Marcus Tullius Cicero on... Donald Trump?

[Baruch]

So even against the Trumps campaigns admission to first meeting with one Russian, then more and more as evidence came out,  and firing of its own staff for ties to Russia after they were exposed, the Russia link is, "100% fabrication"'.

That turtle with the world on its back has a bridge it would like to sell you.

Russians exist.  Both parties have relationships with the largest and best governed country on Earth.  They weren't always well governed, but compared to the US, Kazakhstan is well governed.  And both parties cut deals with foreigners ... didn't even start with Nixon in 68 or Reagan in 80.  Corruption is what we do.  You puritan ladies can clutch your peals all you want, but it won't change a thing.

[Baruch]

None of these are Trump's.  That was pretty clearly stated throughout.  So no, he hasn't done these.

Try reading for comprehension next time.

And Obama-care wasn't really by Obama, it was by the 2010 Congress.  The President isn't a god, no matter what you R or D fans think.  Congress is where the action is always at, and the corruption too.

[fencerider]

boring might be a nice change from Trump... a little more Gerald Ford please

they would fire on Ft Sumter again, but it is so hard to hit that from Berkeley CA.

They would have to borrow that big gun Saddam was building in Iraq; after they get a noise pollution permit. (last time they fired a cannon for 4th of July at the fort in San Pedro they shattered a lot of windows in the downtown. => no more cannon firing)

[Mike Cl]

You should be ... The Eye on top of the pyramid ... you Pharaoh's sorcerer, you.

Damn!  And here I thought I had hidden that about me quite well!  Crap!  Can't get anything past you, can I Baruch???!

[Unbeliever]

Hey, at least Chump's pick for the Alabama senate seat got voted down. But that means Roy Moore is in - and that likely won't be a good thing.

[Gilgamesh]

None of these are Trump's.  That was pretty clearly stated throughout.  So no, he hasn't done these.

Try reading for comprehension next time.

"Policy: a course or principle of action adopted or proposed by a government, party, business, or individual."

Trump signed the bill, turning it into policy. He may not have created the bill, but it is his policy if he signed it into legislation. He agrees with it; he supports it; it's his policy.

This isn't about reading comprehension. This is about you playing mental gymnastics as hard as you can hold both the position that a bill is good, and also the position that the president who made the very same bill into legislation didn't do good. This rhetoric is self-evidently ridiculous to anyone who isn't already in your camp. You're not convincing anyone.

[Gilgamesh]

Trump followers are like theists--reasoning, thinking and facts don't seem to matter.

Anyone who supports a politician 100% - who thinks that they can do no wrong - is like a theist.

It's ironic though that you refuse to have a debate about your beliefs, but in the same breath contend that your political opponents don't care for reason and facts.

[Mike Cl]

Anyone who supports a politician 100% - who thinks that they can do no wrong - is like a theist.

It's ironic though that you refuse to have a debate about your beliefs, but in the same breath contend that your political opponents don't care for reason and facts.

Oh, the irony of it all!

[trdsf]

"Policy: a course or principle of action adopted or proposed by a government, party, business, or individual."

Trump signed the bill, turning it into policy. He may not have created the bill, but it is his policy if he signed it into legislation. He agrees with it; he supports it; it's his policy.

This isn't about reading comprehension. This is about you playing mental gymnastics as hard as you can hold both the position that a bill is good, and also the position that the president who made the very same bill into legislation didn't do good. This rhetoric is self-evidently ridiculous to anyone who isn't already in your camp. You're not convincing anyone.

No, *you* were asked for examples of what Trump has done.  You failed to produce anything other than four actions that pre-dated his time in office, and had such broad bipartisan support that even he couldn't fail to sign off on it -- these were in no way Trump proposals, these were things that were already in the pipeline before he took office.  The one of those five that he *did* campaign on, I do not agree is a positive policy to have either put forward or supported.

The question stands, what has he *done*?  Not what has he tacked himself onto, what has he himself put forward and he himself *done* that's any damn good for this country?

And whether I convince you or not is of no relevance to me.  That you can support this man with such a fundamentalist fervor is sufficient for me to question your ability to reason at all.

[Gilgamesh]

No, *you* were asked for examples of what Trump has done.  You failed to produce anything other than four actions that pre-dated his time in office, and had such broad bipartisan support that even he couldn't fail to sign off on it -- these were in no way Trump proposals, these were things that were already in the pipeline before he took office.  The one of those five that he *did* campaign on, I do not agree is a positive policy to have either put forward or supported.

The question stands, what has he *done*?  Not what has he tacked himself onto, what has he himself put forward and he himself *done* that's any damn good for this country?

And whether I convince you or not is of no relevance to me.  That you can support this man with such a fundamentalist fervor is sufficient for me to question your ability to reason at all.

You're contending that signing something into legislation is not an action. That's it's not 'doing' a thing. Like I said, your rhetoric is self-evidently absurd to anyone who isn't already firmly in your camp.

[trdsf]

You're contending that signing something into legislation is not an action. That's it's not 'doing' a thing. Like I said, your rhetoric is self-evidently absurd to anyone who isn't already firmly in your camp.

Coward.  At least admit you have nothing.  Don't try to make this my problem when you're the one dodging a simple question.

[Gilgamesh]

Coward.  At least admit you have nothing.  Don't try to make this my problem when you're the one dodging a simple question.

Dodging a question? I've answered the question. You refuse to accept it on the grounds that signing bills are not a 'doing'; that they're not an action.

Creating legislation is the only tangible way for a president to 'do', as a president. And you are so entrenched in your tribalistic thinking that you've convinced yourself of the absurd position that creating legislation is not an acceptable answer to the question, "what has ___ president done" all because the president isn't on your team.

[trdsf]

Dodging a question? I've answered the question. You refuse to accept it on the grounds that signing bills are not a 'doing'; that they're not an action.

Creating legislation is the only tangible way for a president to 'do', as a president. And you are so entrenched in your tribalistic thinking that you've convinced yourself of the absurd position that creating legislation is not an acceptable answer to the question, "what has ___ president done" all because the president isn't on your team.

And he created none of those, with the exception of the repeal of environmental protections.  You're still dodging.  Unless you're saying you wanted Trump to continue Obama's policies -- which I suspect is not the case.

I stand by coward.  You've got nothing, you know you've got nothing, and you haven't got the intellectual honesty to admit you've got nothing.  You're reduced to ridiculous and pathetic flailing.  Name something TRUMP HAS DONE.  Not Obama-era legislation he signed off on, what has *he* introduced.  What has *he* promulgated.

Although frankly, the less that blithering idiot does while he infests the White House, the happier I will be.

[Baruch]

Presidents do nothing, they are the false flag of false flags.  You are all fooled.

[Gilgamesh]

And he created none of those, with the exception of the repeal of environmental protections.  You're still dodging.

You're moving the goalposts. I'm not contending that he created the bills. You're arguing against nobody.

Unless you're saying you wanted Trump to continue Obama's policies -- which I suspect is not the case.

Why would you suspect that? I don't play teams. That's your prerogative. You're projecting. It doesn't matter where the bill came from.

You're equivocating here. That's all this is. You're trying to bury the absurdity of your position. Allow me to get rid of the mess:

The conversation is exactly this thus far:

CL: "What good has trump done."
Me: "He signed these bills into legislation, making good legislation"
Your absurd bullshit: "Signing bills and creating legislation isn't a 'thing'; it's not an action unless he himself created the bills."

The fact is you have created a self-evidently absurd position, and you've double-downed on it after it was exposed for exactly what it was - absurd. You've been compromised by tribalistic thinking, which is evident by you trying to bridge the difference in opinion here by suggesting that I would have to concede that Obama has created good bills if I also contend that they are good when Trump turned them into policy - and that I wouldn't want to do that. When in reality that is exactly what I am contending, and have never hinted otherwise. Again, I don't play teams; that's your prerogative and you're projecting.