Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 


Your posts on here anymore show a lot of conhusion and lack of functional thinking.Used to be your posts worthwhile anymore pretty much worthless jiberish. 

0 Kudos
Honored Advisor




Sorry your world is charging you service fees and you finally figured it out.

As far as your other wasted talking points you might be happier if you unsubscribed from the daily liberal talking points, you are parroting.





you are just plain foolish in many of your supposedly high brow, fifty cent word posts.

The old saying of when you have no legitimate facts, just baffle them with bull-s#!t.

The place has quite an odor, enough.  Move on




You are just bitter. Remember election day? What was your quote???


"You lose"?


$2115 a month for health care for two non 65 year old self employed people, nothing affordable about it.


Btw I didn't vote for Trump, I voted against Clinton and the murders, pay to play, and mass corruption that follows that crowd around.


You lost



Not why is it there is only an Isis terrorist that is worse than a losing liberal?

Senior Advisor


Don't know why this thread hasn't been moved to the Forum.


This "bombshell" affects nothing other than adding fodder for those "heartbroken" by the election.  Well, it does serve as further proof of additional erosion of good journalistic principles.  Remember when the weatherman was the least reliable talking head? -- within the past few years or so, things have really changed.  


It appears that the "bombshell" information has been known by FBI/CIA and some other government officials, etc., for quite some time.  It wasn't made public because they knew it's source and why the information was pulled together, they knew it was unverified and mostly just propaganda and/or misinformation intended for an audience that wanted to derail Trump's campaign.  It is not "news".  It's source was apparently not Russian hacking, but some British dude that was hired to put together "dirt" to potentially use against the Trump campaign, initially by republicans struggling to compete within their own party, then by democrats in the general campaign.  It sounds like it was presented to Trump this week to serve as an example of "disinformation" or "propaganda" campaigns that do/can surface in a free press and internet without journalistic integrity.


Personally, I haven't read any of it, don't intend to read any of it, and just don't feel the need, it has no useful purpose.  It's likely being "investigated", and probably has been for quite some time.

Honored Advisor


There's plenty of room in Canada for those who are still "heartbroken".   And........they do have the internet there, so those "heartbroken" folks can live there and still post their drivel from there.    

0 Kudos
Veteran Advisor


i feel that i need to explain the original post. I usually buzz thru my reading list in the morning and eve, and not alot happening,

in the goes from cnn, reuters, bloomberg,msnbc, agrimoney, wall street journal, washing post, new york times,

some gov sites, from usda to noaa, agfax, and a couple with internatal flare...

i admit, i just really look at the headlines, and if it sparks my interest, i'll read the rest of it.

For a while, in most of the media, there had been a "problem" between intelligence agency's and trump. 

Trumps attitude was basicly they were wrong.....wrong about everything......

This was not going over well, considering some bright people have been in the intellignce service, including some

people who were of very high rank in the military. Those fellows are usually pretty sharp.  you don't get "stars"

out of boxes of cracker jacks.

you must get a wider view of the situation, that sets the issue have an intelligence sources saying one

thing (russians hacked the democrats)....and the president say no no no, you are wrong, and then calling names

and then saying he is going to totally redo the intelligence system....then we go a step further, we are now

presented with a report, by the same people who he is saying is wrong wrong, and many other things.....they now

have a report, citing issues with HIM, some links, some issues, that make things very uncomfortable for him.

some, if ture, in my opinion, raises a big doubt if this person has done something that we should not have a

president to be, have done.

in my eyes.....if you have someone running for president, is in contact with gov people in russia, that are

hacking the opposite party, and are working together to get that person to win, and "undermine the american

people's faith in the the democratic process".....that alone, in my do not have the president

working with a country, that does not really get along with us, having them doing something illegal (yes hacking is)

to's wrong......if you can't understand that......i really don't know what to say.

anyhow.......if this is proven true, which it is being would put a "lack of faith" into the

markets......and frankly, the question of a nature is, should trump be president....

one of the advisory services i look at, brought this question up, that the market could become "unsettled".....and thus

could go lower......the u.s. would be seen as "in crisis"....and the dollar go down....and various other  things.

the ironic thing tho......such a situation would be good for ag, to an extent, the lower dollar, and fund money

looking for a "safer" place other than stocks.....


so, my post was not "political" was something that could impact the markets.....and may yet do that.


yes, it is no secret that i have some apprehension with trump.......that is not to say i was a clinton supporter..

personally, i wish there was a better, other choice, then either trump or clinton.


i've noted how polarized we have seems if you are not in favor of something that trump does, you

are automaticlly labeled a democrat, and then given a 5 minute review of all the things that obama done.

we will now call people names at the drop of a hat..........we would have never done this before.....

i think part of it is the way we communicate here.......we have a screen, that doesn't have a face, nor makes

a noise (other than a microsoft melody).......and washington and hollywood now go futher than ever,

on tv......"nothing is left to the imagination"........i thought it used to be that things didn't go down hill

untill 9 pm.......but i guess that only counts if you have a transmitter.....maybe, but i was in my recliner

watching tv, and there was a show that i was supprised the subject matter, and words used....i thought,

what if the grandkids were laying on the carpet watching the tv, and such stuff as that.....they would

have said.....grandpa what's that mean ???????  grandpa is turning beet red, and then holler's

for grandma......


so..........although we took the scenic route........i hope that explains my logic for starting this




how about those beans up 15  !!!

dang corn down 2........chinia issue starting to have an impact ???



0 Kudos
Senior Advisor


Think we understand where you're coming from Elcheapo.  I view things with more skepticism than I used to.  I also think one needs to separate the "Russian hacking" issue into a few parts -- "the Russians" allegedly hacked the Democratic National Committee computers or data stream; "the Russians" allegedly hacked or accessed the emails of some high-level DNC members (Podesta); "the Russians" allegedly selected damaging materials from those hacks and made them available to American media sources; and "the Russians" allegedly have a set of information potentially damaging to Trump.  All of this is no more settled than Clinton's email scandal, lies about Benghazi, the success/failure of Obamacare, or Trump's capabilty to guide our country thru the next 4 years.   The media hypes all this stuff and makes it seem bigger than it is.  At the same time, the media reports this stuff from unnamed sources, unverified sources, people who remain nameless because they are not authorized to speak to the press, etc.  Plus, different media sources clearly promote different angles/slants/spins to all the stories.  A healthy dose of skepticism is therefore justified, as are calm (not panic) reactions -- with all the spin and hype, it is difficult to sort truth from fiction, and opinion from fact.


IF Russians did the DNC hacking to attempt to harm the DNC and/or Clinton, it is understandable in light of the relationship our leadership has had with Russian leadship over the past few years.  Hacking computer systems or emails of our government or leadership should be considered no differently than catching the Watergate break-in perpetrators, or foreign spies.  It wouldn't surprise me if the US did something similar in the last Russian elections, or the Ukraine elections.  On the other hand, IF someone inside the DNC hacked/obtained/provided information to the media, their most obvious defense would be to find a way to blame it on someone else, like "the Russians" and/or Wiki-leaks.  And, apparently if you have the right connections, you could tell the media "the Russians" did it, and it would be reported as "fact".  Then you could hire your own investigators to uncover the "truth" and just have them provide the FBI with the information, no need wasting FBI and other government resources on the matter.


IF Russians did hack into high-level official emails (Podesta), again, it is understandable.  Just another "spy" event.  On the other hand, it sounded like all someone did was send a phishing email to Podesta, which he opened, which then provided the hacker with his password or something to access his email account.  Anyone could have done that using apparently readily available hacking software.  And, again, they could make it look like someone else did it.  Heck, I get garbage emails from myself that I know I didn't send, and of course I don't open them.


PLUS, if we can get the media, FBI, and general public all talking about "the Russians" and the offensive hacking and the damage to our democratic systems, and how it obviously affected/influenced all those "deplorable" voters, then perhaps everyone will ignore the actual content of the information that was hacked or made public.  Oh wait . . . that only applies to the DNC . . .  we want everyone to see exactly what was in that information about Trump, so let's muddy up where it came from or how it came about, let's get the FBI right on it (even though the informaiton has been out there for almost a year, already identified as probable rumor, misinformation, and propaganda gathered together to assist Trump's opponents).  Of course, additional investigation might prove something otherwise.


We, as Americans, grew accustomed to "old-style" journalistic integrity -- verification of information, separation of facts from opinions, and reporting methods and styles that we assumed communicated honestly.  With the advent of the internet news sources, Facebook, Twitter, and news in short screen-size pics, soundbites and written tidbits, much has changed.  Often we don't really know the identify of whoever is purporting to provide us with the news of the day, much less whether or not it is truth or fiction, opinion or fact.  And, Trump's twitters are actually not helping the situation -- they could, IF he would use them more sparingly and with more forethought and pre-publishing help from better-informed and experienced advisors.

Honored Advisor


well stated wcmo....


Verify........... don't you wish that was a real word in the internet age... the internet has crushed that word.



If you were a russian computer surfer.  Wouldn't there be something better to go after, like a good set of bank account numbers or free netflix, instead of anything on a dnc email list.......?  I swear if those emails were presented for free to download, who in the world outside of the dnc or the repub..intern assigned, would bother to read the junk.  

And if you weren't russian,  who would you sell them to.   I would be supprised there is anything in the way of super governmental secrets in those emails...  lets assume there is a little "heaven forbid" lady like profanity or unflatering banter.  There is only one place to get top dollar for this haul....................................................... THE AMERICAN PRESS.

0 Kudos
bruce MN


I'm nearly 70 and have been listening to people on the far political right declare that "you can't believe the news" since I was a little kid tagging along to the elevator, feed mill and hog buying station.  And family reunions and church functions.


Difference now is the Internet and people a) reading only the news they want to read and b)people sympathetic to RW ideaology suddenly finding somewhere that they can believe that somebody is finally listening to them.


You could go anywhere and discuss politics and classic liberal and classic conservative views which would be politely discussed and debated.  More left views would be met with arguments. Far right views would empty rooms and picnic tables.  The respectable Republicans would be the first to vacate.


It's uncharted waters and the waves are treacherous.

0 Kudos
BA Deere
Honored Advisor


Well Bruce, the goalposts and goal line has been moved in favor of the vistors (liberals) they only have to run 40 yards for a touchdown while the conservatives have to run 160 yards for a touchdown.  Growing up whether it was Carter or Reagan or Ford you knew none of them wanted to "change the fundamental makeup of America" as we saw in `08.  In 2008 a community organizer was elected by people that had no business being anywhere near a voting booth and he turned a prize winning bull into a steer that`s now a shell of itself.  I don`t know we it`s possible to rejuvinate the scortum contents or not...perhaps Trump will hook a IV up to his mojo   Smiley Happy



But JFK, Carter even Clinton wouldn`t have a place in today`s Democrat party as they governed during their eras...of course in the cases of Carter and Clinton they change with the wind to remain relevent.


But at a 1977 July family reunion, Carter in office..everyone looked the same Smiley Wink everyone basically had the same goals, only the ladies had ear rings and only tatoos could be found on the WWII vet with the name of his ship on his arm.   Today that family doesn`t bother with July family reunions...and I could say a little bit more but being as it`s the Market page, i better not...but ask me on the Forum and I`ll tell ya  Smiley Very Happy 

Frequent Contributor


lots of truth what you said.  Lots of things are complicated.  When someone lies about small items it makes me distrust the big items.  For example the people in the pictures for the inauguration.  Some things are obvious.  

0 Kudos