dmacleod comments

Posted in: Disney unveils global family-friendly streaming service See in context

I just want to know is Punisher coming back?

Sadly, no. Here is a link:

https://heroichollywood.com/jon-bernthal-netflix-marvel-punisher-cancellation/

All of the Marvel/Netflix series have been cancelled.

I'm really not happy about the cancellation of Daredevil.

I think the whole Marvel/Disney relationship is going to be a disaster.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Former Obama lawyer Craig charged in Mueller spin-off probe See in context

Oh, let me clarify, Russian collusion, left wing conspiracy debunked

No, not debunked. Let's be very clear here: nothing has been debunked about Russian collusion or other crimes that were investigated by Mueller until the full, un-redacted Mueller Report gets released to Congress. Claims otherwise are nothing but speculation and will most likely get disproven when the truth finally comes out--and that truth will not come out of William Barr or other supplicants whom Trump supporters are blindly following. Ditto for the ridiculous "witch hunt" claims since quite a few "witches" were caught, and there are most likely more.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Posted in: Former Obama lawyer Craig charged in Mueller spin-off probe See in context

A deep dive back into debunked, right wing conspiracies.

Yup, welcome to Trump’s world.

Wow. You just admitted that "Trump's World" is full of debunked right wing conspiracies.

Oh, my God...where to begin. The list is quite lengthy.

And to illustrate my observation from above, you just provided one.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Posted in: 2020 Democrats' new litmus test: Abolish Electoral College See in context

Which won’t happen, so even the smaller States would never go for it, it will never happen.

And you are sure of this because of what actual statistical data, or are you just speculating against the current trend?

Worked so far for the nation since the beginning and  Dems never complained about it when benefited from . . .

Nope, not true. Give us an example of how or when the "Dems benefited from it' since no Democratic president has ever won the EC while losing the popular vote.

How about winning on real issues instead of being radical to the core,

You mean like the most recent election where Democrats beat Republicans by a national total of 9 million votes? Where they won the House and took 40 seats? Where they held 7 governorships and won 7 more? Where they flipped 337 state legislative seats? Where they won 7 statehouses? Where they flipped three more states to control the governorship, the House, and the state Senate? "Too funny" indeed! As for the rest of your argument, it falls flat when compared to the actual facts.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Posted in: 2020 Democrats' new litmus test: Abolish Electoral College See in context

I understand it, but you won’t get that many, you’ll never get the Southern States or any of the flyovers to go with it, will never happen.

Clearly you do not since this measure is NOT dependent on Southern states or flyovers. As of right now,  this measure has already been adopted by twelve states and the District of Columbia. Together, they have 181 electoral votes, which is 33.6% of the Electoral College and 67.0% of the 270 votes needed to give the compact legal force. They only need a few more states to get this in place--and there are plenty of others outside of your "Southern States and flyovers" to get this to happen.

What are you talking about here? In 1992, Bill Clinton won 370 EC votes to Bush's paltry 168. In 1996, he won 379 votes to Dole's anemic 159.

And thanks to the EC Bush won.

Please explain to us how Bill Clinton's victories in 1992 and 1996 are somehow related to Bush 2's EC victory in 2000. Also, please explain why because of his EC "victory" (decided by the Supreme Court) in 2000, we got one of the worst Presidents in history (only surpassed by the current EC victory President).

The current EC system is broken and should be replaced.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Posted in: 2020 Democrats' new litmus test: Abolish Electoral College See in context

But they do and it has worked so far in our history, without the EC Bill Clinton would have never made it to the Presidency.

Oh, and I forgot to add that Bill Clinton won the popular vote BOTH times, so I have no idea why you would stated that he needed the EC to win.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Posted in: 2020 Democrats' new litmus test: Abolish Electoral College See in context

It’s not irrelevant because most of the flyover and Southern States would never go for it, so right there off the starting gate it would be defeated.

Again, you are either not understanding the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, or you are somehow confusing it with a Constitutional change. The Compact is a work around the Constitution since it allows individual States to determine how their Electoral College votes get tallied, so "flyover and Southern States" don't matter if the number of other States that adopt this measure outnumber them--and right now, the current measure only needs a few more States (64 more Electoral College votes) to surpass the current 270 needed to win. Go back and read the Compact this time before you comment.

Exactly! Therefore, the EC wouldn’t have a chance of being eliminated for that exact reason you and I both said.

Wrong. The Compact clearly defines why it would render the EC irrelevant with this work around.

But they do and it has worked so far in our history, without the EC Bill Clinton would have never made it to the Presidency.

What are you talking about here? In 1992, Bill Clinton won 370 EC votes to Bush's paltry 168. In 1996, he won 379 votes to Dole's anemic 159.

Yes and that includes all States, even Wyoming, this is why each State regardless of size has 2 Senators.

This comment has nothing to do with the proposed EC work around. There are only a few more states which need to adopt this proposal, and the EC will be rendered moot.

Try again.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Posted in: 2020 Democrats' new litmus test: Abolish Electoral College See in context

two-thirds majority in the House and Senate 2) three-quarters of the states to ratify the change within a seven-year window.

Irrelevant since the laws in this case are made at the State level--the House and Senate are not in play here.

Doesnt matter, California doesn’t dictate to the rest of the 49 States who gets to be President.

Actually, it does matter since a minority of the States don't get to decide who should be President either.

Votes shouldn't matter on geography. The voice of the people should be heard--no matter where they live. Democracy should not be determined by demographics.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Posted in: 2020 Democrats' new litmus test: Abolish Electoral College See in context

3: Clinton won the popular vote by approx. 1.5 million votes.

False: She won by a little over 3 million votes.

And this children, is WHY you have a Electoral College. It's a safety net so that EVERYONES (sic) vote counts.

Not even close to being true.

Here is a measure that is already in the works to render the Electoral College obsolete and would be an actual "safety net so that everyone's vote counts." Look this up:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Posted in: Lawyer apologizes for embarrassing Ghosn with disguise during release See in context

I know what my Halloween costume is going to be this year!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Posted in: Bannon confident of Trump win in 2020 despite investigations See in context

No wonder they lost in 2016 and will probably do so again unless they reverse course and return to being the party of the working class.

Forgot about the 2018 midterm election results?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Posted in: Trump says Cohen hearing may have contributed to North Korea summit failure See in context

Cohen will return to Congress for another round of testimony on March 6. I hope that Trump is ready for another "Cohenoscopy" because I don't think that this one is going to be any better or less painful.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Posted in: MUFG Bank to end over-the-counter int'l cash transfers to combat crime See in context

@Zichi:

Welcome back! It's good to see you again.

My condolences for your loss. I went through something similar a few years back where I was the executor for my mother's estate and had to take care of everything--which was a challenge since I had to do it while I was here in Japan.

I don't know if this is possible for you, but here is how I got around all of this banking mess:

I opened an account with Chase in the U.S. (not sure if this is an option for you, but if it is, you might want to do it the next time you visit the U.S.). Then, any checks that I receive here in Japan from an American insurance company or bank, I simply take a photo of them with my smartphone and then directly deposit them into my Chase account in the U.S. (Chase has a great online app that lets you do this). After the check clears my Chase account (it takes a few minutes), I then transfer the money from my Chase account to my bank here in Japan (SMBC--and the wire fees are only about 4000 yen). The whole thing takes less than a day, and I can do it from the comfort of my home.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Seeking support for a wall, Trump plans prime-time speech, border visit See in context

I wasn’t talking about that,

Oh, it was pretty clear that you were, and you got caught making another false claim. Don't try and move the goalposts.

the WH made sure that and tax returns will delivered promptly,

What? The WH made sure of what exactly?

I was talking about the bigger legislation the Dems have won’t pass McConnell’s desk-DOA or until the Dems give Trump the money for the wall.

So, you are admitting that Senate obstructionism will prevent any legislation passed by the House from getting signed into law, therefore making it the Republican-led Senate that cannot pass anything instead of the Democrats. As far as Trump getting his demands for a wall, it ain't going to happen. The Democrats can keep passing smaller bills offering to fund some of the very agencies that the Senate will refuse to vote on, putting those Senators in a very difficult spot since they would be refusing to pay those federal workers and others affected by the shutdown, so it's on the Republican senators and not the Democrats. There are Republican senators already wavering on this obstructionism, but I hope that McConnell keeps it up which will ensure that the Republicans will also lose the Senate during the next election, so please, keep cheering him on.

And the Democrats can’t even get anything through the Senate, ultimate fai-lee-ur.

Yes, a failure on the Republicans' part since it is not up to the Democrats in the House to get enough votes in the Senate to pass their bills. It's up to the Senate to take a vote on the bills--that is if their so-called leader will let them.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Posted in: Seeking support for a wall, Trump plans prime-time speech, border visit See in context

Oh, what will the Democrats do? Already freshly sworn in and already can’t get any legislation through. Man!

Factually incorrect as usual. The new House was sworn in only a week ago, and they've already passed a package of bills (last Thursday--January 3-- 2nd day on the job) to reopen the government, so your claim is false. It's now up to the Republican-led Senate to do their jobs and put it to a vote, which no thanks to obstructionist Mitch McConnell, they won't get to do, so if you want to blame anyone for not getting legislation passed, look no further than the U.S. Senate.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Posted in: Trump holds firm on border wall; offers steel option as compromise See in context

This is it, its also whats really setting the Democrats and their supporters off the fact he is actually honouring his promises  . . .

Really? He had two years to start construction on his wall, and yet nothing happened. Is that keeping a promise? Remember, his party controlled the House, the Senate, had a majority on the Supreme Court, and held a large number of governorships and state legislatures, and yet you are blaming the Democrats (who were in the minority and had very little power) that it's now somehow their fault? Huh? Please explain the logic underlying that conclusion.

Next, he promised that Mexico would pay for it, but now he's forcing the American taxpayers to do it. Is that keeping a promise?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Posted in: Trump holds firm on border wall; offers steel option as compromise See in context

  . . . this is the thought process of the liberal mind at work.

also do you generalize and stereotype much?

The answer to that question is simple: The narrower the mind, the broader the statement.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Posted in: Democrat Warren announces challenge to Trump in 2020 See in context

Mueller Ain't Got Anything  . . .

Try one of these instead:

Moscow's Agenda Governing America

Moscow's American Gangster Association

My Administration's Going Away

Missed Another Golfing Appointment

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Posted in: More Americans blame Trump for government shutdown: poll See in context

I'm free to express my opinion that polls such as the one discussed in this topic are eschewed to reflect a desired result. Not necessarily a true gauge of public sentiment.

Agreed.

And you're equally free to express your disagreement with the Electoral College, among other things.

Agreed.

Doesn't change the fact that President Trump won the Electoral College and his opponent failed to win in key states which President Obama had handily won. That in a nutshell is why she lost. By less than a 100,000 votes but nonetheless a loss.

Agreed.

Start with the premise that Donald J. Trump is the duly-elected President of the United States, then we can all have a civil discussion of what he succeeded or failed to achieve in two years, despite not having a super majority of 60 votes in the Senate - including the reasons for a shutdown, the lowest rates of unemployment for females, Blacks and Hispanics, 3-4% economic growth, deregulation, tax cuts, combating opioids, energy production, ISIS, defense and veterans affairs.

Sounds fair to me provided that you are willing to support your beliefs with actual facts from credible sources instead of the usual empty rhetoric that dominates these types of threads. Also, I'm hoping that you can point to specific policies or legislation which you believe is evidence for your statistics because in my prior debates with others, they haven't been able to give them.

Let the games begin.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Posted in: More Americans blame Trump for government shutdown: poll See in context

Calling a sample of less that two thousand voters - probably mostly from both "left" coasts simply isn't representative, wouldn't you agree?

Agreed.

So stop crying in your broken dreams about a duly-elected President in power who may not reflect your political views.

I'm not crying about anything. I simply pointed out an inconvenient fact for those Trump supporters such as yourself who like to bring up the number of votes that Trump got in the 2016 election in order to somehow de-legitimize a poll number or result that they don't like about a given issue. Remember, YOU were the one who brought this up--not me. Therefore, if you decided to poll both the 63 million who voted for Trump and the 66 million people who didn't vote for Trump, would you accept the result?

45 presidents won the electoral college; 45 wannabe losers fell short. Simple as that.

No, it's not because you conveniently didn't mention that five of those 45 presidents didn't win the popular vote and therefore didn't truly reflect the will of the people, and before you give me a lecture about how the U.S. Presidential election system works with the Electoral College, I am well aware of how it works. However, it doesn't mean that I have to agree with it and will speak out against it whenever I like. Given the disastrous results of the last two Republican "Electoral College winners," I'd say that the criticism against it is understandable.

Poll or no poll, this latest stunt by Trump will just add to the sad fact that he's the first president to preside over a government shutdown while his party controlled the House, Senate, and White House. He's also the first president to preside over a shutdown on the first anniversary of his inauguration which was also the earliest shutdown ever in a presidency.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Posted in: More Americans blame Trump for government shutdown: poll See in context

63 million American voters ask, why aren't we ever "polled"?

And 66 million American voters respond, "Because our voices were not listened to in 2016 by an outdated system which has given us two of the biggest disasters as presidents in the last twenty years--both of whom were "elected" by the Electoral College and not the will of the people, so stop crying about not being "polled" because the American public and the world ended up being screwed.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Posted in: On Christmas Eve, Trump questions child about belief in Santa See in context

This just in from the U.S.:

Twas the night before Christmas

When in the White House

The President tweeted,

Ignoring his spouse.

“No leader ever

has been so first rate. 

I’m better than Santa

And America’s great!”

He decided to nestle

All snug in his bed

While border wall visions

danced in his head.

When on the South Lawn

There arose such a clatter

He turned on Fox News to see

What was the matter.

When what to his wondering

Eyes in a daze

Came all his “best people” 

In three different sleighs.

Now Tillerson, Mattis

Now Kelly, McMaster,

Now Preibus and Sessions!

Trump said, “A disaster.”

Now Flynn, Porter, Pruitt,

Hicks, Bannon, and Price,

Omarosa and Zinke!

Trump said, “They were nice.”

Then a grand golden sleigh

It flew ’round the bend

Now Vladimir Putin . . . 

Trump said, “My best friend.”

Trump called Kellyanne,

She told him a rumor:

A fourth sleigh was coming,

Pelosi and Schumer.

Trump drew in his head

And was turning around,

When right down the chimney

Someone came with a bound.

Not Chuck and not Nancy

His nose like a cherry

A stranger appeared

A man legendary.

“My name’s Robert Mueller

I’m hardly an elf.”

A prosecutor, special

In spite of himself.

And out of his bundle

A present appeared.

The label said “Report,”

And Trump he just sneered.

“A witch hunt!” Trump yelled

As he came to the brink.

“Bah teetotaling — 

Give me a drink!”

He looked at the gift card,

Holding his beer.

The message said, “Open this

Sometime next year.”

And so we will wait

To find what is inside

We’ll know who was good and

We’ll know who has lied.

The three Christmas sleighs

At once gave a whistle,

And away they all flew, like

The down of a thistle.

“The year’s almost over,”

Trump said with a frown.

“It’s 2018 —

It’s time to shut down.”

The stock market falters

The world’s in a tizzy,

Meanwhile back home

We shop ’til we’re dizzy.

We fret and we worry,

We question the wall —

Now dash away, dash away,

Dash away all!

We hope that the future

Is joyous and bright,

Merry Christmas to all

And to all a good night.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Posted in: With no deal, U.S. government shutdown likely to drag on past Christmas See in context

...stock market booming....

Pretty much, by next year, we’re looking at about a solid 3% growth after the market readjust itself. I’m in it for the long haul, baby!!

Fiction! The DOW has lost 5% of its value this year, and this past week, it had the worst week since 1931. It had several days where it dropped over 500 points. I don't call that "booming" unless you are referring to a destructive explosion.

https://www.denverpost.com/2018/10/24/stock-market-plunges-2018-gains-wiped-out/

It's only going to get a lot worse as the budget chaos threatens to add more to an already volatile market.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

Posted in: With no deal, U.S. government shutdown likely to drag on past Christmas See in context

"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." -- Donald Trump, Twitter, November 9, 2013 (4:01 a.m.)

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Posted in: U.S. government partially shuts down in fight over Trump's border wall See in context

Trump tried to blame Democrats.

“Problems start from the top, and they have to get solved from the top, and the President’s the leader, and he’s got to get everybody in a room, and he’s got to lead. And he doesn’t do that, he doesn’t like doing that, that’s not his strength. And that’s why you have this horrible situation going on in Washington. It’s a very, very bad thing and it’s very embarrassing worldwide.” --Donald Trump - Fox & Friends, 20 September 2013

9 ( +11 / -2 )

Posted in: Cohen claims Trump knew hush money payments wrong See in context

Both parties do it.

No, both parties don’t do it. Name one piece of legislation or one instance of the Democrats engaging in voter suppression since the Voting Rights Act was enacted in the 1960s. In contrast, I can name quite a few examples of Republicans doing it and getting caught in the most recent election. Want some examples? Google Florida, Texas, Nevada, and Georgia for just a small taste of the shameful tactics they employed in order to put their finger on the election scales.  I won’t even get into the voter fraud case in North Carolina where the election results in one district still haven’t been certified because a Republican operative by the name of Leslie McCrae Dowless was caught “harvesting” and then throwing away absentee ballots from Democratic voters. As far as gerrymandering goes, take a look at what happened in Pennsylvania after a judge ruled that the districts needed to be redrawn. The GOP got hammered.

 McConnell already stated he’s not going to play with the Democrats . . .

This is nothing new. However, the American voters are no longer going to put up with his obstructionism.

But at the same time there are millions of people that think the government shouldn’t be involved in the healthcare business, this is another reason why the courts ruled that that crap was unconstitutional.

Nope, the courts did not rule “that crap was unconstitutional.”  Review the rulings by The Supreme Court in the 2012 “National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, “ as well as the 2015 decision where the court ruled 6-3 in favor of the ACA and its constitutionality.

Trump has an over 80% favorable approval among Republicans . . .

Who are in the minority. The Republicans just got defeated by 9 million votes (a record) overall in the most recent election, so your statistic is misleading.

As an incumbent and a President who overhauled the tax code

Which did nothing for the average person and only helped the .1%. I also find it interesting that many Republicans didn’t use it as an election issue in the last election. I wonder why.

brought back business investments

You mean like in what GM just did in Ohio?

having a GDP over 4% putting more money into the economy, translating that into bonuses for corporations and to pass on the tax cuts for their employees, lowest black unemployment, lowest unemployment overall, business investments up

So please explain why the Democrats gained 40 House seats, 337 state legislative seats, 7 governorships, and 7 statehouses if things are as rosy as you claim. Shouldn’t we all be running around barefoot through the fields playing pan flutes and singing songs of praise for all of the so-called accomplishments that you listed? Sorry, but the American voters aren’t buying it—they can’t afford to, especially after the stock market took yet another tumble today.

Finally, Trump’s legal woes will continue after the Democrats in the House take over next month. The convictions and guilty pleas of Flynn, Gates, Manafort, Papadopoulos, Cohen, and many others have demonstrated that this presidency is on very shaky ground. Any hopes of re-election in 2020 are getting bleaker and are only going to get worse as things drag on.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Posted in: Cohen claims Trump knew hush money payments wrong See in context

But thanks to the President they were able to gain seats in the Senate which is a big plus and a deep sigh of relief.

Actually, you can thank voter suppression and gerrymandering for those results, especially in North Dakota, Georgia, Florida, and North Carolina. Kindly explain how the Republicans got rewarded with 65% of the legislative seats in Wisconsin, but they only got 45% of the vote? Is that how democracy is supposed to work? However, despite all of their shenanigans, the GOP only picked up a grand total of two additional Senate seats, and they should have picked up more considering all of the seats that were up for grab were in states that Trump won by double-digits in 2016, so no, Trump had very little to do with it. The good news is, now that the Democrats are back in charge of many state legislatures, future voter suppression tactics will be a lot more difficult for the GOP to pull off. Also, in 2020, there will be a lot more vulnerable Republican Senate seats on the line, so enjoy your small majority while it lasts.

They won’t get a lot done because the Senate won’t sign any legislation from the Democrats if they think it’s a) disastrous for the country. b) they try to block any GOP legislation that will come through, which means, we will see a lot of gridlock, won’t help the Democrats especially if they put all their eggs in one basket (which they generally do) and focus solely on impeaching this President and with a stronger GOP Senate majority, they need to be able to pass some of their legislation through or they’re toast in 2 years.

Nope, all the Democrats have to do is continue to show that any gridlock will be on the shoulders of the obstructionist Republicans should they decide to block or mess around with legislation that the majority of the voters who put the Democrats in charge are expecting to pass. So, should the GOP decide to kill any more of the ACA or shut down the government (something that Trump has already said would be "on him" if it happens) then the GOP will be the toasty ones.

As far as taking things away, well, ask the Republicans how that worked out when they threatened to take away healthcare (something that the Democrats ran on).

You can make the exact same argument about impeachment, ask the Republicans how that went for them.

Not really since many people are very concerned about losing their healthcare or not being able to get any at all, so no it's not the same as a bungled impeachment attempt. However, should impeachment come up because of blatant misuses of power as well as hard evidence that the president and his minions committed high crimes and other offenses, it is not going to be the same as the last time when the Republicans tried to rid of a president over an affair with an intern. I'd wager that a lot of people are going to care if they learn that their president is a traitor, a criminal, and a mentally unstable individual who is grossly unfit for office and needs to be removed ASAP rather than trying to get rid of him because of his inappropriate extra curricular activities.

I agree, so this notion that if Trump gets indicted and the GOP will remove is the joke of all jokes . . .

No, the GOP will get punished in 2020 for refusing to perform their Constitutional duty should enough evidence get produced as to warrant impeachment and removal from office. Go back and see what happened to Nixon--and don't give me any of this nonsense that what Trump might be facing is not the same as Nixon because if you look at Nixon's articles of impeachment (obstruction of justice, abuse of power, etc.), you'll see that history is repeating itself.

Afer (sic) 2024 sure, wake me up.

You need to go back to civics class. The president only gets a four-year term, so you'd better be awake in 2020 because his term will be up. If you think it is a guarantee that he'll be re-elected, then I suggest that you take another look at the midterm results: The Democrats got 9 million more votes than the Republicans in the overall count, so clearly, they're not very happy with the current guy in charge.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Posted in: Trump hails judge's ruling against Obamacare as 'great' See in context

And a lot of people didn’t like to waste money on the wretched ACA, thus the courts decision yesterday.

And this decision will most likely not survive the appeal to the Supreme Court. Review the case of the "National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius." How did that work out again?

No one told the Democrats to screw with the healthcare system.

Someone forgot to tell the Republicans that we actually need a healthcare system--and to this date, they have never put forth an actual plan.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Posted in: Cohen claims Trump knew hush money payments wrong See in context

. . . here is a small conundrum, given the fact that the economy is on steroids, record unemployment, record unemployment in the Black community, over 4% GDP lower corporate tax rate, the influx of new businesses as well as international businesses and investments, companies getting tax breaks, employees getting bonuses with all this in the economy . . . *

What a fantasy! Yet, despite what you posted, the Republicans got their butts handed to them in the Midterms, so how do you explain that? After all, if everything has been so great and what you claim has been true, then why did they lose 40 seats in the House and barely held on to the Senate? Why did Democrats hold not only 7 contested governorships but flipped 7 more? (including the very red states of Kansas and Wisconsin). Why did the Democrats flip 337 state legislative seats? Also, how come the Democrats also took 7 statehouses (3 of where they control everything)? As far as the economy is concerned, its not on steroids. For the past year, it's had hemorrhoids.

. . .so far on the horizon there isn’t a single Democrat that can match that or will match that and as we all know once you give people a taste of something and you try to take it away (like money)*

False again given the results of the election and what is coming in 2019 when the new House gets seated. As far as taking things away, well, ask the Republicans how that worked out when they threatened to take away healthcare (something that the Democrats ran on).

Trump as an incumbent is sure to sail through a second term.

Delusional and not going to happen. He will most likely pull a Nixon or Agnew and resign once it becomes clear that his criminal activities have piled up to the point where not even his staunchest allies in the GOP will support him. Recall what the Republicans did to Nixon once they realized that they could no longer cover for that criminal. History will repeat itself, and no matter how many rants you want to post, you are not going to be able to stop it.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Should we wake you after he gets forced out of office or after he has rotted in jail?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Posted in: Diabetic amputations on the rise in the U.S. See in context

I was diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes two years ago (thanks to a health check that caught it). I managed to get my diabetes under control by changing my diet, exercising, and getting tested regularly. I am basically on a low-carb diet and have pretty much given up all sodas, sugars, breads, rice, and other things that I used to love. I also walk 8 km a day (rain or shine), cycle, swim, and stay active. Intermittent fasting also helps.

There are many people out there who have Type 2 or 1 diabetes and don't know it. It tends to surface after age 40. If you have a history of diabetes in your family, then watch your blood sugar. Type 2 is reversible, but it will take a complete change of lifestyle and diet, and sadly, many people are unwilling to do it or wait until it is too late.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Recent Comments

Popular

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites


©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.