rec.sport.golf@googlegroups.com
Google Groups
Topic digest
View all topics
Biden's medal of freedom - 9 Updates
OT: Hilarious! - 10 Updates
OT: "An Army of Jeff Gannons" - 1 Update
TWO DAYS AND COUNTING!! - 3 Updates
Trump's magnficent nominees - 2 Updates
Biden's medal of freedom
recscuba_google@huntzinger.com: Jan 18 01:12PM -0800
On Wednesday, January 18, 2017 at 3:50:15 PM UTC-5, Moderate wrote:
> > with the proof that you actually know what their respective
> > decision making processes are.
> Nice sentence structure.
Yes, its just a logical "if, then".
> I have no idea what you just said.
So much for writing at an undergraduate
college level, so here you go:
Greg claimed to know something. He needs
to prove it to be so.
FYI, as per the Coleman Liau index[1], the
above is at the 2nd grade reading level.
Is this low enough for you, or do you need
even more dumbing down?
https://www.online-utility.org/english/readability_test_and_improve.jsp
-hh
MNMikeW <mnmiikkew@aol.com>: Jan 18 04:12PM -0600
John B. wrote:
> he is kind, compassionate, dedicated and incredibly smart.
> A lot of people have gotten the Medal of Freedom who had
> done a lot less to serve it than he did.
Like?
BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net>: Jan 18 04:15PM -0600
>>> Empty, diaharea words.
>> So you're smarter than the Nobel Prize Committee. I think not Greg.
>Biden didn't get a Nobel.
Somehow the threads got mixed up.
BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net>: Jan 18 04:20PM -0600
>> That wasn't the criteria. The fact was that something was being done
>> at last.
>Except nothing was done. Except starting two more wars.
That has nothing to do with an award for things being addressed for
the first time. The previous administrations didn't accomplish these
areas either..if they even tried.
"John B." <johnb505@gmail.com>: Jan 18 02:28PM -0800
On Wednesday, January 18, 2017 at 5:12:51 PM UTC-5, MNMikeW wrote:
> > A lot of people have gotten the Medal of Freedom who had
> > done a lot less to serve it than he did.
> Like?
Richard Petty.
MNMikeW <mnmiikkew@aol.com>: Jan 18 04:31PM -0600
BobbyK wrote:
> That has nothing to do with an award for things being addressed for
> the first time. The previous administrations didn't accomplish these
> areas either..if they even tried.
What exactly was being addressed for the first time? He was awarded the
Nobel about a month before he was even sworn in.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jan 18 03:33PM -0800
On 2017-01-18 2:31 PM, MNMikeW wrote:
>> areas either..if they even tried.
> What exactly was being addressed for the first time? He was awarded the
> Nobel about a month before he was even sworn in.
No, Mikey... ...he wasn't.
The award was announced on October 9, 2009.
<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html>
But when you're a zealot, you don't actually need facts, do you?
Moderate <nospam@nomail.com>: Jan 18 05:40PM -0600
> Richard Petty.
He has done more charitable work than the Clinton Foundation.
--
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jan 18 03:41PM -0800
On 2017-01-18 3:40 PM, Moderate wrote:
> "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>> Richard Petty.
> He has done more charitable work than the Clinton Foundation.
More bullshit based on the fact that you can't understand that a
charitable foundation can do charitable work without making grants.
Back to top
OT: Hilarious!
Moderate <nospam@nomail.com>: Jan 18 03:45PM -0600
> of her doing anything for them. I guess she got away with
> her "scams" because the FBI, DOJ and the press were all in
> bed with her, right?
How do you not remember anything?
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/statement-head-of-cli
nton-foundation-admits-donors-got-special-treatment-at
--
Moderate <nospam@nomail.com>: Jan 18 03:46PM -0600
>> I previously posted a cite that detailed Clinton Foundation scams
>> and the Pay to Play has ready been admitted.
> No. You didn't.
Liar.
--
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jan 18 01:54PM -0800
On 2017-01-18 1:45 PM, Moderate wrote:
> How do you not remember anything?
> https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/statement-head-of-cli
> nton-foundation-admits-donors-got-special-treatment-at
Seriously: you don't think there is any bias at "donaldjtrump.com"?
LOL
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jan 18 01:54PM -0800
On 2017-01-18 1:46 PM, Moderate wrote:
>> No. You didn't.
> Liar.
Nope.
"John B." <johnb505@gmail.com>: Jan 18 02:00PM -0800
On Wednesday, January 18, 2017 at 4:45:46 PM UTC-5, Moderate wrote:
> https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/statement-head-of-cli
> nton-foundation-admits-donors-got-special-treatment-at
> --
Are you fucking kidding me? A press release from the
Trump campaign? That's all you've got?
MNMikeW <mnmiikkew@aol.com>: Jan 18 04:22PM -0600
Alan Baker wrote:
>> nton-foundation-admits-donors-got-special-treatment-at
> Seriously: you don't think there is any bias at "donaldjtrump.com"?
> LOL
No more biased that Boingboing. LOL
MNMikeW <mnmiikkew@aol.com>: Jan 18 04:23PM -0600
John B. wrote:
>> --
> Are you fucking kidding me? A press release from the
> Trump campaign? That's all you've got?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/emails-reveal-how-foundation-donors-got-access-to-clinton-and-her-close-aides-at-state-dept/2016/08/22/345b5200-6882-11e6-8225-fbb8a6fc65bc_story.html?utm_term=.a901e068badf
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jan 18 03:34PM -0800
On 2017-01-18 2:22 PM, MNMikeW wrote:
>> Seriously: you don't think there is any bias at "donaldjtrump.com"?
>> LOL
> No more biased that Boingboing. LOL
Please...
Moderate <nospam@nomail.com>: Jan 18 05:35PM -0600
>> --
> Are you fucking kidding me? A press release from the
> Trump campaign? That's all you've got?
I specifically posted from Trump thinking it might jog your memory.
No hope of that obviously. It was discussed previously, but you forgot.
--
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jan 18 03:39PM -0800
On 2017-01-18 3:35 PM, Moderate wrote:
>> Are you fucking kidding me? A press release from the
>> Trump campaign? That's all you've got?
> I specifically posted from Trump thinking it might jog your memory.
So let's see a less biased source that confirms your claim...
...which you've now snipped.
Back to top
OT: "An Army of Jeff Gannons"
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jan 18 03:35PM -0800
I'd never heard of this before...
...but it certainly is illuminating, do you think:
'The Trump administration's reported proposal to move the White House
press briefing to a large room that can accommodate pro-Trump sycophants
and propagandists is brazen and destructive. But it's also not entirely
new -- the Bush administration adopted a similar strategy in 2004,
granting press briefing access to a shill working for a right-wing
outlet who they could rely on for softball questions.
That shill's name was Jeff Gannon. Actually, that shill's name was James
Guckert. But that's getting ahead of ourselves.
Gannon parlayed a two-day, $50 broadcast journalism workshop at the
right-wing Leadership Institute into a job reporting from the White
House briefing room for Talon News. Talon News was a shell organization
run by a GOP political operative that used articles written by
right-wing activists to drive traffic to another conservative website
run by the operative.
Thanks to the access the White House press office provided, Gannon had a
platform to draw plaudits from Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, get his
work published by the American Enterprise Institute, and even attend
White House Christmas parties.
The White House got something in return: Gannon became the lifeline for
Bush's press secretary at the time, Scott McClellan.
Here's how it would work: Other journalists would be grilling McClellan
over the Bush administration's activities. McClellan would call on
Gannon for a question. And Gannon would bail McClellan out, frequently
with a leading question ladened with false assumptions.'
<http://mediamatters.org/blog/2017/01/18/donald-trump-wants-army-jeff-gannon-shills-white-house-press-briefing-room/215043>
'Thirteen years later, the landscape has shifted. Incoming White House
press secretary Sean Spicer is openly discussing moving the press
briefings to a larger space in order to accommodate "talk radio,
bloggers and others." While the White House Correspondents Association
currently determines who gets the 49 seats in the briefing room, the
White House Press Office handles credentialing and distributes daily
press passes, giving Spicer significant control over the composition of
the press room.
In practice, that means that Spicer could have a sea of Jeff Gannons on
which to rely -- "reporters" from openly pro-Trump propaganda outlets
who will side with the president over their colleagues in the press.
If ABC News gives him trouble during the briefing, he could turn to the
reporter from Breitbart.com. When The Washington Post tries to pin him
down, he could retreat to the representative from Right Side
Broadcasting Network. If The Associated Press and CNN and NBC News are
all pressing him for answers, he could take questions from Laura
Ingraham's LifeZette or One America News Network or Infowars to stall.
We could even see our first all-shill press briefing, with reporters
from mainstream outlets entirely shut out while Spicer calls on the
sycophants.'
Back to top
TWO DAYS AND COUNTING!!
recscuba_google@huntzinger.com: Jan 18 01:51PM -0800
> This fact from 2014:
> http://dailycaller.com/2014/10/29/obamacare-year-one-78-percent-premium-hikes/
> In its first year, Obamacare hiked health insurance premiums by up to 78 percent, according to a new analysis comparing insurance costs before and after Obamacare.
The dailycaller has been determined to be an 'unreliable source' by Wiki.
It also pays to go read the original report, which can be found here:
<https://www.healthpocket.com/healthcare-research/infostat/obamacare-2014-premiums-higher-than-pre-reform-market#.WH_gZ6q7rq4>
"Conclusion
The examination of unsubsidized health insurance premiums
is multifaceted and prone to political misuse....However,
the degree to which the cost of consumers' premiums increased
is a more complicated matter than suggested by the premium data.
First, the Affordable Care Act has prohibited the rejection
of health insurance applicants based on medical history...
A second issue to consider is that the government data on rates
in the pre-reform market did not include 'rate-ups.'
Health insurance premium subsidies are a problematic
consideration as well.
Additionally, the average health plan benefit package also
expanded....the individual market were required to cover ten
categories of Essential Health Benefits....Less than 2% of
pre-reform plans provided all of the essential health benefits.9"
> Because no one knows what plan is going to replace the ACA,
> there really is no argument at this point.
What's that? Are you saying that despite having SEVEN YEARS
to formulate a replacement plan that the Republicans are
still coming up utterly empty? How can they be credible at
all if they've been so incompetent in planning for the past
3/4's of a decade?
> I sincerely hope Trump and his team succeed.
I do too because we're all on this boat together; I
really want to be wrong, but I'm afraid I'm not.
-hh
michaelunowho@gmail.com: Jan 18 02:29PM -0800
> still coming up utterly empty? How can they be credible at
> all if they've been so incompetent in planning for the past
> 3/4's of a decade?
Republican politicians are like Democrat politicians, out for their own hides and those of their contributors. What they do best; is take with both hands.
Trump will be fighting them all. He is an outsider.
But Trump has a group of smart, successful businessmen, working on this. I'm very curious to see what's going to happen.
> > I sincerely hope Trump and his team succeed.
> I do too because we're all on this boat together; I
> really want to be wrong, but I'm afraid I'm not.
It should be interesting.
Eight years ago I was sucked into the "hope and change" bullshit. I was disappointed.
I'm hoping for better now.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jan 18 03:34PM -0800
>> 3/4's of a decade?
> Republican politicians are like Democrat politicians, out for their own hides and those of their contributors. What they do best; is take with both hands.
> Trump will be fighting them all. He is an outsider.
He'll be joining them at the trough...
Back to top
Trump's magnficent nominees
"John B." <johnb505@gmail.com>: Jan 18 02:26PM -0800
He's off to a great start!
Monica Crowley, chosen to be NSC spokeswoman,
plagiarized parts of her doctoral dissertation
and book.
Tom Price, nominated to be HHS secretary, bought
stock in a medical device company days before
introducing a bill that would specifically
benefit that company. That's insider trading.
Betsy DeVos, nominated to be Education
Secretary demurred when asked if guns
should be allowed in public schools,
although she said a public elementary
school in Wyoming should allow them in
case of a grizzly bear attack.
Scott Pruitt, to be EPA administrator,
refused to say if he would recuse himself
from lawsuits that he himself filed. In
other words, he may be the plaintiff and the
respondent at the same time.
Rick Mulvaney, to head OMB, failed to pay
$15,000 in taxes on a household employee.
At least two Clinton cabinet
nominees had to withdraw their names from
consideration for the same reason.
michaelunowho@gmail.com: Jan 18 02:39PM -0800
On Wednesday, January 18, 2017 at 5:26:29 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> At least two Clinton cabinet
> nominees had to withdraw their names from
> consideration for the same reason.
I guess you weren't asked to join Trumps team.
And if he does ask, I guess you will refuse.
Back to top
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.golf+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.