Do vitamins and supplements really work? Get your questions answered by leading brain health experts.

Reply
Info Seeker
1
Kudos
748
Views

Re: SENATE INTELLIGENCE SUBCOMITTEE HEARING

748 Views
Message 1 of 31

Very well spoken pc6063

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
748
Views
Moderator
1
Kudos
785
Views

Re: SENATE INTELLIGENCE SUBCOMITTEE HEARING

785 Views
Message 2 of 31

Hello everyone.

 

AARP welcomes robust debate and a difference of opinions.

 

However, the guidelines clearly state:

 

We are a community of people with diverse beliefs, opinions and backgrounds, so please be respectful and refrain from making hateful and/or incendiary comments. You are free to express your opinions, but you must do so in a way that respects the opinions of others.

 

http://community.aarp.org/t5/custom/page/page-id/Guidelines

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
785
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
5
Kudos
812
Views

Re: SENATE INTELLIGENCE SUBCOMITTEE HEARING

812 Views
Message 3 of 31

@alferdpacker wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@alferdpacker wrote:

 


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@pc6063 wrote:
But I'm sure that you smiled and/or used some of the names used against Mr. Obama.

--

But of course "Mr. Obama" isn't president is he?  Does that justify all of 'Der Trumpers', GOPers, etc? 

 

 


Sure it does...

 

Just as RWNJs attacked President Obama, those opposing the malignantly narcissistic orange orangutan have equal right to return the favor in kind.

 

No poster here on this discussion site is certified to make that determination or has the authority to be the final arbiter of what may or may not be considered to be proper or justified. 

 

While posters running their own groups had that kind of power in previous iterations of the site - that's not been the case here for quite a few years...

 

P.S.  In retrospect, I feel that the unspeakably vile insult to decent and honorable orangutans deserves an apology - which I hereby tender...

 

 


It is sad that the hate filled are unable to distinguish between disagreements with a President's policies and obnoxious, personal attacks.

 

It certainly does make any adult discussion on the issues of the day just about impossible since everything seems to veer the President and the personal side of things.


Ahh... here we go again - the spurious allegation that trump has ever been worthy of respect... coupled with the bogus "adult discussion" gambit. 

So predictable.  Still the same old republican/conservative sandwich filling that has caused more than a few trump nominations to be declined...

 


Can't help but notice we never hear any actual defense of the orange buffoon - only whining about we should talk nice about the President - seems a bit odd, where it not the case everything said about Der Trumper's actions is caught-on-tape-true so the only thing the RW can fuss about would be to complain how easy it is to find colorful descriptors for the manchild in the whitehouse.

Report Inappropriate Content
5
Kudos
812
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
5
Kudos
816
Views

Re: SENATE INTELLIGENCE SUBCOMITTEE HEARING

816 Views
Message 4 of 31

@rk9152 wrote:

@alferdpacker wrote:

 


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@pc6063 wrote:
But I'm sure that you smiled and/or used some of the names used against Mr. Obama.

--

But of course "Mr. Obama" isn't president is he?  Does that justify all of 'Der Trumpers', GOPers, etc? 

 

 


Sure it does...

 

Just as RWNJs attacked President Obama, those opposing the malignantly narcissistic orange orangutan have equal right to return the favor in kind.

 

No poster here on this discussion site is certified to make that determination or has the authority to be the final arbiter of what may or may not be considered to be proper or justified. 

 

While posters running their own groups had that kind of power in previous iterations of the site - that's not been the case here for quite a few years...

 

P.S.  In retrospect, I feel that the unspeakably vile insult to decent and honorable orangutans deserves an apology - which I hereby tender...

 

 


It is sad that the hate filled are unable to distinguish between disagreements with a President's policies and obnoxious, personal attacks.

 

It certainly does make any adult discussion on the issues of the day just about impossible since everything seems to veer the President and the personal side of things.


Ahh... here we go again - the spurious allegation that trump has ever been worthy of respect... coupled with the bogus "adult discussion" gambit. 

So predictable.  Still the same old republican/conservative sandwich filling that has caused more than a few trump nominations to be declined...

 

He is useless on top of the ground - he should be under it - inspiring the cabbages... Mark Twain 1894 - APPLIES TO TRUMP TODAY
Report Inappropriate Content
5
Kudos
816
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
818
Views

Re: SENATE INTELLIGENCE SUBCOMITTEE HEARING

818 Views
Message 5 of 31

@alferdpacker wrote:

 


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@pc6063 wrote:
But I'm sure that you smiled and/or used some of the names used against Mr. Obama.

--

But of course "Mr. Obama" isn't president is he?  Does that justify all of 'Der Trumpers', GOPers, etc? 

 

 


Sure it does...

 

Just as RWNJs attacked President Obama, those opposing the malignantly narcissistic orange orangutan have equal right to return the favor in kind.

 

No poster here on this discussion site is certified to make that determination or has the authority to be the final arbiter of what may or may not be considered to be proper or justified. 

 

While posters running their own groups had that kind of power in previous iterations of the site - that's not been the case here for quite a few years...

 

P.S.  In retrospect, I feel that the unspeakably vile insult to decent and honorable orangutans deserves an apology - which I hereby tender...

 

 


It is sad that the hate filled are unable to distinguish between disagreements with a President's policies and obnoxious, personal attacks.

 

It certainly does make any adult discussion on the issues of the day just about impossible since everything seems to veer the President and the personal side of things.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
818
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
5
Kudos
845
Views

Re: SENATE INTELLIGENCE SUBCOMITTEE HEARING

845 Views
Message 6 of 31

 


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@pc6063 wrote:
But I'm sure that you smiled and/or used some of the names used against Mr. Obama.

--

But of course "Mr. Obama" isn't president is he?  Does that justify all of 'Der Trumpers', GOPers, etc? 

 

 


Sure it does...

 

Just as RWNJs attacked President Obama, those opposing the malignantly narcissistic orange orangutan have equal right to return the favor in kind.

 

No poster here on this discussion site is certified to make that determination or has the authority to be the final arbiter of what may or may not be considered to be proper or justified. 

 

While posters running their own groups had that kind of power in previous iterations of the site - that's not been the case here for quite a few years...

 

P.S.  In retrospect, I feel that the unspeakably vile insult to decent and honorable orangutans deserves an apology - which I hereby tender...

 

 

He is useless on top of the ground - he should be under it - inspiring the cabbages... Mark Twain 1894 - APPLIES TO TRUMP TODAY
Report Inappropriate Content
5
Kudos
845
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
854
Views

Re: SENATE INTELLIGENCE SUBCOMITTEE HEARING

854 Views
Message 7 of 31

@rk9152 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:


And if Graham went on CNN and said, "Donald Trump is the President, let it go" would you be saying, "Well, that settles that"?  "Hey, look over there!"

 

Did he define  "meddled" - more important, did he say it had any effect on the outcome? Seems that is the real question. IMO, anyone with an IQ over 90 understands the constant drip, drip, drip of stolen information had an impact.  In fact, that includes the Cons here.  They just aren't going to admit such here on this forum; it'll ruin their gig.

 

What "stolen information" concerns you? Is the information that the DNC corrupted it's own primary process? Was it that Hillary participated in the corruption of the debate process? Or is there something else?

 

All stolen (hacked) information. I don't pick and choose like some choose to do.


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
854
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
855
Views

Re: SENATE INTELLIGENCE SUBCOMITTEE HEARING

855 Views
Message 8 of 31

    I have pity for the donald supporters who are stuck with mindless rhetorical nonsense distraction claims because they appear to mindlessly believe in their transactional guy, Donald.   

    Apparently they won't watch the CSpan video, perhaps they will read the transcript?     Well, I may as well give it to them - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/05/08/full-transcript-sally-yates-and-jame...

 

     Well perhaps reading the 4Chan dump is what they rely on for their factoids.  

PRO-LIFE is Affordable Healthcare for ALL .
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
855
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
855
Views

Re: SENATE INTELLIGENCE SUBCOMITTEE HEARING

855 Views
Message 9 of 31

@pc6063 wrote:
But I'm sure that you smiled and/or used some of the names used against Mr. Obama.

--

But of course "Mr. Obama" isn't president is he?  Does that justify all of 'Der Trumpers', GOPers, etc? 

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
855
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
860
Views

Re: SENATE INTELLIGENCE SUBCOMITTEE HEARING

860 Views
Message 10 of 31

@Centristsin2010 wrote:


And if Graham went on CNN and said, "Donald Trump is the President, let it go" would you be saying, "Well, that settles that"?  "Hey, look over there!"

 

Did he define  "meddled" - more important, did he say it had any effect on the outcome? Seems that is the real question. IMO, anyone with an IQ over 90 understands the constant drip, drip, drip of stolen information had an impact.  In fact, that includes the Cons here.  They just aren't going to admit such here on this forum; it'll ruin their gig.

 

What "stolen information" concerns you? Is the information that the DNC corrupted it's own primary process? Was it that Hillary participated in the corruption of the debate process? Or is there something else?


 


 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
860
Views