Name:	DS Realist -	Reply
Subject:	Hilda Staffer
Date:	8/15/2016 11:02:02 PM

I would hate to work for Hilda.  Apparently, she goes on rants cussing her staff out for the smallest thing.  Now we know why Bill came to work one day as President with a black eye.  Several sources say they worried about Bill's safety around her. 

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Hilda Staffer
Date:	8/15/2016 11:52:10 PM

Just another example of how she will man handle Trumps best friend Putin.

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Hilda/Goofbutt
Date:	8/16/2016 11:53:21 AM

Let's see.  Putin has invaded the Ukraine, Syria, and made a general fool of o-BAMA/HILDA on her watch, so your reference is really excellent.  Maybe she can give Putin a blackeye....he's about her height so she won't even have to reach up...

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Well
Date:	8/16/2016 5:16:37 PM (updated 8/16/2016 5:24:50 PM)

Hillary punching him out is a whole lot better than what the Donald has planned for his favorite dictator...kissin his behind!

As for working for Hillary...I guess it depends on who you are talking to.  Several staffers and ex-staffers have publicly commented on how Hillary's somewhat formal and aloof public face is not her private face before family, friends and employees where she is witty with a warm and friendly demeanor that shows consistant respect and concern and sense of fairplay for all with whom she interacts.  She never forgets a birthday or christening and is always ready to lend a hand or shoulder to cry on for staffers going through and difficult times.  I guess maybe a few backstabbing layabouts who were dismissed from her staff for incompetance or spouting off may feel the need to display sour grapes. 

Now DS, where are these ''several sources'' of which you speak?  You sound like your political savior Donald Trump who has as one of his favorite authoritative sources "Lots of people are saying......''

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Hilda Staffer
Date:	8/16/2016 6:27:30 PM

It's no joke.  Despite all her claims to care about people and all her "it takes a village" rhetoric, she is condesending and dismissive to people at work.  In the WH, she was known for being awful to the house staff, sometimes telling them to "shut up" and "get out" and once a F--K you to a doorman wishing her a good day.  Tempermentally, she is no better than Trump, and he is probably actually a nicer person.  Despite what she says, the only person that Hilary cares about is herself.  And don't forget that she was the major strategist to get Bill through the intern schedule. 

BTW, who did former WH staff think was the best to work for?  The Bush Srs.  They were used to dealing with staff, and treated them with respect and kindness.  The Clinton's were the worst. 

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Hilda Staffer
Date:	8/16/2016 9:04:21 PM

Just exactly how do you know all this Hound?  Do you say the present and former staffers who tell a very different story are lying?  And, do you consider Trump any less concerned "only about" Trump as you insist Hillary is about herself?

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	Well
Date:	8/16/2016 11:27:39 PM

What would you expect from staffers and others who are being lucratively compensated and receive their livelihood from Hillary to say about her. There's an old saying that says "you don't bite the hand that feeds you". Hillary has been catered to for so long it appears that she has developed a temperament that does not endear her to those that have to serve her. 

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Hilda Staffer
Date:	8/17/2016 9:46:27 AM

The thing about Trump is that he doesn't pretend he is any different than he is.   

There are a couple of books out there where WH staff was interviewed (they are all retired) and talked about the differences of different Presidents in the residence. 

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Hilda Staffer
Date:	8/17/2016 3:29:41 PM

You are completely correct Hound...with Trump what you see is what you get, and that is exactly why I am so very opposed to him!  Where he is promising to take America is NOT where America needs to go!

Now, do you believe those present and former Clinton staffers who have been appearing and expressioing admiration of how she treats staff and associates are all lying?

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	Hilda Staffer
Date:	8/17/2016 3:58:08 PM

I've never seen one of those creatures but I don't go to huff and puff for news either. I have seen several that state her reputation as a horrible human being is well deserved.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Hilda Staffer
Date:	8/17/2016 6:32:32 PM

You know, if you want to believe that Hilary is a wonderful person, then believe it.  If you are drinking the kool-aid that she cares about the poor and disadvantaged, and the middle class, then drink it.  If you buy into her "it takes a village", then move there.  One thing that you don't likely know is that Washington is filled with people who use Preparation H for chapstick, so it doesn't surprise me that her close aids, would praise her to the sky, in hopes of future chances in her Adminisration (if it happens).  Most campaign staffers and the inner circle end up working for her Administration.  Because, after all, these are people that would walk over their mothers in track shoes to get 5 minutes of facetime with power, and after the campaign they are out of a job unless Hillary employs them.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Hilda Staffer
Date:	8/17/2016 10:24:25 PM

I do not believe Hillary is a wonderful person.  In fact I think she is a pretty sleazy person.  But, we are not electing Miss Congeniality or a Cub Scout den mother...we are electing the President of the United States...the most powerful human on the planet, the person that will likely have to make life and death decisions over the next four years, select 2 or 3 supreme court justices and dozens of other ambassadors and departmental leaders, deal with immigration, guide the economy, reform the tax code to save the middle class, and negotiate with foriegn friend and foe.  No, Hillary is no saint, but neither is she arguably mentally unstable nor an egotistical narcissist who can be goaded into saying and doing stupid things by a word from a reporter or protester.  Under those perameters, it is not a difficult call for me or, as it increasingly appears, for most of the citizens of the United States!  For that I am very thankful!

Now, as for drinking the Kool Aide,  I suggest you check the contents of your refrigerator.

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	Hilda Staffer
Date:	8/18/2016 11:13:45 AM (updated 8/18/2016 11:17:20 AM)

How you can trust a lying Hillary to lead in any of the areas you have described as being critical in the near future iis beyond me. Does the treaty that she and Obama negotiated with Iran not run chills down your spine? When you look at all the missteps that she and Obama have made and then realize that under her leadership we are in for more of the same or worse, something has to change. Her handling of Benghazi and her use of a personal server which has resulted in "classified" material being spread around the world is truly frightening. Her main interest has been the undercover way she has elected to deal with foreign governments in the building of the "Clinton Foundation" empire. What do you think she has given away in return for the millions of dollars foreign countries have contributed to the foundation, particulary with daughter Chelsea involved its administration? And you want this woman who has been given four or five "Pinnochios" and is working on more to lead our country? Trump will surround himself with a cabinet of qualified members who can lead our country in a new direction. We the people no longer have a government that adheres to the "Constitution".

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Hilda Staffer
Date:	8/18/2016 1:40:42 PM

No Kool Aid in my fridge, ever. 

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Do I trust "lying" Hillary?
Date:	8/18/2016 3:42:36 PM (updated 8/18/2016 3:50:35 PM)

When Donald Trump is the only alternate possibility...you bet your sweet fandango!!

I respectfully but completely reject your description of her tenure in public office.  You believe you are expressing "fact" when in reality you are giving an opinion based on truths, half truths and outright falsehoods.  My opinion differs from yours.  You are entitled to yours...do you concede I am equally entitled to mine or are you such a Trump believer that you fall for his claim that he "alone" knows what it takes to solve America's problems and all other opinions be damned?

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	Do I trust "lying" Hillary?
Date:	8/18/2016 8:01:15 PM

I agree we are both entitled to our opinions but I disagree with your reference to truths, half truths, and falsehoods. When asked,  FBI Comey said she lied, so are you calling Mr. Comey a liar. Hillary bluntly stated that there were no classified documents on her server so how can you call her anything else but a liar? How can anyone with any reasonable degree of intelligence believe that foreign governments are going to give millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation without receiving a quid pro quo? The Clinton's have lived a life above the law and continue to be an embarrassment to our country. 

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	Hilda Staffer
Date:	8/18/2016 8:23:55 PM

With all her "baggage", how can you support a sleazy person for President of the United States?

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Hilda Staffer
Date:	8/18/2016 10:45:30 PM

Buteye...given the incompetence of Trump would you vote for any Democrat for President?

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Do I trust "lying" Hillary?
Date:	8/18/2016 10:55:19 PM

Clinton has been caught telling lies as has Trump.  Clinton is the most investigated member of the government in the history of the United States, she has had 9 very biased congressional committees investigate her every move and no actionable law breaking has been uncovered much to the committee's chagrin.  She has been investigated by the FBI under the leadership of a Republican appointed director and was found to be very careless but not a criminal.

Please point out just one single quid-pro-quo reward granted by the US government which can be traced to ANY contribution to the Clinton Foundation.  If there were such rewards do you think it could have been hidden from the hundreds of committee members and staff not to mention the new GOP accolite Julian Assange digging under every rock to find out anything on Hillary Clinton.

If Donald Trump's business dealings (Trump U, unpaid sub-contractors, housing discrimmination, bankruptcies, use of illegals from Poland to build his empire, tax returns, etc., ets., etc., ad-nausiam) were put under the same microscope what do you think would be turned up?

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	Do I trust "lying" Hillary?
Date:	8/19/2016 1:56:03 AM (updated 8/19/2016 1:59:11 AM)

Doesn't the fact that she has been investigated at least nine times indicate that she is continually involved in situations that lead one to question her governmental dealings? She can be compared to the "cat" that has nine lives. Just because she has not been convicted is even more reason to be concerned about all the accusations that have come her way. The fact that she has not been investigated further suggests that the "establishment" wants her to stick around so they can continue business as usual. The fact that the FBI Director used a play on words by calling her actions "careless" rather than "criminal" gave her another "loophole" in which to avoid prosecution. Also, the fact that Attorney General Loretta Lynch said that the findings of the FBI investigation would be used to determine any action that would be taken against Hillary. In comparison to Hillary, Martha Stewart received five months in prison plus five months of home confinement for lying to federal investigators about a stock sale tha she called "a small personal matter".

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Do I trust "lying" Hillary?
Date:	8/19/2016 9:22:05 AM (updated 8/19/2016 9:31:56 AM)

It would seem to me that anybody investigated 9 times for basically the same issues by committees set up by his or her political and personal enemies, yet ALL producing no negative results, should give exactly the opposite reading from what you imply!! 

Mr Comey testifiying before congress was asked if the lack of criminal indictment was for political reasons he answered emphatically NO and went on to say that it there had been an incictment it would have clearly been for political reasons!

Martha Stewart's treatment was itself a travesty.  She was punished for receiving and acting on insider information.  A crime which is ignored  on a routine basis when committed by the really big players on a regular basis.  I wonder what an investigation into the Trump business dealings would reveal about "insider trading"?  Not making any accusations, just wondering.  I am looking forward to the Trump U trial coming up shortly after the elections.  Instead of complaing about the ''biased Mexican'' judge, Trump should be offering him profuse thanks for not scheduling the trial during the campaign!

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye, apparentely you misunderstand
Date:	8/19/2016 11:10:41 AM

I don't. For the record--- I DO NOT SUPPORT HILARY CLINTON.  I would vote for a yellow dog before I'd vote for Hilary.   I think my Coonhound would make a better President than Hilary. 

While I might not like everything that Trump says, does and believes in, I believe he will make a better President.  We have been on the same road now for over 8 years, and it is not leading anywhere productive.  It's time for a change.  I don't want to hear anymore BS about lying - they all lie; I don't want to hear anything more about Trump's temperment, because Hilary's is not better.  I don't want to hear anymore about nuke codes - he is no more likely to "push the button" anymore than Hilary is. I do not believe we can talk about any new programs since we can't afford the one's we have.  Yes, it is a shame that some people may be cut off from services that they need - their families will just have to step up, like it used to be, before all these programs.  When most of these programs were put in place, the U.S. was in a much different economic place than it is today.

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye, apparentely you misunderstandu
Date:	8/19/2016 2:54:38 PM (updated 8/19/2016 2:55:41 PM)

Sorry, my question was intended for Architect. I think it became confusing because I may have misplaced my question under the wrong subject. I fully understand your disdain for Hillary and support and share in your reasoning to not vote for her.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye, apparentely you misunderstand
Date:	8/19/2016 3:01:00 PM

If Trump's tax proposals are put into place 94% of the tax cuts will go to he top 1% of Americans  and in 10 years will increase the budget deficit by 11 trillion over what it will be if no changes are made to the current tax rates.  This is not the forecast from some left wing blog but from a very conservative think tank that is headed up by the man who was John McCain's economic advisor!

Hope you like The Donald's Supremes Hound.  You can kiss a woman's right to choose goodby along with any hope of getting big money interests out politics!

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	archidiot
Date:	8/19/2016 10:00:41 PM

just love how you quote the most stupid statistics.  BTW, "women's right to choose" isn't that liberal BS for killing babies?

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Wiximbecile and Hound
Date:	8/19/2016 11:24:34 PM

W'imbecile, just because true facts don't align with your warped opinion doesn't make them stupid, your response to them is what is stupid.

Hound, here is your typical Trump fellow traveler who thinks facts are stupid and a woman's right to chose means a woman's right to kill babies!  This is the crowd you have thrown in with!

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	Wiximbecile and Hound
Date:	8/20/2016 7:42:10 AM

If right to choose doesn't mean kill babies, please oh wise one, enlighten us to the proper meaning of right to choose.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Wiximbecile and Hound
Date:	8/20/2016 11:12:18 AM (updated 8/20/2016 11:15:39 AM)

If you don't know by now there is no reason for me to waste my time repeating it yet again.  My experience is that there is no possibility of enlightenment in your case...your mind is closed to any input that challenges your extraordinarily extremist opinion.  Maybe Hound is willing to give it a shot.

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye, apparentely you misunderstand
Date:	8/20/2016 2:19:22 PM

Why have you all of a sudden become concerned about the National Debt? In 2008 it was 10 trillion dollars, today it is over 19 trillion dollars and rising at 2.4 billion dollars a day. Obama has added more to the National Debt than the other 43 Presidents combined. If the "US Dollar" is replaced as the world currency as is being pursued by China and other countries, the United States will experience a natiional crisis. When the United States has to depend on borrowiing from foreign countries to fund our government, we are no longer the great America we once knew. If the United States is incapable of working under a "balanced budget", we are doomed as a nation. Even a "fool" should see that if we are dependent on borrowing money from China to fund our government that we are playing right into their hand. Would someone explain why our "government" is any different than a "family" when it comes to managing money? Architect, here is a question for you. I am "assuming" you are married, so if you can't control your wifes' spending and your monthly bills exceed your monthly income, what happens? Unless you are tied into Hillarys "foundation" or have a rich relative or friend to bail you out, you go bankrupt. So is that any different than our government?

stares

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	WOW!!
Date:	8/20/2016 10:29:47 PM (updated 8/20/2016 10:49:36 PM)

You show your true colors when you assume I would need to ''control my wife's spending''.  I am happy to say my wife and I have a marriage of cooperation and understanding with neither of us ''controlling'' the other.  If you are still dragging your wife around by her hair shame on both of you.

Balanced budget!!...can you tell me the year and president when that last occured?  Huh?  Even a ''fool'' can see, when ''W'' came into office the national debit had been reduced by 400 billion under Bill Clinton and there was a 250 million budget surplus the year he left office...2000.  8 Years later under ''W'' the budget was 1.2 billion in deficit.  It was in the same range of 1.2 to 1.4 billion for 2 years under Obama and then began to shrink and for 2015 was a little over 300 billion.  No it is not good, but it is going in the right direction and I see no reason to do a Bush repeat by electing Trump.  Under his plan if he serves 2 terms (shudder to think) the debt will be 32 to 34 trillion when he leaves office.  Is that what you and you obedient wife want Mr Neanderthal?

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	WOW!!
Date:	8/21/2016 11:47:04 AM

I was in no way trying to insinuate that you have a wife whose spending is out of control. I was merely using a hypothetical to try and relate the need for the "federal government" to have a balance budget and the need for a "family" to have a balanced budget is basically the same. But as usual you had to turn things into a negative situation by calling me a neandertha, calling me a "controlling" husband,l and referring to my "obedient" wife. Notice I used the word "if" in referring to your wife but you had to jump to the conclusion that I am a "controlling" husband. Also, you made no mention to the fact that Obama essentially "doubled" the national debt in eight years and that the national debt is rising at 2.4 billion dollars a day. Further, you seem to have no concern about our indebtedness to foreign countries. I will respond later to your question about the occurence of a balanced budget.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye, apparentely you misunderstand...again
Date:	8/21/2016 2:25:51 PM (updated 8/21/2016 3:33:49 PM)

I in no way took your remarks to imply anything about my wife and her spending, l did take it that you were implying you considered it a ''husband's'' duty to have control over his wife's spending.  Hey buddy it was you that made the remark ''if you can't control your wife's spending and your monthly bills exceed....."!  I consider that a remark that would typically come from a controlling husband...a ''Neanderthal'' by today's standards.  In my marriage there is no deficit spending but there is also no ''controlling'' by either member.  Maybe your wife needs to exert some ''control'' on your posts. You may be of the same opinion as one of GA's most extreme right members of congress who was elected even after saying "I have no problem with a woman running for public office as long as she has the permission of her husband''!

Now, Obama has increased the debt by about 9 trillion, a very unfortunate occurance even considering the economic free fall we were in when he took office.  According to the conservative American Tax Fd'n your guy is proposing to institute policies which will increase the debt 14 to 16 trillion over 8 years while giving a tax cut to ''all'' but which will award over 90% of those cuts to the richest (yes, RICHEST...politically correct and class warfare or not) 1 % of the citizens.  The lowest 20% would save on average $128/year and the top 1% would average an annual savings of $275,000.  Who says Donald is not supportive of the big money boys on Wall St?

The conservative American Action Forum headed by Douglas Holtz Eakin has also put out an ''invoice'' to the American people on what the cost of Trumps immigration promises would be...400 to 600 billion, a reduction in GDP of 1.6 trillion, a severe labor shortage, and problematic wage and consumer inflation.  That of course is only for the deportations, not the wall...guess Mr Eakin agrees Mexico will pay for that.  I don't think you Trump folks really know what will happen if this guy is elected and actually does what he is promising to do.  The only saving grace...no 1/  he is probably not going to get elected and no 2/  if he is elected he will not be able to carry out ANY of his most extreme promises.  Of course when his most ardent supporters realize he has broken his promises they may start to exert some of the same measures suggested by their master in the event Hillary Clinton ever had the opportunity to make appointments to the Supremes!!

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	No
Date:	8/21/2016 4:47:21 PM

Archie, it appears you are purposefully misunderstanding his post, again.  He was making a comparison to a hypothetical.  Stick to real arguments on real issues, not those you create and promote.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	No
Date:	8/21/2016 10:59:05 PM

Controlling someone's spending is not necessarily Neanderthal and certainly doesn't imply he is controlling his wife.  I think it is fair to say that most marriages are pretty equal these days with many women having careers as well as men.  But every once in a while, one or the other gets into a spending mode and the other person may have to say - wait, we need to get back on track.  I know this is true in my marriage and I don't think my husband considers me controlling and I don't consider him controlling. 

Such is the case with the federal government.  Everybody has a lot of "wants", but there is a limited amount of money available.  If our debt continues to go up, more and more of that money has be put towards servicing our debt.  You cannot continue to print money indefinitely.  So despite all the big personalities and bravado, I think a lot of us think that there needs to be some changes to how we allocate the money.  Yes, I would be the first to agree that all these programs are lovely and a lot of people have become quite dependent on them, but we need to remember that these are "nice to haves" and not necessities.  Now I am not in favor of privatizing SS or cutting it, in fact, I don't consider it an entitlement.  But unending welfare programs and giving everyone a free college education is a pipedream and has no basis in reality.  It was a different time and place in this country when these programs were put in place. We were prosperous then, and now we are not.  We were moving up in the world at that point, and now we are trying to hang on to our leadership in the world.  It's nice that other countries have these great programs, but their tax burden is much different than ours, the population is different, they centalize things much more than we are able to.   

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Good grief
Date:	8/21/2016 11:09:49 PM (updated 8/21/2016 11:17:46 PM)

Of course I know he was making a hypothetical point and a valid one at that, but he was doing it such a clumsy way that it makes his true feelings about women and their ''place'' in society and the family painfully obvious.  Had he put his advice about me controlling my wife's spending in parenthesis I would have seen it a tongue in cheek, but he didn't!  Mr H I KNOW you are not that dense.

Interesting but typical for this forum how everybody comes down on the sideshow and fails to respond to ''the real arguments and real issues'' which were the main points behind my post... the conservative think tank's facts related to Trumps idiotic plans! 

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Hound
Date:	8/21/2016 11:16:24 PM (updated 8/21/2016 11:21:26 PM)

you are right, he didn't imply he was ''controlling'' his wife, but he did ask what would happen to our family budget if I couldn't control my wife's spending!!  I urge you to re-read his post.  You really have changed if you are defending such a blatent but apparently intentional sexest comment!!

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye, apparentely you misunderstand...again
Date:	8/21/2016 11:31:37 PM

I give you credit, you are the best at taking a situation and taking it to the extreme. I don't know why you are hung up on whom is misunderstanding whom. I was merely trying to use a family's need to manage their finances as a comparison to the need for the federal government to do the same. For whatever reason, you said you took it that I was implying that it was a "husbands" duty to have "control" over his wife's spending. Nothing could be further from the truth. You seem to enjoy your gift of belittingly people as you referred to me as a Neanderthal, controlling husband who pulls his wife around by the hair of the head. Instead of the example I used to describe a family's need to manage their finances, I could have just as easily have used the husband as the one whose spending needed  to be controlled. But leave it to good old Architedt, he had to make a mountain out of a mole hill. Also, maybe you need to heed your  "own"  advice and have your wife exert some "control" over your posts.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Hound
Date:	8/22/2016 10:22:32 AM

I think I correctly assumed he was using that as an example.  Are we so concerned about being politically correct?

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	Hound
Date:	8/22/2016 10:52:11 AM (updated 8/22/2016 11:06:05 AM)

Appears Archie will seize upon any opportunity, valid or not, to try to prove his point.  Don't know why he keeps spouting his far left rhetoric when nobody on the forum but Goofy and maybe Copper is buying it.

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	Hound
Date:	8/22/2016 11:20:41 AM

Thanks to Hound and MrHodja for coming to my defense. Without going back and doing a fact check, it seems that Architect is usually the one who has to go around the world to find a way to try and humiliate the poster. I still have one more question from Architect that I haven"t answered, and once I do I will probably leave it up to Architect to see who else he can take his wrath out on. Good Day!!!!

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Hound
Date:	8/22/2016 12:15:02 PM

When it comes to a man talking about another man needing to "control" any aspect of his wife's life, he!! Yeah, and I am shocked that you are not of a similar bent.  You really have changed!  I would never use such sexist language to discuss the necessity of a family's need to spend and budget wisely.  What is wrong with asking the same question as "if your family spends more each month than its income....".  Do you not agree that if a man uses an expression implying he needs to control his wife it is at least a bit out of step with modern thinking by intelligent men and women?

Again, what about the facts of Trumps tax and immigration plans that were mentioned in the post above and beyond the side issue of sexism or political correctness?

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Mr H
Date:	8/22/2016 12:17:50 PM

since when is it far left rhetoric to post the conclusions of 2 respected conservative think tanks?

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye, apparentely you misunderstand...again
Date:	8/22/2016 12:27:40 PM (updated 8/22/2016 12:30:39 PM)

Then I would respectfully suggest that you need to find an updated way (see my post above) to express that opinion.

Now, any comments on the conclusions regarding Trump's tax and Immigrations plans.  These conclusion go to the question of debt and budget that you are so concerned about.  Why is nobody coming to his defense?  If anybody does wish to defend him please do so by explaining what is good about and why you like is programs and their consequences, not by degrading the ideas of his opponent.

This is the thing that those of us who oppose Trump cannot quite fathom...Trump's words explain his appeal but what would actually happen if he put his words into action never seems to get much attention.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Hound
Date:	8/22/2016 6:30:22 PM

I think we go overboard with political correctness, especially in this case where he was just throwing an example out.  I don't have to worry about being controlled and I doubt Buteye's wife feels controlled. 

I am dismayed about possible Supreme Court picks that would do away with Roe v. Wade, but you cannot have everything, and another generation of women can fight for it again. 

Looking at Trump's age, it doesn't surprise me that he is a bit sexist.  His first wife said that he could pay off his divorce in dresses. Marla Maple was a gold digger.  His third wife seems happy in the role of stay at home mom.  I remember when I first started working, men regularly called women "honey", "sweetie" "babe" and I am sure among themselves they said that any woman that was a bit bi_chy, that she was having her time of the month. But at the same time, his daughter runs one of his companies, Ivanka has a business.  I'm sure they are not the only women working for him. He's probably not much into "feminists".  There was a time I might have been a bit more offended by his comments than I am now.  My experience is that what men like him, don't always mean exactly what they say. 

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Hound
Date:	8/23/2016 9:31:13 AM

Thanks for the reasoned answer.  Of course neither you nor any other Trump supporters have commented on the main thrust of my posts...the conclusions related to his tax and immigration plans.  Are you unwilling to defend them?  Will anybody refute the numbers?