Any thoughts on last night's debate

[Jerry Oz]

I think Chris Wallace actually did better than the previous three moderators at keeping them on track. Trump was extremely disrespectful to Lester Holt, Martha Raddatz, and Anderson Cooper. I think he was told to keep his rudeness in check for the final debate. I fully expected Wallace to tailor his questions to Trump and also to let him get away with much more, but he did okay as could be expected with a madman.

And I cannot stand anything about Faux News. Curiously, Drumpf hasn't ripped Wallace like he did the previous moderators, even though he lost the debate. I think he knows he needs that fake news outlet in his pocket if he's going to have any positive coverage for the last three weeks of this mess.

[Roberta75]

I think Chris Wallace actually did better than the previous three moderators at keeping them on track. Trump was extremely disrespectful to Lester Holt, Martha Raddatz, and Anderson Cooper. I think he was told to keep his rudeness in check for the final debate. I fully expected Wallace to tailor his questions to Trump and also to let him get away with much more, but he did okay as could be expected with a madman.

And I cannot stand anything about Faux News. Curiously, Drumpf hasn't ripped Wallace like he did the previous moderators, even though he lost the debate. I think he knows he needs that fake news outlet in his pocket if he's going to have any positive coverage for the last three weeks of this mess.

I didnt get the impression that Chris Wallace cared much for Trump. He probably knows hes a misoginistic bully and bigot.

[Jerry Oz]

I didnt get the impression that Chris Wallace cared much for Trump. He probably knows hes a misoginistic bully and bigot.

Maybe. But Chris Wallace is as much of a jerk as most at Faux News besides Hannity and O'Reilly. Just by association, he's also a bigot and a misogynist or he wouldn't keep his job for very long.

[Roberta75]

Maybe. But Chris Wallace is as much of a jerk as most at Faux News besides Hannity and O'Reilly. Just by association, he's also a bigot and a misogynist or he wouldn't keep his job for very long.

I dont watch Fox News because they yell too much and are in bed with the far right.

[soulster]

Maybe. But Chris Wallace is as much of a jerk as most at Faux News besides Hannity and O'Reilly. Just by association, he's also a bigot and a misogynist or he wouldn't keep his job for very long.

Chris Wallace is one of the [[slightly) saner voices on Fox, and he does the straight news. He doesn't engage in the extreme partisan garbage that Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly do. He's like a male Megyn Kelly with less of a profile.

[TomatoTom123]

I dont watch Fox News because they yell too much and are in bed with the far right.

I have never seen it here in the UK, the closest thing we've got is Sky News, which is owned by Fox but is not as overtly right-wing. Presenter Kay Burley is particularly, erm, aggressive, LOL

[soulster]

"Trump has single-handedly destroyed the GOP!"
THAT is music in the air! Obama should be popping the champagne cork!
If that party goes down the toilet....the drinks are on me!

You know what? People keep saying Trump destroyed the GOP, but they did that to themselves years ago with their crazed ambition to dominate the country and wipe out Democrats. It was bound to backfire. Ever since Ronald Reagan, they sat about a long-term strategy to systematically move this country to the far-right, aided by the christian conservative evangelists. Their only problem is that President Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama got in their way. They just got two lucky breaks when Al Gore lost the Supreme Court challenge, and Al Qaeda attacked the World Trade center.

The christian conservatives' ultimate goal was, and remains to this day, to get Roe vs. Wade overturned.

As soon as Obama was sworn in, they set their plan into overdrive by allowing the tea party to gain an absolute control over their party. That was the ultimate blunder because they not only opposed every single move Obama tried to do to help this country, but the tea party types are now faithful Trump supporters. Trump made it OK for them to really come out. And, Trump is very flawed, but they really had no choice but to accept him after he wiped out all of the other challengers. Trump is the personification of the GOP's eight years of racial hatred, extreme partisanship, and obstruction.

I really hope that the polls are correct [[again) and means that the GOP will be wiped out at the congressional level nationally, and at state level, and will, for the rest of our lifetime, destroy the GOP's chances of ever dominating U.S. politics again as they have for the last 30+ years. I want the republicans to be punished for all the things they have done, and have tried to do to the people of this country and the world. I want them to suffer and feel the pain. I want to see ruby-red states turn blue next month. I want Trump to be crushed by the feet of the American public legitimately and completely so maybe he'll move to Canada...no, I wouldn'wish that on our neighbors to the north. Maybe he'll move to Russia and try to push out Putin. Hey, yeah! That would be a hoot!

[Jerry Oz]

How interesting that when Clinton left the White House, we finally had a balanced budget [[with thanks to a Republican Congress that at least worked with him in that regard when they weren't trying to tar and feather him). Bush got in by buying votes for $500 per. There went the balanced budget. Obama inherited Bush's FUBAR and the TEA Party came into being and they were a bunch of puppets who were "taxed enough already". They tried to destroy the country's progress in order to make Obama look bad.

Same with the Christian Right, who had a Republican president and congress that failed to end Roe v. Wade when they could.

Flip to 2016 and President Obama is the most popular late term president in a generation while the TEA Party is all in with a guy whose only concrete proposal will raise the deficit to ridiculous levels. I'm starting to think that their problem with the president is not because of taxes or abortion. What is odd, is that the people who comprise these two groups are the ones who will/would benefit from President Obama and Hillary Clinton's proposals. Dumb asses.

[soulster]

How interesting that when Clinton left the White House, we finally had a balanced budget [[with thanks to a Republican Congress that at least worked with him in that regard when they weren't trying to tar and feather him). Bush got in by buying votes for $500 per. There went the balanced budget. Obama inherited Bush's FUBAR and the TEA Party came into being and they were a bunch of puppets who were "taxed enough already". They tried to destroy the country's progress in order to make Obama look bad.

Yup! Yup!

Same with the Christian Right, who had a Republican president and congress that failed to end Roe v. Wade when they could.

Uh, when did they have that chance??? It's up to the Supreme Court, not the republicans in congress or the president.

Flip to 2016 and President Obama is the most popular late term president in a generation while the TEA Party is all in with a guy whose only concrete proposal will raise the deficit to ridiculous levels. I'm starting to think that their problem with the president is not because of taxes or abortion. What is odd, is that the people who comprise these two groups are the ones who will/would benefit from President Obama and Hillary Clinton's proposals. Dumb asses.

They vote on ideology, but like to chide democrats and liberals for voting on a straight ticket. Hypocritical dumb asses!.

[Jerry Oz]

Uh, when did they have that chance??? It's up to the Supreme Court, not the republicans in congress or the president.

Never. But that doesn't stop them from feeding that line to the rabble nor the idiots believing it. They'd never get rid of abortion, even if they could because it is the one thing [[besides gun control) that works their base into a lather.

My point is that they say they'll get rid of abortion rights and they'll shrink government and they'll bring back jobs and they'll improve the economy. They've had plenty of opportunity to do each but it's less important once they're in power than when they want to be.

[TomatoTom123]

Never. But that doesn't stop them from feeding that line to the rabble nor the idiots believing it. They'd never get rid of abortion, even if they could because it is the one thing [[besides gun control) that works their base into a lather.

My point is that they say they'll get rid of abortion rights and they'll shrink government and they'll bring back jobs and they'll improve the economy. They've had plenty of opportunity to do each but it's less important once they're in power than when they want to be.

Why do they want to get rid of abortion so desperately?

[ralpht]

Keith Olberman on Trump.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIHXhs7rYps

[soulster]

Why do they want to get rid of abortion so desperately?

Religious beliefs. Most anti-abortion activists, like gun advocates, are single-issue voters. All they really care about is one thing.

We have a clear separation of church and state in our Constitution, but they do not respect that. They want mention and allegiance to god everywhere it isn't currently allowed by law.

[soulster]

My point is that they say they'll get rid of abortion rights and they'll shrink government and they'll bring back jobs and they'll improve the economy. They've had plenty of opportunity to do each but it's less important once they're in power than when they want to be.

And, they are wrong.

When they say they want to shrink government, it is coded language to mean Blacks, and now Mexicans, from getting any government help. That's what it really means, and they have been using that kind of language since Richard Nixon ran for office in 1968. Ahh, but, don't take away their social security and medicare benefits!

When these fools talk about getting the jobs back, they are fooling themselves because those lost jobs are never coming back. Technology has replaced most of them. All they have to do is get retrained. The people they want you to vote for will keep sending jobs to other countries because so they don't have to pay U.S. workers what they are worth. And, it's more dog whistles to keep out "illegals". They like the cheap labor they provide without having to give them protection, but they know that the more immigrants who come here and gain citizenship, the more their majority rule dwindles. I made this point before and someone tried to take me to task on it, but it's very true: the foundation of this anti-immigrant movement is the fear of losing the majority in population and control. The white nationalists are the only ones who aren't afraid of saying it.

[soulster]

Keith Olberman on Trump.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIHXhs7rYps

Thank you Ralph! I miss Keith Olberman! I didn't know he was back to political commentary. He, along with Lawrence O'Donnell, Joe Madison, and Rachael Maddow, are all of my favorite people.

[ralpht]

We like the same people, Soul.

[TomatoTom123]

Religious beliefs. Most anti-abortion activists, like gun advocates, are single-issue voters. All they really care about is one thing.

We have a clear separation of church and state in our Constitution, but they do not respect that. They want mention and allegiance to god everywhere it isn't currently allowed by law.

Jesus Christ!

[[Sorry, LOL)

I am very irreligious. I mean, I'm all for freedom of religion but religion itself should have nothing to do with the state. I do hate how it is still a part of how countries are governed. It's not so bad in the UK but there are some seats in Parliament [[the House of Lords) that are specifically reserved for bishops from the Church of England. I mean, what's all that about?! It's totally undemocratic and unfair to all the other religions, including non-believers, isn't it?!!

[[rant about religion is now over)

[soulster]

Jesus Christ!

[[Sorry, LOL)

I am very irreligious. I mean, I'm all for freedom of religion but religion itself should have nothing to do with the state. I do hate how it is still a part of how countries are governed. It's not so bad in the UK but there are some seats in Parliament [[the House of Lords) that are specifically reserved for bishops from the Church of England. I mean, what's all that about?! It's totally undemocratic and unfair to all the other religions, including non-believers, isn't it?!!

[[rant about religion is now over)

I am very anti-religious. That does not mean I am anti-God or anti-Jesus, or anything like that. I respect anyone for their religious beliefs as long as they do not try to force me to live by their rules. I do not try to challenge them as long as they don't try to proselytize me. At this point, I am even questioning the existence of god as an omnipresent figure. I guess you could call me am agnostic these days. I reserve a special hatred for hypocritical evangelical christians because of their politics. Even jesus warned his followers about false religions and getting into politics.

[TomatoTom123]

I am very anti-religious. That does not mean I am anti-God or anti-Jesus, or anything like that. I respect anyone for their religious beliefs as long as they do not try to force me to live by their rules. I do not try to challenge them as long as they don't try to proselytize me. At this point, I am even questioning the existence of god as an omnipresent figure. I guess you could call me am agnostic these days. I reserve a special hatred for hypocritical evangelical christians because of their politics. Even jesus warned his followers about false religions and getting into politics.

soulster, yes, yes, yes, YES!!! Thank you, I understand EXACTLY what you mean and agree with you wholeheartedly! Although I am an atheist, through and through. My dad actually teaches physics [[the Big Bang and such), so you don't get much more atheist than that, LOL

[soulster]

soulster, yes, yes, yes, YES!!! Thank you, I understand EXACTLY what you mean and agree with you wholeheartedly! Although I am an atheist, through and through. My dad actually teaches physics [[the Big Bang and such), so you don't get much more atheist than that, LOL

The great Carl Sagan was not an atheist.

[Jerry Oz]

I'm Christian. That doesn't mean that my beliefs are more important than yours. It's up to you to save your own soul. As for abortion, someone of my faith would not likely use it for birth control, so what is it to me if someone else chooses to do it? As far as I am concerned, we should care about the kids already here.

I live in a state [[Ohio) that has a reasonably high number of technology jobs and institutions of higher learning, certainly it's not a backwoods state by any means. But we have an infant mortality rate that compares to some third world countries. I'll care more about the plight of the unborn when the born starts getting a fair shake.

The holier than thou set both wants to eliminate the options of women while continually trying to reduce society's burden toward helping their children have a good quality of life. Forcing someone to have a kid while also ensuring that they live in poverty is the opposite of a Christ-like thing to do. And not one takes the time to help those families or share their burdens as Christ would. SMH.

Consider: The same crew that thinks welfare that provides a few hundred dollars per month to a poor family is fighting hard to elect the biggest welfare mother in history president. What else is it when my tax dollars subsidize his poor business decisions and subsequent failures. Yah, I'm Christian all day, but don't confuse me with being "pro-religion".

[TomatoTom123]

The great Carl Sagan was not an atheist.

Oh yes, of course, you don't have to be an atheist

I'm Christian. That doesn't mean that my beliefs are more important than yours. It's up to you to save your own soul. As for abortion, someone of my faith would not likely use it for birth control, so what is it to me if someone else chooses to do it? As far as I am concerned, we should care about the kids already here.

I live in a state [[Ohio) that has a reasonably high number of technology jobs and institutions of higher learning, certainly it's not a backwoods state by any means. But we have an infant mortality rate that compares to some third world countries. I'll care more about the plight of the unborn when the born starts getting a fair shake.

The holier than thou set both wants to eliminate the options of women while continually trying to reduce society's burden toward helping their children have a good quality of life. Forcing someone to have a kid while also ensuring that they live in poverty is the opposite of a Christ-like thing to do. And not one takes the time to help those families or share their burdens as Christ would. SMH.

Consider: The same crew that thinks welfare that provides a few hundred dollars per month to a poor family is fighting hard to elect the biggest welfare mother in history president. What else is it when my tax dollars subsidize his poor business decisions and subsequent failures. Yah, I'm Christian all day, but don't confuse me with being "pro-religion".

I agree! That is a very fair and rational [[and Christian) way of looking at things. Although I don't believe in Jesus or that I have a soul to be saved. [[But I agree with everything else! )

[soulster]

Jerry, I know not all so-called christians are rotten, but, man, they are the most obnoxious! And, what pisses me off is that the good ones don't speak out against them , at least not forcefully. It's like cops. You have bad cops and cops that don't do what the bad cops do, but they all maintain that blue wall of silence.

[144man]

soulster, yes, yes, yes, YES!!! Thank you, I understand EXACTLY what you mean and agree with you wholeheartedly! Although I am an atheist, through and through. My dad actually teaches physics [[the Big Bang and such), so you don't get much more atheist than that, LOL

I don't believe the existence of God can be logically proved because that would eliminate the need for faith.

I wish your dad would be able to explain to me [[1) why the expansion of the universe is accelerating [[2} what dark energy is, and [[3) why and how there is so much carbon [[without which life would be impossible) in the universe.

[TomatoTom123]

I don't believe the existence of God can be logically proved because that would eliminate the need for faith.

I wish your dad would be able to explain to me [[1) why the expansion of the universe is accelerating [[2} what dark energy is, and [[3) why and how there is so much carbon [[without which life would be impossible) in the universe.

Yes, well, he probably could, but I certainly can't, LOL.

I don't believe the existence of God can be logically proved because God doesn't exist! Hehe

[144man]

Yes, well, he probably could, but I certainly can't, LOL.

I don't believe the existence of God can be logically proved because God doesn't exist! Hehe

And the other reason I don't accept the results of the Brexit vote is why should I have faith in the views of a population half of whom don't even believe in Darwinian evolution.

[Roberta75]

Jerry, I know not all so-called christians are rotten, but, man, they are the most obnoxious! And, what pisses me off is that the good ones don't speak out against them , at least not forcefully. It's like cops. You have bad cops and cops that don't do what the bad cops do, but they all maintain that blue wall of silence.

NO we do speak out forcefully. im a woman of God and a Christian but im also very pro choice and im for same sex marriage and im a real strong defender of rights for all. I always challenge Christians who have bigoted imo ways of thinking so some of us DO speak out forecfully.

[144man]

In the same way, the UK press does not give any coverage when Moslem leaders speak out against terrorism.

[Jerry Oz]

I don't believe the existence of God can be logically proved because that would eliminate the need for faith.

I wish your dad would be able to explain to me [[1) why the expansion of the universe is accelerating [[2} what dark energy is, and [[3) why and how there is so much carbon [[without which life would be impossible) in the universe.

It goes both ways. If all space and time began with the Big Bang, how could it have catalyzed? I can't give you answers but my response to every question of "why" is that there is order in the chaos of existence that nobody has ever explained to my satisfaction. I also question how life can [[1) come from non-life and [[2) how the first organisms not only survived but developed the means to reproduce and adapt to changing environments. Upon what did the protozoa [[i assume that was the first organism) subsist? And why would it be encoded toward mutation that allows evolution hundreds of millions of years later?

Any answer that you provide is as speculative as my belief that the universe was created as opposed to having just happened. God bless you in your belief, though.

[TomatoTom123]

It goes both ways. If all space and time began with the Big Bang, how could it have catalyzed? I can't give you answers but my response to every question of "why" is that there is order in the chaos of existence that nobody has ever explained to my satisfaction. I also question how life can [[1) come from non-life and [[2) how the first organisms not only survived but developed the means to reproduce and adapt to changing environments. Upon what did the protozoa [[i assume that was the first organism) subsist? And why would it be encoded toward mutation that allows evolution hundreds of millions of years later?

Any answer that you provide is as speculative as my belief that the universe was created as opposed to having just happened. God bless you in your belief, though.

We can never really know, but we can make predictions and theories based on evidence and such, and I'd rather go with that than just pure faith.

No offence, Jerry Oz, but I don't really want God's blessings! Lol

[calvin]

If you love wars, including possibly war with Russia, Hillary Clinton will give you what you want. It's no coincidence that the neocons are all backing Hillary.

I hoped that Americans [[and Brits) would be sick of these wars after Iraq. Wrong. Just look at Libya and Syria.

Here's an editorial from Der Spiegel, a leading and influential left-of-center German news publication. Germans can't vote in this election, so it's not an "endorsement", but Jakob Augstein [[son of Rudolf Augstein, one of the founders of Spiegel) writes that Germans should hope for a Trump win, despite his obvious flaws. I'll translate the opening - if you don't read German, you can use Google translate to read the rest.
"Security risk Clinton
The Case for Trump
Is there at least one single reason to hope for a victory from Donald Trump? Yes - peace. Hillary Clinton wants to risk military confrontation with Russia in the Syrian war. Germany cannot want that."

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutsc...a-1117476.html

Assad is horrible, but the US is arming terrorists fighting against him. Hillary Clinton continues to insist on a no-fly zone, despite statements by the US military that this means war with Russia [[she pushed for this while in the State Department, but Obama refused). Note that when directly asked in the third debate whether she was prepared to shoot down a Russian plane violating her no-fly zone, she deflected and did not answer the question. [[The answer is "yes", she will not declare a no-fly zone unless she intends to enforce it.) Russia has pointed out that it was invited by the legitimate government of Syria and warned that it will defend itself. It has moved S-300 anti-aircraft missiles into Syria - these are intended for American planes, as the rebels have none. Look for Russia to make a big push to defeat the rebels in Aleppo before Clinton is inaugurated; a Russian aircraft carrier just passed through the English Channel, probably on its way to Syria.

Meanwhile, the Russian government is preparing its people for a nuclear war.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/...ashar-al-Assad

Even if this is a bluff, the state of high alert makes it more likely that a misunderstanding could lead to a nuclear exchange.

The Podesta emails from Wikileaks also show that Clinton plans to confront China in the South China Sea.

Brace yourself for more wars under Clinton, and possibly a very big one. Hillary Clinton is a war monger. I hope the UK can stay out of all this, but I have little confidence in that.

At least some Democrats are beginning to wake up:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...l_benefit.html

[soulster]

Calvin, i'd rather have Clinton in office than an emotionally immature and unstable megalomaniacal narcissist that is Donald "grab her by the pussy" Trump.

[Jerry Oz]

We can never really know, but we can make predictions and theories based on evidence and such, and I'd rather go with that than just pure faith.

No offence, Jerry Oz, but I don't really want God's blessings! Lol

None taken. I wasn't trying to convert you. When I say "God bless you", it's more for me than you. [[It's hard to explain.) My own beliefs are much different than those of traditional Christians. I don't even discuss it with them or I wind up in a contentious debate. I'm certainly not going to go into it on a message board.

But when I hear people ask existential questions, I often take the bait to ask a few of my own.

[TomatoTom123]

None taken. I wasn't trying to convert you. When I say "God bless you", it's more for me than you. [[It's hard to explain.) My own beliefs are much different than those of traditional Christians. I don't even discuss it with them or I wind up in a contentious debate. I'm certainly not going to go into it on a message board.

But when I hear people ask existential questions, I often take the bait to ask a few of my own.

You know what, I completely understand! Thank you, Jerry Oz

[TomatoTom123]

Calvin, i'd rather have Clinton in office than an emotionally immature and unstable megalomaniacal narcissist that is Donald "grab her by the pussy" Trump.

Thank you, soulster. You said it all!

[calvin]

Thank you, soulster. You said it all!

To the extent that there is any coherence at all in Trump's foreign policy, it seems to be in favor of less foreign military intervention, and that would be good. Knowing Hillary's past record and current positions, I think Trump is probably the lesser evil on this point. But I write "probably", because of course no one can be sure until the person is in office. Just look at Obama and the disasters in Libya and Syria.

I could vote in this election [[I'm both a US and UK citizen), but I decided months ago that the choice is so horrible that I will not. Now it's too late, but if I did vote I would certainly vote against Hillary, either holding my nose and going for Trump, or perhaps for Jill Stein as a protest.

Said it all? If the two of you are saying you'd rather have wars, with hundreds of thousands of innocent people killed [[Syrian civil war, 300,000-400,000 killed and still counting, with the US complicit in a fair share of that), because the megalomaniacal narcissist Trump [[and I agree with that assessment) said eleven years ago that he "grabbed some pussy", I'd invite you to reconsider your priorities.

[TomatoTom123]

I am not saying that Hilary is perfect, by no means is she perfect. But if you are seriously suggesting that we would be safer under the leadership of a racist, misogynist and megalomaniac, I cannot agree.

The situation in Syria is terrible. Because of previous wars I would say that the US and the UK are reluctant to go in with full military intervention. However, I don't even know what Donald Trump's foreign policy is - and that in itself is probably not a good sign.

I agree that neither candidate is very good though, and it is a case of the "lesser of the two evils". Donald Trump, however, is probably not the answer!

[soulster]

None taken. I wasn't trying to convert you. When I say "God bless you", it's more for me than you. [[It's hard to explain.)

Well, it annoys me when people say that, or "You are blessed", and I say it is a way for them to push their beliefs on people.

[soulster]

To the extent that there is any coherence at all in Trump's foreign policy, it seems to be in favor of less foreign military intervention, and that would be good. Knowing Hillary's past record and current positions, I think Trump is probably the lesser evil on this point. But I write "probably", because of course no one can be sure until the person is in office. Just look at Obama and the disasters in Libya and Syria.

I could vote in this election [[I'm both a US and UK citizen), but I decided months ago that the choice is so horrible that I will not. Now it's too late, but if I did vote I would certainly vote against Hillary, either holding my nose and going for Trump, or perhaps for Jill Stein as a protest.

Said it all? If the two of you are saying you'd rather have wars, with hundreds of thousands of innocent people killed [[Syrian civil war, 300,000-400,000 killed and still counting, with the US complicit in a fair share of that), because the megalomaniacal narcissist Trump [[and I agree with that assessment) said eleven years ago that he "grabbed some pussy", I'd invite you to reconsider your priorities.

Clinton has certainly made mistakes, such as voting for the Iraqi war, and Trump keeps lying about his non-support for it despite there being recorded evidence of him supporting it.

I honestly don't know what Clinton would do with regard to using military muscle, but I wouldn't Trust trump's judgement or temperament to not do the same.

[TomatoTom123]

Well, it annoys me when people say that, or "You are blessed", and I say it is a way for them to push their beliefs on people.

Yes. I don't get why you have to say "God bless you" when someone sneezes. That annoys me, LOL. You know, I don't even say "pardon me" when I burp because of its potential religious connotations, hehehe!! [[I say "excuse me", of course)

[Jerry Oz]

Well, it annoys me when people say that, or "You are blessed", and I say it is a way for them to push their beliefs on people.

Say what you will. You're right in some cases and wrong in others. That's your problem. You have no problem proclaiming your belief, so it's interesting that you ascribe your meaning to the words of others who feel differently. God bless you, brother but it doesn't matter to me if you believe in heaven or hell, just as I'm not concerned whether you find either.

[Jerry Oz]

Yes. I don't get why you have to say "God bless you" when someone sneezes. That annoys me, LOL. You know, I don't even say "pardon me" when I burp because of its potential religious connotations, hehehe!! [[I say "excuse me", of course)

As I said, their blessing you has less to do with you than them. If you are so offended by "pardon me", I suggest that you not say "goodbye" either. You should also avoid saying that you hope something does or does not happen. Semantics and language are interesting.

I'm happy that you found your belief system and have not written one word against it here or elsewhere in spite of what I perceive to be your attitude toward others. You don't have to "get" why I might bless you just as I don't get [[or care, really) that you don't. But it's interesting that you care more about the words used to express kindness toward you than you do that someone who cared enough to do it.

[144man]

Yes. I don't get why you have to say "God bless you" when someone sneezes. That annoys me, LOL. You know, I don't even say "pardon me" when I burp because of its potential religious connotations, hehehe!! [[I say "excuse me", of course)

I don't mind anyone blessing me when I sneeze or even praying for me when I'm ill. I need all the help I can get!

[TomatoTom123]

As I said, their blessing you has less to do with you than them. If you are so offended by "pardon me", I suggest that you not say "goodbye" either. You should also avoid saying that you hope something does or does not happen. Semantics and language are interesting.

I'm happy that you found your belief system and have not written one word against it here or elsewhere in spite of what I perceive to be your attitude toward others. You don't have to "get" why I might bless you just as I don't get [[or care, really) that you don't. But it's interesting that you care more about the words used to express kindness toward you than you do that someone who cared enough to do it.

I wasn't being very serious about the whole "bless you" or "pardon me" thing. I don't stay up at night, angry that someone has blessed me for sneezing or teaching myself to say "excuse me" instead of "pardon me", LOL! You're right, though, when I think about it, I rarely say "goodbye", it's always "bye" or "see ya". Now what does that say about me?? Lol

And I'm not really offended by "bless you". It's good that someone is being nice by saying it, it's just that I wouldn't really know they were being nice, it means nothing to me. It just feels a bit, I don't know, demeaning, like I need God's blessings because I don't believe in him. I don't know. It's probably just me

[Roberta75]

Sean Hannitty has lost the last shred of dignity he had since he started shamelesly kissing Trumps rear end.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/hannity-i...150646880.html

[edafan]

I voted early today.

For the first time ever, I didn't vote for a president,

but I did vote on the rest of the ballot.

edafan

[Jerry Oz]

I might vote early. I'm definitely voting for president when I do.

[sophisticated_soul]

I have already voted. I happily voted for Hillary.

[Roberta75]

I voted early today.

For the first time ever, I didn't vote for a president,

but I did vote on the rest of the ballot.

edafan

I hope you dont live in a swing state that goes to Trump. Your business but having that dangersous lunatic in the oval offices is a high price to pay.

[Roberta75]

I have already voted. I happily voted for Hillary.

Me too I mailed mine in a week ago and I voted for Hillary.