tr8er Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 A comment was made to me: "I think what will be more interesting is 5 years from now after people have had Trump as a president. Will they think Obama was still so bad?" ;) After Trumps re-election? Link to comment
paradime Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 They're both made for each other lol Sad, but this is what it takes to get into the White House. Look at the Bush's and Kennedy Family's history. Behind every great fortune is an even greater crime. 1 Link to comment
KoHeartsGPA Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 Sad, but this is what it takes to get into the White House. Look at the Bush's and Kennedy Family's history. Behind every great fortune is an even greater crime. La Cosa Nostra, bro! Fo reals! Link to comment
HRH Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 And then there's this: Let the hipocrasy begin! http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/7/hillary-clinton-gave-inequality-speech-in-12k-gior/ 2 Link to comment
KoHeartsGPA Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 Can we just kill em all?....fuuuuu 2 Link to comment
KoHeartsGPA Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 Oops.....I just triggered homeland security.....I better start watching some good ole p0rn on my phone to keep them entertained....get your favorite lube ready, agent :thumbup: Link to comment
q-tip Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 And here I thought you were talking about the Metallica album.... 3 Link to comment
240zness Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 And then there's this: Let the hipocrasy begin! Public verses private wealth. I'll vote to redistribute gov wealth, but...somebody said why is she dressing like a benevolent alien? Link to comment
Mattndew76 Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 Matt, once again, you're great at throwing personal insults, but you've yet to respond to a single point I've made. Had you defined your attack on the US college system as shyster for profit colleges, or get rich quick seminars, I might have been in 100% agreement, but you lumped the entire system in with Trump U when you stated "So why isnt (aren't) our college institutions being taken to court over this same BS?" "Its a fucking scam as is a ton of things offered in a 1000 different forms and even by our federally accredited universities." What Trump University did is not the same as a shitty private college inflating their placement numbers, or a top notch university offering a degree in basket weaving. You should know that before sticking your neck out for a shyster like Trump. Many of these BS seminars like Trump's have class action suit against them, but they aren't owned by a presidential candidate. Trump created this shit, not the federal judge trying the suit. No doubt, after 8 years of Obama's piss poor economic Reign, the job market is still in the toilet, but you can't blame the college system for continuing to educate people. You obviously have no idea what you're talking about with respect to the suit against Trump University, or how great the US college system actually is, but when I point that out, you call me pompous and I'm feigning some intellectual superiority. Dude, this is what a debate looks like, you make a point, and the other guy makes a counter point. Instead of offering a logical rebuttal, you grandstand by insulting my genitalia. You do a great job of demonstrating what intellectual inferiority looks like, but I'm not going to follow you there. If you took the time to investigate this shit yourself, you'd have seen Obama has been crushing these POS for profit colleges. I'm right there with you in going after shitty schools who make false claims about their job placement %. So why haven't you jumped off your elephant and praised Obama for doing exactly what you want? Before you throw more sophomoric insults, PLEASE READ THIS http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/barack-Obama-pushes-for-profit-colleges-to-the-brink-119613 http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/obama-administration-takes-action-protect-americans-predatory-poor-performing-career-colleges http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/02/the-downfall-of-for-profit-colleges/385810/ Registered non partisan my whole voting life, but I'm liberal enough to value the pure logic of conservative ideology. What you fail to see is that we need Republicans and Democrats to survive, but neither party are who they claim to be anymore. I am not the one who made assumptive remarks about your comment. You attached your idea of what was being said onto mine. You assigned " lumped the entire system " to what I had said. You filled in your own blanks without any iota of asking for clarification. Here is your immediate reply to my comment: Begin Quote: Come on Matt, not defending Trump? Give me a break. Your passionate condemnation of the US College system (The best in the fucking world) is moving, but totally casuistic. in other words B U L L F U C K I N G S H I T...... Did you know this case in San Diego was filed in 2013? Did you know New York's attorney general brought a consumer fraud class action suit against Trump University long before the one in SoCal? Donny won't talk shit about Eric Schneiderman though. He's not Mexican. Did you know 11 state attorneys general and the US Department of Justice have an ass load of complaints filed against Trump’s "university"? Did you know educational "seminars" are not stupid enough to call themselves a university because it's illegal? The accreditation process for a college to be called a University in insanely rigorous. ttps://www.bigclassaction.com/lawsuit/Donald-trump-university-consumer-fraud-class-action-lawsuit.php What do you really know about Judge Gonzalo Curiel Matt? Jump off the Elephant ride and investigate it for yourself. He was appointed by a Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger as a San Diego Superior Court judge in 2006, before he was nominated for a Federal Judgeship by a Democrat. It's the Judicial Branch that confirms an appointment as a federal court judge. You believe what ever Trump tells you though Matt. He's a very honest guy. End quote: This really lacks the one question that any person should ask if they are foggy on the point being conveyed. Its assertive conjecture and frankly lacks any centilian of a real questions.. Just a bunch of Blasting with question marks on the tail end to appear legitimate. ( Could you please clarify or expand on what you said? ) Is the question that could have been presented as in any proper debate, but since you define the debate I guess I am wrong. It allows the Pro or Con the ability to make a valid or invalid points., unless we are being timed. In your situation you displayed a classic case of conjecture. You had no idea what I was saying but ran with it without any need for clarification. You are the know all to end all. If anyone is to say anything to the contrary of your opinion, you say that they have "narrow perspective".. well Paradime Here is a quote from you that is pure conjecture and narrowed perspective. "I submit Matt, clearly this suit is politically driven" Yet I never muttered (typed) any of that. I can pull more quotes if you would like? In your case and its not rare. There is self assigned blank area filling with your assumption of what is said and is common place. Take the fucking time before you start insulting a persons position and ask for a better view, because If I was as broad minded as you are.... That's where I would have started. 3 Link to comment
DaBlist Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 This thread is taking way to much thinking 3 Link to comment
paradime Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 Matt, I need clarification on what you meant by: "So why isnt our college institutions being taken to court over this same BS?" "Its a fucking scam as is a ton of things offered in a 1000 different forms and even by our federally accredited universities." "Not defending Trump but the whole concept behind the suit is extremely questionable and very thin on validity." Please let me clarify, "I submit" means I am putting that thought out there. It doesn't mean you ever did. Is this what you mean by assumptions. Link to comment
Mattndew76 Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 It would be nice to say something without all the additives inserted in between the lines. ( I assume he said something else, so therefore it is what he said.) Link to comment
DaBlist Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 This thread needs more mobility scooters 4 Link to comment
Mattndew76 Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 Matt, I need clarification on what you meant by: "So why isnt our college institutions being taken to court over this same BS?" Dude......"Had you defined your attack on the US college system as shyster for profit colleges, or get rich quick seminars, I might have been in 100% agreement, but you lumped the entire system in with Trump U when you stated" That sentence just did.. You assigned the broad brush to the whole system not me. I am sorry for wrecking your mood without completely detailing which of those places it's occurring. It is my fault for thinking that you could differentiate. Pick any college you want, and they are making profits off the inflated numbers the college is enrolling. Many of those being enrolled are not even up to the standards required to do so.. Everyone gets accepted now and it's not because of fairness. "Its a fucking scam as is a ton of things offered in a 1000 different forms and even by our federally accredited universities." Again I refer to your quote above. This is the same as in the first quote line I origianlly made. Written differently in an attempt to help you see a view point. "Not defending Trump but the whole concept behind the suit is extremely questionable and very thin on validity." Because like many other shyster seminars and Accredited Colleges; not all people are going to succeed at the information given out after going into debt. There will be a percentage of whom will fail by their own volition and seek retribution for their own incompetence against the host. Accept you cannot seem to get the retribution against a college through a civil law court system. They get a pass from the Fed Government. Those reforms are slid under the carpet and no one will ever be punished individually. Trumps case is thin on validity because there are so many seminars running at current and his case will fall apart not because of political reasons but because there is already precedence set from other suits pinning blame of failure on the participant, and not the seminar offering the information. Many people have succeeded at making the Trump U information work for them and some have not. This by no means was any reference to the judiciary who is overseeing the case. That was your addition and was not even in my thought process during the original post. I dont give a shit if Trump loses his case or wins it. It was started in 2013 and now for some stupid reason we have to hear about it because of the office he seeks. So don't you think its a bit cherry picked for our information? Just like Mrs. Clinton we get to hear cherry picked shyster shit she has done? So how you see this as me defending him really baffles me. I saw this as legalities and was commenting on the topic as such. I stand by my opinion that precedence will get Mr. Trump out of this legal issue, and that's not me defending him. Please let me clarify, "I submit" means I am putting that thought out there. It doesn't mean you ever did. Is this what you mean by assumptions. I see the definition of submit as it is defined, and not as anything else. Arguing that I was backing someone I don't like or that I am of narrow perspective is bold direct terms, and means exactly what the words intend them to be. The words " I am putting this out there." means you are putting that out there. Not "I submit.". You used this setup as a curt way to lessen any standing defense I had for defending myself of your argument. I was by your definition lacking perspective and sewn to a rigid ideology. Yet I was not arguing politics whatsoever. Another thing you placed as my intention. 1 Link to comment
RatVonDude Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 This thread is taking way to much thinking No shit, it's starting to sound like a bum fight. 2 Link to comment
Mattndew76 Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 No shit, it's starting to sound like a bum fight. 3 Link to comment
paradime Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 Sorry guys, I'll take it to PM. 1 Link to comment
Mattndew76 Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 Is this really a shock? The guy has been pretty limp wristed for ages. http://radaronline.com/celebrity-news/richard-simmons-woman-sex-change-national-enquirer-photos/ Link to comment
paradime Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 Wow Dude, that's so not PC Matt. ;) 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts