Ask Me Help Desk - A Conservative win in UK

Quote:

Correct. It is
ahead
of where we started. Obama chose to sit on his arse rather than try and confront the Chinese. Coward.

No, one communist to another, business as usual

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

What part of the word "record" do you not understand?

What part of inheriting a good economy is it you don't understand. Try starting at 10 and bring it down over years and you may be in line to celebrate an accomplishment. Of course anyone following Obama would have had the record too, even HC!

Quote:

Do you remember the Keystone pipeline that Obama REFUSED to build that have gotten us here much faster?

Now how did that happen since it hasn't been completed yet? Maybe in the future but NOW? I don't think so!

Quote:

So you link to the Wash Post which requires a sub to view. Really?

Sorry 'bout that but here is the GDP chart

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-ap...OVY.jpg&w=1440

Quote:

You are stubborn to facts. Remember? The first 21 months of the Trump admin was TEN TIMES better than last 21 months of Obama. Remember? And that's what you call a good trend???

YUP, a good trend, and here's the proof

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-ap...VBU.png&w=1440

Quote:

Correct. It is ahead of where we started. Obama chose to sit on his arse rather than try and confront the Chinese. Coward.

Prove it, your turn!

Quote:

Prove it, your turn!

Started at 104. Now at 108. Hello? Obama had 4 years out of 8 with growth under 2%. So far, Trump has ZERO years under 2%. In addition to 10 TIMES faster growth in manufacturing jobs, what else do you want to know? Unemployment at record low levels? Energy independent? What else would you need?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Started at 104. Now at 108. Hello? Obama had 4 years out of 8 with growth under 2%. So far, Trump has ZERO years under 2%. In addition to 10 TIMES faster growth in manufacturing jobs, what else do you want to know? Unemployment at record low levels? Energy independent? What else would you need?

While interesting, this has nothing to do with the OP, so did a conservative win in the UK precipitate the break up of the royal family who had younger members opt for the socialist safe haven of Canada?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Started at 104. Now at 108. Hello? Obama had 4 years out of 8 with growth under 2%. So far, Trump has ZERO years under 2%. In addition to 10 TIMES faster growth in manufacturing jobs, what else do you want to know? Unemployment at record low levels? Energy independent? What else would you need?

I need everybody to get some of that good economy and not just the ones who were already getting it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

While interesting, this has nothing to do with the OP, so did a conservative win in the UK precipitate the break up of the royal family who had younger members opt for the socialist safe haven of Canada?

I think the pomp and ceremony is much different than the actual governing Clete, and the Parliament has work to do while the royal kids are doing their own thing.

Quote:

I need everybody to get some of that good economy and not just the ones who were already getting it.

Are you one of these, "The glass is 1/10 empty" kind of guys?

Equal justice and equal opportunity for ALL! That's the kind of guy I am. You can ignore and dismiss those who have neither, but I will not. We are talking people not glasses of water.

Quote:

Equal justice and equal opportunity for ALL! That's the kind of guy I am. You can ignore and dismiss those who have neither, but I will not. We are talking people not glasses of water.

If you really believed that, then you would be raising your voice against abortion. It is the ultimate equal justice cause for which you care not one ounce. You would also be raising your voice loudly against the epidemic of sexual promiscuity which results in out of wedlock births, one of the great robbers of equal opportunity. I guess it's just a lot easier to call names and blame it on someone else. It's what seems to me to be the typical liberal mentality of "I want to sit in the comfort of my living room and think of myself as a SJW." Well, it doesn't work that way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

If you really believed that, then you would be raising your voice against abortion.

No. All males upon reaching puberty must have a vasectomy. That will take care of the problem.

Have no clue what an SJW is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by talaniman

I need everybody to get some of that good economy and not just the ones who were already getting it.

I think the pomp and ceremony is much different than the actual governing Clete, and the Parliament has work to do while the royal kids are doing their own thing.

Yes there could be nothing more boring than being nice to people all the time

Quote:

No. All males upon reaching puberty must have a vasectomy. That will take care of the problem.

True. Then we could all sit around for several more decades enjoying the rotting fruit of the sexual revolution while we wait on our species to become extinct. A much easier solution is for women to keep their pants on until they have a ring on. Worked for thousands of years. Only the recent feminist liberal philosophy, which you seem to have embraced with enthusiasm, has brought about that change. It has not been for the good at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

True. Then we could all sit around for several more decades enjoying the rotting fruit of the sexual revolution while we wait on our species to become extinct. A much easier solution is for women to keep their pants on until they have a ring on. Worked for thousands of years. Only the recent feminist liberal philosophy, which you seem to have embraced with enthusiasm, has brought about that change. It has not been for the good at all.

A man can have sex over 100 days with 100 women and produce 100 babies. A woman can have sex with 100 men over 100 days and produce one baby. Who needs to keep pants on???

Quote:

A man can have sex over 100 days with 100 women and produce 100 babies. A woman can have sex with 100 men over 100 days and produce one baby. Who needs to keep pants on???

A man could not have sex at all if all of those 100 women insisted on the ring going on first, but you have a fair enough statement. So do we agree that men and women alike need to postpone sex until marriage?

Well here we go with this abortion debate again, but I suppose it's inevitable since some love to blame a woman for being a women and the men are just to stupid to count on. That's the whole illogic part of this is the blame is always one sided if it's a bad thing. Would you be happy if marriage was mandatory or something JL? Or should we return to the secret days of sending pregnant women to boarding schools however it was dealt with before we started keeping track of such things. Yes I suppose your way has worked for a few thousand years but wonder what they did for thousands of years before that. That could be said to have worked also. What was that again?

Lets go back to letting the village raise the children and stop making faults and laying blame. Does it really matter why they are here when they are a blessing either way regardless? When are we going to ACT like it instead of this useless babble into what's good for YOU!

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

A man could not have sex at all if all of those 100 women insisted on the ring going on first

None of those women want a ring -- or anything else -- from him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

A man could not have sex at all if all of those 100 women insisted on the ring going on first, but you have a fair enough statement. So do we agree that men and women alike need to postpone sex until marriage?

People have been breeding many thousands of years before somebody came up with the idea of a ring and I predict they will keep doing it for a thousand more years to come, with or without a ring so good luck stopping them.

Quote:

None of those women want a ring -- or anything else -- from him.

And again, do we agree that men and women alike need to postpone sex until marriage? If not, then what, as a confessing Christian, do you suggest?

Quote:

People have been breeding many thousands of years before somebody came up with the idea of a ring and I predict they will keep doing it for a thousand more years to come, with or without a ring so good luck stopping them.

Oh please. Are you really going to try and suggest that our present ideas of sexual promiscuity are not primarily limited to the 20th century? If you do, then you don't know squat about history. And the "ring", of course, symbolizes marriage which has been the primary arena for sex for millennia.

Quote:

some love to blame a woman for being a women

You do that? I didn't know. You really should stop.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

And again, do we agree that men and women alike need to postpone sex until marriage? If not, then what, as a confessing Christian, do you suggest?

I was allowed to date only Christian young men. My parents made sure they were. Their Christianity didn't interfere with their lust. I had to be my own gatekeeper.

So, how do you propose to prevent men and women from enjoying sex before marriage? And if no pregnancy results, why can't they indulge? Or is that your only concern, an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy?

Plainly you don't wish to answer my question which is, "Do we agree that men and women alike need to postpone sex until marriage?" At any rate, I will answer yours.

Quote:

So, how do you propose to prevent men and women from enjoying sex before marriage? And if no pregnancy results, why can't they indulge? Or is that your only concern, an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy?

First of all, it's an astonishing question coming from a professing Christian. Still, this issue relates back to the question of out of wedlock pregnancies. It is true that women can take the pill and be largely assured that they will not become pregnant. It is also true that, to the tune of several million a year, single women become pregnant and either have an abortion or give birth to a child which is born, in the great majority of cases, into a disadvantaged situation. My concern is primarily for those children and for the 900,000 a year killed in abortion. They are certainly free, as you so casually describe, to "indulge". As to how to prevent that, perhaps we could start by preaching about it on Sunday mornings, or even start with you and me agreeing together that sex should be reserved for marriage. Sadly, you won't even answer the question. It is a huge task since it is an enormous problem. We have dug ourselves a huge hole.