Englebert

If anyone speaks bad of Obama's policies then we know he must have a good head on his shoulders...until proven otherwise.

Is that all you can muster? No enlightening commentary? I didn't expect much of a reply, but this is just disappointing.

I don't think Trump was asking people to go watch a sex tape. I took his tweet as saying "go verify what an immoral and untrustworthy person she is...the proof is the sex tape". I have no problem with that request. A Democrat wouldn't have to make that request because the mainstream media would have smeared her beyond belief if she was attacking a Democrat.

The cost of shipping goods will go to their actual cost, as opposed to the artificially deflated costs due to tax deductions/write-offs.

The holier than thou left elitists argue that anyone using the flawed tax code to reduce their tax burden is starving children and depleting our military which puts our country at risk. But these same elitists have no problem exploiting these same loopholes to contribute as little as possible. Where is new tobie when I need a clarification on the word hypocrite.

I realize this was not to me, but I will attempt to explain. BS Wildcats, please reply if you have a different answer. No deductions for anything. Some businesses will have a higher cost of operation than other businesses by definition. If your line of work requires more expenses than other lines of work, the company pays for these expenses through higher compensation. That is the way it has always been, until the government decided to try and make things "fair". Every business has a cost of operation. Some businesses have more costs than others. That cost of doing business has to be factored into the price charged for the service provided. Therefore, the consumer picks and chooses which services they are willing to pay for...not the government. Giving deductions to certain businesses artificially deflates the true cost of providing the service. Let the consumer decide if the service is worth it.

Once true interactive TV becomes available, this will be solved. The technology is already here, just not implemented. One thing that scares me, and I'm convinced it's coming, (and in some part it is already being utilized) is the advertisements. When you activate any interactive feature, you are going to have to deal with advertisements surrounding the screen. Just look at this site. Just look at any website. The bandwidth for the added commercials is the holdup. We are already getting a taste of them on many channels (the little pop-ups at the bottom of the screen). As soon as they implement interactive TV in earnest, they will justify the cost of the new technology with ads littering every side of the screen. And as the good little sheeple we are, we will complain but still accept this. Man, I hope I'm wrong on this, but am willing to bet good money I'm not.

Agreed, and no other POTUS felt obligated to pave the way for Iran to obtain nuclear bombs for Iran either. Big Girl, do some research and try to refute the FACT that the Obama administration paved the way for Iran to legally obtain a nuclear arsenal. And after doing your research, please explain why you feel the need to post in bold letters the headline of Trump doing business with an Iranian bank 30 years ago, but fail to acknowledge that Obama gave Iran weapons of mass destruction...including the nuclear option.

How about you do some research. You post faulty accusations on a daily basis, then accuse others of being subhuman when you don't agree with their accusations. And research doesn't mean scanning the Liberal rags like Huffington Post, Mother Jones, Politifact, etc. to let them formulate your well-rounded opinion. While doing your research, see if you can find the definition of sheeple, then try to comprehend how that definition fits you to a tee. And you mysteriously (I had to retype that word three times because my laughing caused me to mistype it) fail to answer any challenging question I pose to you. How does it feel to have to look up to see the bottom of the barrel. If you look to the left you might see Hillary. If you look to the right you might see Obama.

And did this bank contribute to the Clinton Foundation? Do you really want to go down the road of who "did business" with who? You are such a hypocrite it is not even funny anymore. On second thought, yes, it is still funny. Please keep posting.

The $400 million was what the current administration confessed. Subsequent reporting has it much higher. Reports vary, but all say it's in the billions. [Hidden Content] [Hidden Content] [Hidden Content] [Hidden Content] [Hidden Content] I just listed the first ones that came up. A Bing search will give plenty of information. Nobody is disputing the fact that Iran is receiving money in the billions. In fact, there is more consensus that the figure is in the billions than the administration's claim of consensus for Man-Made Global Warming.

The State of California is petitioning the Federal Government to allow illegals into Obamacare in California. Obama's administration not only thinks they can do whatever they want, they do whatever they want.

California trying to open Obamacare to illegals: [Hidden Content] For those few that don't like FoxNews: [Hidden Content] Do you think Obama and the rest of the Democrats will apologize to Joe Wilson for attacking him on his "You Lie" shoutout after Obama said illegals would not be eligible for Obamacare?

You'll have to define your definition of the middle. Like I said above, the definition of middle varies wildly depending on which way you lean. Most people on the left think they are middle/slightly left and think anyone on the right is far right. Most people on the right think they are middle/slightly right and think anyone on the left is far left. Some far, far left and right people think they are middle. We would have to lay out the terms to define what is a moderate, then try to define people on the criteria. I don't think we could get a consensus on the criteria though.

1. The Woodlands/Beaumont West Brook 2. Galena Park North Shore/Atascocita 3. Barbers Hill/Splendora 4. Crosby/Conroe Caney Creek 5. Porter/Dayton 6. Beaumont Central/Nederland 7. Port Arthur Memorial/Lumberton 8. Vidor/Port Neches-Groves 9. Cleveland/Bridge City 10. Huffman Hargrave/Navasota 11. Little Cypress-Mauriceville/Silsbee 12. Jasper/Rusk 13. Tarkington/Shepherd 14. Hamshire-Fannett/West Orange-Stark 15. Orangefield/Liberty 16. Coldspring-Oakhurst/Kirbyville 17. Kountze/Buna 18. Woodville/Trinity 19. East Chambers/Hempstead 20. Crockett/Newton 21. Groveton/Deweyville 22. Hull-Daisetta/Evadale 23. Apple Springs/High Island 24. Beaumont Legacy/Magnolia Legacy 25. Baytown Christian/Orange Community Christian

So what is your definition of the left, right and middle? If you ask someone on the left what their definition of the middle is, they will assuredly give a wildly different answer than someone from the right. You have repeatedly posted things that lead me to categorize you as way, way, way on the far left...in Obama/Hillary territory. You probably think you are in the middle or slightly left. I consider myself center right, but I am confident you think I'm far right. So frankly I give very little credence to anyone trying to speak about how the left, right or middle feels. And why do many people change affiliations multiple times during their lifetime?

Sorry, I thought I had quoted you in my previous post. Here's your quote...so you will get the notification. My response is above.

You responded to my post by stating that the middle is not controlled by hate. That can only mean that you are suggesting that anyone that thinks Hillary should be in jail is controlled by hate. I don't consider that bragging on the middle. In fact, I don't think anyone would consider that bragging on the middle. And the definition of far right and far left varies greatly. Many on the left think that governmental control of all aspects of life, cradle to grave, should be strictly regulated...and they consider this "middle" and open-minded. Too many of these people exist, which is the whole reason Obama was re-elected. He wasn't re-elected by open-minded people, he was elected by sheeple. Sorry if I don't share your rosy view of the American electorate.

Remind me again about the arguments of BLM. Aren't they railing against their assumption that certain people are committing crimes that go unpunished? And how is wanting a person to pay for her criminal activity considered hate. Do you understand the definition of hate, or do you just throw around terms because you think they sound good. I'm guessing you will throw out the race card next even though Hillary is white.

Put it where ever you want. I didn't focus on the Latino woman because it was obvious that was the hot topic of the day. You made the comment that Trump tweeted at 3:00am about a beauty queen. The beauty queen aspect was the media topic of the day, so you couldn't possibly be implying that was the weird part. So I took it as you were saying the 3:00am part was weird. Every sane person on this planet would have taken that angle. And you have the nerve to call Trump insane. And if you meant that tweeting about the hot topic of the day is weird, you have a very skewed and asinine definition of the term weird. Frankly I'm shocked that you are trying to carry on with this topic. I guess any semblance of credibility means absolutely nothing to you. Didn't I read one of your posts a while back where you said that Trump wouldn't even admit when he was wrong. For someone who hates the way Trump acts, y'all sure seem to have more and more personality traits in common.

The only point I was making was that it I don't find it weird that some people tweet at 3:00am. You made it a focal point of your comment that the tweet was at 3:00am and suggested that was weird. Gingrich did not say that tweeting at 3:00am is "strange". You are inferring that. And even it Gingrich is saying he thinks tweeting at 3:00am is weird, that doesn't make it so. How about starting a poll and see what other people think. You cursory poll of 3 people does not bolster your argument.

He was tweeting about the subject of the day. Why was a Latino women the subject of the day for the Liberal media? If Trump just came out and attacked the Latino women out of the blue, that would be weird. He was responding to the topic. I find it very weird that you think it is weird. And if you are going to quote me, get it right. I said I know people that get to work at 5:00am. Many of them get up at 3:00am. Man, you are having problems that are inexplicable.

The middle wants to see Hillary in jail where she belongs.

Man you are just all over the place. I answered your original question directly and now you say I don't want to talk about it. You accuse and scold me for getting off topic and ranting (which was not the case), then the very next post you rant about something that is way off-topic. You truly are a Progressive Liberal. And all this time I thought you were just a Democrat. Sounds like you joined in on George Soro's payroll. Even if not, he's still not getting his money's worth.

Trump has stated that he will repeal Obamacare, but he keeps adding the "and replace" caveat. I'm not optimistic that his replacement package will be much better. He's no Republican. Hillary will do everything she can to get us to a Socialist single-payer plan. Hillary tried to get her healthcare plan passed when she was First Lady, but couldn't get any support for it...not even from her own Democrats. She got stuffed like me trying to dunk on Lebron James.