Englebert

There are many terms or sayings for this phenomenon. On of my favorites is "rose colored glasses".

What is the impetus of this topic? Do you have a point of discussion? I'll start. Do you think that a bunch of people disseminating false, fake, and biased information should achieve the moniker of a news organization, afforded all of the protections of a free press?

But the "good reason" happened before he got fired.

And what is that "good reason"? Please explain.

Did you also read about the stunning revelation that the Clintons have Russians connections? And is it possible that the Clinton connections were innocent solicitations for donations to the Clinton Foundation, and of course with no strings attached. But uh oh, if anyone not supporting the Liberal agenda can point to Russia on a map, this is proof of connections and nefarious dealings.

Who gets to decide what is fake? new tobie posted a link from Politifact that rated various statements as lies, and it was easy to see their biased hate clouded their judgment enough that even 3rd graders could see the outrageous propaganda they are trying to peddle. So should Politifact be a judge as to what is fact? How about members of this board, are we good enough stewards to decide what is fake? Do you think you could perform this task?

This topic is not about who started Fast and Furious, or whether or not it was a good idea. The topic is about how Holder lied and deceived Congress and the American people. Obama is complicit in this disgusting act by exerting executive privilege over the documents, thus grinding any investigation to a halt. But yeah, let's bring Bush into the discussion.

Wow, I hope I'm never a defendant with you on the jury. Please explain what information about the whole subject that you gleaned from this revelation. Do you believe that every time a person wants to talk in private signifies something sinister is going on? And how do you come to the conclusion that Trump's "suggestions" are illegal? And why do you feel Comey is honest and truthful when he admitted to leaking information? Does leaking information exemplify someone that's honest and truthful? And why didn't Comey leak or even come forward about the political pressure Loretta Lynch put on him? And why didn't Comey leak the fact that Trump is not under FBI investigation? I have a strong feeling you think Comey is all-of-a-sudden truthful and honest because he is now challenging Trump.

I agree with that's the way it should be. But in today's world, if you give one person an exception, the one you deny will file a lawsuit.

So what happens when the next exception request is to wear a T-Shirt of the enrolled college colors? How do you defend your stance of no when you've already made exceptions? I will agree with y'all if I can get an acceptable answer to that question. And I like the idea of a military requirement after graduation or of a certain age. For the longest I was against the idea, but I've changed my stance over the last ten years or so.

I read some of the statements that Punditfact is considering as false, and it is crystal clear that Punditfact is the one that needs to be fact-checked. That was pathetic. Would you like to discuss some of these new tobie? I'm sure you are anxious to defend the integrity of your post.

I wouldn't necessarily have too much of a problem making an exception in this case, except I think it could possibly lead to trouble later on. Someone might want to wear the College T-Shirt of the college they will be attending after graduation. It would be hard to say no when that person can use the "Well you made an exception for so and so" argument. Then you would possibly get all kinds of exception requests, which again will be hard to defend once you've already made previous exception(s). If the decision was made because of upholding traditional values of uniformity in dress, then I agree with the decision. If the decision was made because the decision makers don't want or like the military presence being displayed at the graduation ceremony, then I would have a real problem with that.

I don't have a problem with this decision, considering I don't know the motivation behind not letting the graduate don his uniform. If others are allowed to wear garments other than the graduation robes, then he should be allowed to wear his military uniform. But if all are required to wear the robes and only the robes, so should he. He is not representing the military when accepting his diploma. I look at it akin to other functions. If he was playing a high school baseball game, he would be required to wear his baseball uniform. If he was performing in the band, he should wear the band uniform. If he was a cheerleader, he should wear his cheerleading outfit. (Have to walk on egg shells and show I'm tolerant and inclusive.) When traditional rules call for the robes to be worn on graduation, he should wear the robes.

The intolerance from the group that preaches tolerance is on full display. The Liberals demand, many times through force and/or intimidation, that everyone be tolerant and inclusive, and yet openly practice intolerance and exclusivity on a regular basis. The irony is that I don't think they are cognizant of their hypocrisy and double-standards. They deem their excuses for excluding one or a group as valid, while every other reason for exclusion is based on hate and intolerance, all the while bolstering a holier-than-thou superiority attitude.

What does Obama have to do with this?

After being lied to for eight years without a peep from you, we all understand perfectly that you either have no clue as to what a lie is, or you just selectively throw that label around based on party affiliation. That hashtag reached it's prime during the last administration, so why are you just using it now?

So you want to go after the imaginary terrorists, but have no comment on the real ones (by your definition). If I went to the police station and requested the cops come arrest you for terroristic threats, what do you supposed would be their first question? I'm guessing it would be along the lines of "do you have any proof?" And if I responded with "Yes, he threatened me." The next question would be "When?" And if I responded "50 years ago", I would be shown the door in an abrupt fashion. By that same token, I will ask the obvious question that any normal person would ask. Do you have any proof of terrorists in Alabama, Kentucky, or Mississippi?

Cruz looks like he is reaching for his gun. He was probably giving it some consideration.

And the 1st graders get their laugh for the day, and they are not laughing with you. When you are a kid, it's always funny when a grown up acts more immature than you. You bring much joy to their little hearts.

Luckily a new administration has assumed power, but you will keep voting for those willing to go back to the rampant abuse, and then "shockingly" will keep complaining about the very people you voted for.

So that's why you have his poster hanging over your bed. You admire and adore people that exemplify everything you aspire to be. Too bad your hateful bitterness and spite is holding you down, although in true Liberal fashion you will blame everyone but yourself.

Did you conveniently forget to include the ones in Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, Baltimore and practically every other urban city, or do you always pick and choose which people to denigrate based on your biased and hateful stereotypes?

Has Texas ordered their Conference Champions banner yet?

I've been there four times now, and at least one Cop, DPS, or Sheriff Deputy has been there each time. I'll be there tomorrow for the beef tips.

If he is so "humiliated" in enforcing the laws of the United States, "humiliated" for doing his job, he needs to do the honorable thing and resign. No one should call him "you honor" until he proves he has honor and principles. There are plenty of other lucrative jobs out there, like "Community Organizer". If he disobeys or ignores the law, then he definitely should be impeached. When he took the Judicial Oath, it did not say he will enforce only the laws he agrees with.