America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 6 years ago by teedubbya. 149 replies replies.
3 Pages<123
Senator Al Franken D-MN
victor809 Offline
#101 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
teedubbya wrote:
None of this changes the fact that Democrats are way smarter than Republicans and have managed to have absolutely everything rigged all the way back to the time of Obama’s birth and secretly want the Republicans to control all three branches while they really control things.

It’s beautiful.



Wow... tehy're that smart?

So my options are to vote for a creepy old pedophile too stupid to not write notes to young girls, or a member of a generational-long brilliantly masterminded and perfectly executed conspiracy?

Tough call there... :)
Abrignac Offline
#102 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,270
teedubbya wrote:
None of this changes the fact that Democrats are way smarter than Republicans and have managed to have absolutely everything rigged all the way back to the time of Obama’s birth and secretly want the Republicans to control all three branches while they really control things.

It’s beautiful.



I'm gonna reserve judgement on that. I would be surprised if Trump doesn't bully the DEMs into a budget resolution without a DACA provision. Then brows beats Congress for said resolution the comes out the hero for allowing them a path to citizenship without having to be deported.

Many people call Trump an idiot. But, a billion dollar plus business, an idiot doesn't build. If you're gonna be honest with yourself, you have to see that Trump has driven the conversation since he gained the nomination.
Abrignac Offline
#103 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,270
victor809 wrote:
Wow... tehy're that smart?

So my options are to vote for a creepy old pedophile too stupid to not write notes to young girls, or a member of a generational-long brilliantly masterminded and perfectly executed conspiracy?

Tough call there... :)


Notes?

Seems like the accuser has now admitted that she wrote comments in her yearbook then attributed them to Moore. And her publicity seeking lawyer refuses to allow anyone but her own expert verify the handwriting. You have to reach deep, deep in your anal cavity to pull proof beyond a reasonable doubt from your small intestine.

On the other hand, if better proof is presented then he needs to be locked up.
teedubbya Offline
#104 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Abrig I was being sarcastic

By the way I beleive Trump might actually have more money if he had taken daddy’s money and simply put it in an indexed fund. It wouldn’t have been as fun or leveraged the bankruptcy laws however.

Remember the 80s or was it 90s when Trump was synonymous with bankruptcy? I’m impressed how he made that not matter. That I’ll give him credit for.
teedubbya Offline
#105 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I’m voting for the Cosby ticket.
victor809 Offline
#106 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Abrignac wrote:
Notes?

Seems like the accuser has now admitted that she wrote comments in her yearbook then attributed them to Moore. And her publicity seeking lawyer refuses to allow anyone but her own expert verify the handwriting. You have to reach deep, deep in your anal cavity to pull proof beyond a reasonable doubt from your small intestine.

On the other hand, if better proof is presented then he needs to be locked up.


Anthony... just three items - 1 She made a note of the date. That's not changing the idea that a dude in his 30s is signing a teen's yearbook. We're not talking about her forging anything, nor do I think she attributed the date to him. 2 - We aren't talking about a trial. Why should she be required to hand over her crap to any random dude people want just to satisfy their personal belief? Seriously... she's not having him charged with anything. There's no reason for her to acquiesce to any random request any random person or media channel has to put their hands on her yearbook. 3 - beyond reasonable doubt is for trials. I'm talking about sufficient doubt for a person to be uncomfortable saying "yes this dude represents my values better than this other dude". In this particular case, many (including our president) are saying "This dude who is accused by many people of liking to fondle 15 year olds when he was 30, and apparently thinks america was greatest when we had slaves, represents my values better than this democrat". I mean, I understand our president thinking that...
cacman Offline
#107 Posted:
Joined: 07-03-2010
Posts: 12,216
teedubbya wrote:
I’m voting for the Cosby ticket.

You mean the guy that gave the "Pound Cake" speech?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Gh3_e3mDQ8

Yeah… that would go over well.
Abrignac Offline
#108 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,270
teedubbya wrote:
Abrig I was being sarcastic

By the way I beleive Trump might actually have more money if he had taken daddy’s money and simply put it in an indexed fund. It wouldn’t have been as fun or leveraged the bankruptcy laws however.

Remember the 80s or was it 90s when Trump was synonymous with bankruptcy? I’m impressed how he made that not matter. That I’ll give him credit for.


But he didn't take Daddy's $1,000,000 and invest in an index fund. Instead he has created 10's of thousands of jobs.

Of Trump's 4 Chapter 11 bankruptcies, 3 were in the casino business. During the period of their bankruptcies many other casino's failed. Kudos to him for investing a dilapidated boardwalk. He just didn't foresee riverboat gambling diluting his customer base.

How do you feel about Warren Buffet? Some of his companies leveraged bankruptcy laws as well.

I understand you dislike him, but he given far more to the economy than he has taken. Insistence on a different narrative is disingenuous.
victor809 Offline
#109 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Abrignac wrote:

I understand you dislike him, but he given far more to the economy than he has taken. Insistence on a different narrative is disingenuous.


Anthony... it's weird, but you have to stop for a second and wonder if your insistence on the narrative that he has given to the economy more than he has taken isn't the disingenuous narrative. Without providing any evidence (economic informatoin) it sort of smells like a talking point.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but it isn't a whole lot different than saying "trump is the best president in the history of the world, any other narrative is disingenuous"
teedubbya Offline
#110 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
That’s his story. There are many varying stories that dispute the inheritance amount, his scorched earth along the way, propensity to not pay, branding rather than creating etc, but we’d be rehashing things. I’m not sure we’ve been better with him than without him prior to politics. I though he was a pile of shot well before he ran. An embarrassment.

Buffet, I could take him or leave him. I like Nebraska furniture mart though. I’ve never heard him acting like a carnival barker or puffing himself up as something he’s not. I’m not sure he’s a financial messiah but I do like his approach to life and what he’s doing with his money in terms of his kids and inheritance.
victor809 Offline
#111 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
To expound on the idea of giving to the economy... I know that the construction of a hotel creates jobs. But it costs a butt-load of money. Money trump didn't pony up, at least for a bulk of it. He got investors to sink cash into a project. One would have to compare the amount of $$ invested, the number of jobs created, the amount of money lost at the end, and whether that money investors sunk could have been used in other industries also creating jobs (more or less). Then you also have to take into account the 39million he paid himself over 10 years for that casino project...

He would have "created jobs" if he had simply invested the money in an index fund too. That investment is a representation of money invested in companies. These companies use the capital to buy new equipment, new manufacturing and generally expand operations.

so to simply say that he contributed more than he took out would really take some serious analysis. More than I think people have actually put in when they make that statement.
teedubbya Offline
#112 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
And kudos to him for investing in a delapitaded boardwalk? Really? Have you really looked at that? Do you think he was being altruistic?
teedubbya Offline
#113 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
But really this thread is more about pvssy grabbing young and old. Roll Tide.
Abrignac Offline
#114 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,270
victor809 wrote:
Anthony... just three items - 1 She made a note of the date. That's not changing the idea that a dude in his 30s is signing a teen's yearbook. We're not talking about her forging anything, nor do I think she attributed the date to him. 2 - We aren't talking about a trial. Why should she be required to hand over her crap to any random dude people want just to satisfy their personal belief? Seriously... she's not having him charged with anything. There's no reason for her to acquiesce to any random request any random person or media channel has to put their hands on her yearbook. 3 - beyond reasonable doubt is for trials. I'm talking about sufficient doubt for a person to be uncomfortable saying "yes this dude represents my values better than this other dude". In this particular case, many (including our president) are saying "This dude who is accused by many people of liking to fondle 15 year olds when he was 30, and apparently thinks america was greatest when we had slaves, represents my values better than this democrat". I mean, I understand our president thinking that...


Point taken. But, when one decides to dump this weeks before an election, then refuses to have it verified leads any reasonable person to be circumspect about the entire situation.

Lets take a look at the accusations:

Leigh Corfman told the Washington Post that she met Moore in 1979 when she was just 14 years old. The then-district attorney offered to watch Corfman while her mother attended a custody hearing, she said, and he asked for her phone number when he was alone with her. Corfman said that days later, Moore drove her to his house and kissed her. During a second encounter, he allegedly took off her shirt and pants and touched her over her underwear and led her hands to touch him over his underwear. “I wanted it over with,” Corfman told the Post.

Moore’s response: “It never happened,” Moore said during an interview with Sean Hannity. “I don’t know Miss Corfman from anybody. I never talked to or never had any contact with her. Allegations of sexual misconduct with her are completely false. I believe they’re politically motivated.”

She said/he said, What has her mother said, no smoking gun.

Wendy Miller told the Post that she met Moore when she was 14 and working at Gadsden Mall. She claimed that Moore asked her out on dates when she was 16, but her mother forbid her from going out with Moore. Miller said that she was flattered at the time. “Now that I’ve gotten older, the idea that a grown man would want to take out a teenager, that’s disgusting to me,” she told the Post.

Moore’s response: In an interview on Hannity, Moore said he only recognized the names of Debbie Wesson Gibson and Gloria Thacker Deason. “It’s political,” Moore told Hannity of Miller and Corfman’s allegations. “It’s a direct attack on this campaign and it involves a 14-year-old girl, which I would have never had any contact with — nothing with her mother or any courthouse or anywhere else would I have done that.”

She said/he said, no smoking gun.

Debbie Wesson Gibson told the Post that Moore first asked her out in 1981, when she was 17, after he had spoken to her high school civics class. She said that they went on several dates over a period of two to three months, but they never did anything more than kiss. She said her mother approved of her going out with Moore.

Moore’s response: Moore told Hannity he didn’t remember speaking to her civics class, but said he knew Wesson Gibson and her parents. “I remember her as a good girl,” he said. “I know her, but I don’t remember going out on dates. I knew her as a friend. If we did go out on dates, then we did. But I don’t remember that.” (Later in the interview, Moore said that he dated “a lot of young ladies” after his return from the military, but said that he didn’t remember dating women who were much younger than him. He also added: “I don’t remember ever dating a girl without the permission of her mother.”)

She said/he said, Gibson 17, Moore 44 no smoking gun.

Gloria Thacker Deason told the Post that she met Moore when she was 18 at the department store where she worked at the Gadsden Mall. She said they dated on and off over several months, including dates where they drank wine. But she said that the relationship did not go beyond kissing. “My mom was really, really strict, and my curfew was 10:30, but she would let me stay out later with Roy,” she told the Post.

Moore’s response: Moore told Hannity that he never provided alcohol to a minor. “I seem to remember her as a good girl… I had some sort of knowledge of her parents, her mother in particular,” he said.

At 18 one is considered an adult. No smoking gun.

Beverly Young Nelson said that Moore sexually assaulted her in 1977 when she was just 16. She claims that Moore offered to drive her home from her job waitressing at a restaurant and then groped her and forced her head toward his crotch. She said that she had first met Moore at the restaurant she worked at when she was 15. She said he frequently complimented her appearance and signed her yearbook with the note: “To a sweeter, more beautiful girl I could not say Merry Christmas. Love Roy Moore, D.A.”

Moore’s response: During a press conference on Nov. 13, Moore denied her allegations. “I can tell you without hesitation, this is absolutely false,” Moore said. “I never did what she said I did. I don’t even know the woman. I don’t know anything about her. I don’t even know where the restaurant is or was.” Moore also denied signing her yearbook and called on Nelson to release the yearbook so a handwriting expert could examine it.


See above, no smoking gun.

Tina Johnson told AL.com that Moore groped her in 1991 when she visited his law office with her mother. Johnson, who was 28 years old at the time, said Moore complimented her appearance throughout the meeting and then grabbed her butt when her mother had left the room.

Moore’s response: Moore has not commented on Johnson’s specific allegations, but denies all of the allegations against him.

She said/he said, no smoking gun.

Gena Richardson said that she first met Moore at Gadsden Mall in 1977 either before or just after her 18th birthday. She said that she declined to give him her phone number, and Moore then called her at school to ask her out. After Moore allegedly attempted again to ask her out, she agreed to go on a date, Richardson said. At the end of the night, she said that Moore gave her an unwanted “forceful” kiss.

Moore’s response: Moore has not commented on Richardson’s allegations, but denies all of the allegations against him. “If you are a liberal and hate Judge Moore, apparently he groped you,” Moore’s campaign said in a statement to the Post. “If you are a conservative and love Judge Moore, you know these allegations are a political farce.”

She said/he said, Richardson is 17 or 18, Moore is 30, No smoking gun.

Becky Grey told the Post in the story published Nov. 15 that she met Moore at Gadsden Mall, where she worked at the time, when she was 22. Gray said that Moore repeatedly asked her out, and that she consistently turned down his advances. She said she complained to her manager, who allegedly told her that it was “not the first time he had a complaint about him hanging out at the mall.”

Moore’s response: Moore has not commented on Gray’s allegations, but denies all of the allegations against him.

She said/he said, Grey is 22, Moore is 30ish, No smoking gun.

Still don't see where any laws have been broken. Shouldn't he be treated as Hillary, innocent until proven guilty.

Not sure I agree with his courtship choices, but the're not that uncommon.
Abrignac Offline
#115 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,270
victor809 wrote:
Anthony... it's weird, but you have to stop for a second and wonder if your insistence on the narrative that he has given to the economy more than he has taken isn't the disingenuous narrative. Without providing any evidence (economic informatoin) it sort of smells like a talking point.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but it isn't a whole lot different than saying "trump is the best president in the history of the world, any other narrative is disingenuous"



Turn left. Walk 3 steps forward. Engage in conversation with brick wall.
Abrignac Offline
#116 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,270
victor809 wrote:
To expound on the idea of giving to the economy... I know that the construction of a hotel creates jobs. But it costs a butt-load of money. Money trump didn't pony up, at least for a bulk of it. He got investors to sink cash into a project. One would have to compare the amount of $$ invested, the number of jobs created, the amount of money lost at the end, and whether that money investors sunk could have been used in other industries also creating jobs (more or less). Then you also have to take into account the 39million he paid himself over 10 years for that casino project...

He would have "created jobs" if he had simply invested the money in an index fund too. That investment is a representation of money invested in companies. These companies use the capital to buy new equipment, new manufacturing and generally expand operations.

so to simply say that he contributed more than he took out would really take some serious analysis. More than I think people have actually put in when they make that statement.


Active verses passive.

Turn left, take 3...
Phil222 Offline
#117 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2017
Posts: 1,911
Abrignac wrote:
How do you feel about Warren Buffet?


Maybe not the best billionaire to compare to Trump.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/21/warren-buffet-is-the-most-charitable-billionaire.html
victor809 Offline
#118 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Abrignac wrote:
Point taken. But, when one decides to dump this weeks before an election, then refuses to have it verified leads any reasonable person to be circumspect about the entire situation.

**lots of text**

Still don't see where any laws have been broken. Shouldn't he be treated as Hillary, innocent until proven guilty.

Not sure I agree with his courtship choices, but the're not that uncommon.

I don't disagree with the individual examples you put up. They are all he said/she said. There's one you missed though.

Kayla Kisor/Roy Moore:
Roy Moore stated in his book: “Many years before, I had attended a dance recital at Gadsden State Junior College,” Moore wrote. “I remembered one of the special dances performed by a young woman whose first and last names began with the letter 'K.' It was something I had never forgotten. Could that young woman have been Kayla Kisor?”
Roy Moore in an interview:
“I was standing at the back of the auditorium and I saw her at the front and I remember her name, it was Kayla Kisor, K.K,” he said. “It was, oh gosh, eight years later or something, I met her and when she told me her name I remembered K.K."

Given that Roy Moore met his wife "officially" at 23, the girl in question that he is talking about is 15

I don't know about anyone else, but when a grown azz adult says things like that about a 15 year old, I am more inclined to believe the "she" in a he-said/she-said around a dude fondling a 15 year old.

But again, we aren't trying him in court. We're not determining if he's "guilty". We're determining if "to the best of our ability at this time" we would associate him as more in-line with our values than someone else. No one is yelling "lock him up" (that appears to be a difference in party). Hell, I don't even think he could be tried for any of the crimes he is accused of at this point.

I can tell you, I wouldn't want to associate my name with an individual with that amount of questionable behavior surrounding him.
DrafterX Offline
#119 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
It was the 70s.. it was the style at the time.. even I was doing teen girls in the 70s... Mellow
Abrignac Offline
#120 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,270
Where is Jerry Lee Lewis when you need him?
victor809 Offline
#121 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Abrignac wrote:
Active verses passive.

Turn left, take 3...



I'm not a stock wizard, but I'm pretty sure money invested in companies is actively creating jobs. Those hotels he built were funded by investors. The company TRJ or whatever it was, eventually was listed on the stock exchange. How would him having invested his money in GE been any different than what the investors did to invest in his hotels? Ultimately the bulk of the money to create those jobs came from investors.
Abrignac Offline
#122 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,270
victor809 wrote:
I'm not a stock wizard, but I'm pretty sure money invested in companies is actively creating jobs. Those hotels he built were funded by investors. The company TRJ or whatever it was, eventually was listed on the stock exchange. How would him having invested his money in GE been any different than what the investors did to invest in his hotels? Ultimately the bulk of the money to create those jobs came from investors.


You're not that dense are you?
banderl Offline
#123 Posted:
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
The reappearance of the "I only got one million from my Daddy" lie.
teedubbya Offline
#124 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Drafter if you were creeping on 15 year olds when you were 23 there’s a special place in hell for you.

Just paraphrasing the first daughter. Don’t lump yourself in with Moore.
victor809 Offline
#125 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Abrignac wrote:
You're not that dense are you?


When it comes to stock investment, apparently.
Correct me if I'm wrong, and I know it's abstracted out quite a bit in the modern stock market... but the fundamental idea still should apply. shares are an investment in a corporation. That investment can be used for anything, but was historically used for capital projects.
teedubbya Offline
#126 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Banderl, it’s not worth arguing about is why I glossed past it.
teedubbya Offline
#127 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Victor if what you say isn’t true how does that impact the current tax debate.
victor809 Offline
#128 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
If what I say isn't true?

Hell if I know. If what I say isn't true then I'm not 100% sure where shares fall in on a corporation.
teedubbya Offline
#129 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
You read it right.
victor809 Offline
#130 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Were you picking up on the "capital projects" part? Because that is the weakest part of my statement. I've said before that generally extra cash ends up in things other than R&D or manufacturing.... you know... pay to ceos... marketing. that crap.
teedubbya Offline
#131 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
#114 sure is a Long post. My lips got tired reading it.

They all are prolly lying.
teedubbya Offline
#132 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Victor I’m being more basic than that. Just embracing trickle down. If I invest the mere million and only million and anyone who proves it was much more than a million is a liar million in to the markets and it doesn’t create jobs then neither does a tax cut.
teedubbya Offline
#133 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
And in general I’m just effing around and not all that serious.

If anyone wants to vote pedo they don’t need to justify it. If anyone wants to associate or equate themselves with it they owe nothing to anyone.

Roll tide. When the corn silk appears it’s time to pollinate.
Abrignac Offline
#134 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,270
victor809 wrote:
When it comes to stock investment, apparently.
Correct me if I'm wrong, and I know it's abstracted out quite a bit in the modern stock market... but the fundamental idea still should apply. shares are an investment in a corporation. That investment can be used for anything, but was historically used for capital projects.


Passive vs active, think
victor809 Offline
#135 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Abrignac wrote:
Passive vs active, think


In investing PAssive vs active is just index funds/mutual vs specific shares. Not sure why you think this is important. An index fund investment is just further subdividing your investment, but still putting that money into shares of companies. Just fewer $$ into a lot more of them. Shouldn't have an impact on the basic theory.
teedubbya Offline
#136 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I think compounding the gains he would have made investing the multiple millions on dollars his dad gave him May very well have benefited the economy more than his haphazard series of failures and refusal to pay people along the way.

I say MAY because we don’t and can’t know. But I don’t accept the financial genius trump says he is. He is good at marketing trump though.
victor809 Offline
#137 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
teedubbya wrote:
Victor I’m being more basic than that. Just embracing trickle down. If I invest the mere million and only million and anyone who proves it was much more than a million is a liar million in to the markets and it doesn’t create jobs then neither does a tax cut.


Gotcha. I'm not smart enough to make that argument. But yes, an interesting point.
teedubbya Offline
#138 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
By the way does he have dentures or is he simply losing it?
victor809 Offline
#139 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
prevailing theory is dentures.
secondary is stroking out.

I would prefer dentures.
Abrignac Offline
#140 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,270
victor809 wrote:
In investing PAssive vs active is just index funds/mutual vs specific shares. Not sure why you think this is important. An index fund investment is just further subdividing your investment, but still putting that money into shares of companies. Just fewer $$ into a lot more of them. Shouldn't have an impact on the basic theory.



Think...
teedubbya Offline
#141 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I vote option 3. Animatronic unfortunate timing for battery change.
victor809 Offline
#142 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Abrignac wrote:
Think...

Dude... if I haven't gotten your point yet, I'm not gonna.
victor809 Offline
#143 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
teedubbya wrote:
I vote option 3. Animatronic unfortunate timing for battery change.



An animatronic ***** grabbing machine? We may be able to market this
teedubbya Offline
#144 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I think he was just quoting Aretha
teedubbya Offline
#145 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Victor that animatronic device already exists. We can slap our name on it and pretend we created something though. It’s all the rage.
victor809 Offline
#146 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
I'm in. Call it the Victdubbya *****-matic?
teedubbya Offline
#147 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
We can make one that is sluggish and sort of depressed and call it the teeore (have to add the e on the end for effect). We’ll Disney it all up and market it in Alabama.
victor809 Offline
#148 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
teedubbya wrote:
We can make one that is sluggish and sort of depressed and call it the teeore (have to add the e on the end for effect). We’ll Disney it all up and market it in Alabama.



ohhhh.... it'll be a big seller there. Put some hello kitty on it. I bet you I know who'd want to be the door to door salesman.
teedubbya Offline
#149 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
We can market it with the Roy Moore do you like bunnies game.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages<123