Jump to content

The Beaumont Enterprise endorses


Big girl

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, BS Wildcats said:

If this had been taken further, as it should have been, she would have charged.  Bill made sure that would not happen with the meeting on the airplane in Phoenix. The legalities are not conjecture, but fact.  The FBI and others decided not to indict.

Yeah right. Do you really believe that Bill has that much power? You guys act as if Hillary is Lex Luthor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, BS Wildcats said:

If this had been taken further, as it should have been, she would have charged.  Bill made sure that would not happen with the meeting on the airplane in Phoenix. The legalities are not conjecture, but fact.  The FBI and others decided not to indict.

Tt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big Girl_ I am going to ask the question once more since you ignored it before:  And you "know", for a fact, that it was Mr. Trump who was behind the keyboard on each tweet?  If you believe what he said in the debates, then you also believe that he is a highly successful businessman who  built a substantial business empire and will make America great again and that Mrs. Clinton is crooked- since he also made those statements in the debates.  Oh wait- are you now going to tell me that you get to pick and choose which statements you believe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, stevenash said:

Big Girl_ I am going to ask the question once more since you ignored it before:  And you "know", for a fact, that it was Mr. Trump who was behind the keyboard on each tweet?  If you believe what he said in the debates, then you also believe that he is a highly successful businessman who  built a substantial business empire and will make America great again and that Mrs. Clinton is crooked- since he also made those statements in the debates.  Oh wait- are you now going to tell me that you get to pick and choose which statements you believe?

11 hours ago, stevenash said:

Big Girl_ I am going to ask the question once more since you ignored it before:  And you "know", for a fact, that it was Mr. Trump who was behind the keyboard on each tweet?  If you believe what he said in the debates, then you also believe that he is a highly successful businessman who  built a substantial business empire and will make America great again and that Mrs. Clinton is crooked- since he also made those statements in the debates.  Oh wait- are you now going to tell me that you get to pick and choose which statements you believe?

This is the hidden content, please
  

Some of Hilliary's accomplishments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎10‎/‎25‎/‎2016 at 8:33 PM, TxHoops said:

So did the Arizona Republic (conservative paper that hasn't endorsed a Democrat for President in  its 126 years).  So did the Dallas Morning News (the first Dem its endorsed for President in more than 75 years).  And the Cincinnati Enquirer endorsed her as well (the first in almost 100 years).  

Trump is that bad...

They are both bad.  papers endorsing anything doesn't hold weight for me.....they re media .......only prints what sells no matter what

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, 5GallonBucket said:

They are both bad.  papers endorsing anything doesn't hold weight for me.....they re media .......only prints what sells no matter what

I can't imagine anyone making a choice based on a newspaper endorsement.  I guess it may happen with some people but has to be pretty rare.  It's a time-honored tradition though and does speak to how awful the Donald is that some are endorsing a Dem after a 100+ years of refusing to do so.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heard a radio commentator this morning say he believes that some people don't need to vote.  When pressed for specificity, he said that if you know who the spouses of Beyoncé and Kanye West are, can name at least three members of the Kardashian family, and have never heard of Benghazi, you shouldn't be voting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stevenash said:

Heard a radio commentator this morning say he believes that some people don't need to vote.  When pressed for specificity, he said that if you know who the spouses of Beyoncé and Kanye West are, can name at least three members of the Kardashian family, and have never heard of Benghazi, you shouldn't be voting.

I'm all over that.  I remember a fortune teller on late night TV, Miss Cleo.  I said at the time, anyone who calls here should have their right to vote revoked.  This guy has taken it further.

Seriously, before someone votes, they ought at least be able to name the president, the VP, and their two senators.  Is that to much to ask?  And I'd bet that at least 50% of the people voting now, couldn't do it.  Instead of voting, why don't we just throw a dart at a board.  Smh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,977
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined



  • Posts

    • We'll see. I don't trust us. 
    • Starting pitching has been shaky the last few weeks due to some injuries outside of Hagen Smith.  He goes tomorrow, so y’all should be fine 
    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
    • MODS please remove that ISD twitter link! I had no idea it would copy the whole posting. I only highlighted the portion about the venue change. Sorry about that!
    • See why I don't trust my Hogs?
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...