Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, October 09, 2019

Donald Trump has raised record amounts of money as a presidential candidate. But he's still left a slew of unpaid bills in his wake.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Why would a sociopath pay money that he owes?

#1 | Posted by Zed at 2019-10-09 07:58 AM | Reply

Meanwhile one of our right wing posters here tried to make a case that Minneapolis was being unfair to Orange Hitler yesterday. One thing you can say about that poster is that she is always wrong about everything.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2019-10-09 08:36 AM | Reply

Minneapolis was being unfair to Orange Hitler yesterday.

Its is Minneapolis and many of the other cities are "overbilling" for political reasons.

Trump campaign threatens to sue Minnesota over 'phony and outlandish' rally security bill

a "phony and outlandish" security fee of $530,000 ahead of the president's rally at the Target Center in Minneapolis.

The Trump campaign also pointed to a report that a health care reform-themed rally in 2009 that then-President Barack Obama hosted at the same venue amid ongoing congressional debate over Obamacare. The price for security was $20,000, according to the St. Paul Pioneer Press.
abcnews.go.com

#3 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-10-09 12:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

Minneapolis was being unfair to Orange Hitler yesterday.

Its is Minneapolis and many of the other cities are "overbilling" for political reasons.

Trump campaign threatens to sue Minnesota over 'phony and outlandish' rally security bill

a "phony and outlandish" security fee of $530,000 ahead of the president's rally at the Target Center in Minneapolis.

The Trump campaign also pointed to a report that a health care reform-themed rally in 2009 that then-President Barack Obama hosted at the same venue amid ongoing congressional debate over Obamacare. The price for security was $20,000, according to the St. Paul Pioneer Press.
abcnews.go.com

#4 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-10-09 12:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

Nice, a double post for truth!

#5 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-10-09 12:02 PM | Reply

Nice, a double post for truth propaganda!

#5 | Posted by AndreaMackris

#6 | Posted by jpw at 2019-10-09 12:11 PM | Reply

--Its is Minneapolis and many of the other cities are "overbilling" for political reasons.

Like colleges charging outrageous "security fees" for conservative speakers. In effect they are saying we need to provide extra security to protect you...against us.

#7 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-10-09 12:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Barack Obama hosted at the same venue amid ongoing congressional debate over Obamacare. The price for security was $20,000

The report says they had to pay just 50 cops to provide security at that event. How many cops and security professionals do you think it takes to keep people from killing each other at one of Trump's klan rallies?

#8 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-09 12:14 PM | Reply

"the municipalities can sue as individuals have

YEAH

Cause Litigation is "Free"

Trump is wasting Americans hard earned dollars, the and "right" wing "conservative" solution is for them to waste more.


Because trump is a Grifter

#9 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-10-09 12:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Trump has a strong documented history of not paying contractors. Why does anyone still do work for him without getting paid up front?

#10 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2019-10-09 12:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Advertisement

Advertisement

""the municipalities can sue as individuals have"

Trump is wasting Americans hard earned dollars, the and "right" wing "conservative" solution is for them to waste more.
#9 | POSTED BY CHIEFTUTMOSES"

Then keep complaining.

#11 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-09 12:37 PM | Reply

"Why does anyone still do work for him without getting paid up front?"

I won't speak to why people continued to do so before he became a presidential candidate but it's long been established how vindictive he can be toward people that don't cooperate with him. Now they must figure it's easier to roll over in the hopes they might at least get partially paid than it is to have to become another name on his list of enemies.

#12 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2019-10-09 12:39 PM | Reply

The Trump campaign also pointed to a report that a health care reform-themed rally in 2009 that then-President Barack Obama hosted at the same venue amid ongoing congressional debate over Obamacare. The price for security was $20,000, according to the St. Paul Pioneer Press.
abcnews.go.com

#3 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

$20,000 was JUST for overtime paid to 50 police officers coming in for security during Obama's event.

It didn't include anything for lane closures, additional security needed for Trump's rally, use of the facility, or any other number of costs that aren't part of that $20,000 figure. The figure from Trump's Rochester, MN visit is just under $200,000 and Rochester is MUCH smaller.

The costs being used to determine the $530,000 number are being based on other events like the Super Bowl ($6 million) and the Men's Final Four ($1.5 million).

In addition, the reason they are also charging differently: This is a Trump campaign rally. Obama's was not a campaign rally in 2009 after he was elected; it was just a Presidential visit. So the City footed more of the bill for that visit.

#13 | Posted by Sycophant at 2019-10-09 02:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

One more benefit of living in left wing Portland.... in 20 years I've never seen a republican presidential rally

#14 | Posted by 503jc69 at 2019-10-09 02:54 PM | Reply

I get the same luxury in Madison, Wi. The republicans only hold events in front of the choir in waukesha or in the northeast red counties. Trump can't show up in Madison or he would have to see that 75 years of progressive control has made the city a great place to live. #3 in the top 100 according to liveability

livability.com

#15 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2019-10-09 03:10 PM | Reply

I don't know the answer...but can a city or municipality demand the money up front to cover the costs of supporting one of these events?

#16 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-10-09 03:11 PM | Reply

#15

Ha got you beat. We're in second place.

#16

I doubt it since it includes costs which won't be known until after the event. I could see doing an estimate and getting 50% of that upfront. Not sure how billing between government agencies works though.

#17 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2019-10-09 03:17 PM | Reply

#16 | Posted by madbomber

I do believe so and if I recall correctly SOME municipalities have done just that since I want to say El Paso where he first failed to pay his bill. I believe it is still unpaid.

#18 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2019-10-09 03:25 PM | Reply

Trump owes El Paso $570,000 still
Minneapolis is smart to get the money up front with President big brain

#19 | Posted by 503jc69 at 2019-10-09 05:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Trump owes El Paso $570,000 still
Minneapolis is smart to get the money up front with President big brain

#19 | POSTED BY 503JC69 A"

Yep, and El Paso would be smart to sue him. I don't understand why these cities aren't' doing that, rather than complain to whomever will listen.

#20 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-09 05:09 PM | Reply

""the municipalities can sue as individuals have"

"YEAH
Cause Litigation is "Free"
Trump is wasting Americans hard earned dollars, the and "right" wing "conservative" solution is for them to waste more.
#9 | POSTED BY CHIEFTUTMOSES "

No, litigation is not free, but for all practical purposes, it is to the city. All these cities have a legal department with gaggle of lawyers on their payroll who take care of things like this. The city doesn't have to pay them a penny more for going after folks who stiff them. So they would not be "wasting money."

You didn't know this? Actually, I'm not surprised.

#21 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-09 05:14 PM | Reply

Meanwhile, The Trump Organization is getting paid on time for space leased at its buildings and hotel rooms and banquet space booked. Why? Because political campaigns are notorious for stiffing landlords and hotels, since they eventually run out of money...

#22 | Posted by catdog at 2019-10-09 05:20 PM | Reply

Why does anyone still do work for him without getting paid up front?
#10 | Posted by Whatsleft

Maybe some of them are Rs and figure it's a way to use taxpayer money for a campaign contribution.

#23 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2019-10-09 06:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

At this point, any city that allows a Trump rally without getting it's money upfront deserves to be stiffed.

#24 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2019-10-10 04:10 AM | Reply

This is not just a Trump thing. Its not even a Republican thing. In fact, it seems to be the status quo when candidates are campaigning. I know the usual suspects will scream "whataboutism" but things have to be put into perspective. If candidates not paying for their security is status quo, then stories like this are fueled by TDS, not reality.

"Romney, Obama campaigns stick their hosts with the check"

www.latimes.com

"Who pays for Gov. Bullock's security while he's campaigning for president?"

www.missoulacurrent.com

"Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton haven't paid back Wisconsin taxpayers $75K for 2016 events"

www.jsonline.com

#25 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 05:40 AM | Reply

"Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton haven't paid back Wisconsin taxpayers $75K for 2016 events"
www.jsonline.com
#25 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-10-10 05:40 AM | REPLY

Donald Trump still owes $56,000 to Wausau.

Hillary owes $18,000

Trump is fundraising and spending Money. Hillary is not running for office

#26 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2019-10-10 02:17 PM | Reply

"Trump is fundraising and spending Money. Hillary is not running for office

#26 | POSTED BY HATTER5183 "

I didn't say hillary was runnig for office. Nor did I say Romney or Bullock were. As I said in my post, I brought the others up for a reference and how that seems to be the status quo. I guess you missed that part in my post.

BTW, Hillary owes a lot more than that. (wanna see the links?) I figured three links was enough to make the point and I knew if I mentioned Hillary too much people would whine that I did. Just like you are doing now.

#27 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 02:21 PM | Reply

Lots of people have lots of unpaid bills.

This thread is about President Donald J. Trump's unpaid bills.

#28 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-10-10 02:26 PM | Reply

Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton haven't paid back Wisconsin taxpayers $75K for 2016 events

Of that 75k, $56,778 is owed by Trump.

So if "things need to be put in perspective" (your words), that makes Trump 3 times worse than Hillary with respect to not repaying Wisconsin taxpayers.

#29 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-10 02:28 PM | Reply

No, litigation is not free, but for all practical purposes, it is to the city. All these cities have a legal department with gaggle of lawyers on their payroll who take care of things like this. The city doesn't have to pay them a penny more for going after folks who stiff them. So they would not be "wasting money."
You didn't know this? Actually, I'm not surprised.

#21 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-10-09 05:14 PM | REPLY

This is why republican economics never work out. They think that for all practical purposes it is free to use a gaggle of lawyers on the taxpayer payroll. If they have to do more litigation they have to hire more lawyers and it costs more. There are no city attorneys sitting around waiting for work. Cities with limited budgets don't hire a 2nd attorney until the first is overwhelmed. They are chronically understaffed

#30 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2019-10-10 02:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"This thread is about President Donald J. Trump's unpaid bills.

#28 | POSTED BY SNOOFY "

I know. And if you'd rather not see the evidence that what he's doing is pretty much status quo, then don't read my posts. A frame of reference is necessary. I like to put things in a realistic perspective.

Using your standard, climate change cannot be proven because you would not allow a frame of reference to be posited.

Go ahead and twist and spin. I don't care. But again, if you don't want to see what the status quo is, don't read my posts. I will provide them because without them nothing can be properly judged.

It's that simple.

#31 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 02:35 PM | Reply

"This is why republican economics never work out. They think that for all practical purposes it is free to use a gaggle of lawyers on the taxpayer payroll. If they have to do more litigation they have to hire more lawyers and it costs more. There are no city attorneys sitting around waiting for work. Cities with limited budgets don't hire a 2nd attorney until the first is overwhelmed. They are chronically understaffed

#30 | POSTED BY HATTER5183 "

Partially true, but not true enough to make a valid point.

Legal staffs are sometimes overwhelmed, and sometimes they aren't. During the slow times, the backlog gets worked on. They know about how much litigation the have to deal with a year. And for a city like Chicago to go after an unpaid bill is nothing. It takes no time at all. Indeed, this is true of most all cities. Most legal work is writing letters and maybe research, neither of which take much time given form letters in computers and computer searches for legal cases.

If these whining cities sued rather than just whine, the respective lawyers would have it worked out after a few letters were exchanged. You act like the city's lawyers are spending man-weeks to collect a debt. That's not how it works.

#32 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 02:45 PM | Reply

This thread is about President Donald J. Trump's unpaid bills.
#28 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Then stop following the troll down the rabbit hole.

You know there's nothing to be gained by discussing anything with Trollman.

He's a master whataboutist and deflector.

He'll do anything to protect Trump.

#33 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-10-10 02:46 PM | Reply

Most legal work is writing letters and maybe research

And phone calls, and emails, and meetings, and (in some cases) drafting pleadings, and responding to discovery, and appearing in court, and updating your clients, etc, etc, etc

#34 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-10 02:51 PM | Reply

"So if "things need to be put in perspective" (your words), that makes Trump 3 times worse than Hillary with respect to not repaying Wisconsin taxpayers.

POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-10 02:28 PM "

That's one state. And a small one. Now do (as the latest internet meme goes) the entire country for a true perspective. And also, to make sure we keep the apples with the apples and the oranges with the oranges, make sure the timeline is there. IOW, if Hillary's campaign paid off a debt long after the facrt, that doesn't count since Trump's campaign may do the same And I saw a few of those in the research I did for the links I provided above. But again, I didn''t post them all for brevity's sake and also knowing I'd get cries of "whataboutism" even though I was only setting a frame of reference.

#35 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 02:52 PM | Reply

That's one state. And a small one

You're the one who brought it up. Now it's no longer a good example? It's also top 20 in population, hard to call that "a small one."

Now do (as the latest internet meme goes) the entire country

Since you're the one trying to whatabout Hillary into this, you do it.

#36 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-10 03:04 PM | Reply

"Since you're the one trying to whatabout Hillary into this, you do it.

#36 | POSTED BY JOE"

I wasn't "whatabouting". I was setting a frame of reference. I was establishing a status quo. This is the third time I've said that.

Reading is fundamental, Joe.

"You're the one who brought it up. Now it's no longer a good example? "

It's a good example for Wisconsin. But the four people I cited were running for president of the USA, so it is not a good example for that.

For a lawyer, a lot of the obvious sure has to be explained to you -- and in some cases (as in this thread) more than once.

#37 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 03:11 PM | Reply

so it is not a good example for that.

If it's "that" which you're looking for (and apparently now demanding of me), then why did you raise an example which is, according to you, not reflective of "that?"

#38 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-10 03:16 PM | Reply

"I was establishing a status quo"

otherwise known as a "Whatabout"

#39 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-10-10 03:19 PM | Reply

""I was establishing a status quo"

otherwise known as a "Whatabout"
POSTED BY CHIEFTUTMOSES "

Um, no -- exactly known as establishing a status quo. It's not on my you don't recognize that, big chief trollum.

#40 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 03:27 PM | Reply

Goat,

You have to understand that with Trump it has to be 100% bad.

I know exactly what you are doing - looking to historical precedents to gauge whether or not this is the norm, or not.

It's a perfectly reasonable approach and it's something I do when trying to evaluate a specific action taking by a politician - is there a precedent for _____________?

#41 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-10-10 03:31 PM | Reply

I know exactly what you are doing - looking to historical precedents to gauge whether or not this is the norm, or not.

And i took his example as valid and pointed out that in that example, Trump had unpaid bills more than 3x larger than those of his opponent. Upon that being pointed out, suddenly the goalposts were moved and it wasn't a worthwhile example anymore.

If you really think what goat's doing is valid then you aren't being objective. As usual.

#42 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-10 03:40 PM | Reply

"It's a perfectly reasonable approach and it's something I do when trying to evaluate a specific action taking by a politician - is there a precedent for _____________?

#41 | POSTED BY JEFFJ "

Exactly. I saw a lot of links I could have used to cite precedent. I was very careful to choose other presidential candidates including Republicans and only mention Hillary once because I knew it would ruffle feathers. I wanted to make it clear I was establishing a precedent -- not engaging in whataboutism.

Still, the usual suspects whine.

It's as I said upthread, without using the past as a precedent, or frame of reference, or status quo or whatever, we can't talk about climate change, either. We can only talk about the climate as it is now.

#43 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 03:41 PM | Reply

Joe,

I haven't been following the thread closely. You know - drive-by blogging.

#44 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-10-10 03:41 PM | Reply

Of course not. And yet you said "I know exactly what you are doing." Guess not?

#45 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-10 03:45 PM | Reply

"And i took his example as valid and pointed out that in that example, Trump had unpaid bills more than 3x larger than those of his opponent. Upon that being pointed out, suddenly the goalposts were moved and it wasn't a worthwhile example anymore.
If you really think what goat's doing is valid then you aren't being objective. As usual.

#42 | POSTED BY JOE "

No goalposts were moved, Joe. Common sense dictates that if you are talking about presidential candidates, you need to talk about more than one state. Surely you understand this.

And at 3 different links, things were getting unwieldy. In the interest of brevity, I stopped there. And yes one of the links was about Wisconsin. Do you really think I meant to say "Only Wisconsin matters?" Do you honestly think I should have provided 49 more links to make my point?

Get real, Joe.

#46 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 03:46 PM | Reply

Let's recap the thread.

Thread topic: Trump owes unpaid bills

Goatman: But look at these places where Hillary owes bills too!

Joe: Ok, i looked. Trump owes 3x as much there.

Goatman: Bad example!

Get real. If you wanted to make a point oter than that Trump owes 3x the bills that Hillary does, then make it.

#47 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-10 03:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Of course not. And yet you said "I know exactly what you are doing." Guess not?

#45 | POSTED BY JOE "

You mean you don't think it's possible to read one or two posts and grok them, yet not read the entire thread as carefully if at all?

Really?

I've got some news for you. Wanna hear it?

#48 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 03:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"#47 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-10 03:49 PM "

That post has so much taken out of context, it doesn't even deserve a rebuttal. That you have to stoop to speaksoftly and snoofy tactics to make a point is sad, Joe.

I enjoy good debate, but lying (that's what taking out of context is) is something I won't tolerate.

Have your last word, liar.

Later.

#49 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 03:53 PM | Reply

Trump has credit?

Not in my house. I cannot imagine the bank that would trust him now.

The National Bank of Cyprus perhaps.

Mr Robot was right again.

#50 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-10-10 03:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If you think i omitted some context, then point to it instead of bailing like a -----.

Oh wait. That's what you are, and it's what you do every time your back's against the wall.

I invite anyone to read the thread and claim my summation of it in 47 isn't accurate.

#51 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-10 03:56 PM | Reply

Have your last word, liar.

Later.

#49 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

Translation:

You win. I am outa here.

#52 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-10-10 03:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"If you think i omitted some context, then point to it instead of bailing like a -----.
#51 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-10 03:56 PM "

If you don't think you did, my C&Ping full context wouldn't help. Duh.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. I'm fully satisfied how this ended for me. Thanks, Joe!

" 'When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers."

Socrates

The study of psychology teaches us that when someone resorts to name calling, it usually speaks to feelings of inferiority and a feeling of inadequacy of the person doing the name calling. People stoop to the process of name calling when they feel lesser and need to make themselves feel more powerful.

#53 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 04:00 PM | Reply

it amazes me that anyone hasn't plonked that idiot yet.

#54 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2019-10-10 04:00 PM | Reply

Re 52

That was a Jeffersonian translation.

All the mythology and pointless name calling stripped out.

#55 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-10-10 04:00 PM | Reply

Its is Minneapolis and many of the other cities are "overbilling" for political reasons.

The security bill is not FOR protecting the POTUS and his mob of cultists, it is that high to protect the citizens of Minneapolis FROM POTUS and his mob of cultists.

#56 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-10-10 04:01 PM | Reply

"Translation:
You win. I am outa here.

#52 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY "

You support the liar who took several posts out of context.

Noted, and I'm not surprised with whom you side.

BTW, the "translation" thing was lame and trite 5 years ago. Think of something new. If you are able, of course

#57 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 04:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Its is Minneapolis and many of the other cities are "overbilling" for political reasons.

Either way, by requesting payment in advance, Donnie 2 Scoops can decide if he wants to hold his rally there or not. His call. They don't owe him anything. Pay up or shut up.

#58 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-10-10 04:03 PM | Reply

"it amazes me that anyone hasn't plonked that idiot yet.

#54 | POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE "

Like you? LOL

Alex "do as I say, not as I do" andrite

The study of psychology teaches us that when someone resorts to name calling, it usually speaks to feelings of inferiority and a feeling of inadequacy of the person doing the name calling. People stoop to the process of name calling when they feel lesser and need to make themselves feel more powerful.

#59 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 04:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"When the debate is lost, psychology articles and classic philosopher quotes become the tool of the loser."

-Joe

#60 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-10 04:04 PM | Reply

If you are able, of course

#57 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

Debate not going well?

You mad bro?

That's an oldie but goodie, too!

#61 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-10-10 04:04 PM | Reply

Poor. Goat.

Joe holds a mirror and Goat runs in terror at what sees.

It's your tail goat!

Don't eat that!

It's your own tail!!

#62 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-10-10 04:06 PM | Reply

"Debate not going well?

#61 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY "

No, not at all. Joe stooped to taking things out of context completely altering the meaning of my words -- and his own -- to his advantage. I chose not to play that game It's dishonest, so I bowed out

Thanks for asking.

#63 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 04:07 PM | Reply

""When the debate is lost, psychology articles and classic philosopher quotes become the tool of the loser."
-Joe

#60 | POSTED BY JOE"

Joe proved himself a liar by taking things out of context. So much for Joeisms. LOL

#64 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 04:09 PM | Reply

Have your last word, liar.
Later.
#49 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-10-10 03:53 PM

#53 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-10-10 04:00 PM
#57 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-10-10 04:02 PM
#59 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-10-10 04:04 PM
#63 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-10-10 04:07 PM
#64 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-10-10 04:09 PM

You may want to see a doctor for your addiction

#65 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-10 04:22 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#49 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-10-10 03:53 PM
#53 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-10-10 04:00 PM
#57 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-10-10 04:02 PM
#59 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-10-10 04:04 PM
#63 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-10-10 04:07 PM
#64 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-10-10 04:09 PM

You may want to see a doctor for your addiction

#65 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-10 04:22 PM

#8 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-09 12:14 PM |
#29 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-10 02:28 PM |
#34 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-10 02:51 PM
#36 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-10 03:04 PM |
#38 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-10 03:16 PM
#42 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-10 03:40 PM |
#45 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-10 03:45 PM |
#47 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-10 03:49 PM |
#51 |#60 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-10 04:04
#60 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-10 04:04 PM
#65 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-10-10 04:22 PM

Um, yeah. Sure big guy. I'll get on that addiction thing right away. LOL

Another liberal, another "do as I say, not as I do" attitude.

#66 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 04:40 PM | Reply

When did i say "Have your last word...Later"

Or are you going to pretend that didn't mean you were leaving?

#67 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-10 04:43 PM | Reply

And yet you said "I know exactly what you are doing." Guess not?

#45 | POSTED BY JOE

I read Goat's comment and saw a couple of "Whataboutism!" responses.

Glancing through it looks like you aren't doing that so my post doesn't apply to you.

#68 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-10-10 04:49 PM | Reply

"Using your standard, climate change cannot be proven because you would not allow a frame of reference to be posited."

Has climate change been proven, Goatman?

#69 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-10-10 04:49 PM | Reply

"Has climate change been proven, Goatman?

#69 | POSTED BY SNOOFY "

Using your criteria for judgement? Or an honest one?

#70 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 04:56 PM | Reply

Whether you support this big orange Turd or not you as a taxpayer get to foot the bill for his constant political rallies in our big liberal cities where his out of town supporters come in hoards and they and him stick us with the bill. What a lousy rotten bum. I am glad when he finally goes down that these bills will not just go away.

#71 | Posted by tknees at 2019-10-10 05:18 PM | Reply

-but can a city or municipality demand the money up front to cover the costs of supporting one of these events?

why the hell not?

I'm sure it's legal and I'm sure without looking Trump is likely paying correctly and on time in swing states.......

#72 | Posted by eberly at 2019-10-10 05:30 PM | Reply

"Has climate change been proven, Goatman?
#69 | POSTED BY SNOOFY "

Using your criteria for judgement? Or an honest one?
#70 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

Honest one.
Has climate change been proven?

#73 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-10-10 05:56 PM | Reply

"Honest one.
Has climate change been proven?

#73 | POSTED BY SNOOFY "

Yes, it has been proven. There is no doubt it has changed a lot -- from no ice caps to total ice coverage during the history of this planet.

#74 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 06:09 PM | Reply

"Yes, it has been proven. There is no doubt it has changed a lot -- from no ice caps to total ice coverage during the history of this planet."

That's not what was being asked.
Obviously the climate has always changed, and any discussion of climate change would be stillborn if "the climate has always changed" weren't the backdrop.
Nobody would consider it reasonable to deny that the climate has always changed, and I certainly don't.

But that is not what is being asked with "Has climate change been proven" unless you are being a charlatan and dodging the question with the ostensibly pithy observation that the climate has always changed.

"A frame of reference is necessary. I like to put things in a realistic perspective. Using your standard, climate change cannot be proven because you would not allow a frame of reference to be posited."

The frame of reference I'm positing is mankind changing the climate.
Has that been proven, Goatman?

#75 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-10-10 06:23 PM | Reply

"The frame of reference I'm positing is mankind changing the climate.
Has that been proven, Goatman?

POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2019-10-10 06:23 PM "

Not in my opinion.

#76 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 06:40 PM | Reply

"Not in my opinion."

LOL!!!
What's holding you back, not enough of a frame of reference for you?

#77 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-10-10 06:42 PM | Reply

"What's holding you back, not enough of a frame of reference for you?

#77 | POSTED BY SNOOFY "

Arguments on both sides have validity and I'm not certain which is right. It's the reason I stay off of global warming threads. I'm not going to get sucked into debating something I deliberately distance myself from.

Besides, Trump's unpaid bills is pretty far from global warming.

#78 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 06:48 PM | Reply

"Arguments on both sides have validity and I'm not certain which is right."

Check this out:

You claimed I employ a standard by which climate change cannot be proven, which of course I don't.

But -- this is the good part -- it turns out that's your exact stance on climate change!

#79 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-10-10 09:04 PM | Reply

"But -- this is the good part -- it turns out that's your exact stance on climate change!

POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2019-10-10 09:04 PM "

Works for me, snoofygames (tm)

#80 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-10 09:09 PM | Reply

This is hilarious. Like paying your bills is a discussion item for cons.

#81 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-10-11 10:43 AM | Reply

Basic Truths that Republicans think are debateable in the Trump Era

1) You should pay your bills
2) You should honor your treaties
3) You should fullfill your contracts
4) You should obey the law
5) You shouldn't pal around with mob bosses and criminals
6) The people you surround yourself with are a reflection of yourself

#82 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2019-10-11 11:22 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort