Respond as you will, I have no intention of arguing the points made.

Personal insults towards anyone, innuendo that crosses the CoC line, hate-speak, etc., will prompt me to call for a moderator.

I'll be in the photo/Creative Arts venues.

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏 inf.

You are my HERO🏆

I have no intention of arguing the points made.

Expressing your opinion is NOT "making a point" . I don't know how else to put it ...

A POINT OF ORDER

My article presents a number of SPECIFIC ISSUES/POINTS/QUESTIONS … SPECIFICALLY DELINEATED SO AS TO FOMENT REAL ISSUE-BASED DISCUSSION …

Instead of A DISCUSSION/DEBATE ABOUT THOSE SPECIFIC ISSUES … what do we have … A BITCHING, SHIT-FLINGING LAMENTATION OVER THE FACT THAT I DARED TO RAISE ISSUES, GLOATING, MOCKERY … 

Can't take an articulate position as to why:

• ONE-PERSON-ONE-VOTE is more representative of the electorate than the Electoral College

• Can't refute specifically why the EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE APPEARS TO BE VIOLATED WHEN FEWER VOTES TRUMPS A GREATER NUMBER OF VOTES … that's not equal protection … it pro-rates one's vote… it's not the "equitable" protection clause … do you know why the electoral college was implemented in the first place

• Can't intelligently discuss why people demonstrate in fear of history repeating itself

• Can't comprehend that Trump is already being the very "Crooked Hillary" he claimed Clinton to be; he's already involved in pay-to-play with foreign governments, in violation of the emolument clause of the Constitution, has conflicts-of-interests that will affect his Attorney General appointment, General Services appointments, Labor Department et al. .

• Not concerned that the FBI, Russian Hackers and David Duke devotees played key roles in the election outcome?

I am (with point--of-order related exceptions like this), going to remain away from FP/Political discussions, and, for the very reason that WE DON'T HAVE DISCUSSIONS … WE HAVE PISSING CONTESTS AND INSULT FESTS laced with information-free school yard type rants.

Make a fair, specific counter-point, I'll be back to respond.

Do the usual… then look for me in the photo section.

I haven't quit … I've just resolved that while ignorance can be remedied, you can't fix stupid! 

Interestingly, some of you have advised me on this fact … AND NOW I AM FINALLY TAKING THEIR GOOD ADVICE.

Make an intelligent argument … I'll show up.

Wise decision, Mac. It is the only thing anyone with rationality and decency can do. It is very unfortunate that freedom to express oneself has led to such hateful and aggressive platforms. Almost everywhere. I do not engage with anyone on the current political scenario. It is pointless and unlikely to change. 

Donald Trump has recently tweeted his complaints about a Broadway cast, the New York Times, Saturday Night Live , and praise for a right wing British politician,  and yet he cannot find 30 seconds to tweet to condemn a meeting of alt right white nationalists that cheered his election with nazi style salutes just a few blocks from the White House. 

Although Newstalkers is in present danger of having only seriously one sided topics because of the "liberals" who have stopped seeding and commenting, I can't honestly say that I blame you for wanting to wash your hands of this front page Mac. 

Though Mr. Trump did find time to call the father of the assassinated police officer in an Antonio.  Maybe he felt that these 'Nationalist' (assholes) didn't deserve ot be noticed at the presidential level, so he let his press person leave a message of 'The Trump Administration wants all people to be treated equally'. 

That's someone acting presidential.  I know it's been a while since you've seen it.

Personally, I would be disturbed if he were following what a small group of racists are doing. If I were president, they would be beneath my notice and I wouldn't give them any publicity by even mentioning their name.

AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster

It’s becoming clearer with each passing day of this presidential transition that like so much of what he said during the campaign, Donald Trump’s promise to separate himself from his business during his presidency was simply a lie. The convenient fiction that Trump offered up is that his children would run the corporation on his behalf as a “blind trust,” which is like referring to a plate of steamed kale as a “hamburger.”

Now, as Trump works to monetize the presidency for his own financial gain like some post-Soviet kleptocrat, we have to look back to the campaign to understand why he’s doing this.

There’s a simple explanation:  Donald Trump thinks he can get away with anything

Yes, his limitless greed plays a part, as does his contempt for the rules and norms of the American system of government. But if the election had not gone the way it did, Trump would not feel so free to cash in, and in such a public and obvious way.

And it is obvious. In a matter of days, he’s invited his daughter Ivanka, who will be leading the Trump Organization, to  sit in  on a meeting with the Prime Minister of Japan. He held a  meeting  with Indian businessmen developing a Trump-branded apartment complex. He had his Washington hotel  encourage  foreign diplomats to stay there while they’re in the nation’s capital. He  pressed  British party leader Nigel Farage to fight against a proposed wind farm Trump believes mars the view from a golf course he owns in Scotland.

In response to criticism of these actions, Trump  tweeted

Prior to the election it was well known that I have interests in properties all over the world. Only the crooked media makes this a big deal!

This made it clear that he sees no problem with having ongoing business interests in foreign countries as president, and if it becomes an issue he will simply blame the media.

We have to see this as the culmination of what Trump went through and learned during the campaign, and I’d like to point to one particular thing he said almost a year ago. In January, Trump : “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters, okay?”

This turned out to be an accurate assessment of the loyalty he inspired in his supporters. His white nationalist message was so powerful for them that no matter what he did or said, up to and including bragging about sexually assaulting women, they would stick with him and wave away his sins. It also revealed how Trump himself was coming to see his campaign, even at that early stage.

At that point, the Iowa caucuses were still a week away. Not a single primary vote had been counted. And Trump stood up in front of an audience and TV cameras and said, in effect,  I can get away with anything . And he was right.

So let’s imagine a conversation today between Trump and one of his aides, who says, “Sir, you’re taking a lot of heat for the business stuff. We have to draw a bright line to assure people that you won’t be using the presidency to enrich yourself. This needs to be addressed.” How would Trump respond? I’m guessing he’d say something like this:

“I hear you. But you know what? I got the same advice advice — we need to address this, you’ve gone too far, blah blah blah — when I called Mexicans rapists and criminals. And when I said John McCain wasn’t a hero. And when I went after Megyn Kelly. And when I mocked a disabled reporter. And when I refused to release my tax returns like every other presidential candidate. And when I said we should ban Muslims. And when I got in a fight with a Gold Star family. And when I made fun of Ted Cruz’s wife and said his father may have killed JFK. And when I talked about the size of my penis in a debate. And when I encouraged my fans to knock the hell out of protesters. And when I went after Judge Curiel’s Mexican heritage. And when I invited Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails. And when I said Barack Obama founded ISIS. And when I said a former Miss Universe was fat. And when I said that Clinton started the birther controversy but I finished it. And when everyone found out I didn’t pay federal taxes. And when everyone found out my foundation (which has now  admitted  to the IRS that it violated the law on ‘self-dealing’) is basically a scam. And when everyone heard me brag about groping women, and then I threatened to sue the women who said I groped them. And when I said I wouldn’t accept the results of the election unless I won.

“And guess what: I got away with  all of it . I got the Republican nomination, and then I won the presidency despite the fact that my opponent got a couple of million more votes. I won. And now you’re telling me that I’m going to be in big trouble if I take the opportunities I’m presented with to make my beautiful, successful company even more beautiful and successful? Don’t make me laugh. Who’s going to stop me?”

Let’s not forget that even if tomorrow Trump decided to really not be involved in his businesses, there would  still  be copious opportunities for foreign interests and foreign governments to line his pockets, since they’ll just be able to do it by working with his children. And if you’re hoping that the web of his connections and arrangements at home and abroad will become clear once his IRS audit ends and he finally releases his tax returns as he promised, don’t get your hopes up. He’ll find another excuse for keeping them secret. We’re never going to see them.

Trump surely believes that he’ll get away with that, too. Everything that has happened since he first rode down that escalator last June has served to convince him that he can do whatever he wants, and when everyone around him is telling him he can’t, that’s just proof that he’s right and they’re wrong.

The question Trump asks at the end of my imagined conversation is one without a clear answer at this point. Republicans in Congress  sure aren’t going to be investigating his conflicts of interest . Democrats have no institutional power to do so. The performance of the most of the news media (with some important exceptions) when it comes to holding Trump accountable has been less than encouraging.

So who’s going to stop him?

Trump Inadvertently Admits Conflict Of Interest

Donald Trump just wrapped up a meeting with editors and reporters of the New York Times. Reporter Maggie Haberman relays that this happened:

In saying this, Trump may have flatly and openly admitted to a conflict of interest, according to Noah Bookbinder, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

Trump’s admission that he “might have brought up” wind farms in his meeting with Nigel Farage is a reference to  today’s New York Times story reporting this :

When President-elect  Donald J. Trump   met with the British politician Nigel Farage  in recent days, he encouraged Mr. Farage and his entourage to oppose the kind of offshore  wind farms  that Mr. Trump believes will mar the pristine view from one of his two Scottish golf courses, according to one person present.

The meeting, held shortly after the presidential election, raises new questions about Mr. Trump’s willingness to use the power of the presidency to advance his business interests. Mr. Trump has long opposed a wind farm planned near his course in Aberdeenshire, and he previously fought unsuccessfully all the way to Britain’s highest court to block it….

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/11/22/trump-may-have-just-flatly-and-openly-admitted-to-a-conflict-of-interest/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_term=.12941f351b9f

A Mac, I don't blame you.  I'm feeling the same way...

It takes two sides to argue and also to have a civil dialogue.  In the election, one side won and the other lost.  Obviously the winners will be happy and the losers not so much.  The last two presidential elections went the other way. Conservatives didn't threaten to leave or to control the content of the winners seeds and posts.  Why do progressives try to do that now?  The whole thing about progressives trying to control the content and expression of their political opposition here or else they are going to leave is getting so old.  

Since the election you have posted DOZENS of seeds which attack Clinton, the "elites", Democrats, liberals, snowflakes, etc.  No one in their right mind would have a "civil" dialogue with you, given what you seed. 

But I wouldn't have a civil dialogue with you for another reason - Donald Trump is not qualified to be president of the United States

here is one small example from today

Campaign: constantly repeated claim that torture works. Today: says Gen. Mattis talked him out of it with one simple anecdote.

• RETWEETS 92

Now, because he talked to a general that he likes, he is sure that waterboarding will not be useful.

Who was he talking to about it for the past year and a half? The doorman at his apartment building? 

Trump vowed all during the campaign that he would bring back waterboarding, now this disappears in a whim. 

He is incompetent, and often at the mercy of the last person that talks to him, OR more likely, he a pathological lying con man who has no sincerity toward the job or the American people.

John, while I voted a straight GOP ticket down ballot, I didn't vote for Trump or Clinton.  I wrote in Evan Mc Mullin.  

John I don't know of any other Republican candidate who has done what Trump has done.  He played right out of the Democrat playbook for the first time ever for a Republican candidate for President and beat them at it.

Now if he continues using it for his Presidency, he won't do a damn thing he said he was going to do.

I am amazed at how many people want to throw out the electoral system and with it the constitution because of one election.   How short sighted can you get?   That is worse than cheering BO for using newfound powers that Trump now has.  (and I warned about it then)   I can't wait to see how the cheerleaders react when Trump uses them!/s   The Democrats have only themselves to blame for that.   Now you are considering tearing apart the only thing left that stops a dictatorship!  Madness!!!

I am amazed at how many people want to throw out the electoral system and with it the constitution because of one election.   How short sighted can you get?......   Now you are considering tearing apart the only thing left that stops a dictatorship!   Madness!!!

Now before I start, I support the electoral college, but oppose gerrymandering, which consistently, no one here has addressed, interestingly. That being said... the electoral college doesn't stop us from a dictatorship. Unless you are feeling that Republicans couldn't win a popular vote. 

May I present to you that every Republican prez we have had in the last 60 years, including George W. Bush, has won the popular vote, with the exception of this election. And I can tell you as a New Yorker, Trump isn't a true Republican, so questionable if he qualifies for this. So calm yourselves down. 

en.wikipedia

Perrie,

In order to get rid of the electoral system you would have to re-write much of the constitution and the constitution is what stops a dictatorship in this country.   The fact that getting rid of the electoral system would require practically re-writing much of the constitution does not seem to bother liberals that think it needs to be re-written to allow their agenda anyhow.   Funny that these are the same short sighted folks for the most part that applauded BO obtaining new powers by abusing the system that Trump will now wield.   I told them all when they were applauding it this day would come, and when I posted and article on it they all avoided it like the plague....go figure.

The constitution has worked for over 100 years don't mess with it.

How can anyone look at this map and not say the electoral college did exactly what is was designed to.  It stopped a concentration on individuals from deciding the fate of the entire country.  It is clear that the COUNTRY overwhelmingly wanted Trump.   Like I said before, I am just waiting for Trump to do what they applauded of BO.   Any doubt at all in your mind about how they will react?

96,

You must have missed my opening sentence to my post. I clearly state that I am NOT for getting rid of the electoral system, but I am gerrymandering, and again, you didn't address that at all.  And there is a reason that no one is addressing it. Gerrymandering produces electoral districts that favor one party or another. That is wrong! 

Look at these maps from the 2014 elections. I mean come on. This isn't fair and it has nada to do with the electoral college. It has nothing to do with the constitution. It has to do with the GOP wanting to keep more seats in districts that they would lose, if the map had anything to do with geographic location.  

This map is designed to keep control of the house and the senate and now there is a push to make gerrymandering acceptable for the Presidential election and it is unfair and wrong! 

How can anyone look at this map and not say the electoral college did exactly what is was designed to.  It stopped a concentration on individuals from deciding the fate of the entire country.  It is clear that the COUNTRY overwhelmingly wanted Trump.

The electoral college did stop concentrations of individuals from deciding the fate of the country, but the country didn't overwhelmingly want Trump, since the popular vote was for Hillary. DO NOT CONFUSE THOSE TWO CONCEPTS. That is why you are having dems say they want to get rid of the electoral college? Because if it was by popular vote, Hillary would have won. That being said, this is my point. That your earlier statement:

I am amazed at how many people want to throw out the electoral system and with it the constitution because of one election.   How short sighted can you get?......   Now you are considering tearing apart the only thing left that stops a dictatorship!   Madness!!!

is false. And I pointed out that with the electoral college, in the past, we have had republican presidents that were also voted in by popular vote. That cries of dictatorship are over exaggerations at best. What is truly at issue, is if you go by self identifying party voters, there are more dems than republicans and that freaks out the republicans. Thank goodness for us independents. At least we balance out the vote for both parties. 

Just think, the people of Michigan would not have had a voice in this election if the President were to be elected by Popular Votes.  That's not even a small state.  The Electoral College isn't perfect, but it is a lot closer to being fair to all the people scattered throughout this nation than anything else we've come up with.

Six,

There are recounts taking place currently; what if those recounts result in flipping a state or two and give Clinton the 270 electoral votes in addition to the popular vote.

It's a hypothetical now, but should it become the reality, what would you say?

Six,

There are recounts taking place currently; what if those recounts result in flipping a state or two and give Clinton the 270 electoral votes in addition to the popular vote.

I would accept it as I know there would be nothing I could do to change it.  That doesn't mean I would like it, but I truly believe in doing my best to live in harmony with whatever life throws my way to best of my ability.

Congrats to President Clinton.  And a promise to be a part of the loyal opposition for the next four years.  

You are a mean, tired, and bitter old man.  I was answering your question:  "There are recounts taking place currently; what if those recounts result in flipping a state or two and give Clinton the 270 electoral votes in addition to the popular vote.

It's a hypothetical now, but should it become the reality, what would you say?" and the above is your angry response?  Perhaps it is you that is what's the matter with this forum? 

You are a mean, tired, and bitter old man.  I was answering your question:  " There are recounts taking place currently; what if those recounts result in flipping a state or two and give Clinton the 270 electoral votes in addition to the popular vote.

It's a hypothetical now, but should it become the reality, what would you say?" and the above is your angry response?  Perhaps it is you that is what's the matter wit h this forum? 

Who you callin' "old"?

However, I see your point … you did in fact answer my question as it was asked AND THEREFORE, I OWE YOU AN APOLOGY.

I apologize; I was wrong to comment as I did and I will have it deleted.

It is deleted but my apology to you will remain.

Well, I for one see it a bit differently Perrie.

The electoral college worked EXACTLY the way the founders intended it to.

Advocating for the electoral college to be forced to vote along with the national popular vote destroys the intent to make elections fair. Yes there are more democrat voters concentrated in very small areas of the nation. and the Founders addressed the vary valid concerns of the other less populated states at the convention when this issue was specifically raised back then. Without this compromise there would not be a United States of America, not back in 1787 and not today soon after ditching or perverting the process.

WE have exactly the same situation today, large concentrations of voters controlling small sections of the nation and they make no bones about wanting to control the whole nation with those small blocks of area.

The founders created this compromise to get around the very serious issue.

The ten other less populated states did not want to be subject to edicts passed by the most powerful three with the force of law.

You advocating dominance of the minority.

This is either a nation claiming a lot of citizens, or a lot of people claiming to be a nation.

I can live in the former, I cannot live in nor tolerate the latter.

I am currently in a free land, do what you want we will no longer have a free land.

And I will openly revolt and openly advocate for armed revolt. Just like the founders did.

The basis for revolt is identical, from then to now if what you say you want is put into effect.

To me, this is an issue that reveals peoples political leanings and how little they know of the basis for the creation of this country and decisions and solutions they chose.

If we have to relearn the lessons of the revolution, let it start NOW.

I am dead set against any liberal operation to subvert the fair and open elections we have grown accustomed to in this nation.

Maybe it IS time to stand up and be counted.

The GOP huh?

What do you expect from a 2014 waPO article on Gerrymandering . (clearly critical of the republicans maintaining their control of the house after taking control of the senate and lamenting that the republicans were going to have control of most redistricting) Why didn't they post which districts those were? They do make a claim that it is part of the basis for them holding the House...

There is another Image from the same article of the entire nation showing the areas with the most gerrymandered districts....

This one.

As you can clearly see darker red, more gerrymandering. quite a bit of it coming from heavy democrat areas also like the entire left coast, huge chunks of Eastern Pennsylvania, Southern Florida, Northern Illinois and other areas known as heavy democrat areas.

Yes both parties do it. it was named for the politician to both invented the practice and helped put it into effect nationally.

Elbridge Gerry ,

Elected to the Second Continental Congress he signed the Declaration of Independence, and The Articles of Confederation.

A member of the Constitutional Convention, He refused to sign the constitution cause it didn't contain a bill of rights.

He is a founding father.

It may be a dirty practice, but it is a legal one.

And was created and abetted by the founders.

You may not like it, but it is the way the political parties make it work.

''It may be a dirty practice, but it is a legal one.''

Actually in some cases it isn't legal and the federal judges decided in a recent case in WI. The gerrymandering by the republicans was found to be illegal.

nytimes

As a point of interest, the dark red to almost black on the map involves quite a few red states such as AZ, TX, LA, MS, AL, AR, KY, TN...Also much of the changes in California are in areas that are republican controlled.

I can't view the complete map since some of the east coast isn't visible.

BTW, I'm not in favor of gerrymandering by either side.

right click and view image and you can see the whole image, I didn't scale it down enough. the only part cut off is the eastern tip of Maine, which is grey...

And yes Gerrymandering is evil, that I agree with whole heartedly. in some cases a balanced district creation process would create more democrat votes and in others it would create more republican ones.

Personally I would say a law requiring political demographics be taken into account along with census population when redistricting so all districts are half and half politically. That would be politically fair.

Make the politicians really work for your vote and stop disenfranchising each other in those specific districts.

Let everyone's vote count.

Add to the mix, each district must vote for the candidate that won the district, and we have eliminated all the political favoritism issues.

And I doubt that a democrat would win a presidential election ever again.

But take a look at these maps beside either other or one above the other.

Look where the worst Gerrymandering is and look at where each candidate received the most votes, not that it matters in a Presidential election.

Also much of the changes in California are in areas that are republican controlled.

That may be true, but according to the two maps it looks like the darkest areas in California voted Democrat.

And the bottom of Texas looks like they voted Democrat and have a tremendous amount of Gerrymandering going on as well as Washington state.

Perrie,

Gerrymandering is something both parties do.   I don't agree with gerrymandering but overall the electoral college is the best way to go and it did it's job this election.  Imagine with the number of proven ballots cast by deceased and illegals caught this election how many problems a popular vote election would have caused.

96,

We have people far more worried about debating the electoral college than the fact that we have a complete know nothing going into the white house. Look at the transcript of the New York Times interview with Trump and the articles and columns that people who were in the room have written about it this morning. The consensus is that trump is an empty suit with unformed or non existent ideas about important issues. The thing he is most sure about is that he has a right to run his business empire from the oval office if he wants to. 

To heck with all this talk of the electoral college as if it were the most important thing going on. Keeping the heat on the looming embarrassment and disaster known as the Trump administration is what is needed now. 

So far the only embarrassment is the liberals reaction to the election. 

Draining The Swamp ?

Trump's new Sec of Education, Betsy deVos, admits that her billionaire family buys influence

 

twitter

The response to the results of the election, one part rage one part burying their head in the sand is truly a sad spectacle to behold.  

Just keep heaping the garbage onto your President-elect - the whole world is watching what American democracy is all about.

Buzz, Donald Trump is not qualified to be president of the United States, a fact that doesnt seem to have made it's way over to China. He will be opposed every single day he is in office. 

Winning the election did not make him qualified. This appears to be where you may be getting stuck. 

I have NEVER said he WAS qualified, so you can stop pasting that on me. Although the only thing I criticized was his being more unfairly treated and reported than Hillary, you have constantly criticized me for supporting him. In my opinion, the constant criticism is probably one of the reasons he won - which proves that a lot of voters were being more fair than was expected. I never seriously supported any candidate (although I preferred Johnson until he proved to the world what an idiot he was) - I would have supported Clint Eastwood had he run and if I had a vote, but then I've always been fond of classic movies and classic actors.

Whenever I would drive somewhere with my young kids in the back seat, I would hear repeatedly "Are we there yet, daddy?"  I'm beginning to get the same feeling about the ruminating after this election. Don't ignore the line from Leonard Cohen's poem/song Anthem: "There's a crack, a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."  In other words, John, there could be light at the end of the tunnel so it's not wise to blow up the tunnel before you get there.

"Fair" has nothing to do with it. No one should have been fair to Donald Trump in his guise as a presidential candidate. The fact that the media insisted on being "fair" to the worst candidate in American history is one of the main reasons we are in the fix we are now in. 

"Fair" has nothing to do with it. No one should have been fair to Donald Trump in his guise as a presidential candidate. The fact that the media insisted on being "fair" to the worst candidate in American history is one of the main reasons we are in the fix we are now in.

I interpret Buzz's use of the word "fair" to mean impartial. The mainstream media was clearly putting its thumb on the scale in favor of Hillary. Wikileaks exposed collusion between Hillary's campaign and the media to get rid of Bernie and the media's bias against Trump was obvious. For instance, I don't recall seeing a single segment on CNN covering Hillary's shady past dating back to watergate but Trump's alleged 30 years of p***y grabbing was covered day and night for weeks. Trump used the media's bias to whip up public sentiment against them. The more they hit him, the stronger he became . . . like a science fiction monster. 

That's exactly what I meant, 1ofmany. I should have used a thesaurus to find a more accurate word than "fair".  During my lifetime the media has become more and more biased to the extent that it is impossible to get an accurate picture of anything any more.

You guys are hopeless. Fricking hopeless, and the forum is losing contributors for it. 

Buzz and 1 of many , why should anyone be fair to this?

" So let’s imagine a conversation today between Trump and one of his aides, who says, “Sir, you’re taking a lot of heat for the business stuff. We have to draw a bright line to assure people that you won’t be using the presidency to enrich yourself. This needs to be addressed.” How would Trump respond? I’m guessing he’d say something like this:

“I hear you. But you know what? I got the same advice advice — we need to address this, you’ve gone too far, blah blah blah — when I called Mexicans rapists and criminals. And when I said John McCain wasn’t a hero. And when I went after Megyn Kelly. And when I mocked a disabled reporter. And when I refused to release my tax returns like every other presidential candidate. And when I said we should ban Muslims. And when I got in a fight with a Gold Star family. And when I made fun of Ted Cruz’s wife and said his father may have killed JFK. And when I talked about the size of my penis in a debate. And when I encouraged my fans to knock the hell out of protesters. And when I went after Judge Curiel’s Mexican heritage. And when I invited Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails. And when I said Barack Obama founded ISIS. And when I said a former Miss Universe was fat. And when I said that Clinton started the birther controversy but I finished it. And when everyone found out I didn’t pay federal taxes. And when everyone found out my foundation (which has now  admitted  to the IRS that it violated the law on ‘self-dealing’) is basically a scam. And when everyone heard me brag about groping women, and then I threatened to sue the women who said I groped them. And when I said I wouldn’t accept the results of the election unless I won.

“And guess what: I got away with  all of it . I got the Republican nomination, and then I won the presidency despite the fact that my opponent got a couple of million more votes. I won. And now you’re telling me that I’m going to be in big trouble if I take the opportunities I’m presented with to make my beautiful, successful company even more beautiful and successful? Don’t make me laugh. Who’s going to stop me?”"

 

By  Paul Waldman    Washington Post  November 22 at 1:17 PM

“I’m guessing he’d say something like this:”

  I'm not the least bit interested in reading some biased person's conjecture.

Those are all facts related to Donald Trump. You are clueless about all this Buzz and your assessment is about as persuasive as if we randomly picked someone out of a crowd. 

Those are all facts related to Donald Trump. You are clueless about all this Buzz and your assessment is about as persuasive as if we randomly picked someone out of a crowd. 

. . . a crowd at oxford. 

Buzz and 1 of many , why should anyone be fair to this?

All we said is that the media should be impartial. Why? So I can trust what they say. 

You guys are hopeless. Fricking hopeless, and the forum is losing contributors for it. 

Geez you were walking around dressed as the grim reaper doing a post mortem on the country just because Hillary lost the election and you think that's just fine. Buzz said that the media covered Trump unfairly and I agreed so we damaged the site. Rest you need. 

You are commenting in an article where the author said he is withdrawing because of the reaction to this election on NT. Or are you lost? 

You are commenting in an article where the author said he is withdrawing because of the reaction to this election on NT. Or are you lost?

He didn't say he was withdrawing.  Man.... get a hold.  AMac said he was staying away from the Front Page and for how long he didn't know.  I don't blame him if it bothers him to read and comment on articles.  AMac can get really involved in something, like take a look at all the edited photos he's put up.  Those things don't just happen, you have to really put yourself into them and that is what AMac does when he gets involved in the arguments on the Front Page. 

And he doesn't like Trump, probably absolutely hates him and it really really bothers him, so he's getting the sh*t out of Dodge at least for awhile and even he doesn't know how long, but he didn't say he was withdrawing from The Newstalkers.

You make me nervous.  I feel your pain so to speak.  I feel your anxiety and stress. 

Maybe you and I can put one political article up and then something else other than political.  You know too much of a bad things isn't good for you.  If you don't want to do it, maybe I will.  Get one or two comments, but at least I won't be as inclined to get too involved in the politics at a time like this.

Anyway I have to hit the sack.

I really like this.

Go dream up some more conspiracies to contaminate this site with. 

"You are commenting in an article where the author said he is withdrawing because of the reaction to this election on NT. Or are you lost? "

If he was a Republican he would have wrote the article 8 years ago.  It looks to me like you people need to grow up.  Do you remember any "safe spaces' for people that were upset about BO getting elected?   I am great with it though.  Keep this whiny baby shit up and soon no one will want to call themselves a Democrat.  How embarrassing that must be to admit with what is going on today.   No wonder where millennial's got their ideology and mindset from any more is there?

I believe A Mac said he was giving the front page a rest, not the entire site.  In fact, I believe he said he'll be over in the Arts & Photography section.  This Chicken Little routine is getting a little old for everyone, John.

Next time, filed a palatable candidate.  It's just as much your fault as anyone else's the Mr. Trump won the election.

John.... I can count the fingers on my two hands the people who post to the front page and they are the same people who have been posting long before the campaign even started.  Occasionally one or two other than the regulars will comment here and there, but basically the forum has the same main people posting every day as it has for ages.

I keep hearing this accusation about Republicans whining after you put 6 or 7 articles whining about Trump.  That's alright, I don't care, but you need to take a look at yourself and see if maybe you aren't doing a little whining yourself.

The only time the people on the left get upset is when they are not getting their way.  It never fails.  The people on the left, and you know who they are, can put all kinds of crap on the Front Page and none of you ever say a word about it, but let someone on the right put some crap up and the left comes out of the woodwork complaining about how bad the Front Page is. 

I have something for ya!

Trump will be the president, that is why he is news (for the worse unfortunately).

If Trump had lost the election, you wouldnt see me attacking him any more on the front page. I wish I never had to see that idiots face or hear his voice again, but no such luck. 

You right wingers didnt know how to handle your narrow victory and keep piling on Clinton and some mythical "elites" as if anyone here gives a fuck about that. I don't think we have any elites here. 

Defend the ahole we have in the presidency -(elect) now, if you can. That is what the game is now. 

You right wingers

I'm not a right winger.  Remember that test Jefferson put up here a few months ago?  I took it 3 times trying to get to be a right winger and I still was just a tad to the left.

John, like most of the Dems in America, believes that anyone to the right of him is a right-winger. Just another way of underestimating and ignoring those people that should not be underestimated and ignored.

Jonathan, the same can be said about the right. To them, I am a liberal. I am not a liberal. I have some liberal stances, but I also have some conservative ones to. But anything to the left of right is a liberal. 

Right.    Because you can't have content control and can't dictate what your political opposition believes and expresses people are leaving the site.    Conservatives didn't leave when liberals won the last two presidential elections no matter what the lefties here or on NV said or did.  Threatening that the snowflakes will leave if we can't be compelled to celebrate in silence and repress the expression of our equally legitimate view point is no way to have a discussion of issues. 

XX several of our more conservative members left, for a while, when they felt the FP to be too liberal.  It is an individual choice.  Not trying to be mean to you, but it's true.

Hope you have a great day!

Well I didn't.  I don't care how many liberals, moderates, conservatives seed stuff to the front page.  I don't care how many or how partisan their articles are.  I think that real clear politics daily articles provide a good variety of topics and viewpoints.  There is plenty to comment on in their articles.  I often seed articles from there.  Some return you to the original source to read and copy and some run under the real clear politics heading.  I don't care how badly our resident liberals bash republicans, conservatives, Christians, or whatever I happen to support.  I may just skip on by it or I might read and respond.  My choice.  I will not complain that they seeded the article or complain that it's on the front page.  Live and let live.  I know I won't change the mind of a liberal member seeding an article I disagree with, but I might have a chance with neutral nonmember readers/observers.  

Conservatives didn't leave when liberals won the last two presidential elections no matter what the lefties here or on NV said or did.  Threatening that the snowflakes will leave if we can't be compelled to celebrate in silence and repress the expression of our equally legitimate view point is no way to have a discussion of issues. 

No; instead the stuck around, questioned Obama's citizenship, repudiated his every word and initiative, posted every smear …over and over and over …

And whose the snowflake now? Or are only conservatives allowed to complain?

No, you didn't leave, you made things unpleasant enough so that others left or limited their exposure to the ugliness and misinformation.

Reality check.

John,

You are the one that is fricking hopeless.  You think rules should apply to others and not you and vise versa as long as you get your endgame.  I can't wait to hear you piss an whine when Trump uses the newfound powers that your savior  has given him.  I told you then you were being short sighted and ignorant and now you will have to live with the consequences of your own shortsightedness and ignorance.   This is the time to cut your losses instead of doubling down.

Let's have some fun !

Really John? The forum is losing contributors because we have a diversity of viewpoints and opinions?  We're losing participants because there are weak minded people out there who won't join because they might have to deal with viewpoints they don't like or agree with?  That's just silly.  Why would you want this place to be an echo chamber where only left of center viewpoints are seen and read and where only those who agree with you about Trump qualifications should post anything?  Those who can't deal with that there are all sort of view points and that they are all welcome and that some might have voted for Hillary, some for Trump, and some for someone else, and that some who didn't vote for Trump still saw Hillary as the greater of the two evils might as we not even join might find a number of solid red or solid blue sites more to their liking.  What's really sad is long term members who avoid discussion when their side loses an election and can't force the other side into silence.  

Nice to see you admit advocating media bias against your opponents.   Can't wait until it happens to your next savior.

 I would have supported Clint Eastwood had he run.

Humphey Bogart would be my first choice! 

You want a President who's already dead, Krishna? If we want to elect dead politicians how about an honest one like Jimmy Stewart - if he's anything like the Mr. Smith who went to Washington, or Atticus Finch?

an honest one like Jimmy Stewart?

Or-- Jon Stewart!

Jimmy Stewart

Now I could vote for him or Gregory Peck and he was a Democrat.

 I would have supported Clint Eastwood had he run.

Humphey Bogart would be my first choice! 

Still in denial.  Keep it up until the next election.  You obviously need the lesson at least one more time..

He will be opposed every single day he is in office.

Nice to see you displaying your hypocrisy again.  

Just keep heaping the garbage onto your President-elect

He's not mine...

Randy,

Even guys who hated Obama, recognized him as their president. You can hate Trump, but he is your president. Protest him, if you must, fight for what you believe in, but the office is his for the next 4 years, like it or not. 

Perrie, Donald Trump is not qualified to be president of the United States and I expect that he will be opposed every day that he is in office. This was not a "normal" election and we don't have to pretend it was. 

John,

It doesn't matter what you think of Trump.. or the elections. As far as the Constitution says, he was an eligible candidate, and that is all that matters. His qualifications is up for debate, and that is what this forum is for. 

John, It doesn't matter what you think of Trump.. or the elections.

Well, excuuuuseeeeeee me ! lol. 

I guess you put me in my place. 

Well John, somebody's got to do it!  

 I expect that he will be opposed every day that he is in office.

You mean the way Obama was?

There you go Krish.

This was not a "normal" election and we don't have to pretend it was. 

Unless of course Hillary won right John?

Randy,

Even guys who hated Obama, recognized him as their president. You can hate Trump, but he is your president. Protest him, if you must, fight for what you believe in, but the office is his for the next 4 years, like it or not. 

Perrie,

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievance"

Emphasis mine. Under my right to the freedom of speech I have the right to reject him as my President and say so. If you or others like it or not. He is not my President. I have the right to reject a racist, fascist as the leader of this great nation. In fact I have a duty as a patriotic American to reject him.

Randy.... I don't think anyone is stopping you from doing that.  I don't blame you..... If you don't like him, hate him or whatever and you don't want to accept him as your President, then by all means be my guest.  I can understand those feelings.

Thank you.

Randy, I hope your new home in Mexico has internet service. We wouldn't want to lose you. You DID say you would move there if Trump won, didn't you. You said you were looking for a place there just in case.

Yes he did Buzz I too remember that. 

We saw some nice condos Buzz, but nothing we really liked or made financial sense that much in Puerto Vallarta, which is really where we want to move. Also I'm pushing more for a single family home rather then a condo. In January we're going on a 15 day cruise to Hawaii so I can check off seeing the USS Arizona from my bucket list and it makes a stop in Ensenada on the West side of Baja, South of California that has a large community of retired Americans. That might be a better option. We need to find something that makes financial sense and that we really like.

Besides, Trump didn't win. Hillary did by almost 2 million votes and counting. So, since he is not my President (and my wife feels the same way. He's not hers either.) we'll move or not if we find something we like and works for us money wise.

Well if you get to Zihuatanejo, say hello to Andy and Red for me, okay?

LOL! Ok, I will.

He won't have to move.  He's too busy trying to make California its own country.  

Mac,

I have known you for almost 9 years now, and I have never known you to be a quitter. Reading this.. I am really disappointed. There is never an issue or a discussion that can't be had. It's when we stop talking, that things go to pot. Do you know how many movies have been made about things that have gone unsaid? I mean lots (I don't have an actual number, you realize). But quit? Mac... that ain't you. Not the Mac I know. 

"This will be my only FP comment in a political forum until I can't say when."

It's significant, Perrie, that A.Mac used the word "until", which means he did not quit permanently. He is doing what a lot of us have already done and may do again.

I've seen him make the claim he was quitting the FP at least four of five times. The last time was when NWM made his dramatic exit. 

This will be my only FP comment in a political forum until I can't say when.

I understand and don't blame you one bit.

Or we can just do this....

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,

Courage to change the things I can,

And wisdom to know the difference.

And gripe all you want to.  Write your Congressman.  Write an article.  Do what makes you feel better, that's the important thing to remember.

Well, that is a tad condescending, Six. (referring to the meme)

I'm behind those doors with all of you!!!

Well, if this is the way it's going to be around here, maybe I should bow out for another month or two.....

Doesn't look like much has changed.....

Think I'll join you...

XX, I have done my best to try to get along with you, but that little emoji is just mean...  Please don't do that again-- I'm asking you, as a friend.

Do you really want an echo chamber here on the site?  Or do you want to not have us around to kick when it pleases you?  You can't make the site untenable for about 1/2 it's members, just because you disagree with them politically.

You and I disagree on many things and yet, there are things we agree on-- even if it is that we both like dogs.  Lowering the level of snark is a big plus to all of us being able to 'live in the same neighborhood'.  I'm just asking, with respect, and, yes, love.

I've always opposed turning this site into an echo chamber for either the left or the right.  We're all adults and can deal with viewpoints opposite our own and opinion posts that oppose everything we stand for and do it in a civilized way.  No one here asked for the grim reaper to show up and carry on and then promote protests in our city streets yet we dealt with it and didn't personally attack that person or threaten to leave the site when he dished out all that.  Yet when we counter it with the opposite point of view, many here who generally agree with the reaper would rather leave than be exposed to views from the other side.  There is nothing that JWC or John could seed here or say in a post that would make me want to throw up my hands and run away.  

There is nothing that JWC or John could seed here or say in a post that would make me want to throw up my hands and run away.  

Nobody should run away. Stand your ground and express yourself, whatever your view.

Exactly the point I was making.  

Doesn't look like much has changed.....

NWM it isn't going to change.  It would have been the same if people were whining about Hillary winning.  That's the reason each of us should accept what we can't change and start from there. 

The first thing you have to do is have a starting point of truth.  The truth is Trump will become President in January whether anyone likes it or not.  He will probably use some of the privileges granted to him by Obama's administration whether we like it or not.  After all elections have consequences and the losers can come along, but they have to ride in the back of the bus.  Don't act stupidly like the cops did.

Doesn't look like much has changed.....

Nowhere-man is right. I took a few months off and came back and nothing had changed. No matter the subject on the FP you can almost absolutely guess who is going to say what word for word. Who is going to get angry. Who is going to say something ideological. Who is going to joke about it. Who is going to say something stupid and so on. It doesn't matter if it's about a Republican or a Democrat or an Independent or anyone else, because the FP is almost always filled with political articles and comments that drive everything else away. It's no longer a discussion site when everyone is so predictable. It's just the same record being played over and over again. It's not the constant arguing that is the FP's problem. The problem is that the FP has become boring.

All this BS Nazi Trump is a racist crap should soon be coming to an end. It has been reported Trump has offered Carson a black man a cabinet position and he's narrowed his choice for head of the Treasury to two people and they are both Jews. 

You know how you can test the Electoral College?  First we have to agree we want everyone across this great country to have a voice in the election of our President. 

In doing this we have to test the extreme situations that could exist, like testing a boiler in its present design to see how much pressure it could withstand before it blew up or how fast a particular car can hit a wall before it kills the driver of that car.  There are probably better examples, but I'll use these for this example.

California keeps allowing people to enter the state and somehow figures a way for everyone to vote whether they are legal or illegal.  In the extreme situation they add 10 or more million people to their voter roster who all will be voting Democrat.  We could use even higher figures by adding states like NY, TX, FL and any other state that is susceptible to having large amounts of Democrat voters for one reason or another.

Now keep in mind we are a fair and just country and we don't want to leave anyone out like the transgenders who want to use the little girls rooms, the point 3 percent of the population, so how will the people in the smaller states make out in this scenario with the Popular Vote?  How will they fair with the Electoral College?  Which one will they still have a voice and which one will their voice be taken away from them?

POINT OF ORDER

Look carefully at the comments herein; how many have addressed the very specific and significant points I have raised several times?

How many criticize me et al for not wanting to be involved in these so-called "discussions", and that, for the very reason, these "discussions" not only fail to actually discuss and debate specifics, but instead, become insult and snark-festivals and tangential bullshit criticizing the fact that a member would even dare to post one!

Look at the comments ... LOOK!

215 comments at the moment … not bad for someone who allegedly "quit" … but LOOK AT THE COMMENTS.

Can no one see what the FP has become? Look at the article and look at the comments … look at the specifics and try to find actual discussion related to them. 

If, in your personal or professional lives, you tried to engage someone in a conversation on a specific subject or issue, and, that someone berated you for even raising the issue, did so multiple times while evading the question ... how many such episodes of that kind from that person, would it take before you said "see ya' later"?

Beg the questions and insult the one asking them ... and those who do so repeatedly can't figure out exactly why they (et al) are annoying, if not infuriating, to be around?

And the very few herein who actually addressed any of the questions/issues I broached … GAVE MISINFORMATION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ISSUES … and did so in such a way as if they knew what they were stating … ALTHOUGH THEY DID NOT, AND WORSE … piled on to an already too-tall pile of divisive crap.

See you in the photography and creative art areas until such time as we can communicate ... we can disagree -- which makes things interesting, but if disagreement is fraught with "bad facts" (a euphemism), and, can't be done respectfully and specifically, those with common sense will eventually walk away and those who continue to metaphorically "piss on the floor" ... will eventually slosh around with the other sloshers.

I have posted many articles about the new administration's plans and policies since the election, and his conflicts of interest , and his new cabinet and advisors, (as has JWC Blue and Randy)  almost all of which has been ignored here.  The articles getting comments are all about the failure of the Democrats and how Clinton belongs in prison, and "snowflakes" and "riots". This is of course because it is very hard to defend Donald Trump on any objective basis. 

Whatever, I will do what I do regardless, but this forum is definitely off track. 

H e ll o …….  (pause)       h e ll o ……… h e ll o ………  Just as I suspected - I'm stuck in an echo chamber. 

When one opens up and article by throwing this pile of crap in peoples faces they are going to get crap thrown back in return. 

"I stay away from the FP primarily because the usuals, IMO, have at least one thing in common, that being … they voted for and/or supported in discussions, the CANDIDATE WHO HATES THE SAME PEOPLE THEY DO, that manifested in a number of ways, all of which necessitate their buying the bullshit up-and-down-the-line. To perpetuate and empower a hater-agenda, looking the other way from Trumpisms while summarily accepting all anti-Clinton rhetoric, was requisite"

All I'm getting from this is that some people can't accept a contrary view or they're hyper sensitive about how a contrary view is expressed or both. Nothing anybody says bothers me at all. I can do without the personal insults but, otherwise, I think we should all be free to say whatever we want in the manner we want to say it and people can respond (or not) as they choose. If you want to control a discussion, you're free to limit freedom with redbox rules but that kind of discussion usually doesn't interest me. If you think what's posted is boring and the responses predicable, then post something different. AMac does that with pictures and Kavika sometimes does it with interesting non-political articles. 

Happy Thanksgiving to all . . . I'm sure everyone has something for which they can be thankful.

Speaking of the usual stuff from the usual stuff-purveyors, earlier, one such stuffer posted seven or eight consecutive emoticons … no thoughts, no discussion, just little cartoons.

How 'bout so many consecutive examples of the usual from one of our members doing his usual?

USUAL -- "habitually or typically occurring or done"

Another adverse act, repeated in order to do nothing but annoy.

Multiple, same reasons to hang around? ... Sure, if you enjoy pointless, stupid and annoying.

What do you think someone coming to NT for the first time might expect of our site after the cartoon show?

Who would consider walking away from such rich dialogue?

Uhmmm, how 'bout current or prospective members who don't want to deal with vitriol, stupidity and frivolous drivel when the hoped for serious issues are posited for discussion?

I offer no apologies or equivocation regarding keeping my distance from mean-spirited, evasive, dumb actions that hurt the site.

I offer no apologies or equivocation regarding keeping my distance from mean-spirited, evasive, dumb actions that hurt the site.

When R U gonna thank me for saving you from becoming a victim of your own anger ?

When R U gonna thank me for saving you from becoming a victim of your own anger ?

Petey,

I have thought all along that your concern was other than real … a jab of sorts. But, you have expressed the same concern enough times so that I have to believe in its sincerity, and indeed, say "thank you".

No question, I have anger and have had it for a life time. Injustice, unfairness, hatred, abuse of power, willful ignorance … and more … they do occupy much of my time.

I do have better moments … peaceful, contemplative hours in forests, along streams … look at my photos and artwork … they are composed in such ways and with such subjects as to evoke a sense of some "order" among the oft-apparent chaos. I write about my anger and that gives me a release … but, it doesn't dissolve it.

I walk 2-4 miles every day, hit the gym three days every week (since 1999) and have a great family life.

Still, I know there are no guarantees … anger may victimize me in time.

So, you finally got through … I thank you for your expressed concern and your persistence in reminding me to chill.

You are owed a thanks … 

And again, I thank you.

I have thought all along that your concern was other than real … a jab of sorts.

I guess I will have to spell out "hypothetically" instead of using the shortened "if" ...

I'm tired, my term is soon over, and I won't be re-elected.

The campaign is done, time to go home.

Experience isn't listened to anymore, it's all about what singulars think everyone wants or should have and no one's opinion is as accurate or viable as their own.

It's a selfish world I'm retiring from. Also one in which the few think they know better than the many.

I'm ready for retirement. My brand of freedom is no longer wanted. The reasoning of the creators of this great nation is no longer held as valid. and should be throw out for expediency's sake or a pyrrhic victory.

Time to make my peace with this world.

Get my affairs in order and ready for the next.....

I'll just pop in from time to time to say hi to those who would like that. But I've retired from all else.

Let the fear mongers and selfish take over.

It's just not worth it anymore....

You dont have to quit and no one wants you to

Stop pontificating

If I say I know what plurality means , then I know what plurality means. Ok? 

Oh for Christ's sake NWM, stop with the melodrama...

Come on NWM....  I've learned a lot from you and other members.  I'm sure others have as well.  You have spent a lot of time studying and even though no one agrees with any of us all the time I really would hate to see you go.  BF said it best when he said he didn't have an emotional investment in internet politics.  I think we should all think about that.  Say what we want.  Put forth what we have with no expectations of anyone agreeing with us and accepting it when they don't.

The main thing to remember right now is you don't have to worry about the Electoral College because you know they'll never reach the threshold of number of states needed who will cut their own throats, at least during our lifetime.

Pontificating, Melodrama, right everyone is a cynic and an expert in what is going on with others.

It's really isn't about quitting a forum, It's about the big quit, the one we all face eventually.

My day is arriving, according to the medical people. Don't know the exact time and hour and I have competing estimates,  but I will be seeing my last Christmas this year, and might make it to my next birthday, but no guarantees.

So to be honest with ya I really don't care what they say, it can't possibly effect me anymore. It is really a decision if I wish to deal with the petty bullshite of a minor internet forum.

And some people who really haven't a clue, but insist they do.

My life is way to short at this point to worry about any of this anymore.

If some have gained some worth from my efforts great, I was glad to be of service. If others haven't, their problem not mine.

I don't expect anything from anyone.

To be honest I really do not know why I came back here, I told the people who's e-mail address I have kept .

I've terminated all my political contacts and am now officially completely out of politics.

Mostly off the various fora I used to participate in, I guess I'm looking for a final home. Something to keep the mind working while waiting for the inevitable.

Severed all my loosely held business contacts, made what financial arrangements I can and have planned for those when it's over. Making sure the wife is taken care of before I sign off.

Important things.

Things that matter.

Mostly accepting that this is it, what I have accomplished in life is enough, it has to be cause there ain't really that much more I can accomplish.

Besides, who will care?

The sum total of my life would be sad to measure on an internet forum. The highs and the lows, the greatest wins, the lousiest defeats. No one knows, most who were there are already gone,and I'm out of touch with the rest.

I love this country, gave a good chunk of my life to it.

To be honest what I'm doing here is deciding if I'm an idiot to think that people can still care about this country or just wish to tear it down.

But then I'm an old fool, bandying around with ghosts.

Anyway, same ol' same ol' I may stop back by and say hi to a few, I wish there was a way to do it privately other than e-mail.

There are some of you that I would really like to chat with one on one.....

But this forum doesn't lend itself to such....

Later my friends

NWM

NWM -- I'm deeply saddened to know that the world will lose your council and I understand that you must now make every moment count. I truly appreciate the time you took to share your thoughts with us and you will be greatly missed. Until we meet again. 

My dear friend-- I'm so sorry to learn of your illness!  Every day is a gracious gift, and I don't blame you one bit for not wanting to spend it here, with all the vitriol going on...

That being said, I love you very much, and you are in my prayers.  Please call me if you need anything!  I will do whatever I can from here to be of help.

LOVE to you, and know that I will miss you being here!

I'm sad that I didn't have more time to get to know you better and to give you more of a hard time.  I do like fighting with you hahahaha  {:0)  but I also loved hearing about your adventures.  You have my personal email so please reach out if you want to chat or fight.  With great affection and admiration - Patti

Sorry NWM to read about your situation.  I lost my dad a few years ago to a rare cancer and when he was told he had less than a year, he fought and made it 9 yrs beyond that point in 1998.  Keep up the good fight and do what makes you happy and have no regrets with the time you have left.  

I hope NWM beats the odds and proves the doctors wrong. My prayers are with him.

"Besides, who will care?"

I care. Nobody else took the trouble to post classic movies on Classic Cinema, providing a service that was not available elsewhere. And I, being a person who has been complimented many times on my photo essays, did and now state again that mine paled in comparison to yours. I may not have always agreed with your comments but most of the time I did, and I know that NT will miss a person of your common sense and ability to express his opinions intelligently.

In the meantime, try to think positively.  Perhaps by doing so, my sister-in-law outlived the doctors' opinions of her impending demise by many years.

Regardless of our politics, if/when any member of The NT needs a helping hand or a sympathetic ear (on the site or on the phone), I offer that here and now and make it a standing offer at that.

FOR THE RECORD …

Although there is a bit of persistence in posting THE USUAL discussion-killing stuff, DON'T LOOK NOW, BUT THIS HAS BECOME AN EXCELLENT, ACTUAL, GIVE-AND-TAKE, HIGH-LEVEL DEBATE!

Now, I have a plan.

I just thought of a good adaptation of a well-known adage that could be used by the Trump supporters, due to Trump's decision not to pursue criminal proceedings against Hillary.

"A change is as good as an arrest."