(10-21-2019 09:51 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-20-2019 08:49 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-20-2019 04:02 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-20-2019 02:49 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-20-2019 02:38 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Left your name off for a reason.

I understand and appreciate that. But I think Tanq and OO deserve to be left off for the same reason.

I agree, but I don't really care. When he gave me some things of Trump he supported, I backed off my claim. When I gave him some things of Trump I didn't support, silence. Typical left wing ethics.

I just get tired of all these memes about Trump's lies, when a lot of them are equally lies. C'mon, left - play fair.

I have more than a few disagreements with Trump on his 'way' and on his policies. I dont have the patience to bother with lad on this, since when I would state them, he would either say that '[I] always have to be right', or do the usual lad thing when pointed out as something not correct, simply scuttle off without proffering that limb of 'no es la verdad' that might accompany that position from time to time.

A no-win/no-win situation from my point of view and not worth a fing iota of effort because of that.

I do know that on a whole slew of occasions I have expressed more than a sliver of displeasure with the measure of the man, and at least a couple of times expressed a difference of opinion with his policies. But all in all, the cost of dislodging lad from his Somme-like broad sweeping and very exceptional statement '*never* disagree', just isnt worth the fing effort (as noted before).

Almost all I can say to this post in lol.

Sorry to OO, it was very busy weekend without much time to response. I definitely do appreciate his willingness to point out a few things he disagrees with Trump on - like his response to me, that's the first time I remember him actually criticizing Trump. But like OO's memory of me having nothing positive to say, my memory is likely biased by the general overwhelming defense of Trump I see OO build.

So I'll walk back that he always defends Trump and couch it in the same way - he's a 95% Trump Does-No-Wronger.

Hope OO can forgive me for taking a few days to respond.

I think we can both say that some things he does or doesn't do just do not merit comment. I have not commented at all on the Syria withdrawal because I am not sure of my feelings about it. I have not commented at all about scheduling the meeting at Doral because I don't care one way or the other.

But I have responded to statements about Trump's lying because (a) many if not all are overblown, (b) many if not all are incorrect, and most of all, (3) MANY, IF NOT ALL ARE ACTIONS MIRRORED IN THE BEHAVIOR OF HIS DETRACTORS. So I guess if I only react to unjust or inaccurate statements, it would seem as if I only defend. Similar as when you only respond to "defense" statements, it seems as though you only attack.

If you cannot remember me criticizing the "Wall", you need to see a doctor. I have criticized the Wall since he first said it in the campaign. As a former owner of properties actually on the banks of the Rio Grande, and having a cousin with a ranch bordering on the Rio, I have first hand knowledge of the problems a wall from the Gulf to the Pacific would cause. More enforcement and more facilities is the better answer, and would be needed whether we have a wall or not. Been saying this since before the election. Said it many times. Like dozens. Pay attention.

Likewise, I have been saying that he is not a role model for my grandkids since at least 2017. I don't have to like his manner to like his policies. Said it many times. Pay attention.

I support him as President against the unfair and mindless attacks from the left, like the Russia probe. It was illogical and the evidence was twisted and/or manufactured, but some insisted the smoke warranted the three year investigation into nothing. Haven't heard the statement lately that the witch hunt has found witches.

I support him as a 2020 candidate because I like most of his policies and abhor most of the policies of the left. He may not be perfect, but he is the best of a bad lot.

It is amusing that the left continually wants me to switch to them on the basis that he is an *******. Why should I vote for the nice lady who wants to gut me and not for the ******* who is helping me?

I guess in the future, it would be best if we both avoided always/never types of statements when discussing other people. Always/never statements do not always result in a factual inaccuracy(a lie), but they often do.