Trump vowed to not cut Social Security and Medicare — hours before proposing just that

I fail to see how telling you the post number where you can find a source qualifies as "scavenger hunt."

Perhaps it would be a scavenger hunt for a tiger cub scout or younger.

 

Define grunting... what volume is alright? duration and frequency of each grunt?

Science.....

 

Its almost like you are trying to insult him... Will wonders never cease!

 

That rule applies to source articles for the title.

But here's another:

President Trump's proposed budget would slash social programs

 

Everyone not doing it sees it.

Still waiting for you to actually address a single point.

I suspect I wait in vain.

 

Where in the hit piece was there anything from his secretary of state? I saw something from Ben Michaelis whom also works for the Huffington post.

 

That just raises my level of enjoyment though.

 

Appealing to an authority is a perfectly sound and reasonable method for supporting an argument.

Appealing to an irrelevant authority is a logical fallacy.

For example, appealing to the Supreme Court of India for the justification on your interpretation of the U.S. Constitution would be a logical fallacy because it is an appeal to an irrelevant authority.

 

Maybe you could call the author of your articles and ask them to speak to us since you can't explain anything.

 

I was just making a point.... Never mind sigh.

 

Sure.

That's why it's a logical fallacy.

 

A **** translation is a **** argument.

 

Over the last 30 years we've tried light to no regulation up through to what we have today.

None of that caused insurance companies to address the tens of millions of Americans who can't afford the products insurance companies sell. They also refused to sell anything to those who might actually need coverage, obviously, as it might not lead to a profit. And, it wasn't atypical that insurance companies would drop customers who got sick.

Not one of these problems has been improved by methods other than regulation.

What we're seeing here is a problem where solutions offered by capitalism are simply not adequate.

And, I do not see ANY chance that they will be, as we've tried that. We can predict how capitalism will operate. And, we have the examples of all other industrialized countries where solutions are clearly superior.

 

You wanted a source for the "****ing moron" quote that Trump's secretary of state said about him? Sure.

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Rex_Tillerson

 

Yeah that Obamacare really fixed healthcare. /knee slap

Yes we can predict how capitalism will operate. It provides the highest standards of living for all people.

 

I’ve not seen evidence of Trumps statement as presented in this thread as being false. Has anyone seen where his budget cut benefits?

 

Gruber said it all.

 

Only if you make the assumption that the authority can not be wrong.

The GAO could currently be wrong about their projected tax revenues in a world where the GOP did not pass its tax cut. It is a hypothetical world that requires a whole host of assumptions and the GAO readily admits to those limitations.

The Trump administration said that the tax cuts would pay for themselves - the fact that his current budget does not propose a balance until 2035 means that statement was definitely wrong.

 

See post #249.

 

LoL wikipedia.

You say wikipedia says GQ says NBC news says Axios says...

Meanwhile, Tillerson says:

https://www.gq.com/story/rex-tillerson-spot-the-lie

At a hastily-assembled press conference on Wednesday, a somber Tillerson repudiated the story in a speech written for an audience of one, indignantly asserting that his commitment to the president's success remains "as strong as it was on the day I accepted his offer to serve as Secretary of State."

So Tillerson actually says he didn't say it, but all the leftists say they don't care, he said it anyway.

Leftys gonna lefty.

 

Yeah reporters whose headlines you keep regurgitating are never wrong.

 

We need to take a meat cleaver to other things entirely but I would get infracted for suggesting violence.

Strange that we can suggest killing thousands by starving them and the rules say nothing

 

The tax cuts did pay for themselves. Hence why we made more money.

Making more money doesn't balance your budget.

 

Like i said previously.. small cuts = people starving and you wonder why we dont have a balanced budget... Fearmongering like this.

 

Can't you get infracted for suggesting you're suggesting violence?

Just curious.