independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Fri 18th Oct 2019 2:45am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Book: How to get rid of a President: History's guide to...
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 1 of 3 123>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 12/28/18 3:58pm

onlyforaminute

Book: How to get rid of a President: History's guide to...

...(too lazy to type the rest, see below) Anyone read it? I'm tempted.

39088993.jpg

Year of Return 2019
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 12/29/18 6:43am

RodeoSchro

avatar

I haven't read it, but the similarities between how Nixon acted and how Trump acts are many and frightening.

Second Funkiest White Man in America

P&R's Palladin
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 12/29/18 2:13pm

EmmaMcG

avatar

"How To Get Rid of A President" by Lee Harvey Oswald.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 12/29/18 2:39pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

EmmaMcG said:

"How To Get Rid of A President" by Lee Harvey Oswald.


You think that's funny?

Ross Perot was right!!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 12/29/18 4:33pm

IanRG

djThunderfunk said:

EmmaMcG said:

"How To Get Rid of A President" by Lee Harvey Oswald.


You think that's funny?

.

Too soon?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 12/29/18 4:53pm

EmmaMcG

avatar

djThunderfunk said:



EmmaMcG said:


"How To Get Rid of A President" by Lee Harvey Oswald.


You think that's funny?



Yes.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 12/29/18 4:53pm

EmmaMcG

avatar

IanRG said:



djThunderfunk said:




EmmaMcG said:


"How To Get Rid of A President" by Lee Harvey Oswald.


You think that's funny?



.


Too soon?



Evidently. For some people.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 12/29/18 6:05pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

EmmaMcG said:

IanRG said:

.

Too soon?

Evidently. For some people.


"too soon" doesn' even make sense in this context.

Beyond that, if you would find it acceptable to aim such a "joke" at obama, or bernie or anybody else other than trump, then okay, you're not funny, but whatevs, have fun amusing yourself.

If someone had said the exact same thing when obama was in office the people here would label that person a racist and would still be bent out of shape about it and would continually bring it up to attack that person.

Not triggered, just sayin'... you would be.





[Edited 12/29/18 18:13pm]

Ross Perot was right!!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 12/29/18 7:54pm

13cjk13

EmmaMcG said:

IanRG said:

.

Too soon?

Evidently. For some people.

Some snowflakes. lol

"If we had had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 12/29/18 8:16pm

IanRG

djThunderfunk said:

EmmaMcG said:

IanRG said: Evidently. For some people.


"too soon" doesn' even make sense in this context.

Beyond that, if you would find it acceptable to aim such a "joke" at obama, or bernie or anybody else other than trump, then okay, you're not funny, but whatevs, have fun amusing yourself.

If someone had said the exact same thing when obama was in office the people here would label that person a racist and would still be bent out of shape about it and would continually bring it up to attack that person.

Not triggered, just sayin'... you would be.





[Edited 12/29/18 18:13pm]

.

Kennedy was assassinated in 1963. I was 1 year old. Perhaps you are obsessing too much about people not liking Trump yet again.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 12/30/18 1:07am

MoBettaBliss

EmmaMcG said:

IanRG said:

.

Too soon?

Evidently. For some people.



should have gone with John Wilkes Booth?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 12/30/18 1:14am

EmmaMcG

avatar

djThunderfunk said:



EmmaMcG said:


IanRG said:


.


Too soon?



Evidently. For some people.


"too soon" doesn' even make sense in this context.

Beyond that, if you would find it acceptable to aim such a "joke" at obama, or bernie or anybody else other than trump, then okay, you're not funny, but whatevs, have fun amusing yourself.

If someone had said the exact same thing when obama was in office the people here would label that person a racist and would still be bent out of shape about it and would continually bring it up to attack that person.

Not triggered, just sayin'... you would be.





[Edited 12/29/18 18:13pm]



I never even mentioned Trump. Nor was the joke aimed at Trump. "Not triggered", you say. Well you certainly come across as "triggered". By the way, that's not another gun joke, I'm just using the word "triggered" because you used it, so no need to get your undies in a bunch.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 12/30/18 1:15am

EmmaMcG

avatar

MoBettaBliss said:



EmmaMcG said:


IanRG said:


.


Too soon?



Evidently. For some people.



should have gone with John Wilkes Booth?



He'd probably accuse me of hating actors or something.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 12/30/18 2:27am

IanRG

MoBettaBliss said:

EmmaMcG said:

IanRG said: Evidently. For some people.



should have gone with John Wilkes Booth?

.

Or Brutus, Cimber and the other Senators?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 12/30/18 6:10am

djThunderfunk

avatar

Oh, we're pretending this thread isn't about the trumpclown are we? I guess Rodeo hadn't already made the "connection" before me, huh?


At least have the courage of your convictions. wink


[Edited 12/30/18 6:13am]

Ross Perot was right!!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 12/30/18 7:26am

EmmaMcG

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

Oh, we're pretending this thread isn't about the trumpclown are we? I guess Rodeo hadn't already made the "connection" before me, huh?


At least have the courage of your convictions. wink



[Edited 12/30/18 6:13am]



I wasn't even talking about Trump. I was making a joke about John F Kennedy based on the title of the book mentioned in the thread title. You brought up Trump, not me. Is that clear enough for you?

Rodeo said there were a lot of similarities between Trump and Nixon. That might be true. I don't know. Because I don't give two fucks about either of them. But other than that, you're the only one who brought up Trump so if you feel that this thread is "about Trump", it's only because you made it about him by jumping in to defend him unnecessarily.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 12/30/18 10:16am

djThunderfunk

avatar

I'm calling "bullshit".

Ross Perot was right!!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 12/30/18 12:33pm

IanRG

djThunderfunk said:

I'm calling "bullshit".

.

Calling it BS does not make it BS.

.

The thread was started by a Republican supporter with no mention of the T word. That you and Rodeo linked this to the current president when the cover is clearly about a long gone President says more about your obsessions respectively for and against the current encumbent than other people's convictions.

.

The problem with this forum at the moment is its obsession with loving or hating one single person and attacking people rather than what they say purely on this basis.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 12/30/18 12:59pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

IanRG said:

djThunderfunk said:

I'm calling "bullshit".

.

Calling it BS does not make it BS.

.

The thread was started by a Republican supporter with no mention of the T word. That you and Rodeo linked this to the current president when the cover is clearly about a long gone President says more about your obsessions respectively for and against the current encumbent than other people's convictions.

.

The problem with this forum at the moment is its obsession with loving or hating one single person and attacking people rather than what they say purely on this basis.


Since you, like most in this forum, insist that I am "for" the trumpclown, despite me making it clear that I am not... How dare you have a problem with me making assumptions about others.

Be the change you want to see. wink


Ross Perot was right!!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 12/30/18 1:34pm

onlyforaminute

IanRG said:



djThunderfunk said:


I'm calling "bullshit".



.


Calling it BS does not make it BS.


.


The thread was started by a Republican supporter with no mention of the T word. That you and Rodeo linked this to the current president when the cover is clearly about a long gone President says more about your obsessions respectively for and against the current encumbent than other people's convictions.


.


The problem with this forum at the moment is its obsession with loving or hating one single person and attacking people rather than what they say purely on this basis.


Uh, no. This thread was started by someone who listens to a whole lot of kpbs.
Year of Return 2019
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 12/30/18 1:40pm

onlyforaminute

Former CIA officer Priess (The President’s Book of Secrets: The Untold Story of Intelligence Briefings to America’s Presidents, 2016) discusses a discrete path toward departure: rejected by one’s own political party (Presidents Tyler, Fillmore, Pierce, Buchanan, Arthur, and Lyndon Johnson); undermined by opponents and/or subordinates (Nixon); sunk due to general unpopularity (Taft); death by natural causes (Harrison, Taylor, Harding, Franklin Roosevelt); assassination (Lincoln, McKinley, Garfield, Kennedy); temporarily unable to serve due to a traumatic occurrence (Wilson, Eisenhower, Reagan); and impeachment (Andrew Johnson, Clinton). Throughout the book, Priess delves into the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, explaining debates among the Founding Fathers about how much stability to offer a chief executive. Nobody desired an executive with powers so weak as to be ineffective, but at the same time, nobody wanted to be ruled by a monarchy similar to the one from which the country had just won independence.
Year of Return 2019
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 12/30/18 1:52pm

IanRG

djThunderfunk said:

IanRG said:

.

Calling it BS does not make it BS.

.

The thread was started by a Republican supporter with no mention of the T word. That you and Rodeo linked this to the current president when the cover is clearly about a long gone President says more about your obsessions respectively for and against the current encumbent than other people's convictions.

.

The problem with this forum at the moment is its obsession with loving or hating one single person and attacking people rather than what they say purely on this basis.


Since you, like most in this forum, insist that I am "for" the trumpclown, despite me making it clear that I am not... How dare you have a problem with me making assumptions about others.

Be the change you want to see. wink


.

This thread is NOT about your obsession that person and it is not about you wanting to argue against the Orger rather than discuss the topic.

.

Except when denying your obsession, you argue for the encumbent all the time, even to the point of assuming all references to a president must be an attack on him that you must defend. A wise man once told me to have the courage my convictions.

.

Have you read the book the topic is about? It is a history book about how presidents were removed - note the use of past tense - the encumbent has not been removed. Chapter 4 is titled "Displaced by Death" Do you realise that the Lee Harvey Oswald joke was about Kennedy's displacement by death.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 12/30/18 1:58pm

EmmaMcG

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

I'm calling "bullshit".



You can call bullshit all you want. You talk enough of it.

If I have something to say, I say it directly. If I were talking about someone shooting Trump, I would have said it directly. But I didn't. I never even hinted at Trump. You did. I don't know if you have some sort of obsession with him or if you're just one of those people who like to pretend to be offended on other people's behalf. But whatever your issue is, it doesn't change the fact that I was referring to the shooting of JFK and ONLY the shooting of JFK. After all, Donald Trump had never been shot as far as I know. So why would you think I was talking about him?
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 12/30/18 2:00pm

IanRG

onlyforaminute said:

IanRG said:

.

Calling it BS does not make it BS.

.

The thread was started by a Republican supporter with no mention of the T word. That you and Rodeo linked this to the current president when the cover is clearly about a long gone President says more about your obsessions respectively for and against the current encumbent than other people's convictions.

.

The problem with this forum at the moment is its obsession with loving or hating one single person and attacking people rather than what they say purely on this basis.

Uh, no. This thread was started by someone who listens to a whole lot of kpbs...

.

And has made a lot of arguments in support of the Republicans.

.

Given you subsequent post about the book emphasising that it is a political history study of how former Presidents lost office, I assume your post has nothing to do with the current emcumbent?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 12/30/18 2:20pm

IanRG

onlyforaminute said:

Former CIA officer Priess (The President’s Book of Secrets: The Untold Story of Intelligence Briefings to America’s Presidents, 2016) discusses a discrete path toward departure: rejected by one’s own political party (Presidents Tyler, Fillmore, Pierce, Buchanan, Arthur, and Lyndon Johnson); undermined by opponents and/or subordinates (Nixon); sunk due to general unpopularity (Taft); death by natural causes (Harrison, Taylor, Harding, Franklin Roosevelt); assassination (Lincoln, McKinley, Garfield, Kennedy); temporarily unable to serve due to a traumatic occurrence (Wilson, Eisenhower, Reagan); and impeachment (Andrew Johnson, Clinton). Throughout the book, Priess delves into the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, explaining debates among the Founding Fathers about how much stability to offer a chief executive. Nobody desired an executive with powers so weak as to be ineffective, but at the same time, nobody wanted to be ruled by a monarchy similar to the one from which the country had just won independence.

.

Australia has gone through a period of instability in political leadership since 2007 followng a long period of stability and we have been looking at how Prime Ministers have been removed from office - it is more often than not by means other than by losing an election. Many of us want Australia to become a republic and have looked at executive president (US/France style) and non-executive president (Ireland style) models. As the latter one would see little difference in the structure of government other than the Governor General's role being replaced by the President, the general position here has little support for an executive president model. Without an executive president this gived primacy to the Parliament. It does not remove the problem of how to effectively remove a leader but it does reduce the problem of President / House majority missmatches.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 12/30/18 2:26pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

IanRG said:

djThunderfunk said:


Since you, like most in this forum, insist that I am "for" the trumpclown, despite me making it clear that I am not... How dare you have a problem with me making assumptions about others.

Be the change you want to see. wink


.

This thread is NOT about your obsession that person and it is not about you wanting to argue against the Orger rather than discuss the topic.

.

Except when denying your obsession, you argue for the encumbent all the time, even to the point of assuming all references to a president must be an attack on him that you must defend. A wise man once told me to have the courage my convictions.

.

Have you read the book the topic is about? It is a history book about how presidents were removed - note the use of past tense - the encumbent has not been removed. Chapter 4 is titled "Displaced by Death" Do you realise that the Lee Harvey Oswald joke was about Kennedy's displacement by death.


How "special" are you? Can't wait to see "all the times" I "argued for" the trumpclown.

Go ahead, pull up some screenshots or links. I'll wait. popcorn

Ross Perot was right!!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 12/30/18 2:27pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

EmmaMcG said:

djThunderfunk said:

I'm calling "bullshit".

You can call bullshit all you want. You talk enough of it. If I have something to say, I say it directly. If I were talking about someone shooting Trump, I would have said it directly. But I didn't. I never even hinted at Trump. You did. I don't know if you have some sort of obsession with him or if you're just one of those people who like to pretend to be offended on other people's behalf. But whatever your issue is, it doesn't change the fact that I was referring to the shooting of JFK and ONLY the shooting of JFK. After all, Donald Trump had never been shot as far as I know. So why would you think I was talking about him?


Whatever you say, dear. Happy New Year! party

Ross Perot was right!!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 12/30/18 2:41pm

IanRG

djThunderfunk said:

IanRG said:

.

This thread is NOT about your obsession that person and it is not about you wanting to argue against the Orger rather than discuss the topic.

.

Except when denying your obsession, you argue for the encumbent all the time, even to the point of assuming all references to a president must be an attack on him that you must defend. A wise man once told me to have the courage my convictions.

.

Have you read the book the topic is about? It is a history book about how presidents were removed - note the use of past tense - the encumbent has not been removed. Chapter 4 is titled "Displaced by Death" Do you realise that the Lee Harvey Oswald joke was about Kennedy's displacement by death.


How "special" are you? Can't wait to see "all the times" I "argued for" the trumpclown.

Go ahead, pull up some screenshots or links. I'll wait. popcorn

.

It is not all about you, you get nothing from me.

.

And in answer to your next post - No, the reason I am not supplying the list of all the myriad times you have leaped to the defence of the current encument is not because I cannot.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 12/30/18 2:45pm

EmmaMcG

avatar

djThunderfunk said:



EmmaMcG said:


djThunderfunk said:

I'm calling "bullshit".



You can call bullshit all you want. You talk enough of it. If I have something to say, I say it directly. If I were talking about someone shooting Trump, I would have said it directly. But I didn't. I never even hinted at Trump. You did. I don't know if you have some sort of obsession with him or if you're just one of those people who like to pretend to be offended on other people's behalf. But whatever your issue is, it doesn't change the fact that I was referring to the shooting of JFK and ONLY the shooting of JFK. After all, Donald Trump had never been shot as far as I know. So why would you think I was talking about him?


Whatever you say, dear. Happy New Year! party



Happy new year to you too. I actually mean it though.

But don't call me "dear". It makes you come across as a condescending dickhead.
[Edited 12/30/18 14:47pm]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 12/30/18 2:52pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

IanRG said:

djThunderfunk said:


How "special" are you? Can't wait to see "all the times" I "argued for" the trumpclown.

Go ahead, pull up some screenshots or links. I'll wait. popcorn

.

It is not all about you, you get nothing from me.

.

And in answer to your next post - No, the reason I am not supplying the list of all the myriad times you have leaped to the defence of the current encument is not because I cannot.


Have the "courage of your convictions", honey. lol

You can't because you're lying. I don't know what an "encument" is, but I've never "argued for" the trumpclown. Now you're changing it to "leaped to the defence" which I also haven't done. Just more bullshit. blahblah

Ross Perot was right!!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 of 3 123>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Book: How to get rid of a President: History's guide to...