m scared of both [leaders], but I’m mostly scared of what Donald Trump would do. No US leader has ever personally targeted North Korea’s leadership this directly before, because they knew that it doesn’t mean anything. Trump seems like a person who would do something to prove that he’s different.”

I see it as two leaders with similar feelings of insecurity. This has been a trans-generational trait of the Kim dynasty for as long as I can recall. Whenever times got tough (like after another national drought and farming disaster) or they simply need world attention (maybe some old generals are having secret meetings) the table-banging and sabre rattling would ultimately see some sort of appeasement or hand-out in the shape of an approved easing of an export sanction or a wedge of US$ and rice from China... and an old general or two gets shot or fed to the pigs. On the other hand, I don't think the White House has witnessed an insecure occupant before. Yes, there's been indecisive and wishy-washy leadership; all democracies have at least a couple they prefer not to talk about. But the current POTUS appears cut from a completely different cloth from (most of) his forebears but it's not all good news IMHO. Yes, insecurity is something that we all possess to some degree but in my experience in a totally non-military working life in the oil patch, the insecure bosses are the absolute worst and most dangerous. In my line of work, they don't last long either.

Either way sir, you stay safe up there.

TJ wrote: ↑

October 11, 2017, 4:28 am

President Trump is a far better leader than is being described here. It is understandable why some have a poor opinion of him as progressives, especially the media have been twisting the truth and fabricating lies nonstop. And they are not very shy about this and are often found bragging about their ultra-left bias.

For example: Nick Dudich, Audience Strategy Editor for NYT Video, Says the Times Slants Anti-Trump News to the Front Page, "Oh, we always do." Claims to Be "Gatekeeper" for New York Times Videos: "My imprint is on every video we do."
Worked for Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama Campaigns. Admits He Won't Be Objective, "That's why I'm here [at the NYT]."
Read the rest at https://breaking.projectveritas.com/NYTimes1.html

Solely in the interests of keeping this fair and balanced...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... ion&wpmk=1

^Yes. That is an excellent example of vile progressive propaganda and typical of Washington Post progressive political articles.

TJ wrote: ↑

October 11, 2017, 7:30 am

^Yes. That is an excellent example of vile progressive propaganda and typical of Washington Post progressive political articles.

Cool!

Then we are agreed that I posted an example of vile progressive propaganda and typical of Washington Post progressive political articles that perfectly counters your post of equally vile but regressive propaganda that is typical of narrow-minded, regressive, conservative, right wing cheerleaders.

NB: "fair and balanced" is NOT copyright protected by Faux News or things of that ilk of either political persuasion.

TBH, I do miss O'Reilly. Since Hannity lost his "& Colmes" training wheels with the departure of Colmes, O'Reilly was reasonably palatable as he frequently had Colmes guesting on his show. Similarly "The 5" was all the better for having Bob Beckel in the 'liberal chair' and was also a frequently invited commentator on O'Reilly but like O'Reilly, he ---- in his own nest. Pity they didn't remember the f-bomb he dropped on Hannity before firing him for that catch-all of political correctness they all seem to despise called 'being insensitive'.

TJ wrote: ↑

October 11, 2017, 7:30 am

^Yes. That is an excellent example of vile progressive propaganda and typical of Washington Post progressive political articles.

Here's the Washington Post revealing how the guy who defeated Trump's preferred nominee in a Senate race is just another abhorrent, self-serving, cheating and dishonest bottom-feeder heading for the swamp in Washington.

"A Washington Post review of public and internal charity documents found that errors and gaps in the group’s federal tax filings obscured until now the compensation paid to Moore, whose defeat last month of President Trump’s choice for Republican nominee in the Senate race will likely embolden far-right challengers to the party’s mainstream incumbents."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investig ... ion&wpmk=1

Can't get more 'fair and balanced' than that IMHO. I sure hope DT gets those swamp-draining pumps going soon.

The moron thinks that gains in the stock market, reduce national debt. Envoke the 25 th amendment before it’s too late.

From a UK perspective, the left wing gutter media, BBC included has never give Trump a chance. He has recieved bad publicity from day 1 of his Presidency. The Global elite were aghast that their stooge candidate, Clinton was beaten! Trump won and like ' Brexit in the UK, the 'left wingers, champagne socialists, limousine liberals' cannot come to terms with the fact that ordinary people have now rejected Globalisation which seems only to benefit the rich.
Go for it Trump.

newtovillagelife wrote: ↑

October 12, 2017, 1:47 pm

The moron thinks that gains in the stock market, reduce national debt. Envoke the 25 th amendment before it’s too late.

In the current US progressive tax system, the more GAINS an investor realizes in their stock market portfolio -- and in income -- the higher the percentage of taxes that the earner pays. That translates into higher tax revenue for the federal government. If spent correctly by the CONGRESS, that would reduce the national debt.

You need to get out of that village more often.

MAGA! WINNING!

No, he actually said gains in the market offset national debt dollar for dollar. So if the market gains 5 trillion then the debt falls by 5 trillion. Do you get it.

He also said he would prefer the popular vote, I guess the arrogant moron thinks he won the popular vote. What a dotard.

Again Mr. Lonestar, if the US is so great, why are you living in a country that is under non white military rule.

newtovillagelife wrote: ↑

October 12, 2017, 4:06 pm

No, he actually said gains in the market offset national debt dollar for dollar. So if the market gains 5 trillion then the debt falls by 5 trillion. Do you get it.

But that's not what you posted.

newtovillagelife wrote: ↑

October 12, 2017, 4:06 pm

He also said he would prefer the popular vote, I guess the arrogant moron thinks he won the popular vote. What a dotard.

I notice you rarely provide a source for all of your remarks. Kinda hard to take your word for it, ya know? Your bias overwhelms just about everything that falls off your keyboard when it comes to Trump.

His latest interview with the esteemed journalist Hannity. Don’t you watch Fox News???
https://youtu.be/

You neglected to let me know why you choose a third world nation over the US, as your home.

joudon wrote: ↑

October 12, 2017, 2:24 pm

From a UK perspective, the left wing gutter media, BBC included has never give Trump a chance. He has recieved bad publicity from day 1 of his Presidency. The Global elite were aghast that their stooge candidate, Clinton was beaten! Trump won and like ' Brexit in the UK, the 'left wingers, champagne socialists, limousine liberals' cannot come to terms with the fact that ordinary people have now rejected Globalisation which seems only to benefit the rich.
Go for it Trump.

Once again the undeniable fact that Clinton was even less desirable and ultimately lost is regurgitated to try and illuminate and elevate the winners less than stellar global stature since he got hired.

The man wan't even supposed to have gotten close and only by grace of the GOP's own dithering, hand-wringing and partial but ongoing implosion did he manage to become the last-man-standing and garner so many reluctant, 11th hour endorsements. For every Democrat that was reluctant to throw their weight behind Hillary, there were at least a couple who didn't like Trump but their party didn't afford them any real choice. They GOP actually lost when he won.

We are lead to believe that he appealed to the common man in spades but has he come anywhere close on delivering any of those fanciful, living the dream, grandiloquent MAGA promises that the common man (and assumedly their common woman) was promised? I mean beyond a solitary coal mine and the free, red MAGA baseball cap that is? I hear he donated a golf trophy to the people of typhoon-ravaged US Gulf states and Puerto Rico. Now they'll have something for their leaking roof... but they'll have to pass it around, like the red cap.

tamada wrote: ↑

October 12, 2017, 4:45 pm

We are lead to believe that he appealed to the common man in spades but has he come anywhere close on delivering any of those fanciful, living the dream, grandiloquent MAGA promises that the common man (and assumedly their common woman) was promised?

He's done what one branch of the three branches can do alone, and he's even done it with questionable checks from the lower courts (that are being over-ruled by the SCOTUS).

There's no POTUS capable to doing it all himself. It would be unconstitutional.

newtovillagelife wrote: ↑

October 12, 2017, 4:42 pm

His latest interview with the esteemed journalist Hannity. Don’t you watch Fox News???
https://youtu.be/

Your link doesn't go to the interview. I haven't watched television in a decade or more.

Like he cares about the constitution, or even knows what it’s about.

https://youtu.be/hx7eykgdURA
Sorry this link should work.

newtovillagelife wrote: ↑

October 12, 2017, 5:02 pm

Like he cares about the constitution, or even knows what it’s about.

Source?

Your behavior is starting to resemble that of a troll.