Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [sphere] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You know I'm an optimist at heart.

You must be, to think that Trump might actually do the right thing, or that he'd get credit for it if he did.

There ain't no Santa Claus, either.








"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In case you haven't noticed, I have made no comment one way or another on the nominee.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Honestly, I don't really expect him to be paying attention to Senate hearings at the moment. He's got a lot more on his plate. I'm guessing he's getting feedback from his echo chamber that she's withstanding a blistering Democratic assault but that they have the votes to guarantee confirmation, so nothing to worry about. Now about those nuclear codes...

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [sphere] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The smug look on her face when refusing to answer questions tells you she knows she is sailing through. She cares about one issue, vouchers.

I think I may have mentioned that we are all fucked.

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sanuk wrote:
I can't recall this much interest in past presidents' cabinet picks.

The difference is that Trump has never held elected office and his supporters said he would surround himself with people with a lot of experience in government. The scrutiny is because people were wondering if he would live up to that promise. There was a fair amount of scrutiny on Obama for the same reason but he picked a lot less controversial cabinet members, and many with a lot of previous experience (Biden, Clinton, Tom Daschle, Eric Holder). He also satisfied a lot of Republicans with a few non-partisan picks and in fact, was criticized for hiring so many without private experience.

The school children will be safe from grizzly bears though, so you've got that going for you.


People didn't vote for him because he said he was going to hire a bunch of career politicians and lifelong bureaucrats. They voted for him because they are tired of the status quo in every governmental department. I won't comment on the nominee in this thread as I don't know much about her. But there should be no surprise that he is hiring people from left field and there should be no surprise that no one other than the Canadians and the Clinton voters are pissed about it.

Just what do you think this woman is going to do that is going to be so detrimental? I can assure you she won't be the one to put a gun in every school for Grizzly protection if that indeed happens.
Last edited by: aarondb4: Jan 19, 17 10:34
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [aarondb4] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That's sort of a red herring. Generally speaking, when people don't like the direction the ship is heading, and they want someone to steer it in a different direction, the basic qualification is that you know to operate a ship.

The objection I'm seeing to this nominee has very little to do with philosophy.

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Maybe grizzlies are slang for sex offenders?
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [sphere] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sphere wrote:
That's sort of a red herring. Generally speaking, when people don't like the direction the ship is heading, and they want someone to steer it in a different direction, the basic qualification is that you know to operate a ship.

The objection I'm seeing to this nominee has very little to do with philosophy.

I must say that Rick Perry gets some credit for admitting that the things he's said in the past about Energy were wrong, and now that he's actually learning about the department he has a newfound respect for it. Still, he's no rocket scientist...

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [aarondb4] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
People didn't vote for him because he said he was going to hire a bunch of career politicians and lifelong bureaucrats. They voted for him because they are tired of the status quo in every governmental department. I won't comment on the nominee in this thread as I don't know much about her. But there should be no surprise that he is hiring people from left field and there should be no surprise that no one other than the Canadians and the Clinton voters are pissed about it.

Not sure why you group me in with those who are pissed about something. I think a number of his picks have been excellent (Tillerson, James Mattis, Nikki Haley) and I also think Steve Bannon is a great pick for Chief of Staff.

I think his questionable picks are Tom Price (conflicts of interest) and DeVos (no clue) and am mixed about Ben Carson and Jeff Sessions. Isn't the process of nominating cabinet ministers supposed to be scrutinized?

I was just responding to the point that these picks are getting more scrutiny than in the past and there are some good reasons for that.

Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
klehner wrote:
sphere wrote:
That's sort of a red herring. Generally speaking, when people don't like the direction the ship is heading, and they want someone to steer it in a different direction, the basic qualification is that you know to operate a ship.

The objection I'm seeing to this nominee has very little to do with philosophy.


I must say that Rick Perry gets some credit for admitting that the things he's said in the past about Energy were wrong, and now that he's actually learning about the department he has a newfound respect for it. Still, he's no rocket scientist...

I'm having some internal struggles. The last Secretary of Energy had won a Nobel, Perry, well ... He is not qualified for this job, but he seems to at least want to do a decent job and could be the best we can hope for at this point.

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 
Wasn't necessarily putting you in that group, just a general swipe at the resident LR Canadians that have been foaming at the mouth for the last week.

I was responding to your point about Trump having no experience and thus hiring people with experience supposed promise. I don't recall him promising to hire career politicians, I did hear a lot about draining the swamp. Obama had 2 years experience over Trump and hired career politicians. Trump supporters wanted something different and hired someone with less experience but I don't think they expected him to hire career politicians. The general theme was blow up the status quo in Washington and see what happens. He is better off with some off the wall picks than the just hire a bunch of status quo political experts.
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [j p o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
j p o wrote:
klehner wrote:
sphere wrote:
That's sort of a red herring. Generally speaking, when people don't like the direction the ship is heading, and they want someone to steer it in a different direction, the basic qualification is that you know to operate a ship.

The objection I'm seeing to this nominee has very little to do with philosophy.


I must say that Rick Perry gets some credit for admitting that the things he's said in the past about Energy were wrong, and now that he's actually learning about the department he has a newfound respect for it. Still, he's no rocket scientist...

I'm having some internal struggles. The last Secretary of Energy had won a Nobel, Perry, well ... He is not qualified for this job, but he seems to at least want to do a decent job and could be the best we can hope for at this point.

Didn't that Nobel winner want to strangle gas consumption by taxing it so people couldn't afford it?
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [aarondb4] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
aarondb4 wrote:
Sanuk wrote:
I can't recall this much interest in past presidents' cabinet picks.

The difference is that Trump has never held elected office and his supporters said he would surround himself with people with a lot of experience in government. The scrutiny is because people were wondering if he would live up to that promise. There was a fair amount of scrutiny on Obama for the same reason but he picked a lot less controversial cabinet members, and many with a lot of previous experience (Biden, Clinton, Tom Daschle, Eric Holder). He also satisfied a lot of Republicans with a few non-partisan picks and in fact, was criticized for hiring so many without private experience.

The school children will be safe from grizzly bears though, so you've got that going for you.


People didn't vote for him because he said he was going to hire a bunch of career politicians and lifelong bureaucrats. They voted for him because they are tired of the status quo in every governmental department. I won't comment on the nominee in this thread as I don't know much about her. But there should be no surprise that he is hiring people from left field and there should be no surprise that no one other than the Canadians and the Clinton voters are pissed about it.

Just what do you think this woman is going to do that is going to be so detrimental? I can assure you she won't be the one to put a gun in every school for Grizzly protection if that indeed happens.

Trump's choices don't need to do anything to be attacked and called names by the left. They only need to be mentioned.

In the past several weeks, Trump has gotten more liberals engaged in their government than ever before. That's a damn good thing. Thanks Trump.
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [owen.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
owen. wrote:
BLeP wrote:
I can't speak for American schools but my wife grew up in Swan Hills, Alberta. Sometimes recess was cancelled due to a grizzly bear being in the vicinity.


Yeah, there was a bear shot at a suburban Victoria elementary school last year and a cougar shot at another.

Wildlife danger does exist in schools... but both absolute gun free zones and everyone with CCP gets to pack a gun in a school are equally stoopid positions.

Lots of cougars at my kid's school.
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sanuk wrote:
Isn't the process of nominating cabinet ministers supposed to be scrutinized?


The process has long been scrutinized. People here saying otherwise just have short memories.
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Duffy wrote:
I can't recall this much interest in past presidents' cabinet picks.

Well Clinton had a couple doozies...

In fairness, this is the first time we've elected Hitler reincarnate, or is it?

************************
#WeAreTheForge #BlackGunsMatter

"Look, will you guys at leats accept that you are a bunch of dumb asses and just trust me on this one? Please?" BarryP 7/30/2012
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [Old Hickory] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Old Hickory wrote:
aarondb4 wrote:
Sanuk wrote:
I can't recall this much interest in past presidents' cabinet picks.

The difference is that Trump has never held elected office and his supporters said he would surround himself with people with a lot of experience in government. The scrutiny is because people were wondering if he would live up to that promise. There was a fair amount of scrutiny on Obama for the same reason but he picked a lot less controversial cabinet members, and many with a lot of previous experience (Biden, Clinton, Tom Daschle, Eric Holder). He also satisfied a lot of Republicans with a few non-partisan picks and in fact, was criticized for hiring so many without private experience.

The school children will be safe from grizzly bears though, so you've got that going for you.


People didn't vote for him because he said he was going to hire a bunch of career politicians and lifelong bureaucrats. They voted for him because they are tired of the status quo in every governmental department. I won't comment on the nominee in this thread as I don't know much about her. But there should be no surprise that he is hiring people from left field and there should be no surprise that no one other than the Canadians and the Clinton voters are pissed about it.

Just what do you think this woman is going to do that is going to be so detrimental? I can assure you she won't be the one to put a gun in every school for Grizzly protection if that indeed happens.


Trump's choices don't need to do anything to be attacked and called names by the left. They only need to be mentioned.

In the past several weeks, Trump has gotten more liberals engaged in their government than ever before. That's a damn good thing. Thanks Trump.

As usual, you're entirely full of shit. Plenty of people paid attention to prior cabinet picks; if there was less outrage it's because for the most part they were less outrageous. That goes back further than Obama & GWB as well, although you'd never admit anything that wasn't 100% anti-Obama.

Zinke, for one, appears to be fairly well-qualified and has his head screwed on straight, and *SURPRISE!* nobody is pitching a fit over his nomination, even though, you know, he's still Trump's pick. So you can lose the fake shtick that people are only now paying attention or that they're only pissed because it's Trump doing the nominating. If people are saying DeVos is a shitty choice, maybe it's really because she's actually a shitty choice. She's right up there w/ "Heckuva Job Brownie" at FEMA for grossly unqualified crony appointments.

The biggest farce is that your BS is coming from the side which wouldn't even hold hearings on Obama's last SC nominee ~ Not complain that Garland was a poor choice because of XYZ and decline to confirm him, mind you, but to refuse to even consider the choice at all one way or the other simply because Obama was the one making it. If you actually made an argument for or against something based on merit, you might have a point for once instead of offering nothing but more of the same hyper-partisan hackery.
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Duffy wrote:
In case you haven't noticed, I have made no comment one way or another on the nominee.

In case you haven't noticed, when you make hundreds of posts supporting Trump and/or complaining about anything & everything the D's do, your occasional false protests that you're actually neutral or balanced pretty much fall on deaf ears.

If you don't think DeVos is dumber than shit (or if you do), why not say so? You're more than happy to criticize anything Obama does, yet somehow this one time you're withholding judgement as if you're suddenly impartial or above it? Not buying.
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I, for one, am just glad that someone is finally taking seriously the issue of grizzlies in our schools.

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [OneGoodLeg] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
When was the last time I criticized obama?

As for this nominee, I think she's a Jesus freak idiot that has no place in any position of power.

In other words she's no worse that the current occupant of the position.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
j p o wrote:
klehner wrote:
sphere wrote:
That's sort of a red herring. Generally speaking, when people don't like the direction the ship is heading, and they want someone to steer it in a different direction, the basic qualification is that you know to operate a ship.

The objection I'm seeing to this nominee has very little to do with philosophy.


I must say that Rick Perry gets some credit for admitting that the things he's said in the past about Energy were wrong, and now that he's actually learning about the department he has a newfound respect for it. Still, he's no rocket scientist...


I'm having some internal struggles. The last Secretary of Energy had won a Nobel, Perry, well ... He is not qualified for this job, but he seems to at least want to do a decent job and could be the best we can hope for at this point.


Didn't that Nobel winner want to strangle gas consumption by taxing it so people couldn't afford it?

You ought to at least get the quote right. “Somehow,” Chu said, “we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.” But a related question, when do we see the $5 gas under Obama? He better hurry.

And at least Chu knew what the job entailed, Perry? Well ... And remember, while he wouldn't be my choice, I'm not saying he is the worst that could come around. When he figured out there were things he didn't know well enough to run for president he made a sincere attempt to learn.

While we are on the topic of dumb things people have said:

"I will tell you: It's three agencies of government, when I get there, that are gone: Commerce, Education and the -- what's the third one there? Let's see. ... OK. So Commerce, Education and the -- ... The third agency of government I would -- I would do away with the Education, the ... Commerce and -- let's see -- I can't. The third one, I can't. Sorry. Oops."

"Those of you that will be 21 by November the 12th, I ask for your support and your vote."

"The reason that we fought the Revolution in the 16th century — was to get away from that kind of onerous crown, if you will."

"It's a theory that's out there. It's got some gaps in it. In Texas we teach both Creationism and evolution."

"You can always follow me on Tweeter."

"Juarez is reported to be the most dangerous city in America."

"From time to time there are going to be things that occur that are acts of God that cannot be prevented." —Rick Perry, on the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico

"I am a firm believer in intelligent design as a matter of faith and intellect, and I believe it should be presented in schools alongside the theories of evolution

"George W. Bush did a incredible job in the presidency, defending us from freedom."

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [OneGoodLeg] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
OneGoodLeg wrote:
Old Hickory wrote:
aarondb4 wrote:
Sanuk wrote:
I can't recall this much interest in past presidents' cabinet picks.

The difference is that Trump has never held elected office and his supporters said he would surround himself with people with a lot of experience in government. The scrutiny is because people were wondering if he would live up to that promise. There was a fair amount of scrutiny on Obama for the same reason but he picked a lot less controversial cabinet members, and many with a lot of previous experience (Biden, Clinton, Tom Daschle, Eric Holder). He also satisfied a lot of Republicans with a few non-partisan picks and in fact, was criticized for hiring so many without private experience.

The school children will be safe from grizzly bears though, so you've got that going for you.


People didn't vote for him because he said he was going to hire a bunch of career politicians and lifelong bureaucrats. They voted for him because they are tired of the status quo in every governmental department. I won't comment on the nominee in this thread as I don't know much about her. But there should be no surprise that he is hiring people from left field and there should be no surprise that no one other than the Canadians and the Clinton voters are pissed about it.

Just what do you think this woman is going to do that is going to be so detrimental? I can assure you she won't be the one to put a gun in every school for Grizzly protection if that indeed happens.


Trump's choices don't need to do anything to be attacked and called names by the left. They only need to be mentioned.

In the past several weeks, Trump has gotten more liberals engaged in their government than ever before. That's a damn good thing. Thanks Trump.


As usual, you're entirely full of shit. Plenty of people paid attention to prior cabinet picks; if there was less outrage it's because for the most part they were less outrageous. That goes back further than Obama & GWB as well, although you'd never admit anything that wasn't 100% anti-Obama.

Zinke, for one, appears to be fairly well-qualified and has his head screwed on straight, and *SURPRISE!* nobody is pitching a fit over his nomination, even though, you know, he's still Trump's pick. So you can lose the fake shtick that people are only now paying attention or that they're only pissed because it's Trump doing the nominating. If people are saying DeVos is a shitty choice, maybe it's really because she's actually a shitty choice. She's right up there w/ "Heckuva Job Brownie" at FEMA for grossly unqualified crony appointments.

The biggest farce is that your BS is coming from the side which wouldn't even hold hearings on Obama's last SC nominee ~ Not complain that Garland was a poor choice because of XYZ and decline to confirm him, mind you, but to refuse to even consider the choice at all one way or the other simply because Obama was the one making it. If you actually made an argument for or against something based on merit, you might have a point for once instead of offering nothing but more of the same hyper-partisan hackery.

Lots of emotional bravado in your reply. Are you okay?
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Possibly....
In Alaska, maybe.
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [OneGoodLeg] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I only agree with a handful of Trump's picks, but he gets to pick them.

That said, she is almost definitely the worst selection we've seen, and she is completely unqualified. Trump would be better served if her nomination got derailed
Quote Reply
Re: Are grizzly bears that big a threat to American school children? [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
https://act.credoaction.com/...p;source=fb_share_sp

You could join about a million other people and sign that petition against her confirmation.

Of course, it's addressed to Senate Democrats, who don't have the ability to block the nomination, and don't need the encouragement to try, but hey, I guess it's therapeutic?








"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply

Prev Next