JUST A SHOUT OUT

Share thoughts, news, views, etc. WARNING, this forum contains a lot of heated political debate. Harsh profanity is not allowed, but if you are easily offended, do not visit this forum.

Moderators: Pike Ridge Beagles, Aaron Bartlett

Post Reply
Welshman
Posts: 189
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 5:18 pm

JUST A SHOUT OUT

Post by Welshman »

BREAKING NEWS
PRESIDENT TRUMP MAKES DECISION - BEAGLE WILL BE OFFICIAL WHITE HOUSE PET
Latest report from White House President Trump in an attempt to reach across the aisle to LGBT community and Transgenders. President Trump has decided that the beagle is the pet he sees as best for White House. Stipulates he only wants one of proper color that will remind aforementioned constituents of spring, colorful flowers, peace and tranquility. Also just as he has required all materials used in Dakota pipelines be made in America, this colorful animal will be purchased directly from a kennel owned by someone from previously mentioned communities or with previously documented left leaning tendencies.
Again he is not looking for normal, black, white and tan color. Only colors that will evoke visions for Transgenders and LGBT individuals of dandelions and spring time.

WARNING BY ACKNOWLEDGING OWNERSHIP OF SUCH AN ANIMAL YOU WILL HAVE DECLARED YOURSELF AS MEMBER OF AFOREMENTIONED COMMUNITY AND CANNOT HOLD AUTHOR TO ANY LIABILITY IN A COURT OF LAW

For additional information please go to JUST TRYING TO HELP LIBTARDS A LITTLE@PINE MT.COM

Fellas I had to retype all this from original site. Do we know anyone that is a left winger and has dogs that meet these requirements.

Also to you who wish to donate/sell an animal we are strictly don't ask don't tell. Please feel free to come forward.
Last edited by Welshman on Wed Feb 22, 2017 5:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Pine Mt Beagles
Posts: 7803
Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Pineville Ky

Re: JUST A SHOUT OUT

Post by Pine Mt Beagles »

I am glad trump is ,bringing the Republican Party out of the closet,,

The Log Cabin Republican

And the GOPROUD Republicans

Will thank him ,Heck, I missed Wood Stock the USMC thought I had better places to be ,,Maybe we can have another.


In Trump, pro-gay rights Republicans see a new hope
His response to the Orlando mass-killing and statements regarding the LGBT community has social moderates hopeful of making changes to the party platform.
By KYLE CHENEY 06/15/16 05:34 AM

Donald Trump buoyed Republican LGBT activists with his defense of the gay community in the wake of Sunday’s mass murder at a gay nightclub.

Republican gay rights advocates, long sidelined by the party’s socially conservative core, suddenly see an opening to move the GOP away from its hardline opposition to same-sex marriage. And they think Donald Trump is the candidate to help them do it.

Trump buoyed Republican LGBT activists with his defense of the gay community in the wake of Sunday’s mass murder at a gay nightclub. “Ask yourself, who is really the friend of women and the LGBT community. Donald Trump with his actions, or Hillary Clinton with her words?” he said Monday, in a speech condemning the Orlando attack, which left 49 club-goers dead at the hands of a man who pledged allegiance to the Islamic State and other terrorist groups. Trump followed it up with a tweet Tuesday in which he thanked LGBT Americans and said: “I will fight for you.”

The sudden warmth from a Republican standard-bearer comes amid a push to moderate the party platform’s current conservative stances on social issues — an effort bankrolled by some of the Republican Party’s biggest donors. That effort faces fierce opposition from social conservatives, who are looking to preserve the party’s position that regards same-sex marriage as an affront to social order and call for a Constitutional amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman. But the more centrist elements in the party say Trump’s welcoming tone toward LGBT Americans and a sudden outpouring of national support for the gay community could move the debate in their direction.

“I believe we truly hit a tipping point in the LGBT equality movement in the United States in that for so long, you had Republicans reluctant to even mention the phrase ‘LGBT community’ and here we have our presumptive Republican presidential nominee not only using that phrase but directly expressing sympathy,” said Gregory T. Angelo, president of the Log Cabin Republicans. “If Republicans try to position themselves as being justified in maintaining harsh anti-gay rhetoric in the platform … you better believe that Democrats are going to demonize them any chance they get.”

John Fluharty, an openly gay adviser to the Delaware GOP, said de-emphasizing language opposing same-sex marriage could invite gay Americans to vote for Republicans in November.

“Trump has a real opportunity to help expand the party by pushing Republicans to accept the reality of what happened in Orlando,” Fluharty said. “He can reset the clock for Republicans on LGBTQ issues if he’s willing to bring down the hammer on reactionary elements in the Party, and drive home the point that Orlando was not just an attack on America, but it was an attack aimed directly at American LGBTQ citizens …Republicans admit this reality and it seems to be reflected in the platform with language that supports ending discrimination and expanding equality.”

Sunday’s massacre, the worst mass shooting in American history and deadliest terror attack since Sept. 11, 2001. In its aftermath, leaders on both sides of the aisle rallied around the LGBT community in Orlando and expressed solidarity with their families.

The American Unity Fund has largely spearheaded the organization to remove language in the party’s platform that condemns same-sex marriage. The group, funded by billionaire GOP financiers like Paul Singer, Dan Loeb, Seth Klarman and Cliff Asness, has been pushing for a middle-ground approach – striking the anti-LGBT language in the party’s platform and replacing it with an acknowledgment of the widely varying opinions on the issue.

“I think Donald Trump has his finger on the pulse of the Republican Party. I think he is reflecting the sentiment that people have about LGBT issues, and in reflecting that he’s showing that it’s time to move on,” said Tyler Deaton, a senior advisor to the effort. “He’s said that in many different ways. He says that in a style that only Trump can do it.”

If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered

Welshman
Posts: 189
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 5:18 pm

Re: JUST A SHOUT OUT

Post by Welshman »

Mr Stewart you were not supposed to respond to this one. I was aiming for those who left that Marine out their fighting their battles.

Newt
Posts: 5358
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 7:42 am

Re: JUST A SHOUT OUT

Post by Newt »

Glenn
_Greenwald

The Deep State Goes to War With President-Elect, Using Unverified Claims, as Democrats Cheer
Glenn Greenwald

January 11 2017, 9:35 a.m.

In January 1961, Dwight Eisenhower delivered his farewell address after serving two terms as U.S. president; the five-star general chose to warn Americans of this specific threat to democracy: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” That warning was issued prior to the decadelong escalation of the Vietnam War, three more decades of Cold War mania, and the post-9/11 era, all of which radically expanded that unelected faction’s power even further.

This is the faction that is now engaged in open warfare against the duly elected and already widely disliked president-elect, Donald Trump. They are using classic Cold War dirty tactics and the defining ingredients of what has until recently been denounced as “Fake News.”

Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media, much of which reflexively reveres, serves, believes, and sides with hidden intelligence officials. And Democrats, still reeling from their unexpected and traumatic election loss, as well as a systemic collapse of their party, seemingly divorced further and further from reason with each passing day, are willing — eager — to embrace any claim, cheer any tactic, align with any villain, regardless of how unsupported, tawdry, and damaging those behaviors might be.

The serious dangers posed by a Trump presidency are numerous and manifest. There is a wide array of legitimate and effective tactics for combating those threats: from bipartisan congressional coalitions and constitutional legal challenges to citizen uprisings and sustained and aggressive civil disobedience. All of those strategies have periodically proven themselves effective in times of political crisis or authoritarian overreach.

But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy allies to unilaterally subvert the U.S. election and impose its own policy dictates on the elected president is both warped and self-destructive. Empowering the very entities that have produced the most shameful atrocities and systemic deceit over the last six decades is desperation of the worst kind. Demanding that evidence-free, anonymous assertions be instantly venerated as Truth — despite emanating from the very precincts designed to propagandize and lie — is an assault on journalism, democracy, and basic human rationality. And casually branding domestic adversaries who refuse to go along as traitors and disloyal foreign operatives is morally bankrupt and certain to backfire on those doing it.

Beyond all that, there is no bigger favor that Trump opponents can do for him than attacking him with such lowly, shabby, obvious shams, recruiting large media outlets to lead the way. When it comes time to expose actual Trump corruption and criminality, who is going to believe the people and institutions who have demonstrated they are willing to endorse any assertions no matter how factually baseless, who deploy any journalistic tactic no matter how unreliable and removed from basic means of ensuring accuracy?

All of these toxic ingredients were on full display yesterday as the Deep State unleashed its tawdriest and most aggressive assault yet on Trump: vesting credibility in and then causing the public disclosure of a completely unvetted and unverified document, compiled by a paid, anonymous operative while he was working for both GOP and Democratic opponents of Trump, accusing Trump of a wide range of crimes, corrupt acts, and salacious private conduct. The reaction to all of this illustrates that while the Trump presidency poses grave dangers, so, too, do those who are increasingly unhinged in their flailing, slapdash, and destructive attempts to undermine it.



For months, the CIA, with unprecedented clarity, overtly threw its weight behind Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and sought to defeat Donald Trump. In August, former acting CIA Director Michael Morell announced his endorsement of Clinton in the New York Times and claimed that “Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.” The CIA and NSA director under George W. Bush, Gen. Michael Hayden, also endorsed Clinton and went to the Washington Post to warn, in the week before the election, that “Donald Trump really does sound a lot like Vladimir Putin,” adding that Trump is “the useful fool, some naif, manipulated by Moscow, secretly held in contempt, but whose blind support is happily accepted and exploited.”

It is not hard to understand why the CIA preferred Clinton over Trump. Clinton was critical of Obama for restraining the CIA’s proxy war in Syria and was eager to expand that war, while Trump denounced it. Clinton clearly wanted a harder line than Obama took against the CIA’s long-standing foes in Moscow, while Trump wanted improved relations and greater cooperation. In general, Clinton defended and intended to extend the decadeslong international military order on which the CIA and Pentagon’s preeminence depends, while Trump — through a still-uncertain mix of instability and extremist conviction — posed a threat to it.

Whatever one’s views are on those debates, it is the democratic framework — the presidential election, the confirmation process, congressional leaders, judicial proceedings, citizen activism and protest, civil disobedience — that should determine how they are resolved. All of those policy disputes were debated out in the open; the public heard them; and Trump won. Nobody should crave the rule of Deep State overlords.

Yet craving Deep State rule is exactly what prominent Democratic operatives and media figures are doing. Any doubt about that is now dispelled. Just last week, Chuck Schumer issued a warning to Trump, telling Rachel Maddow that Trump was being “really dumb” by challenging the unelected intelligence community because of all the ways they possess to destroy those who dare to stand up to them:

And last night, many Democrats openly embraced and celebrated what was, so plainly, an attempt by the Deep State to sabotage an elected official who had defied it: ironically, its own form of blackmail.



Back in October, a political operative and former employee of the British intelligence agency MI6 was being paid by Democrats to dig up dirt on Trump (before that, he was paid by anti-Trump Republicans). He tried to convince countless media outlets to publish a long memo he had written filled with explosive accusations about Trump’s treason, business corruption, and sexual escapades, with the overarching theme that Trump was in servitude to Moscow because they were blackmailing and bribing him.

Despite how many had it, no media outlets published it. That was because these were anonymous claims unaccompanied by any evidence at all, and even in this more permissive new media environment, nobody was willing to be journalistically associated with it. As the New York Times’ Executive Editor Dean Baquet put it last night, he would not publish these “totally unsubstantiated” allegations because “we, like others, investigated the allegations and haven’t corroborated them, and we felt we’re not in the business of publishing things we can’t stand by.”

The closest this operative got to success was convincing Mother Jones’s David Corn to publish an October 31 article reporting that “a former senior intelligence officer for a Western country” claims that “he provided the [FBI] with memos, based on his recent interactions with Russian sources, contending the Russian government has for years tried to co-opt and assist Trump.”

But because this was just an anonymous claim unaccompanied by any evidence or any specifics (which Corn withheld), it made very little impact. All of that changed yesterday. Why?

What changed was the intelligence community’s resolution to cause this all to become public and to be viewed as credible. In December, John McCain provided a copy of this report to the FBI and demanded they take it seriously.

At some point last week, the chiefs of the intelligence agencies decided to declare that this ex-British intelligence operative was “credible” enough that his allegations warranted briefing both Trump and Obama about them, thus stamping some sort of vague, indirect, and deniable official approval on these accusations. Someone — by all appearances, numerous officials — then went to CNN to tell the network they had done this, causing CNN to go on air and, in the gravest of tones, announce the “Breaking News” that “the nation’s top intelligence officials” briefed Obama and Trump that Russia had compiled information that “compromised President-elect Trump.”

CNN refused to specify what these allegations were on the ground that it could not “verify” them. But with this document in the hands of multiple media outlets, it was only a matter of time — a small amount of time — before someone would step up and publish the whole thing. BuzzFeed quickly obliged, airing all of the unvetted, anonymous claims about Trump.

Its editor-in-chief, Ben Smith, published a memo explaining that decision, saying that — although there was “serious reason to doubt the allegations” — BuzzFeed in general “errs on the side of publication” and “Americans can make up their own minds about the allegations.” Publishing this document predictably produced massive traffic (and thus profit) for the site, with millions of people viewing the article and presumably reading the “dossier.”

One can certainly object to BuzzFeed’s decision and, as the New York Times noted this morning, many journalists are doing so. It’s almost impossible to imagine a scenario where it’s justifiable for a news outlet to publish a totally anonymous, unverified, unvetted document filled with scurrilous and inflammatory allegations about which its own editor-in-chief says there “is serious reason to doubt the allegations,” on the ground that they want to leave it to the public to decide whether to believe it.

But even if one believes there is no such case where that is justified, yesterday’s circumstances presented the most compelling scenario possible for doing this. Once CNN strongly hinted at these allegations, it left it to the public imagination to conjure up the dirt Russia allegedly had to blackmail and control Trump. By publishing these accusations, BuzzFeed ended that speculation. More importantly, it allowed everyone to see how dubious this document is, one the CIA and CNN had elevated into some sort of grave national security threat.



Almost immediately after it was published, the farcical nature of the “dossier” manifested. Not only was its author anonymous, but he was paid by Democrats (and, before that, by Trump’s GOP adversaries) to dig up dirt on Trump. Worse, he himself cited no evidence of any kind but instead relied on a string of other anonymous people in Russia he claims told him these things. Worse still, the document was filled with amateur errors.

While many of the claims are inherently unverified, some can be confirmed. One such claim — that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen secretly traveled to Prague in August to meet with Russian officials — was strongly denied by Cohen, who insisted he had never been to Prague in his life (Prague is the same place that foreign intelligence officials claimed, in 2001, was the site of a nonexistent meeting between Iraqi officials and 9/11 hijackers, which contributed to 70 percent of Americans believing, as late as the fall of 2003, that Saddam personally planned the 9/11 attack). This morning, the Wall Street Journal reported that “the FBI has found no evidence that [Cohen] traveled to the Czech Republic.”

None of this stopped Democratic operatives and prominent media figures from treating these totally unverified and unvetted allegations as grave revelations. From Vox’s Zack Beauchamp:

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/11/the ... ems-cheer/

What period of time have we not been involved in a war since the beginning of WW II?
John McCain has been outed by pictures of him visiting ISIS operatives and by Democrat Representative Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii when she visited Syria and found American Weapons in the hands of terrorists.

When I read the words of General Eisenhower, I remembered a story by one of my High School Teachers in about 1959. She said that her Husband was an employee of Lockheed Aircraft Manufacturing in the early 1940's. She said that Lockheed was just weeks away from declaring bankruptcy when WW II started and saved the company.

Pine Mt Beagles
Posts: 7803
Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Pineville Ky

Re: JUST A SHOUT OUT

Post by Pine Mt Beagles »

Mr Weisman

We don't disagree,,as much, as you might think,Many times,I agree with the guys here, but feel the need to point out a difference of opinion .

I Have a Strong Belief in God,Family and my Country,and took an Oath to defend this Country and Uphold the Constitution against ALL ENEMIES FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC.

If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered

Rabbithoundjb
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 4:30 pm
Location: Rocky Mount, NC

Re: JUST A SHOUT OUT

Post by Rabbithoundjb »

LMAO!

Welshman
Posts: 189
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 5:18 pm

Re: JUST A SHOUT OUT

Post by Welshman »

BTT
I did mention John Glenn as a hero, but IMO one of the last great men of our country was John Wayne, the Duke, a Man's Man. You know what the Duke and his buddies called a coward? A low down yellow dog?
Where, O, Where are all the anti-Trumpers?

Post Reply