Oil Slide Worries Traders. *relax* This Should Get Sorted by Year End.

1 hour ago, Enthalpic said:

During the campaign he didn't say US would pay for it first. Nor did he say Mexico would "pay" for it by a trade renegotiation or anything else like that - he straight out was suggesting he could bully Mexico into paying for it.

Trump alternately brag's about how he has secured the border and then the next day or even just hours later talks about how unsecured the border is. 😂

 Dec 11: "Our southern border is now secure and will remain that way." " .....Ice, Border Patrol and our Military have done a FANTASTIC job of securing our Southern Border."

Well I guess you don't need the wall; but maybe perhaps pay those border patrol agents...

Did you attend Trump university? O wait... that wasn't a school at all, just another lie.

Trump IS bullying Mexico into paying for it.

Trump DID secure the border,  but he keeps getting over-ruled by corrupt liberal judges who ignore the Constitution.

Because of liberal corrupt judicial interference,  the border then became un-secured again.

But it will all be resolved by the Supreme Court by this summer.

The WALL is being built, and will be finished.

As for Trump University,  it was a legitimate school under the law,  and from what i have read,  the problem stemmed from "promises" allegedly made that supposedly guaranteed employment after graduation that did not occur,  and a Trump hating State Attorney used that as a means of suing the University.   The suit isn't against Trump.

So,  any other silly things you want to say ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

51 minutes ago, Illurion said:

 

As for Trump University,  it was a legitimate school under the law

 

😂

Clearly you have been brainwashed.  It certainly wasn't a university, it was a scam run in hotel ballrooms for pete's sake.

I love this forum - unending entertainment - you can't buy stuff this good. 

Edited by Enthalpic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

I like that a lot of the trump supporters here admit he lies - now it's just "good lies."  People from theoretically Christian flyover states are supporting a campaign based on hate and sin; but, you know, good sins.

Does "playing fair" mean remaining uneducated and nearly unemployable in a modern economy?  I paid for my own university with loans and working at a car wash on the the weekends - all while most of the others students got to rest and study - so don't say education is unavailable.  Just because you are the son of a coal miner doesn't mean you have to be one.

The sentiments expressed above, veiled insinuation that folks who live in the “flyover” states are simpleton, Bible-clingers, driven by lopsided, hypocritical religious dogma is offensive and patently false.  I’ll reiterate what I think @mthebold was pointing out,  that this dismissal of middle America,  many of whom are self described Christians, by the leftist elites, IS THE REASON their standard bearer Sillary Clinton today resides somewhere other than the Whitehouse.

Who among the leftist leadership  are truth-tellers void of sin, personally or as politicians?  And who among their supporters are holding them accountable by calling them out for their sin/lies?  Crickets.  Willful blindness leads to a belief that the left is any better than the right in this regard. These folks able to get enough traction to actually capture high political office, both sides, are sinful liars, duplicitous, and misguided at their very core.  Truth and accountability rarely have large followings.

True Christians do not condone any of Trump’s sin or lies.  They also don’t condone the sins of the heroes of the left, which are just as numerous.  No person that fit nicely into the ideal Christian Candidate mold prevailed from the primaries and received the republican nomination.   

What Christians did was hold their nose and support a candidate that turned their stomachs less than Clinton.  They voted for a candidate who promised to take actions that promote and protect interests closer to their hearts and beliefs.  It was voting for the least undesirable of candidates.  Thus far, he has kept his word to those who cast a ballot for him.  Do not make the mistake of equating Christians voting for Trump as affirmation of any of his sin/lies, real or perceived, or his cult of personality.  

This Christian calls him out when he’s wrong and affirms him when he’s right.  Trump was not the first choice, he was what we were left with in a two-party system.  Fortunately, we were’nt voting him into our pulpits and houses of worship.  Voting for him was voting Hillary, her ilk and goverment in general out of those places.  It was a repudiation of ever infringing government and eroding constitutional freedom,  failed leftist economic policies and so many more things. 

The only truth in the whole discussion is this, the banner-men of the left are no better than President Trump or the banner-men of the right and they certainly do not possess any moral high-ground.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, TXPower said:

The only truth in the whole discussion is this, the banner-men of the left are no better than President Trump or the banner-men of the right and they certainly do not possess any moral high-ground.

I've never said the left are necessarily morally better; but I also don't think I am "what is wrong with this world" either.  If the right didn't have so many science deniers they would be more credible.

This all started with many people claiming Trump doesn't lie, when we all know he does.

Jesus was/is a liberal if not a full-blown socialist. https://www.openbible.info/topics/socialism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Enthalpic said:

I've never said the left are necessarily morally better; but I also don't think I am "what is wrong with this world" either.  If the right didn't have so many science deniers they would be more credible.

This all started with many people claiming Trump doesn't lie, when we all know he does.

Jesus was/is a liberal if not a full-blown socialist. https://www.openbible.info/topics/socialism

Science deniers?  Please.  For thousands of years a scientists delivered babies and declared them to be male or female, in line with natural law.  Now, in an effort to further degrade absolute truth regressive leftists deny science and say sex, now commonly referred to as gender to blur the lines, say sex isn’t absolute and outside of the parts your born with.  How’s that for science denying.

People claim Obama and Clinton et al weren’t/aren’t liars but they are/were. What of it?  Where is the indignation of the left over their lies.  It’s the same on both sides.  The sooner we admit this the sooner we can find common ground.

No, Jesus was not a socialist.  He was radical in that he challenged the people and religious leaders of the day about their massive amount of religiosity while they had no real conviction coming from real relationship with the Father. Same as He does today.  Jesus was about the Kingdom of His Father.  None of what He did or said was focused on government.  Charity is from the heart and a natural outpouring of Christlike living and was never meant to be mandated by the government lest men become lazy, complacent and dependent.  None of which are biblical.  Churches and local communities took care of charity for millennia and that’s how it should be, not government wealth redistribution program after program in the name of charity and “leveling the playing field”.  That’s where the left fumbles.  Jesus told folks to give unto Caesar what was Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TXPower said:

Science deniers?  Please.  For thousands of years a scientists delivered babies and declared them to be male or female, in line with natural law.  Now, in an effort to further degrade absolute truth regressive leftists deny science and say sex, now commonly referred to as gender to blur the lines, say sex isn’t absolute and outside of the parts your born with.  How’s that for science denying.

 

 

You can have a phenotypically female habitus (vagina) with male (XY) genes and testosterone levels...science

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome

You can be a supermale (XYY, XYYY)... science.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XYY_syndrome

You can also have Klinefelter syndrome (XXY) - micro-penis and breasts... science

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klinefelter_syndrome

There are also women with naturally super-high levels of testosterone.

This is all outside of personal identifications of gender in "normal" XX or XY people. 

Read and explain to me how gender is binary again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill Clinton did a better job of owning up to his bad deeds (BJ, cigars etc.).

Trump tries to hide that he buys whores then pays them off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

Bill Clinton did a better job of owning up to his bad deeds (BJ, cigars etc.).

Trump tries to hide that he buys whores then pays them off.

Genetic mutations and insisting Clinton did a better job of owning up to his bad deeds are unconvincing. 

Yes, Trump’s past philandering offends my sensibilities.  He should have just admitted it.  Did Bill?  By the way, you’re assuming it’s Bill Clinton I’m referring to.  Lots of material there but, we are WAY off subject here in this thread about “Oil slide worries.....” for which I am equally guilty.  We should agree to disagree before we receive reproof from a moderator.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TXPower said:

Genetic mutations and insisting Clinton did a better job of owning up to his bad deeds are unconvincing. 

Yes, Trump’s past philandering offends my sensibilities.  He should have just admitted it.  Did Bill?  By the way, you’re assuming it’s Bill Clinton I’m referring to.  Lots of material there but, we are WAY off subject here in this thread about “Oil slide worries.....” for which I am equally guilty.  We should agree to disagree before we receive reproof from a moderator.

It's all-good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

 

You can have a phenotypically female habitus (vagina) with male (XY) genes and testosterone levels...science

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome

You can be a supermale (XYY, XYYY)... science.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XYY_syndrome

You can also have Klinefelter syndrome (XXY) - micro-penis and breasts... science

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klinefelter_syndrome

There are also women with naturally super-high levels of testosterone.

This is all outside of personal identifications of gender in "normal" XX or XY people. 

Read and explain to me how gender is binary again?

U.S. Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg - remember her history.  

RBG is currently very ill, and the far left is freaking out that RBG may pass away soon, allowing Trump to replace her with a conservative justice.

230-page book called Sex Bias in the U.S. Code, published in 1977 by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

(8 MB pdf, file size exceeds this forum's 2MB limit, so I can't attach it here, but you can download it yourself in the link above.)

Highlights:

● Called for the sex-integration of prisons and reformatories so that conditions of imprisonment, security and housing could be equal. She explained, “If the grand design of such institutions is to prepare inmates for return to the community as persons equipped to benefit from and contribute to civil society, then perpetuation of single-sex institutions should be rejected.” (Page 101)

● Called for the sex-integration of Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts because they “perpetuate stereotyped sex roles.” (Page 145)

● Insisted on sex-integrating “college fraternity and sorority chapters” and replacing them with “college social societies.” (Page 169)

● Cast constitutional doubt on the legality of “Mother’s Day and Father’s Day as separate holidays.” (Page 146)

● Called for reducing the age of consent for sexual acts to people who are “less than 12 years old.” (Page 102)

● Asserted that laws against “bigamists, persons cohabiting with more than one woman, and women cohabiting with a bigamist” are unconstitutional. (Page 195)

● Objected to laws against prostitution because “prostitution, as a consensual act between adults, is arguably within the zone of privacy protected by recent constitutional decisions.” (Page 97)

● Ginsburg wrote that the Mann Act (which punishes those who engage in interstate sex traffic of women and girls) is “offensive.” Such acts should be considered “within the zone of privacy.” (Page 98)

● Demanded that we “firmly reject draft or combat exemption for women,” stating “women must be subject to the draft if men are.” But, she added, “the need for affirmative action and for transition measures is particularly strong in the uniformed services.” (Page 218)

● An indefatigable censor, Ginsburg listed hundreds of “sexist” words that must be eliminated from all statutes. Among words she found offensive were: man, woman, manmade, mankind, husband, wife, mother, father, sister, brother, son, daughter, serviceman, longshoreman, postmaster, watchman, seamanship, and “to man” (a vessel). (Pages 15-16)

● Wanted he, she, him, her, his, and hers to be dropped down the memory hole. They must be replaced by he/she, her/him, and hers/his, and federal statutes must use the bad grammar of “plural constructions to avoid third person singular pronouns.” (Page 52-53)

● Condemned the Supreme Court’s ruling in Harris v. McRae and claimed that taxpayer-funded abortions should be a constitutional right.

More history:

http://humanevents.com/2005/08/23/senators-overlooked-radical-record-of-ruth-bader-ginsburg/

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

😂

Clearly you have been brainwashed.  It certainly wasn't a university, it was a scam run in hotel ballrooms for pete's sake.

I love this forum - unending entertainment - you can't buy stuff this good. 

Wrong.

It was a legally, licensed school,  with unconventional classrooms,  as the classes were held as meetings.

The fact that most classes were held in hotels was part of the mystique of the school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

U.S. Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg - remember her history.  

RBG is currently very ill, and the far left is freaking out that RBG may pass away soon, allowing Trump to replace her with a conservative justice.

230-page book called Sex Bias in the U.S. Code, published in 1977 by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

(8 MB pdf, file size exceeds this forum's 2MB limit, so I can't attach it here, but you can download it yourself in the link above.)

Highlights:

● Called for the sex-integration of prisons and reformatories so that conditions of imprisonment, security and housing could be equal. She explained, “If the grand design of such institutions is to prepare inmates for return to the community as persons equipped to benefit from and contribute to civil society, then perpetuation of single-sex institutions should be rejected.” (Page 101)

● Called for the sex-integration of Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts because they “perpetuate stereotyped sex roles.” (Page 145)

● Insisted on sex-integrating “college fraternity and sorority chapters” and replacing them with “college social societies.” (Page 169)

● Cast constitutional doubt on the legality of “Mother’s Day and Father’s Day as separate holidays.” (Page 146)

● Called for reducing the age of consent for sexual acts to people who are “less than 12 years old.” (Page 102)

● Asserted that laws against “bigamists, persons cohabiting with more than one woman, and women cohabiting with a bigamist” are unconstitutional. (Page 195)

● Objected to laws against prostitution because “prostitution, as a consensual act between adults, is arguably within the zone of privacy protected by recent constitutional decisions.” (Page 97)

● Ginsburg wrote that the Mann Act (which punishes those who engage in interstate sex traffic of women and girls) is “offensive.” Such acts should be considered “within the zone of privacy.” (Page 98)

● Demanded that we “firmly reject draft or combat exemption for women,” stating “women must be subject to the draft if men are.” But, she added, “the need for affirmative action and for transition measures is particularly strong in the uniformed services.” (Page 218)

● An indefatigable censor, Ginsburg listed hundreds of “sexist” words that must be eliminated from all statutes. Among words she found offensive were: man, woman, manmade, mankind, husband, wife, mother, father, sister, brother, son, daughter, serviceman, longshoreman, postmaster, watchman, seamanship, and “to man” (a vessel). (Pages 15-16)

● Wanted he, she, him, her, his, and hers to be dropped down the memory hole. They must be replaced by he/she, her/him, and hers/his, and federal statutes must use the bad grammar of “plural constructions to avoid third person singular pronouns.” (Page 52-53)

● Condemned the Supreme Court’s ruling in Harris v. McRae and claimed that taxpayer-funded abortions should be a constitutional right.

More history:

http://humanevents.com/2005/08/23/senators-overlooked-radical-record-of-ruth-bader-ginsburg/

 

Most of that is just bad policies - none of it science.  Like it or not science and medicine says that gender isn't binary.  I'm not much of a fan of gender transitioning procedures but physicians I know say that there is ample evidence that if they don't offer a "path forward" the patient will commit suicide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Illurion said:

Wrong.

It was a legally, licensed school,  with unconventional classrooms,  as the classes were held as meetings.

The fact that most classes were held in hotels was part of the mystique of the school.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_University#Settlement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TXPower said:

The sentiments expressed above, veiled insinuation that folks who live in the “flyover” states are simpleton, Bible-clingers, driven by lopsided, hypocritical religious dogma is offensive and patently false.  I’ll reiterate what I think @mthebold was pointing out,  that this dismissal of middle America,  many of whom are self described Christians, by the leftist elites, IS THE REASON their standard bearer Sillary Clinton today resides somewhere other than the Whitehouse.

Who among the leftist leadership  are truth-tellers void of sin, personally or as politicians?  And who among their supporters are holding them accountable by calling them out for their sin/lies?  Crickets.  Willful blindness leads to a belief that the left is any better than the right in this regard. These folks able to get enough traction to actually capture high political office, both sides, are sinful liars, duplicitous, and misguided at their very core.  Truth and accountability rarely have large followings.

True Christians do not condone any of Trump’s sin or lies.  They also don’t condone the sins of the heroes of the left, which are just as numerous.  No person that fit nicely into the ideal Christian Candidate mold prevailed from the primaries and received the republican nomination.   

What Christians did was hold their nose and support a candidate that turned their stomachs less than Clinton.  They voted for a candidate who promised to take actions that promote and protect interests closer to their hearts and beliefs.  It was voting for the least undesirable of candidates.  Thus far, he has kept his word to those who cast a ballot for him.  Do not make the mistake of equating Christians voting for Trump as affirmation of any of his sin/lies, real or perceived, or his cult of personality.  

This Christian calls him out when he’s wrong and affirms him when he’s right.  Trump was not the first choice, he was what we were left with in a two-party system.  Fortunately, we were’nt voting him into our pulpits and houses of worship.  Voting for him was voting Hillary, her ilk and goverment in general out of those places.  It was a repudiation of ever infringing government and eroding constitutional freedom,  failed leftist economic policies and so many more things. 

The only truth in the whole discussion is this, the banner-men of the left are no better than President Trump or the banner-men of the right and they certainly do not possess any moral high-ground.

I am a TRUE CHRISTIAN and i had no problem voting for Trump,  and he was my FIRST choice.

All the others were rino's.

Everything else you wrote about i agree with.

The only thing you didn't mention was that Ephesians says no man is perfect, no not one.

But it would be a waste of time,  as this person doesn't listen, and could care less about sins anyway,  otherwise why would he/she love Clinton so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

If the right didn't have so many science deniers they would be more credible.

Jesus was/is a liberal if not a full-blown socialist. https://www.openbible.info/topics/socialism

Science deniers...?   what a joke...

Jesus a socialist...?

When i asked you earlier what other silly things did you have to say,   i was being sarcastic.   I didn't mean you actually had to write more silly things.   But,  read above.

And you base all of the above garbage on something called openbible.info and wikipedia...!

Ridiculous.

You need to stop quoting silly things from silly websites,  and go to CHURCH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

Bill Clinton did a better job of owning up to his bad deeds (BJ, cigars etc.).

Trump tries to hide that he buys whores then pays them off.

bs....

he lied the whole time and denied it all...

Still lies about it.

He was impeached, by the House and stripped of his license to Practice Law, etc...

He was a rapist from his college days in England,  when after being charged with Rape on campus,  his Rhodes Scholarship was revoked and he was sent back to the USA and the charges were dropped.

Kept raping all his life.

You really need to think about your ability to properly judge people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

U.S. Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg - remember her history.  

RBG is currently very ill, and the far left is freaking out that RBG may pass away soon, allowing Trump to replace her with a conservative justice.

230-page book called Sex Bias in the U.S. Code, published in 1977 by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

(8 MB pdf, file size exceeds this forum's 2MB limit, so I can't attach it here, but you can download it yourself in the link above.)

Highlights:

● Called for the sex-integration of prisons and reformatories so that conditions of imprisonment, security and housing could be equal. She explained, “If the grand design of such institutions is to prepare inmates for return to the community as persons equipped to benefit from and contribute to civil society, then perpetuation of single-sex institutions should be rejected.” (Page 101)

● Called for the sex-integration of Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts because they “perpetuate stereotyped sex roles.” (Page 145)

● Insisted on sex-integrating “college fraternity and sorority chapters” and replacing them with “college social societies.” (Page 169)

● Cast constitutional doubt on the legality of “Mother’s Day and Father’s Day as separate holidays.” (Page 146)

● Called for reducing the age of consent for sexual acts to people who are “less than 12 years old.” (Page 102)

● Asserted that laws against “bigamists, persons cohabiting with more than one woman, and women cohabiting with a bigamist” are unconstitutional. (Page 195)

● Objected to laws against prostitution because “prostitution, as a consensual act between adults, is arguably within the zone of privacy protected by recent constitutional decisions.” (Page 97)

● Ginsburg wrote that the Mann Act (which punishes those who engage in interstate sex traffic of women and girls) is “offensive.” Such acts should be considered “within the zone of privacy.” (Page 98)

● Demanded that we “firmly reject draft or combat exemption for women,” stating “women must be subject to the draft if men are.” But, she added, “the need for affirmative action and for transition measures is particularly strong in the uniformed services.” (Page 218)

● An indefatigable censor, Ginsburg listed hundreds of “sexist” words that must be eliminated from all statutes. Among words she found offensive were: man, woman, manmade, mankind, husband, wife, mother, father, sister, brother, son, daughter, serviceman, longshoreman, postmaster, watchman, seamanship, and “to man” (a vessel). (Pages 15-16)

● Wanted he, she, him, her, his, and hers to be dropped down the memory hole. They must be replaced by he/she, her/him, and hers/his, and federal statutes must use the bad grammar of “plural constructions to avoid third person singular pronouns.” (Page 52-53)

● Condemned the Supreme Court’s ruling in Harris v. McRae and claimed that taxpayer-funded abortions should be a constitutional right.

More history:

http://humanevents.com/2005/08/23/senators-overlooked-radical-record-of-ruth-bader-ginsburg/

 

Ginsburg is one of several perverts on the SCOTUS and i for one,  am very happy that she will be replaced soon.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Illurion said:

You need to stop quoting silly things from silly websites,  and go to CHURCH.

I attended a private Christian school from grades 7 to 9... church 3 times a week plus an hour of bible class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

3 minutes ago, Illurion said:

wikipedia = nonsense

Just for you Fox news hahaha

https://www.foxnews.com/tech/fake-news-is-here-to-stay-study-says

 

This trend will be fueled, in part, by “confirmation bias,” that “leads all people to seek out, select and value information that parallels what they believe and expect to be proven true,”

Edited by Enthalpic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

45 minutes ago, mthebold said:

Have you ever fought a sustained battle for your life against an enemy with no moral code? 

Sometimes i think i have,  and am.

Only i call the enemy liberals.

Despite what they claim to believe, they actually have no CORE beliefs.

Everything is RELATIVE.

Talking with them can be very exhausting,  and mostly fruitless.

Edited by Illurion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

I attended a private Christian school from grades 7 to 9... church 3 times a week plus an hour of bible class.

Golly Gee...

So,  you are saying you are in 9th grade...?

That explains all the silly things  you have written..

 

On the other hand,  if you are NOT in the 9th grade,   and what you referred to was long ago,  then you should go back to Church,  as you seem to have lost sight of the intent of what those Bible verses were trying to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

Just for you Fox news hahaha

https://www.foxnews.com/tech/fake-news-is-here-to-stay-study-says

 

This trend will be fueled, in part, by “confirmation bias,” that “leads all people to seek out, select and value information that parallels what they believe and expect to be proven true,”

Golly gee..

You are quoting FOX.

Unfortunately,  FOX is not what it once was,  and contains much FAKE news.

You should go watch OAN,  One America News.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

Yes, only read what confirms your opinions.  Confirmation bias

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

You make me laugh...

You are writing that to me,  but are talking about yourself,  and you just do not see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites