Image of the day

From the
ATWB Customer Gallery

Pleiades Star Alcyone and Dusty Reflection Nebulosity

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

Posts Made By: James Brown

September 23, 2020 04:28 PM Forum: Politics

More facts about the Supreme Court Nomination in an election year.

Posted By James Brown

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Amy over Barbie. 
Hi Rod:

This sort of rhetoric is deemed extremely sexist nowadays.  I'm not exactly calling you a sexist, and I doubt you are.  In many instances, I'm uncomfortable with the new rules of social interaction.  I am in favor of treating women and judges with respect however.  

Jim

September 23, 2020 04:52 PM Forum: Politics

This explains a lot, both here on AP Politics as well as in the 'real world'...

Posted By James Brown

Originally Posted by David Cotterell
I found this while diving around on the intertubes this afternoon.... 

"Why do people continue supporting Trump no matter what he does?" 

Dave
Dave:

To the extent you believe that this "Bev" person accurately describes a majority of Trump's supporters' motivation, please be assured she is wrong.  Most Trump supporters, and I know lots of them, are simply Republicans who prefer R policies.   They hate Trump or love him, but they all prefer R policies.   The prospect of "hating liberals"  is not a motivation  for most.  Of course hatred of liberals is a motivation for a minority of the Trump coalition, they see this as a war.  You know at least one person in this camp on line, but he is hardly representative of the millions who will vote for Trump. 

I would also add that "Bev" re-cycles a cherished canard of some fairly elite Ds in the press and in DC.  The canard that Trump supporters are all stereotype Ozark mountain hillbillies.  This conceit helped get Trump elected in the first place.  No doubt you recall Secretary Clinton's "basket of deplorables" comments?  That was a key turning point in Trump's election.

Jim

September 23, 2020 05:12 PM Forum: Politics

Winning!!

Posted By James Brown

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

This morning would be a good time for you to actually condemn any of the vile actions and corrupt methods that the Democrats are trying to employ which you never do, which includes

1. Trying to eliminate the Electoral College

2.  Packing the Supreme Court

3.  ADDING 2 States so that the liberal leftist socialist Democrats give themselves an unfair advantage in the Senate

4.  Calling for the Complete Removal of the Filibuster

For the record, I think all of 1-4 are horrible ideas.  FWIW I condemn these ideas, although I don' think that is proper usage of the word 'condemn'.  1-4 are instrumental in my financial and vocal support of Cory Gardner.  Are you doing your part?  The fact that I am opposed to 1-4 is not news, I have posted my opposition to some of these schemes, especially #1, many times.

So, are you now going to retract your mistaken at best, dishonest at worst, post about James Lacey?  You are caught with your pants down again Richard, and no amount of spin or dodge is going to fix that.  Your only honorable "out" is to admit you were wrong.

Jim

September 23, 2020 05:20 PM Forum: Politics

More facts about the Supreme Court Nomination in an election year.

Posted By James Brown

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Of course you'll say your regular response of "I just skimmed it".  It is what you do, when you don't have any answers to the questions I posed and to your massive inconsistencies in your political philosophies and your regular intellectual dishonesty, hypocrisy, lack of consistent principles, and your one sided attacks on the right. 

We all understand it.  You're guided by your Trump Derangement Syndrome.  

Being that everything I stated in my previous posting is true, I guess the easiest way to squirm out of answering anything is to ignore it, and employ your lack of equivalent, principled responses towards calling out all your little leftist buddies here.

We get it.  I expected nothing more from you than your regular dodge.  

Have a great day!  smile
Ok, I guess you won't answer my question.  No surprise there.  For the record, I'll go back to your rant, find one or two un-truths and post them.  It's a slow day at work.  Jim

September 23, 2020 05:26 PM Forum: Politics

More facts about the Supreme Court Nomination in an election year.

Posted By James Brown

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

And now you're once again, like Clockwork, ready to appease them, because if Donald Trump DARES to follow the Constitution as it is written, they threaten violence, and they understand that guys like you will then back down and give in to their radical threats of violence. 


This is not true.  I'm OK with Trump nominating and the Senate confirming Justice Ginsberg's replacement.  Yesterday was a discussion of the possible political ramifications.  This was a discussion you are incapable of comprehending.  The rest of your post was pretty much an unhinged rant about War and such.  It really needs no commentary from me.  James has covered that ground pretty well.

Jim

September 23, 2020 05:27 PM Forum: Politics

More facts about the Supreme Court Nomination in an election year.

Posted By James Brown

Originally Posted by James Brown

This is not true.  I'm OK with Trump nominating and the Senate confirming Justice Ginsberg's replacement.  Yesterday was a discussion of the possible political ramifications.  This was a discussion you are incapable of comprehending.  The rest of your post was pretty much an unhinged rant about War and such.  It really needs no commentary from me.  James has covered that ground pretty well.

Jim
p.s. Rich, I'm happy to answer questions.  Just phrase them as questions and post them one or two at a time and I'll do my best.

September 23, 2020 05:31 PM Forum: Politics

Winning!!

Posted By James Brown

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

 the same way you called out the Republicans as hypocrites in your other thread response. 

I actually did not do that.  I knew you would miss the distinction between the historical context of SC nominations in an election year and the blown messaging in 2016.  It is a moderately subtle  point, although everyone else seemed to get it.  Jim

September 23, 2020 05:46 PM Forum: Politics

More facts about the Supreme Court Nomination in an election year.

Posted By James Brown

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

I don't need to answer any questions from the resident forum fraud, who now thinks he's been anointed some sort of forum Policeman, running around trying to catch me in a gotcha' moment.   tongue

You should stick to your day job.  If you had any consistency at all in calling out James Lacey for his lies about me, I may have even considered answering your absurd question.  

But being the intellectual hypocrite you are with your massive ego, I guess that same huge ego, informs you that anyone here cares about your "policing" of me, with you running around chasing me like a dog chases its tail?   

You know who you appeal to, when you take your positions, running around here from posting to posting trying to bait me?

Yep, you guessed it.  Your forum sycophants here are impressed.  

I can assure you that I am not.  LOL!  

Have a great day!  smile
That's a whole lot more words than was necessary to say, "I concede."

September 23, 2020 05:57 PM Forum: Politics

More facts about the Supreme Court Nomination in an election year.

Posted By James Brown

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

They weren't questions.  They were simply accurate observations about you and your political positions over the last 3 years.

They were rhetoric only, however they were accurate.  I stand by them and if you care to refute them, which you apparently can't, you don't need MY permission to do so. 

You know where the list is, so my recommendation is Go for it!  

Have a great day.   smile
Well, just to be complete, some of your "observations" are correct.  I am a moderate R.  Other observations are flat out wrong.  For example, I am not motivated by a desire to appease the left.

I think it is interesting that James Lacey, me, and Greg all agreed in large part on (a) the historical context of election year SC nominations (b) the hard ball tendencies of both parties in this context, and (c) the hypocrisy apparent in the R's (flubbed in my opinion) messaging on this issue in 2016.  I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth; our agreement was probably nowhere near "total."  There are differences of opinion of course.  For example, I do not think the hypocritical 2016 messaging will matter much.  I think Greg agrees,  James (I think) believes it will matter and maybe a lot.  As you know, James is well to the left of me and Greg is well to the right. 

Yet we had a discussion and reached some points of agreement.  You ought to try this some time.

Jim

September 23, 2020 06:10 PM Forum: Politics

Winning!!

Posted By James Brown

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Yes, you actually did call Republicans hypocrites.

Your words:  

I agree that the messaging/rhetoric employed by the R's in this instance reeks of hypocrisy 
Yes, my words taken out of all context.  A discerning reader will understand from my post that I am not calling the Rs hypocrites for nominating and confirming Justice Ginsberg's replacement.  I am saying they flubbed the messaging in 2016 and now reap what they sowed.

The funny thing is, I anticipated this and in my next post clarified:

"Richard lacks the capacity to even understand that the historical precedent and the political messaging from 2016 vs. 2020 are two different things."