No sir.
He is saying Trump is cleaning up Washington, removing corruption.
I'm saying he's more corrupt than any other politician ever and has made things exponentially worse.

All I see we agree on is that there is corruption in congress, but even then we don't agree on what level of corruption or by who.

We absolutely don't agree on Trump's corruption (or lack thereof).

No sir....we KNOW vegans are lying.
What I can't understand is why.
There's plenty of evidence that plant based (not vegetarian or vegan) diets are the healthiest choice.
There's plenty of evidence that vegan diets are almost always lacking in nutrition....they can be healthy but it's a full time and expensive proposition.
You are wrong, studies on cultures that eat large amounts of fish show it's good, and most weren't funded by the fishing industries. The Massai are pretty healthy too, and they eat and drink beef, blood, and milk almost exclusively. They have been studied extensively. You seem to always feel compelled to exaggerate enough to be wrong.

No sir.

I'm addressing his comment about the invasion of Iraq happening because of "Saddam's campaign of genocide against his own people and his conquest of Kuwait." when that's absolutely not how the invasion was sold to us by W. That's only partially how Desert Shield was sold by Sr. (Keeping in mind the gassing had happened years earlier), but that didn't remove or even target Saddam and barely went into Iraq, so clearly wasn't designed to remove him from power or stop his atrocities, just to stop his expansion into our allies territories.

The invasion of Iraq and direct targeting of Saddam was by W, not Sr. and are what led to the current state of the region far more than any result of Desert Storm...what I thought he meant by "blaming Sr. for Iraq"....I read that as 'blaming Sr. for the current state of Iraq and the region'.
I may have misunderstood what he meant by "blaming Sr for Iraq", but I can tell the difference between bushes.

No sir. There is a world of difference between slight bias in reports about the nationalistic leader who continues to attack all actual news reporters like a 2 year old and direct his terroristic followers to attack them as enemies of the people and a deeper level of bias against all non right wingers paired with outright campaigning for the same anti free press candidates.

Wait...you still defend Fox as having reporting but claim you don't need someone to bend facts? Bending facts like using proper English to describe a scene? But reporting on the birther movement for years as true, and the ridiculous waste of money named the Benghazi investigation, continued denial of climate science, etc. does bother you? Fox doesn't bend fact, they omit it. They don't get credit for using 5% (yes, that's exaggerated) truth to sell their lies.

I watched Chris Wallace interview Conway just yesterday (for as long as I could stand it, which admittedly was only a few minutes), his questions were ok, but delivered with a slow underhand pitch and with no follow-up or contradiction of her ridiculous rambling factless replies. That's not good reporting, it's being the setup for spreading their agenda/propaganda.

You think CNN goes to far by using words like "accost" to describe 3 policemen tackling a topless woman in tights, and while you claim to have looked up the definition , you still claim the word is somehow loaded and not proper. Please explain.

When the police were going after the fleeing armed supporters of Mr Bundie under Obama I think you likely called them violent thugs who attacked that poor innocent man unnecessarily....Fox did. That man was armed and an anti American terrorist, but right wing so Fox called him a strong patriotic American standing up for American values that the unAmerican Kenyan thug in the Whitehouse wanted to murder.
There is no equivalence. Fox is (disgusting unAmerican) entertainment, not news. There is no right wing news outlet, they are all propaganda outlets and little more today.
The Ministry of Truth doesn't need fact, you will believe any nonsense they tell you to, even when it contradicts what they had you believe yesterday. They have you believing any non Trump biased news is fake news reported with hyper liberal bias, even in other countries, but Fox has good reporting and less bias.
*facepalm

No, sir! You too can self-promote!

No, you miss the point.
Distinctions are important.
It matters hugely, recognizing the difference between violent rape and an uninvited shoulder rub, just as it matters making the distinction between a spanking and attempted murder....not just legally but rationally.

I wholeheartedly disagree that making those distinctions about gradients of wrongness in any way denies the ability to see that both are wrong.....except for the brainless who can't do both.

Public shaming IS a sentence, one that harms your job, finances, family, and future. I have no problem with fair public shaming, but lumping a bad date in with real rapists is as fair as lumping you in with kidnappers and murderers because you slapped a disobedient child's behind.

He denies he did anything to intentionally make her uncomfortable or pressure her, which is what she accuses him of.

NO SIR. THAT IS YOUR POSITION, you said until overboard sentencing becomes a problem, there's no distinction needed between bad sex and forced sex.
Yes, it's not cool, but it's also not abuse unless it is.

If, like this woman, she #metoo'd that you were an octopus that ignored all her nonverbal signals to stop, your denial wouldn't mean much, and most people would just call you a rapist....just like his denial means nothing to you and you're more than willing to let him be lumped in with rapists and abusers.

You lumped them together in your post about how making distinctions is out of fashion. It's like you said stop eating broccoli, sugar, and bacon, then balked when I said broccoli is good for you, you only meant deep fried candied broccoli. Come on.

Don't expect me to read what you mean and ignore what you write...I absolutely hate that.
Don't be sexually aggressive...do be weird.

Yes, distinctions matter immensely.

No, grading offences is proper, otherwise you put rape and going Dutch on a date at the same level because they both upset the date.

If the person goes on a long date with you, accepts an invitation to your bed, undressed and engages in sex, asks you to slow down a bit (which means continue, slower, which you do), and continues, sleeps over, and only later complains, maybe relationships aren't for HER. Her date did absolutely nothing wrong. Verbal cues trump non verbal cues in the dark 99.9999999% of the time....pretty much any time there's no gun to your head.

Bob, I wholeheartedly disagree with your assessments, but it begs the question....if you thought the nation was in such dire straits, why did you so blindly support the bankrupting idiot baby that's made it exponentially worse while creating and reinforcing so many divisions, making it nearly impossible for Americans to work together while also obliterating our international leadership positions?

You now admit he's not qualified to lead (never was), but you put him in the most important position of responsibility and leadership possible....now you want to blame his utter failings on previous administrations, not his constant lies and total ineptitude that you zealously defended and excused!? No sir, blame yourself.

As to the "agenda", those Hollywood values (you know, honesty, inclusion, diversity, freedom to be who you are, personal liberties, anti corporate personhood,...) are shared by a VAST majority of Americans....they are American values.
Why am I not surprised you don't get that?

As to their debasement, that starts with lies...lies like the ones you defend and applaud, like Trump lying about the tax plan because, as you privately said, if he told the truth he couldn't have passed a tax plan that benefits the wealthy like himself immensely and hurts the people who can least afford it while bankrupting the treasury as a set up to kill programs for the poor. You defended that lie privately....are you too ashamed to do so publicly?

I'm not afraid of heights (outside of the normal sense of being afraid of anything that will kill me), and I had to do exactly the same thing to look over the edge at the Cliffs of Moher. Going in, I thought I was going to be cool about it and just walk right up and look over the edge, but about five or six feet from the edge my hindbrain said "no sir, bad idea" and took away my voluntary movement privileges.

No sir. The Arab Spring happened because people actually got off their toilets and couches and marched in the street and occupied public spaces, standing up to harassment and violent attacks and paralyzing commerce, not because they just tweeted about it with a thumbs up tag. That's the part you seem to have missed.
True, they used social media to organize it, then acted, but that's not what the song is about, it's about people who are smug because they retweeted something and sat back waiting for their accolades.

If the end all message of your stated opinion is "resist" or "clap, clap, clap, clap" paired with your sole action of "recline", then yes, no one wants to see it, it doesn't really matter, and why bother muddying the waters for those who actually DO something more than nod knowingly? No? Expressing your opinion in a retweet is NOT action, it's barely a thought.

No sir. Not yet at least. That's nothing (edit:noting, stupid spell check) that his saying he's the sole source for truth is akin to their MO, and he should not repeat it, even jokingly, imo.

You seem to have missed the first half of the post, where I mentioned I wanted to Upvote for the reasons you mention.

Jimmy is moving from comedy to news commentary online, it seems. News commentary is what Beck and Jones do, btw....just saying. ;-)

I do agree, corporate media, which all buys their news from the same few biased outlets, are little more than propaganda sources and pablum these days. One more reason to be sad/outraged about pbs losing it's meager public funding.

Oh no, sir. I KNOW he lied repeatedly, he wrote a book about how to get ahead by lying.
On the other side, as you put it (and you missed me screaming for months that there aren't only two horrendous choices) was a normal, underhanded, misdirecting politician.

Email cover-up? Really? What crime was she covering, now that we have seen them all....none. Was she transparent about it, no, but as evidence that Trump is at least as bad on that front if not worse....tax returns is all I need say.
Pay for play, after Devos blatantly bought a cabinet position you would actually blindly make that claim with no evidence? Let me guess, you're afraid of the fish people Alex Jones told you about too. Is she corrupt, yes, is she corrupt compared to a man that's screwed over every business partner he's ever had and the taxpayer by intentionally bankrupting his companies repeatedly by hiring and massively overpaying other Trump companies, using that method to steal all funds and assets and build up massive debt, then declaring bankruptcy, stiffing his partners and creditors, and walking away (or in a few cases doing it over before being forced to leave), no. By comparison she's above reproach. Clinton may fit the definition of corrupt, but the word barely covers the insane backstabbing, admitted and repeated bribery (remember he claimed to have bought numerous politicians by bribing them, he thinks it's how government works), and theft from his partners that Trump is proud of.

So yes, tissue paper thin glass snow globe......

No, I don't deny that intelligence reports have been misused repeatedly by dems and reps historically, and horrifically.

No sir...the Bush administration edited multiple reports to lie about what the intelligence community had reported.

I know little about the lies about Vietnam, but would not be surprised to find the same MO by different parties. Please keep in mind that the appointed leaders of these organizations are often at odds with the politically diverse communities they oversee, and often rewrite official reports to reflect their bias...which I gather is what is being implied with this report without seeing the full classified version that allegedly contains the missing proof. It's a bit odd to make that conclusion, though, considering how firmly right wing the head of the FBI has proven himself to be, you would think he would not sign off if it weren't undeniable.

Well, the public report was compiled from 17 different agencies without dissent, and made clear that there is classified evidence to back up their assertions. That sure sounds like "multiple intelligence sources".

What does "actively hacked our election" mean? Only hacking voting machines and counting machines? It seems they tried, but failed or decided against it. If hacking the DNC and Clinton counts, it's not certain beyond doubt, but is certain beyond reasonable doubt with zero evidence to the contrary, imo.

Yes, but have we seen such public statements from so many agencies combined without dissent? Governments lie, intelligence reports lie, news lies, pundits lie, but usually not en masse with such consistency.

No sir, Bill starts with the belief that the scientific method is the best method for finding fact....much better than fables older than they claim the earth is. His belief has verifiable evidence you can see and reproduce, Ham's has impossible fables about magic no one alive has ever witnessed told third hand or more, compiled and edited by a ruler with the sole goal being solidifying political control.

It seems he's forgotten his religious responsibility to care for the planet and creation.

Why would it matter if you're going to die? Because some people find things outside themselves to be important, and care what happens to those that come after them...clearly they don't matter a whit to Mr Ham after he's moved on.

It's crazy to have an intellectual discussion with someone that refuses to utilize their intellect.

Tree rings aren't evidence? But fables are? WTF, man?

How would Ham prove 100% that his insane beliefs are correct? He clearly can't.

The problem with religion, it can't ever admit it's wrong at all, so it can't adapt to new information. When it's proven wrong, they MUST deny the proof, leading to denial of fact and science, leading to idiots like this.

blame?

i don't know if i would use such a charged word to describe a very and nuanced question.i think there is plenty of blame to go around,and it is never quite as simple as the media soundbytes we are all subjected to on a daily basis.

who do i blame most?
democrats..hands down.

but there are other factors that all served to produce this circus of an election cycle.

1.the failure of the left to actually understand just how frustrated and angry the working class had become.those people may be politically unsophisticated,but they are not dumb.

this really had very little to do with republican vs democrat.this was a large portion of the american population that had simply become fed up with a system that they finally understood had thrown them overboard decades ago.many of the people who voted for trump also voted for obama..TWICE..because they wanted to see "change" and what they got nothing,zip,zilch,zero,nada.

they simply refused to play charlie brown to the democrats lucy.

2.the DNC and debbie wasserman shultz,may she burn in hell for eternity.
this woman singlehandedly secured the nomination for clinton,while blocking a sanders nomination.

remember laurence lessig?
well,don't feel bad if you don't,because wasserman and the DNC kept changing the rules of application so lessig couldn't even get on the primary ballot.

the DNC basically said to the sanders supporters "sanders? fuck you! you get hillary and will like it".

3.the ultra left liberals,for being so sensitive and touchy (don't get mad,you guys are way too soft skinned) that they restrict their interactions in these weird,singular echo chambers.where everybody is agreeing with each other and nobody is challenging anything,no critical examination.

so when trump won.
they damn near lost their minds in shock!
because anybody who may have shed some actual light on the situation was already blocked or on ignore.

4.the republican party,who hated trump but allowed him to fan the flames of dissent with his bombastic speeches,emotionally charged rhetoric and divisive language.

they let this go on for almost a year,and while publicly denounced trump,privately sought a way to capture his thunder.

want carson?.....nope
cruz?...nope.
kasich?..nope.

because just like the left,they too,had misjudged just how pissed off people were in regards to our political system,and their plan backfired.

5.the democratic party for allowing such a shit candidate,and just like the republicans,not fully understanding just how pissed the electorate was.

6.the corporate media,who sought solely to profit from the election by giving us all this mish mash of reality tv,wrestling and days of our lives.they didnt report the issues,they fed the drama.

and every political pundit,every pollster,every opinion news mrs mcprettyface,got it FUCKING WRONG.

7.bernie bros who stayed home in protest,but this entire election was a protest vote.

so,
yeah..a lot of mitigating factors went into trumps win.

i didn't think he was going to win but i knew it was going to close,but i sure as fuck was not surprised.i was actually laughing at loud.

would you look at that...
my fellow countrymen just hit the nuclear option.
i didn't want a trump victory..no sir..but i have to admire the audacity of my fellow citizens to hit that shiny red button.

fuck you washington!

we live in interesting times my friends.
interesting and terrifying times.

and really...what would clinton have given us?
more of the same?
more wars and regime change?
more tax breaks for the super rich while children starve and more people become homeless?

i may find my fellow americans choice horrifying,but i have to respect it.
either way kids...something is gonna change.