The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mrclose on February 07, 2020, 02:09:36 am
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/2SVV0gZk/Valentine.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
-
I thought it was funny how she planned to do this at the end, they caught her pre-ripping the notes just enough to make it easy to finish it. Drama queen harpy... that lied about it being spontaneous.
-
I thought it was funny how she planned to do this at the end, they caught her pre-ripping the notes just enough to make it easy to finish it. Drama queen harpy... that lied about it being spontaneous.
She looked off the chain today.
I think he’s driving her insane.
-
She looked off the chain today.
I think he’s driving her insane.
Maybe the Pubs will learn the formula for dealing with the Rats, don't back down attack.
-
She looked off the chain today.
I think he’s driving her insane.
Not a long drive at all.
-
New video shows Pelosi practicing ripping up Trump’s State of The Union speech.
https://www.lifezette.com/2020/02/new-video-shows-pelosi-practicing-ripping-up-trumps-state-of-the-union-speech/ (https://www.lifezette.com/2020/02/new-video-shows-pelosi-practicing-ripping-up-trumps-state-of-the-union-speech/)
Error 404 (Not Found)!!1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaYGknEcu-4#)
-
I could really see Trump do that... :silly:
-
She looked off the chain today.
I think he’s driving her insane.
Yep. Trump now lives in her head 24/7. She brought it all on herself. :rolling:
-
Maybe the Pubs will learn the formula for dealing with the Rats, don't back down attack.
I wonder if any of those who constantly decry Trump’s lack of ‘decorum’ are beginning to see why having a president who doesn’t act with ‘class’ like a Bush or a Dole has its advantages.
-
I wonder if any of those who constantly decry Trump’s lack of ‘decorum’ are beginning to see why having a president who doesn’t act with ‘class’ like a Bush or a Dole has its advantages.
No. And Reagan is that benchmark, not Bush or Dole.
-
She looked off the chain today.
I think he’s driving her insane.
Not likely. She has always been insane.
-
Pelosi was angry precisely because Trump's SOTU wasn't confrontational. They wanted him to be angry and defiant so they could portray him as unhinged, and want nothing more than to keep impeachment alive. By giving a speech in which he completely ignored impeachment, he undermined their entire strategy and left them swinging at air.
-
No. And Reagan is that benchmark, not Bush or Dole.
We are all entitled to our own opinion. But none of us are entitled to speak for anyone else without permission.
-
We are all entitled to our own opinion. But none of us are entitled to speak for anyone else without permission.
You asked:
I wonder if any of those who constantly decry Trump’s lack of ‘decorum’ are beginning to see why having a president who doesn’t act with ‘class’ like a Bush or a Dole has its advantages.
I replied.
-
You asked:
I replied.
Right. You answered for all never trumpers.
It would have been more accurate if you'd said 'I haven't', but I would've easily guessed that.
-
Not a long drive at all.
Just a short putt?
-
No. And Reagan is that benchmark, not Bush or Dole.
Reagan had an opponent in Tip O'Neil who understood the rules of the road at that time. Gingrich also understood the rules, but when the Rats regained control of the House in 2006 it was a new ball game, with new rules enabled by Bush 43's giving up. It's OK to want to return to the pre-2006 rules, but the Rats have tasted being on the upper end of tyranny and aren't about to give that up until they are utterly destroyed. Until then, it's war.
-
Right. You answered for all never trumpers.
It would have been more accurate if you'd said 'I haven't', but I would've easily guessed that.
My statement was my own, and no, I did not indicate that I was answering for anyone else but me.
-
Reagan had an opponent in Tip O'Neil who understood the rules of the road at that time. Gingrich also understood the rules, but when the Rats regained control of the House in 2006 it was a new ball game, with new rules enabled by Bush 43's giving up. It's OK to want to return to the pre-2006 rules, but the Rats have tasted being on the upper end of tyranny and aren't about to give that up until they are utterly destroyed. Until then, it's war.
Nah. They reamed on Reagan just as much - And he didn't back down, nor did he need to act like a boorish ass. This fight has been the very same my whole life.
-
Nah. They reamed on Reagan just as much - And he didn't back down, nor did he need to act like a boorish ass. This fight has been the very same my whole life.
^^^^^^^
This
-
Nah. They reamed on Reagan just as much - And he didn't back down, nor did he need to act like a boorish ass. This fight has been the very same my whole life.
Really? So, Reagan was Impeached for Iran-Contra? I missed that part.... :shrug:
-
^^^^^^^
This
Nope. The analogy is incomplete, see my post above.
-
Right. You answered for all never trumpers.
It would have been more accurate if you'd said 'I haven't', but I would've easily guessed that.
Here we go again...sigh.
-
Really? So, Reagan was Impeached for Iran-Contra? I missed that part.... :shrug:
They came right to the threshold. And they harried him otherwise the entire time.
-
Pelosi was angry precisely because Trump's SOTU wasn't confrontational. They wanted him to be angry and defiant so they could portray him as unhinged, and want nothing more than to keep impeachment alive. By giving a speech in which he completely ignored impeachment, he undermined their entire strategy and left them swinging at air.
Yep. Without pushback, her anger feels no force to her, so she's likely to overextend. The mask is slipping every day.
-
They came right to the threshold. And they harried him otherwise the entire time.
And that's the difference between then and now. The Rats have no problem pulling the Impeachment trigger as a political ploy today.
But you make a good point: Democrats have been criminalizing differences in policy since way back then. It's only a difference in degree.
-
And that's the difference between then and now. The Rats have no problem pulling the Impeachment trigger as a political ploy today.
But you make a good point: Democrats have been criminalizing differences in policy since way back then. It's only a difference in degree.
I see no difference in degree... Only what they think they can get away with.
-
Yep. Without pushback, her anger feels no force to her, so she's likely to overextend. The mask is slipping every day.
I am reminded of the old saw "They play Chess while we play Checkers."
People who think Chess is so superior to Checkers have never played Checkers with a master. I played Checkers with my Dad, who spent days on end playing Checkers when he was on the ship in the Pacific Theater of WWII, and I'm here to tell you it's difficult. Trump is indeed playing Checkers, and he's kicking their ass at it.
The key difference: "Forced moves." If you can jump an opponent's piece, you have to. Trump is forcing the Rats to make errors, like the page-ripping fiasco.
-
I thought it was funny how she planned to do this at the end, they caught her pre-ripping the notes just enough to make it easy to finish it. Drama queen harpy... that lied about it being spontaneous.
@Sighlass
You overlooked the obvious. She had REHEARSED it or she wouldn't have known how many sheets she could tear at one time.
-
Pelosi and Trump deserve each other, in this life and the next!!!
-
I wonder if any of those who constantly decry Trump’s lack of ‘decorum’ are beginning to see why having a president who doesn’t act with ‘class’ like a Bush or a Dole has its advantages.
@skeeter
The problem is that there are too many alleged Republicans that have been involved with the Dims in their "backdoor financial dealings". Since they have not only done the same things they Dims have done,but have often been PARTNERS with them in the deals,they are in no position to point fingers,never mind prosecutors.
Trump came into office on the other side of that equation. He grew up having to PAY bribes to some of the very people he is facing today,just to be able to conduct his business. No bribe often equals "no building permits,no sewer permits,no water permits,no passing health department permits,etc,etc,etc."
When Trump leaves office in 2024,it is ESSENTIAL that we replace him with another non-career politician. America needs another businessman who has spent his whole working life as one of their victims. If we don't the corruption will continue.
-
Trump should have given her a copy printed on paper embedded with carbon fibers and ground glass.
-
Reagan had an opponent in Tip O'Neil who understood the rules of the road at that time. Gingrich also understood the rules, but when the Rats regained control of the House in 2006 it was a new ball game, with new rules enabled by Bush 43's giving up. It's OK to want to return to the pre-2006 rules, but the Rats have tasted being on the upper end of tyranny and aren't about to give that up until they are utterly destroyed. Until then, it's war.
@Cyber Liberty
The Bush Crime Family did NOT "give up". They were a part of the globalist corruption since at LEAST WW-2,maybe earlier. It was Prescott Bush Sr that was the first Bush known to be a traitor,when he was arrested,put on trial,and found guilty of "conspiring with the enemy in a time of war" for helping the Nazi's launder money while working as an account executive for the Harriman Bank. IIRC,he even plead guilty to avoid a public trial.
His "punishment" for treason during a time of war was a fine (paid for by the Harriman's),probation,and then financial and political backing to run for and win a US Senate seat in Ct in 1952.
IIRC,and I might be wrong about this one,he was married into the Harriman Family.
-
I see no difference in degree... Only what they think they can get away with.
@roamer_1
That's where the degree came in. The Dims fully realized their power when they were able to infiltrate Dims into the Republican Party after the "Gingrich Revolution",and actually take Newt down with a bogus misdemeanor charge that would have been dismissed in a real court. That,and the stealth Dim "Republicans" gave them free reign to do any damn thing they wanted to do. Especially when combined with the Bush Crime Family takeover of the Republican Party.
-
Reagan had an opponent in Tip O'Neil who understood the rules of the road at that time. Gingrich also understood the rules, but when the Rats regained control of the House in 2006 it was a new ball game, with new rules enabled by Bush 43's giving up. It's OK to want to return to the pre-2006 rules, but the Rats have tasted being on the upper end of tyranny and aren't about to give that up until they are utterly destroyed. Until then, it's war.
QFT and damned straight.
Now... if only the rest of Americans .... that are not radical leftists....
could wake up to that reality and act/vote accordingly.
-
Really? So, Reagan was Impeached for Iran-Contra? I missed that part.... :shrug:
Also missed the part where the lamestream media and most Democrats came out of the commie closet and let it all (their ugly leftism) hang out.
No, it wasn't "the same" for Reagan, despite what some would claim. Not even close. Things have changed radically in American politics. And those changes occurred as a result of Obama's selection.
-
@skeeter
The problem is that there are too many alleged Republicans that have been involved with the Dims in their "backdoor financial dealings". Since they have not only done the same things they Dims have done,but have often been PARTNERS with them in the deals,they are in no position to point fingers,never mind prosecutors.
Trump came into office on the other side of that equation. He grew up having to PAY bribes to some of the very people he is facing today,just to be able to conduct his business. No bribe often equals "no building permits,no sewer permits,no water permits,no passing health department permits,etc,etc,etc."
When Trump leaves office in 2024,it is ESSENTIAL that we replace him with another non-career Dim politician,but with another businessman who has spent his whole working life as one of their victims. If we don't the corruption will continue.
Oh I get that. I was referring to those on our side who continue to declare their contempt for trump and his style, even as it is clearly causing the left to implode. Honest question - how much more proof will they need?
-
Oh I get that. I was referring to those on our side who continue to declare their contempt for trump and his style, even as it is clearly causing the left to implode. Honest question - how much more proof will they need?
Trump's confrontational attitude toward dems is OK with me, I just think it could be more effective if it wasn't always a knee jerk reflex. My fear is that it plays into the dem meme that what we see now IS toned down and if re-elected all constraints will come off.
I'd also like to see him less concerned about selling the Trump brand and more concerned with selling conservative values to a voting population desperately in need of a crash course in common sense.
-
Also missed the part where the lamestream media and most Democrats came out of the commie closet and let it all (their ugly leftism) hang out.
No, it wasn't "the same" for Reagan, despite what some would claim. Not even close. Things have changed radically in American politics. And those changes occurred as a result of Obama's selection.
I highlighted an important point about the media and Rat commies, and this is why they kept their socialist naughty bits under wraps: The Berlin Wall was still standing then.
-
Trump's confrontational attitude toward dems is OK with me, I just think it could be more effective if it wasn't always a knee jerk reflex. My fear is that it plays into the dem meme that what we see now IS toned down and if re-elected all constraints will come off.
I'd also like to see him less concerned about selling the Trump brand and more concerned with selling conservative values to a voting population desperately in need of a crash course in common sense.
I think those are fair criticisms. But personally I've completely stopped trying to critique his style - whatever he has it seems to be working.
-
I think those are fair criticisms. But personally I've completely stopped trying to critique his style - whatever he has it seems to be working.
Besides, he's usually lucky with the knee-jerks, because they usually cause a corresponding knee-jerk on the part of the Rats, and it may be doing them a lot of damage.
-
@roamer_1
That's where the degree came in. The Dims fully realized their power when they were able to infiltrate Dims into the Republican Party after the "Gingrich Revolution",and actually take Newt down with a bogus misdemeanor charge that would have been dismissed in a real court. That,and the stealth Dim "Republicans" gave them free reign to do any damn thing they wanted to do. Especially when combined with the Bush Crime Family takeover of the Republican Party.
@sneakypete
Nah... Same thing all along... Look at what happened to Tom Delay as an instance...
And all y'all have to disabuse yourselves of a uniform Republican party... The liberal Northeast Republicans have always been the money... And they like them some moderates who intend to give ultimate power to corporate entities. That's what has been driving most of the party for years.
The upstart politically, is the Goldwater/Reagan right wing. And they are the ones who are truly for the base... For all that Conservatives really are.
That is why settling for less - Pragmatism - Always lands yet another RINO.
I will say it again for emphasis:
Liberals are not winning on merit - They have no merit.
They are winning because they have no opposition.
The blame for where we are going lies squarely on Republicans for allowing it to happen.
-
Besides, he's usually lucky with the knee-jerks, because they usually cause a corresponding knee-jerk on the part of the Rats, and it may be doing them a lot of damage.
@Cyber Liberty
The man and his entire family, including Baron, have been under attack 24 hrs a day for almost 4 years and I have really been impressed that he has not hit back harder than he has...
-
@Cyber Liberty
The man and his entire family, including Baron, have been under attack 24 hrs a day for almost 4 years and I have really been impressed that he has not hit back harder than he has...
Be that as it may, I don't think it's the best way to maximize the reelection prospects for himself and the party, and that's all I care about.
-
@sneakypete
Nah... Same thing all along... Look at what happened to Tom Delay as an instance...
And all y'all have to disabuse yourselves of a uniform Republican party... The liberal Northeast Republicans have always been the money... And they like them some moderates who intend to give ultimate power to corporate entities. That's what has been driving most of the party for years.
The upstart politically, is the Goldwater/Reagan right wing. And they are the ones who are truly for the base... For all that Conservatives really are.
That is why settling for less - Pragmatism - Always lands yet another RINO.
I will say it again for emphasis:
Liberals are not winning on merit - They have no merit.
They are winning because they have no opposition.
The blame for where we are going lies squarely on Republicans for allowing it to happen.
Except that.... they're not winning because they do have opposition now. And that opposition will win in a landslide this November, barring something dire and unexpected. And rest assured... we on the right will be watching for more dirty tricks coming from the radical left & RINOs.
-
Except that.... they're not winning because they do have opposition now. And that opposition will win in a landslide this November, barring something dire and unexpected. And rest assured... we on the right will be watching for more dirty tricks coming from the radical left & RINOs.
Yes, they ARE winning. Nothing has changed.
Indicators of Conservatism actually winning are two: Balanced budgets and relinquishing power to the states... Neither of which are present at all. The Big Fed is growing exponentially by the day.
-
Yes, they ARE winning. Nothing has changed.
Indicators of Conservatism actually winning are two: Balanced budgets and relinquishing power to the states... Neither of which are present at all. The Big Fed is growing exponentially by the day.
Lol....[shaking head].... [sigh]....
look, old dear.... I wuvs ya...BUT...
you're delusional.
They've tried everything under the sun and haven't succeeded in defeating Trump, but have only made him stronger and given him (thanks, Nancy!) more voters and more support.
Wake up and smell the reality....
if you dare. :laugh:
-
Lol....[shaking head].... [sigh]....
look, old dear.... I wuvs ya...BUT...
you're delusional.
They've tried everything under the sun and haven't succeeded in defeating Trump, but have only made him stronger and given him (thanks, Nancy!) more voters and more support.
Wake up and smell the reality....
if you dare. :laugh:
I don't care a whit about any of that. I really don't
Reality is out of control debt and an even more powerful fed. And all y'all are cheering about how the deck chairs are rearranged. It makes no sense to me at all.
-
I don't care a whit about any of that. I really don't
Reality is out of control debt and an even more powerful fed. And all y'all are cheering about how the deck chairs are rearranged. It makes no sense to me at all.
I know it doesn't (and that's the sad part). We've been through this many times before.
-
They came right to the threshold. And they harried him otherwise the entire time.
Yep, thank the Lord for Oliver North (under pressure).
-
I know it doesn't (and that's the sad part). We've been through this many times before.
Nothing sad about it at all. I just ain't much for candy thrown by the clown at the front of the parade. I'm a meat eater, and there ain't no beef. Y'all are buying into crap that don't mean a thing to me.
(http://www.thedisciplinedinvestor.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/wherebeef.jpg)
-
Nothing sad about it at all. I just ain't much for candy thrown by the clown at the front of the parade. I'm a meat eater, and there ain't no beef. Y'all are buying into crap that don't mean a thing to me.
(http://www.thedisciplinedinvestor.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/wherebeef.jpg)
I wonder if you would still feel that way if you lived where I live and had to put up with the sh*t passing for political discussion and local popular culture I have for the past 50+ years.
-
Nothing sad about it at all. I just ain't much for candy thrown by the clown at the front of the parade. I'm a meat eater, and there ain't no beef. Y'all are buying into crap that don't mean a thing to me.
(http://www.thedisciplinedinvestor.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/wherebeef.jpg)
The only thing I'm buying into is the survival of America as a communist-free, sovereign nation that is NOT under NWO globalist control. And the only way that happens is via the defeat of the DemocRats.
It ain't rocket science.
-
I wonder if you would still feel that way if you lived where I live and had to put up with the sh*t passing for political discussion and local popular culture I have for the past 50+ years.
Yes I would. The logic of it is unassailable. I don't think my adherence to Conservative principle would change no matter where I am. Anything less will not work.
-
Yeah, nobody made fun of Reagan...
Error 404 (Not Found)!!1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yq7FKO5DlV0#)
-
The only thing I'm buying into is the survival of America as a communist-free, soverign nation that is NOT under NWO globalist control. And the only way that happens is via the defeat of the DemocRats.
It ain't rocket science.
Besides that, since when did we have a candidate who was serious about border control and inland enforcement? Disentangling ourselves from endless wars? Calling the rats out for who they are and swearing America will never be a socialist nation? Seating dozens of judicial Constitutional literalists as recommended by the Heritage Foundation?
Perfect? No, but I'm totally comfortable voting for the guy again.
-
Besides that, since when did we have a candidate who was serious about border control and inland enforcement? Disentangling ourselves from endless wars? Calling the rats out for who they are and swearing America will never be a socialist nation? Seating dozens of judicial Constitutional literalists as recommended by the Heritage Foundation?
Perfect? No, but I'm totally comfortable voting for the guy again.
I've said before and I'll say it again.... barring something really dire and unforseen.... I will (as will millions of other voters) crawl over broken glass to vote against the DemocRATS by voting FOR Donald J. Trump this November.
Earth to Rats: Keep it up. Keep showing who and what you really are (which I've known all along).
-
And that's the difference between then and now. The Rats have no problem pulling the Impeachment trigger as a political ploy today.
But you make a good point: Democrats have been criminalizing differences in policy since way back then. It's only a difference in degree.
But that difference is likely to cost them big time.
-
But that difference is likely to cost them big time.
Time will tell, meanwhile we can work to that goal, and hope for the best.
-
The only thing I'm buying into is the survival of America as a communist-free, sovereign nation that is NOT under NWO globalist control. And the only way that happens is via the defeat of the DemocRats.
It ain't rocket science.
Doesn't matter at all when the Republicans are just as bent on 3rd way socialism via NWO crap. You're just choosing a different master.
-
The only thing I'm buying into is the survival of America as a communist-free, sovereign nation that is NOT under NWO globalist control. And the only way that happens is via the defeat of the DemocRats.
It ain't rocket science.
You are spot on! :amen:
Never Trumpers should really stand down and start focusing on our country.
-
Besides that, since when did we have a candidate who was serious about border control and inland enforcement? Disentangling ourselves from endless wars? Calling the rats out for who they are and swearing America will never be a socialist nation? Seating dozens of judicial Constitutional literalists as recommended by the Heritage Foundation?
Perfect? No, but I'm totally comfortable voting for the guy again.
I don't know how many people picked up on it, but I was jumping out of my seat yelling YES when Trump said at the SOTU, "our ancestors tamed the wildreness". We've been suffering this guilt trip that the settlers were bad people stealing the land. It's not true and we should be proud of our heritage. We are a great nation with a great history.
It's great to see an alpha male mentality at the forefront.
-
Oh I get that. I was referring to those on our side who continue to declare their contempt for trump and his style, even as it is clearly causing the left to implode. Honest question - how much more proof will they need?
@skeeter
NO amount of truth will ever be enough for them. They are true-believer Party People,and no one who didn't pay his dues by working his way up the system "tree" is worthy of their consideration. Above ALL they do not want an actual conservative. They want a Dim-Lite that can play pretty with the Dims while smiling.
-
I don't know how many people picked up on it, but I was jumping out of my seat yelling YES when Trump said at the SOTU, "our ancestors tamed the wildreness". We've been suffering this guilt trip that the settlers were bad people stealing the land. It's not true and we should be proud of our heritage. We are a great nation with a great history.
It's great to see an alpha male mentality at the forefront.
He sounded like the Gipper there.
Reagan changed the culture with his unapologetically patriotic tone. The left has spent 40 years since reclaiming it with their incessant trashing of our heritage, harping on our collective faults and generally guilt tripping us. I hope Trump is able to seize the narrative back from them and put them back another 40 years.
-
He sounded like the Gipper there.
Reagan changed the culture with his unapologetically patriotic tone. The left has spent 40 years since reclaiming it with their incessant trashing of our heritage, harping on our collective faults and generally guilt tripping us. I hope Trump is able to seize the narrative back from them and put them back another 40 years.
This is so true.
I know it hasn't gotten a lot of coverage because there were so many other great moments in the SOTU speech. However, I think Trump's unapologetic pro traditional America comments absolutely drive Pelosi more crazy than anything else. When Pelosi had her "triggered" moment and shredded the speech she slapped us who are truly proud of our country and heritage in the face. I fully expect to see that moment highlighted in campaign ads all across the country. The leftists will think it's to their benefit, but I think there are a lot more of us who do love our country than them.
-
I don't care a whit about any of that. I really don't
Reality is out of control debt and an even more powerful fed. And all y'all are cheering about how the deck chairs are rearranged. It makes no sense to me at all.
@roamer_1
Ok,bubba,the ball is in your court. Name ONE candidate you supported that would be able to kill budget programs already passed by congress,prevent a Dim-controlled Congress from passing more,and balance the budget,all in less than one full term.
Go ahead. I can't wait to hear the response
-
Besides that, since when did we have a candidate who was serious about border control and inland enforcement? Disentangling ourselves from endless wars? Calling the rats out for who they are and swearing America will never be a socialist nation? Seating dozens of judicial Constitutional literalists as recommended by the Heritage Foundation?
@skeeter
I remember it well! It was a movie on the Sci-Fi channel.
Or maybe it was an episode of "The Twilight Zone"?
-
xena wrote (of roamer):
"Lol....[shaking head].... [sigh]....
look, old dear.... I wuvs ya...BUT...
you're delusional."
Have to agree with you.
I've had enough.
Bye, roamer.
You've won the "Fishrrman's ignore list" award for today!
So long!
-
@roamer_1
Ok,bubba,the ball is in your court. Name ONE candidate you supported that would be able to kill budget programs already passed by congress,prevent a Dim-controlled Congress from passing more,and balance the budget,all in less than one full term.
Go ahead. I can't wait to hear the response
You are perfectly distracted @sneakypete ... Messianic bullcrap.
-
You are perfectly distracted @sneakypete ... Messianic bullcrap.
@roamer_1
Can't do it,can ya?
-
@roamer_1
Can't do it,can ya?
That ain't even the point.
-
That ain't even the point.
@roamer_1
Well,yeah,it is. According to you,Trump sucks and we are fools to support him,so that makes it incumbent of YOU to tell us all who is better,and why.
In FACT,it is the WHOLE point of election season.
-
Not a long drive at all.
Actually I think she's rafting along on a river of booze, gin or vodka. She surely looked Owl-Eyed at the SOTU! (https://i.imgur.com/MSVox1C.jpg)
-
Actually I think she's rafting along on a river of booze, gin or vodka. She surely looked Owl-Eyed at the SOTU! (https://i.imgur.com/MSVox1C.jpg)
@GtHawk
PROBABLY is booze,but at her age it could easily be a combination of prescription meds from different doctors.
-
@GtHawk
PROBABLY is booze,but at her age it could easily be a combination of prescription meds from different doctors.
@sneakypete
Likely a combination of booze, meds and most definitely TIA's and I would say the same for Feinstein, Waters, Clinton, probably Biden and a number of others that have definitely passed not only their best used by but also their expiration date.
-
@sneakypete
Likely a combination of booze, meds and most definitely TIA's and I would say the same for Feinstein, Waters, Clinton, probably Biden and a number of others that have definitely passed not only their best used by but also their expiration date.
@GtHawk
I dunno about the rest of them,but I don't think there is any doubt about Bubbette! being a raging alcoholic.
-
@roamer_1
Well,yeah,it is. According to you,Trump sucks and we are fools to support him,so that makes it incumbent of YOU to tell us all who is better,and why.
In FACT,it is the WHOLE point of election season.
Nah, the unfortunate part is that the GOP voters have 'settled' for people who keep kicking the debt up another notch for so long, there really isn't any one, or any practical way in either Party, to stop. It's an addiction that will eventually kill this Republic.
Considering there is no 'simple' spending Bill ever that comes out of Congress. With all the extra-constitutional stuff (neither mandated by, nor authorized) that the FedGov does, it's always a multi-thousand page omnibus packed with grants to study butterfly migrations, gender assignation, and fund abortion, among literally hundreds of other things the government shouldn't be funding nor involved in.
We don't even monetize our own debt, (Like we did with "United States Notes") we borrow money from a banking cartel and pay them interest. They create the money they 'lend' us out of thin air. We could do that ourselves, by changing the wording on the notes, and save $580 Billion a year in interest. Some someones are making a lot of money out of the money we owe.
Unfortunately, people have been gradually steered so far away from the streamlined original concept of what a Federal Government is supposed to be, they can't see around the dungheap of government waste enough to even know what to demand--and as long as that is sold as "better than the other candidate", the lesser evil, then the march toward the greater evil will continue, just at a little slower pace.
Sadly, given the opportunity to actually do something to rein that in, the GOP did diddley-squat, bid'ness as usual, and rang up more tab on our backs. Why the very idea of returning those powers to the States not granted the Federal Government in the Constitution would likely be casus belli in the eyes of the establishment, be that the Communist cadres of the Left, or the mercantile oligarchy of what passes for the Right.
@roamer_1 is Right. Unfortunately, Americans have been led so far from the original concepts of governance in these United States, that they can't conceive of Dr Franklin's Republic, much less keep it.
-
Nah. They reamed on Reagan just as much - And he didn't back down, nor did he need to act like a boorish ass. This fight has been the very same my whole life.
QFT.
Trump's SOTU was notable for its channeling of the Gipper. But it is likely ephemeral, and he'll soon be back to the boorish ass shtick.
-
Trump's confrontational attitude toward dems is OK with me, I just think it could be more effective if it wasn't always a knee jerk reflex. My fear is that it plays into the dem meme that what we see now IS toned down and if re-elected all constraints will come off.
I'd also like to see him less concerned about selling the Trump brand and more concerned with selling conservative values to a voting population desperately in need of a crash course in common sense.
Since you say he he always knee-jerks, can you point out where in the SOTU speech this happened, as well as where in speech he could have been more effective?
-
QFT.
Trump's SOTU was notable for its channeling of the Gipper. But it is likely ephemeral, and he'll soon be back to the boorish ass shtick.
One speech does not a Statesman make. The Gipper's speeches reflected who he was as a person and a patriot. Trump's didn't.
If he had even a modicum of self-control the childishness and pre-adolescent lashing out would have stopped four years ago.
He just has good speech writers......
-
One speech does not a Statesman make. The Gipper's speeches reflected who he was as a person and a patriot. Trump's didn't.
If he had even a modicum of self-control the childishness and pre-adolescent lashing out would have stopped four years ago.
He just has good speech writers......
Speaking of speechwriters and the Gipper, didn't Peggy Noonan claim to be "Reagan's Brain?" Speechwriters are weird.
-
Speaking of speechwriters and the Gipper, didn't Peggy Noonan claim to be "Reagan's Brain?" Speechwriters are weird.
I would amend that by saying Peggy Noonan is weird. happy77
But, Reagan was a good speaker to begin with and had incredible, original Conservative ideas (as proven by his written works well before he was President).
Speechwriters can even make awkward, inept people sound like good speakers.......... like Obama and Trump.
-
Since you say he he always knee-jerks, can you point out where in the SOTU speech this happened, as well as where in speech he could have been more effective?
I'm not talking about the speech - from what I've heard it was great, appropriately confrontational but much more subtly so and therefore much more effective than his average tweetstorm. IMO a bit more of that kind of discipline and maturity would improve his image and make it easier for allies to support and defend him. However well his style may work for him, I think it cost the party in 2018 and is likely to do so again. I also worry about what we'll be left with in 2024 - if Pence is a viable successor then he needs to be given a chance to step up into a meaningful leadership role because I haven't seen anything from him yet. If not, lets get busy finding someone capable of leading the party going forward. What I'm seeing today looks far too much like the way 0bama managed to get himself reelected but left behind a party in shambles. We've made tremendous progress but if we're going to hang onto it we need to do a better job of selling it to the mainstream electorate, not just the base.
-
I would amend that by saying Peggy Noonan is weird. happy77
But, Reagan was a good speaker to begin with and had incredible, original Conservative ideas (as proven by his written works well before he was President).
Speechwriters can even make awkward, inept people sound like good speakers.......... like Obama and Trump.
Canadian David Frum (Bush 43) is also a whackadoo. rrthree
-
One speech does not a Statesman make. The Gipper's speeches reflected who he was as a person and a patriot. Trump's didn't.
He just has good speech writers......
Perhaps if you knew something about Donald Trump beyond the headlines you are drawn to like a moth to a flame, you'd be able to let go of some of the irrational hatred you feel for him.
Error 404 (Not Found)!!1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2qIXXafxCQ#)
-
I'm not talking about the speech - from what I've heard it was great, appropriately confrontational but much more subtly so and therefore much more effective than his average tweetstorm. IMO a bit more of that kind of discipline and maturity would improve his image and make it easier for allies to support and defend him. However well his style may work for him, I think it cost the party in 2018 and is likely to do so again. I also worry about what we'll be left with in 2024 - if Pence is a viable successor then he needs to be given a chance to step up into a meaningful leadership role because I haven't seen anything from him yet. If not, lets get busy finding someone capable of leading the party going forward. What I'm seeing today looks far too much like the way 0bama managed to get himself reelected but left behind a party in shambles. We've made tremendous progress but if we're going to hang onto it we need to do a better job of selling it to the mainstream electorate, not just the base.
You made the accusation, then began talking in hyperbole without specifics when you state he always knee-jerks.
I get it, you are a Never-Trumper. But at least backup the claim.
-
@roamer_1
Well,yeah,it is. According to you,Trump sucks and we are fools to support him,so that makes it incumbent of YOU to tell us all who is better,and why.
In FACT,it is the WHOLE point of election season.
Well no, it ain't @sneakypete
And it ain't incumbent on me to do anything but speak the truth.
And the truth is that this messianic bullcrap serves nothing. It is distraction as much now as it was under Dubya. It's the same dang thing.
(https://fairytales.byu.edu/files/2015/09/pied-piper-art.gif)
This forum hardly does anything except follow all the high drama on the national scene - The kabuki theater - When what really is important is coalition, NOT TUMP. Where's the vetting of house and senate members, governors, state houses? Where's the activism? Nothing.
Nothing but the Tumpy the Clown show 24/7. What a waste.
The point is coalition. The point is unseating the NWO moderate control of Congress. The point is increasing Conservatives. But that ain't what y'all do.
That IS what the TEA party does. That is what I would join.
-
Nah, the unfortunate part is that the GOP voters have 'settled' for people who keep kicking the debt up another notch for so long, there really isn't any one, or any practical way in either Party, to stop. It's an addiction that will eventually kill this Republic.
Considering there is no 'simple' spending Bill ever that comes out of Congress. With all the extra-constitutional stuff (neither mandated by, nor authorized) that the FedGov does, it's always a multi-thousand page omnibus packed with grants to study butterfly migrations, gender assignation, and fund abortion, among literally hundreds of other things the government shouldn't be funding nor involved in.
We don't even monetize our own debt, (Like we did with "United States Notes") we borrow money from a banking cartel and pay them interest. They create the money they 'lend' us out of thin air. We could do that ourselves, by changing the wording on the notes, and save $580 Billion a year in interest. Some someones are making a lot of money out of the money we owe.
Unfortunately, people have been gradually steered so far away from the streamlined original concept of what a Federal Government is supposed to be, they can't see around the dungheap of government waste enough to even know what to demand--and as long as that is sold as "better than the other candidate", the lesser evil, then the march toward the greater evil will continue, just at a little slower pace.
Sadly, given the opportunity to actually do something to rein that in, the GOP did diddley-squat, bid'ness as usual, and rang up more tab on our backs. Why the very idea of returning those powers to the States not granted the Federal Government in the Constitution would likely be casus belli in the eyes of the establishment, be that the Communist cadres of the Left, or the mercantile oligarchy of what passes for the Right.
@roamer_1 is Right. Unfortunately, Americans have been led so far from the original concepts of governance in these United States, that they can't conceive of Dr Franklin's Republic, much less keep it.
Absolutely! Great post! QFT :beer:
-
QFT.
Trump's SOTU was notable for its channeling of the Gipper. But it is likely ephemeral, and he'll soon be back to the boorish ass shtick.
Yes, it is true. And the same under both Bushes, but especially Dubya. Relentless liberal criticism is just part of the game.
-
You made the accusation, then began talking in hyperbole without specifics when you state he always knee-jerks.
I get it, you are a Never-Trumper. But at least backup the claim.
Oh please - have you ever READ any of my posts here??? It should be blindingly obvious that no one wants Trump to continue to succeed more than I do. With what he's accomplished he should have Reagan-like approval numbers and the party should be riding high. Why isn't that what's happening?
-
Oh please - have you ever READ any of my posts here??? It should be blindingly obvious that no one wants Trump to continue to succeed more than I do. With what he's accomplished he should have Reagan-like approval numbers and the party should be riding high. Why isn't that what's happening?
I'd hazard a guess that it's the 90% negative press he receives.
-
@sneakypete
The point is increasing Conservatives. But that ain't what y'all do. That IS what the TEA party does. That is what I would join.
Guess again .....
Joe Walsh, former Tea Partier, says he’d support ‘socialist’ over Trump after dropping primary bid
Fox News, Feb 7, 2020
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/joe-walsh-former-tea-partier-says-hed-support-socialist-over-trump-after-dropping-primary-bid (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/joe-walsh-former-tea-partier-says-hed-support-socialist-over-trump-after-dropping-primary-bid)
-
Guess again .....
Joe Walsh, former Tea Partier, says he’d support ‘socialist’ over Trump after dropping primary bid
Fox News, Feb 7, 2020
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/joe-walsh-former-tea-partier-says-hed-support-socialist-over-trump-after-dropping-primary-bid (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/joe-walsh-former-tea-partier-says-hed-support-socialist-over-trump-after-dropping-primary-bid)
Anyone can say they're a tea party guy, and many did. Doesn't make it so.
-
Anyone can say they're a tea party guy, and many did. Doesn't make it so.
You never fail to make me laugh. 88devil
Thank you.
-
Anyone can say they're a tea party guy, and many did. Doesn't make it so.
Meanwhile, every other Saturday we have a meeting of the Colorado River TEA Party Patriots. The TEA Party is still alive, despite McConnell's best efforts to kill it. He boasted of that a bit prematurely.
-
Meanwhile, every other Saturday we have a meeting of the Colorado River TEA Party Patriots. The TEA Party is still alive, despite McConnell's best efforts to kill it. He boasted of that a bit prematurely.
Yes I know. We are still meeting too, though usually phone conferences... Getting ready for a meetup, probably in Coeur d'Alene in the next 60 days. I am getting pressure to get back in. I don't know that I want it anymore. I don't mind the think tank stuff, or the organizing... But I am getting pretty long in the tooth to climb back in the money game.
-
The local chapter here is still pretty active. I dropped out because contrary to the name, it got to be all about social and religious issues to the point of supporting or opposing repub candidates purely on that basis. If an organization isn't all-in against the dem, it's not for me.
-
The local chapter here is still pretty active. I dropped out because contrary to the name, it got to be all about social and religious issues to the point of supporting or opposing repub candidates purely on that basis. If an organization isn't all-in against the dem, it's not for me.
We're pretty much Reagan Conservatives... With a pretty hard bend toward the original Ron Paul civil libertarian and fiscal issues. Social and Mil issues are included, and important - But in typical Rocky Mountain fashion, It is individualism and independence that have the emphasis.
Don't give a crap about the democrats. What matters is placing genuine Conservatives into position. With Conservative majorities, the rest will fix itself.
-
We're pretty much Reagan Conservatives... With a pretty hard bend toward the original Ron Paul civil libertarian and fiscal issues. Social and Mil issues are included, and important - But in typical Rocky Mountain fashion, It is individualism and independence that have the emphasis.
Don't give a crap about the democrats. What matters is placing genuine Conservatives into position. With Conservative majorities, the rest will fix itself.
Conservatives.... like who, for instance? Can you name a half dozen? Or even a few?
-
Meanwhile, every other Saturday we have a meeting of the Colorado River TEA Party Patriots. The TEA Party is still alive, despite McConnell's best efforts to kill it. He boasted of that a bit prematurely.
Which is another reason why I don't trust Mitch (da Bitch).
-
Conservatives.... like who, for instance? Can you name a half dozen? Or even a few?
Not without revealing who I am. There aren't that many folks around here with regional reach, and anybody inside regional politics around here could probably already make a pretty educated guess.
-
Not without revealing who I am. There aren't that many folks around here with regional reach, and anybody inside regional politics around here could probably already make a pretty educated guess.
So.... let me get this straight. You can't name even a 'few' conservatives that you have in mind without revealing who you are? Sorry, but....
that sounds like BS (and an excuse). Color me skeptical.
-
Not without revealing who I am. There aren't that many folks around here with regional reach, and anybody inside regional politics around here could probably already make a pretty educated guess.
ROFL!!! smh.....
-
So.... let me get this straight. You can't name even a 'few' conservatives that you have in mind without revealing who you are? Sorry, but....
that sounds like BS (and an excuse). Color me skeptical.
Color yourself however you'd like. I value my privacy. You can count on one hand how many Conservative players there are working out of NW MT in a regional capacity.
-
Perhaps if you knew something about Donald Trump beyond the headlines you are drawn to like a moth to a flame, you'd be able to let go of some of the irrational hatred you feel for him.
Error 404 (Not Found)!!1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2qIXXafxCQ#)
@Right_in_Virginia
You don't seriously think that is going to happen,do you? Trump isn't a RINO,so he HAS to go!
-
Well no, it ain't @sneakypete
The point is increasing Conservatives. But that ain't what y'all do.
@roamer_1
That's laughable coming from a Tea Party supporter.
If you want to have an effect,you have to operate in the real world,not the imaginary world. You might as well be supporting the Bull Moose Party.
-
Which is another reason why I don't trust Mitch (da Bitch).
I don't trust him either, although I'm pretty happy about the Judges. He submitted a half dozen or so to the SJC the day the Senate acquitted Trump.
-
Have wondered where the Tea Party went. /s
Have dozens of photos I shot at the very first TEA Party gathering in D.C.. And the 2nd.
Also, Sarah Palin with Glenn Beck at the Lincoln Memorial and Reflecting Pool one August 28th.
Taxed Enough Already was the theme, but eventually the 'Principled' Conservatives hijacked the Movement.
....into obscurity.
-
@roamer_1
That's laughable coming from a Tea Party supporter.
If you want to have an effect,you have to operate in the real world,not the imaginary world. You might as well be supporting the Bull Moose Party.
@sneakypete
That is the entire purpose of the TEA party - Placing Conservatives, from the ground up. That is the focus. There is no point in throwing money and influence away at the national level. National RNC is in moderate hands, who have the game by the throat. That's why the focus is on state houses and county governments - on the up and coming.
That's why the Tea Party rolled over so many governorships and state houses, and has far less to do with national races.
I was a part of that, and I still am, though not to the measure I was then... and that is real as hell.
-
Is the reason she hates the message or the messenger (or both)?
(https://pbs.twimg.com/ext_tw_video_thumb/1225253685615161346/pu/img/Qt9gV60yrAAJF-3H?format=jpg&name=medium)
https://twitter.com/i/status/1225253909666492417
-
Oh please - have you ever READ any of my posts here??? It should be blindingly obvious that no one wants Trump to continue to succeed more than I do. With what he's accomplished he should have Reagan-like approval numbers and the party should be riding high. Why isn't that what's happening?
I happen to have read what you wrote.
And you said he always knee-jerks.
Why write drivel if you don't believe it then?
-
Is the reason she hates the message or the messenger (or both)?
(https://pbs.twimg.com/ext_tw_video_thumb/1225253685615161346/pu/img/Qt9gV60yrAAJF-3H?format=jpg&name=medium)
https://twitter.com/i/status/1225253909666492417 (https://twitter.com/i/status/1225253909666492417)
Both.... I would bet that pelosi regrets tearing up that speech...
-
Canadian David Frum (Bush 43) is also a whackadoo. rrthree
You're right.......... and with delusions of grandeur.
Strange fellow!
-
I happen to have read what you wrote.
And you said he always knee-jerks.
Why write drivel if you don't believe it then?
I will say it this way - his tweetstorms generally come across to me as knee-jerk reactions that do more harm than good, both to him and the party. Feel free to disagree, it's just my opinion.
-
I will say it this way - his tweetstorms generally come across to me as knee-jerk reactions that do more harm than good, both to him and the party. Feel free to disagree, it's just my opinion.
Ok, I now understand.
I happen to think some tweets go to the degree you say; however, overall I support him tweeting primarily as it is the mechanism to bypass the media.
Bush allowed the MSM to brand him as they filtered everything he said rather than directly addressing the people like Trump does with his tweets and very effectively of course during SOTU.
-
Ok, I now understand.
I happen to think some tweets go to the degree you say; however, overall I support him tweeting primarily as it is the mechanism to bypass the media.
Bush allowed the MSM to brand him as they filtered everything he said rather than directly addressing the people like Trump does with his tweets and very effectively of course during SOTU.
:yowsa:
-
The only thing I'm buying into is the survival of America as a communist-free, sovereign nation that is NOT under NWO globalist control. And the only way that happens is via the defeat of the DemocRats.
It ain't rocket science.
:amen: You go, girl!
-
I'd hazard a guess that it's the 90% negative press he receives.
Reagan's negative press wasn't much different. But his poll numbers reflected the public's respect for his policies. But with Trump there's a disconnect. Trump needs to grow up. His SOTU was an excellent start, and echoed the classic Reagan themes. But Musiclady's right - Reagan's voice was authentic.
-
Reagan's negative press wasn't much different. But his poll numbers reflected the public's respect for his policies. But with Trump there's a disconnect. Trump needs to grow up. His SOTU was an excellent start, and echoed the classic Reagan themes. But Musiclady's right - Reagan's voice was authentic.
Yea, well Reagan had 50 years of practice before he was elected also...
-
Yea, well Reagan had 50 years of practice before he was elected also...
And he actually believed what he said, had a great sense of humor, was a mature human being, understood the English language, could and did read, could write.......
IOW, there wasn’t a single similarity between them except that the media excoriated them both and blamed them for everything that was wrong in the world.
Oh yeah........ and Reagan didn’t have a Fox News that worshipped the ground he walked on.
He stood alone and still managed to behave with honor.
There ain’t no comparison.
-
And he actually believed what he said, had a great sense of humor, was a mature human being, understood the English language, could and did read, could write.......
IOW, there wasn’t a single similarity between them except that the media excoriated them both and blamed them for everything that was wrong in the world.
Oh yeah........ and Reagan didn’t have a Fox News that worshipped the ground he walked on.
He stood alone and still managed to behave with honor.
There ain’t no comparison.
Reagan did not have Fox but he did not have to deal with the bulk of the media in the lefts pocket either so his only real competitor was Tip and that was a tame battle compared to the 24 hours a day onslaught that Trump is having to deal with.
-
Reagan did not have Fox but he did not have to deal with the bulk of the media in the lefts pocket either so his only real competitor was Tip and that was a tame battle compared to the 24 hours a day onslaught that Trump is having to deal with.
Exactly. Not sure why republican critics of Trump here at TBR fail to see that the toxic media environment today is orders of magnitude higher than that which Reagan faced and has had a markedly negative impact on Trump’s approval. And what’s puzzling is that they see no cause and effect relationship with this. They instead conclude Trump is to blame!
No, he’s not. Trump didn’t ask for this. It was thrust upon him in a coordinated, democrat operatives/media-wide conspiracy to oust the newly elected president. Trump’s fault? I think not.
-
Reagan's negative press wasn't much different. But his poll numbers reflected the public's respect for his policies. But with Trump there's a disconnect. Trump needs to grow up. His SOTU was an excellent start, and echoed the classic Reagan themes. But Musiclady's right - Reagan's voice was authentic.
Come on, @Jazzhead ...that's just crazy talk.
There were no cell phones, let alone 'smart' phones....the Commodore 64 was cutting edge.
Ronald Reagan got a tongue-bath compared to Donald Trump.
-
Exactly. Not sure why republican critics of Trump here at TBR fail to see that the toxic media environment today is orders of magnitude higher than that which Reagan faced and has had a markedly negative impact on Trump’s approval. And what’s puzzling is that they see no cause and effect relationship with this. They instead conclude Trump is to blame!
No, he’s not. Trump didn’t ask for this. It was thrust upon him in a coordinated, democrat operatives/media-wide conspiracy to oust the newly elected president. Trump’s fault? I think not.
Agree... but ya gotta admit, Trump eggs it on.... :silly:
-
Reagan did not have Fox but he did not have to deal with the bulk of the media in the lefts pocket either so his only real competitor was Tip and that was a tame battle compared to the 24 hours a day onslaught that Trump is having to deal with.
And the 24 hour onslaught that he and his fans are giving back.
No matter how you cut it, there’s no comparison between the behavior of the two.
If Reagan had had to deal with the 24 hour onslaught, he would have dealt with it the same way he dealt with the 100% hostile press in the 80’s (with no conservative media to back him up)....
As an intelligent, articulate, educated, conservative adult.
-
Come on, @Jazzhead ...that's just crazy talk.
There were no cell phones, let alone 'smart' phones....the Commodore 64 was cutting edge.
Ronald Reagan got a tongue-bath compared to Donald Trump.
And that’s not just opinion, the Media Research Center has the numbers, the data that shows off-the-charts media bias and the inordinate saturation of negative reporting compared to what Reagan faced.
I’d like to see anyone who could have possibly survived such an onslaught other than Donald Trump. We are lucky to have such a great warrior fighting for America’s future to remain and grow as a democratic republic.
-
Reagan's negative press wasn't much different. But his poll numbers reflected the public's respect for his policies. But with Trump there's a disconnect. Trump needs to grow up. His SOTU was an excellent start, and echoed the classic Reagan themes. But Musiclady's right - Reagan's voice was authentic.
You have some sort of fantasy glasses on. Reagan had a slanted Press, yes, but it was nowhere near 90%.
Try again.
-
Come on, @Jazzhead ...that's just crazy talk.
There were no cell phones, let alone 'smart' phones....the Commodore 64 was cutting edge.
Ronald Reagan got a tongue-bath compared to Donald Trump.
Nonsense @DCPatriot .
The major difference between then and now, is that then there were but three media sources and everyone believed them. Dan friggin Rather, baby.
-
Nonsense @DCPatriot .
The major difference between then and now, is that then there were but three media sources and everyone believed them. Dan friggin Rather, baby.
I don't know about the "believing them" part. The reason Rush Limbaugh's show took off in 1988 was because there was a huge void in the market, created by a general disbelief of the press.
-
I don't know about the "believing them" part. The reason Rush Limbaugh's show took off in 1988 was because there was a huge void in the market, created by a general disbelief of the press.
Right... But before Rush there was hardly an opposition voice at all. Indoctrination was as complete as it gets
-
Exactly. Not sure why republican critics of Trump here at TBR fail to see that the toxic media environment today is orders of magnitude higher than that which Reagan faced and has had a markedly negative impact on Trump’s approval. And what’s puzzling is that they see no cause and effect relationship with this. They instead conclude Trump is to blame!
No, he’s not. Trump didn’t ask for this. It was thrust upon him in a coordinated, democrat operatives/media-wide conspiracy to oust the newly elected president. Trump’s fault? I think not.
@aligncare
Of COURSE it is Trump's fault! Nobody FORCED him to run,and if he hadn't ran,it would be Jebby in the WH,and the world would be safe for globalism!
-
Right... But before Rush there was hardly an opposition voice at all. Indoctrination was as complete as it gets
Yep.
A single Conservative on a liberal panel on a liberal network was the best we had before Rush.
Now there are all kinds of media outlets for Conservatives, and the cell phone, social media, blogger world also includes conservative voices.
The idea that Reagan didn't have to deal with opposition is absurd. And the idea that Reagan would ever behave as badly as Trump does just because there is greater opposition, or that Trump somehow has an excuse for his behavior because of it, is even more absurd
-
Nonsense @DCPatriot .
The major difference between then and now, is that then there were but three media sources and everyone believed them. Dan friggin Rather, baby.
@roamer_1
Not to mention "Uncle" Walter Cronkite,the "most trusted newsman in America",who liked to go sailing with the Kennedy Klan on weekends. The very same man that single-handedly turned the massive defeat of the North Vietnames during Tet 68 into a massive victory for them,and a total defeat of US forces.
Hey! If a Dim can't defeat the NVA,there was no way in HELL Cronkite,the evil bastard,was going to allow a Republican be seen as doing so!
-
Interesting question this, "who has/had tougher media treatment". Reagan or Trump? Kind of like:
Montana or Brady?
Mays or Trout?
-
Right... But before Rush there was hardly an opposition voice at all. Indoctrination was as complete as it gets
You’re wrong. They were still committing random acts of journalism back then. Today, even the financial pages (and style sections, sports pages, classified, movie reviews and weather) are riddled with politically slanted reporting attacking Trump.
The Media Research Center has the numbers. There’s no comparison.
-
Interesting question this, "who has/had tougher media treatment". Reagan or Trump? Kind of like:
Montana or Brady?
Mays or Trout?
The more important question for me is, if the Trump-has-it-worse people are right and it is worse now, is his bad behavior somehow justifiable....
And conversely, if Reagan were excoriated in a different way than he was (blamed for everything wrong in the world as he was, but in a 24/7 world, would he have been justified in behaving badly because of that?
For me, logically, there is never an excuse for bad behavior, no matter what the opposition is, so it's a moot point.
-
Interesting question this, "who has/had tougher media treatment". Reagan or Trump? Kind of like:
Montana or Brady?
Mays or Trout?
The only real reason I would say Trump is the attacks are personal. The "attacks" on Reagan were more over policy and no one attacked Nancy or the Reagan kids.It was not 24 hours a day, no holds barred, anything goes attacks. Then when we try to defend Trump, we are labeled a cult or worse... It is really a sick time
-
You’re wrong. They were still committing random acts of journalism back then. Today, even the financial pages (and style sections, sports pages, classified, movie reviews and weather) are riddled with politically slanted reporting attacking Trump.
The Media Research Center has the numbers. There’s no comparison.
Again, nonsense. the whole thing is dying on the vine.
-
Right... But before Rush there was hardly an opposition voice at all. Indoctrination was as complete as it gets
The media landscape was different then, and the players too. Crossfire was on CNN, and Hardball with Chris Matthews actually had conservative guests. Pat Buchanan would never be allowed on today's CNN! When Fox News came online, the leftist outfits like CNN and PMSNBC abandoned all pretense of "balance." FNC became the balance.
On radio, as Limbaugh's audience grew, Larry King's overnight show veered dramatically to the left. Same effect.
-
Yep.
A single Conservative on a liberal panel on a liberal network was the best we had before Rush.
Now there are all kinds of media outlets for Conservatives, and the cell phone, social media, blogger world also includes conservative voices.
The idea that Reagan didn't have to deal with opposition is absurd. And the idea that Reagan would ever behave as badly as Trump does just because there is greater opposition, or that Trump somehow has an excuse for his behavior because of it, is even more absurd
I would not say Reagan "had it easy," my point would be the times are not comparable.
-
For me, logically, there is never an excuse for bad behavior, no matter what the opposition is, so it's a moot point.
The same "principled conservatives" who insist on style over substance whine the loudest that their conservative political brand is dying on the vine. If only connecting dots was in their wheelhouse..... 888blackhat
-
The more important question for me is, if the Trump-has-it-worse people are right and it is worse now, is his bad behavior somehow justifiable....
What came first, the chicken or the egg?
-
The media landscape was different then, and the players too. Crossfire was on CNN, and Hardball with Chris Matthews actually had conservative guests.
Right... to be jeered. 3 or 4 to 1 dog piles. *****rollingeyes*****
Pat Buchanan would never be allowed on today's CNN! When Fox News came online, the leftist outfits like CNN and PMSNBC abandoned all pretense of "balance." FNC became the balance.
On radio, as Limbaugh's audience grew, Larry King's overnight show veered dramatically to the left. Same effect.
So what? All of it is dying on the vine. CNN, which is unarguably the liberal powerhouse is underwater.
Often all of liberal media combined can't touch FOX, and FOX ain't all that hot anymore either. The internet has already made liberal papers inconsequential, and liberal media ain't far behind. The battle front now is on facebook, twitter, youtube and the like, with views cratering the MSM. And facebook is already starting to crumble.
-
For me, logically, there is never an excuse for bad behavior, no matter what the opposition is, so it's a moot point.
That's right.
-
Right... to be jeered. 3 or 4 to 1 dog piles. *****rollingeyes*****
So what? All of it is dying on the vine. CNN, which is unarguably the liberal powerhouse is underwater.
Often all of liberal media combined can't touch FOX, and FOX ain't all that hot anymore either. The internet has already made liberal papers inconsequential, and liberal media ain't far behind. The battle front now is on facebook, twitter, youtube and the like, with views cratering the MSM. And facebook is already starting to crumble.
Crossfire was one-on-one.
I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just pointing out that as much as the press disliked Reagan, today's press is demonstrably worse. It seems the fragmentation of the media is responsible.
-
I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just pointing out that as much as the press disliked Reagan, today's press is demonstrably worse. It seems the fragmentation of the media is responsible.
I don't think it is worse. I think it is easier to see now, and then is distant past. Remembering how it was seems hard for folks to do... Even just back to Dubya and all the flack he took, not to mention Reagan
-
I don't think it is worse. I think it is easier to see now, and then is distant past. Remembering how it was seems hard for folks to do... Even just back to Dubya and all the flack he took, not to mention Reagan
Dubya always frustrated me because he never used the Bully Pulpit. He never fought back in ways that were afforded him.
-
Interesting question this, "who has/had tougher media treatment". Reagan or Trump? Kind of like:
Montana or Brady?
Mays or Trout?
:beer:
aluminum trash cans or electronic buzzers. :laugh:
-
Dubya always frustrated me because he never used the Bully Pulpit. He never fought back in ways that were afforded him.
If he had, we'd have the same detractors on the right about Bush not "acting Presidential."
-
Dubya always frustrated me because he never used the Bully Pulpit. He never fought back in ways that were afforded him.
Oh I agree... But the flack was there all the same.
-
If he had, we'd have the same detractors on the right about Bush not "acting Presidential."
No. There is a distinction between 'fighting back' and 'boorish ass'.
Chuck Norris vs. Rodney Dangerfield.
-
Never get in a poo-throwing fight with a bunch of monkeys.
-
Oh I agree... But the flack was there all the same.
Bush knew what kind of buzzsaw he was facing if he fought back, with people gathering on the right to attack him if he did (as they do with Donald Trump today). He chose, to his everlasting shame, to fold up his tent and go home for the last few years of his Presidency.
-
No. There is a distinction between 'fighting back' and 'boorish ass'.
Chuck Norris vs. Rodney Dangerfield.
We'll have to agree to disagree on this. :beer:
-
Never get in a poo-throwing fight with a bunch of monkeys.
151 posts into the thread, and you're just now seeing that?
-
Never get in a poo-throwing fight with a bunch of monkeys.
Agreed. Lurk mode is better until you fill your bucket. :cool:
-
Bush knew what kind of buzzsaw he was facing if he fought back, with people gathering on the right to attack him if he did (as they do with Donald Trump today). He chose, to his everlasting shame, to fold up his tent and go home for the last few years of his Presidency.
Naw. The Right turned on him because he called us 'Nativists' with disgust on his face, and the bailout sealed the deal. He was praised as a fighter prior to that... Standing on the rubble of the Trade Center with a bullhorn in his hand.
He deserved to fold up his tent in shame. It wasn't the left that tore him down. It was the Right that let them. Deservedly so. Dixie Chicks redux.
-
151 posts into the thread, and you're just now seeing that?
I have seen it all along. Ever since the current fight started.
-
We'll have to agree to disagree on this. :beer:
:seeya:
-
I have seen it all along. Ever since the current fight started.
The "current fight" has been going on since 2015. :shrug:
-
Naw. The Right turned on him because he called us 'Nativists' with disgust on his face, and the bailout sealed the deal. He was praised as a fighter prior to that... Standing on the rubble of the Trade Center with a bullhorn in his hand.
He deserved to fold up his tent in shame. It wasn't the left that tore him down. It was the Right that let them. Deservedly so. Dixie Chicks redux.
And that's what we'd get if "Tump" folds up his tent. Bush may have deserved it, but we did not!
-
The "current fight" has been going on since 2015. :shrug:
Yep. Nothing but a poo-throwing extravaganza. I don't see why y'all think it so great. Ya think you're winning, but really you're just getting covered in liberal sh*t. **nononono*
Makes zero sense to me.
-
And that's what we'd get if "Tump" folds up his tent. Bush may have deserved it, but we did not!
The problem is, you're getting it anyway. And applauding.
-
Yep. Nothing but a poo-throwing extravaganza. I don't see why y'all think it so great. Ya think you're winning, but really you're just getting covered in liberal sh*t. **nononono*
Makes zero sense to me.
I remember 2016 well. Who can forget? Donald Trump was #16 out of 17 for my choice for President back in those Primaries. Only Kasich was worse in my view. In 2020, the choices are different, and the President has a record that appeals to most Republicans, whether one thinks it's all Commie-light or not.
-
The problem is, you're getting it anyway. And applauding.
I'm sorry, I missed the applauding part. You must have me confused with somebody else.
-
I'm sorry, I missed the applauding part. You must have me confused with somebody else.
I am. Because the claim that we're getting the same as we'da gotten with Bush is just plain false.
-
I remember 2016 well. Who can forget? Donald Trump was #16 out of 17 for my choice for President back in those Primaries. Only Kasich was worse in my view. In 2020, the choices are different, and the President has a record that appeals to most Republicans, whether one thinks it's all Commie-light or not.
Meh.
-
I'm sorry, I missed the applauding part. You must have me confused with somebody else.
You're kidding right? Not meaning !YOU! particularly...
-
I am. Because the claim that we're getting the same as we'da gotten with Bush is just plain false.
You are getting the same. At least where it matters. Turtle and Graham are not Conservatives, and they are not your friends.
-
You are getting the same. At least where it matters. Turtle and Graham are not Conservatives, and they are not your friends.
I realize most republican congressmen are in the same bucket as the rats, But today we're getting border & inland enforcement including rulings that should stand indefinitely, we're getting decent judges, we're getting better trade deals than we would've with Bush, Clinton, or any other 2016 candidate save maybe Cruz.
-
I remember 2016 well. Who can forget? Donald Trump was #16 out of 17 for my choice for President back in those Primaries. Only Kasich was worse in my view. In 2020, the choices are different, and the President has a record that appeals to most Republicans, whether one thinks it's all Commie-light or not.
Same for me. Donald Trump the candidate confounded me like no other. After the first debate, I remember the otherwise brilliant and insightful Charles Krauthammer remarking it was the end of Trump experiment. Instead, he rose in the polls. The whole run-up to his nomination was so un-Presidential, so unstatesman-like, it truly baffled me. The general campaign was more of the same and it tested me. The toxic debates between pro and never made it worse. For me, at least.
But, given the alternative(s), I voted for him. I did.
He continues to drive me nuts with his style, his rhetoric, and his total lack of a filter. Despite that, it is working and it is driving my political opposites crazy. I will let the Almighty judge whether he is worthy or not. Just as He will for any of us. But in the meantime...
I will vote for President Trump again.
-
You're kidding right? Not meaning !YOU! particularly...
Ah! Thanks for the clarification! I had hoped not...
:beer: :beer:
-
But today we're getting border & inland enforcement including rulings that should stand indefinitely,
Nah. I don't think that's true. All that he has done is pretty well gone with him. The same thing he did to Obama, someone will do to him.
we're getting decent judges,
Remains to be seen, but I doubt it. McConnell would not be jamming them through without his own agenda being served.
we're getting better trade deals than we would've with Bush, Clinton, or any other 2016 candidate save maybe Cruz.
Go look up the difference between NAFTA and USMCA and come back to argue the point.
-
Nah. I don't think that's true. All that he has done is pretty well gone with him. The same thing he did to Obama, someone will do to him.
Remains to be seen, but I doubt it. McConnell would not be jamming them through without his own agenda being served.
Go look up the difference between NAFTA and USMCA and come back to argue the point.
I'm familiar with your arguments. I simply disagree.
-
I'm familiar with your arguments. I simply disagree.
And we all do so agreeably, generally. That's the beauty of TBR! I may not agree with @roamer_1 about some things, but I think we're both welcome to have adult beverages on each others' porches.
-
I'm familiar with your arguments. I simply disagree.
Time will surely tell. I had these same arguments with the Bushies. I know how it turns out.
-
And we all do so agreeably, generally. That's the beauty of TBR! I may not agree with @roamer_1 about some things, but I think we're both welcome to have adult beverages on each others' porches.
:patriot: :beer: :seeya:
-
Dubya always frustrated me because he never used the Bully Pulpit. He never fought back in ways that were afforded him.
Yep. Unfortunately, that only encouraged the opposition.
-
Never get in a poo-throwing fight with a bunch of monkeys.
:silly: :beer:
They're good at it!
-
Yep. Nothing but a poo-throwing extravaganza. I don't see why y'all think it so great. Ya think you're winning, but really you're just getting covered in liberal sh*t. **nononono*
Makes zero sense to me.
Though this be madness, methinks here's method in it.
When the Liberals run out of sh*t, there won't be anything left but a pile of clothes....
-
Though this be madness, methinks here's method in it.
When the Liberals run out of sh*t, there won't be anything left but a pile of clothes....
The problem with your theory is that every monkey and liberal contains within them a dimensional gate to the sh*t universe. They will never run out of sh*t.
At that point, it is all about attrition.
-
And we all do so agreeably, generally. That's the beauty of TBR! I may not agree with @roamer_1 about some things, but I think we're both welcome to have adult beverages on each others' porches.
I'm between porches right now, but ya'll be welcome once I get one.
-
I realize most republican congressmen are in the same bucket as the rats, But today we're getting border & inland enforcement including rulings that should stand indefinitely, we're getting decent judges, we're getting better trade deals than we would've with Bush, Clinton, or any other 2016 candidate save maybe Cruz.
:amen:
I'm a huge Cruz fan, but I don't think he would have been able to do what Trump did with USMCA, China, Japan, and South Korea on trade.
If Trump doesn't win in a landslide I don't know what any Pub could ever do to win big.
-
Time will surely tell. I had these same arguments with the Bushies. I know how it turns out.
I would've agreed with you 100% regarding the Bushies. When someone better than Trump comes along I'll be there.
-
The problem with your theory is that every monkey and liberal contains within them a dimensional gate to the sh*t universe. They will never run out of sh*t.
At that point, it is all about attrition.
Is that why they use that orifice as a wormhole? 888mouth
-
Is that why they use that orifice as a wormhole? 888mouth
Hee hee hee... I see what you did there... :beer:
-
I would not say Reagan "had it easy," my point would be the times are not comparable.
@Cyber Liberty
He had it easy compared to Trump. The left were still easing into power,and more polite back then.
-
The same "principled conservatives" who insist on style over substance whine the loudest that their conservative political brand is dying on the vine. If only connecting dots was in their wheelhouse..... 888blackhat
@Right_in_Virginia
If only they had anything in their wheelhouses,other than a vacuum.
-
@Cyber Liberty
He had it easy compared to Trump. The left were still easing into power,and more polite back then.
I recall Reagan coming into the House during SOUs. Rats were climbing over each other to be seen shaking his hand. Of course they then would turn around and ream him out with legislation and couldn't wait to hog tie him in scandal.
But the difference between then and now in the treatment of POTUS is clear considering the most recent SOU.
-
Crossfire was one-on-one.
I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just pointing out that as much as the press disliked Reagan, today's press is demonstrably worse. It seems the fragmentation of the media is responsible.
@Cyber Liberty
I used to watch Cross Fire,just to see the "deer in the headlights look" on Cornell West's face when Buckley asked his opinion. That was funny,I don't care who you are!
-
Dubya always frustrated me because he never used the Bully Pulpit. He never fought back in ways that were afforded him.
@Lando Lincoln
It wouldn't have been ladylike.
-
@Cyber Liberty
I used to watch Cross Fire,just to see the "deer in the headlights look" on Cornell West's face when Buckley asked his opinion. That was funny,I don't care who you are!
I enjoyed Michael Kinsley's maniacal smile and bugging eyes when he got really p*ssed.
-
Same for me. Donald Trump the candidate confounded me like no other. After the first debate, I remember the otherwise brilliant and insightful Charles Krauthammer remarking it was the end of Trump experiment. Instead, he rose in the polls. The whole run-up to his nomination was so un-Presidential, so unstatesman-like, it truly baffled me. The general campaign was more of the same and it tested me. The toxic debates between pro and never made it worse. For me, at least.
But, given the alternative(s), I voted for him. I did.
He continues to drive me nuts with his style, his rhetoric, and his total lack of a filter. Despite that, it is working and it is driving my political opposites crazy. I will let the Almighty judge whether he is worthy or not. Just as He will for any of us. But in the meantime...
I will vote for President Trump again.
@Lando Lincoln :yowsa:
-
@Cyber Liberty
I used to watch Cross Fire,just to see the "deer in the headlights look" on Cornell West's face when Buckley asked his opinion. That was funny,I don't care who you are!
Did Buckley do "Crossfire?" I know he was on "Firing Line" on PBS. I was a fan of his, back when he was editor of NR. "Call me a crypto-Nazi one more time and I'll break your face."
-
Did Buckley do "Crossfire?" I know he was on "Firing Line" on PBS. I was a fan of his, back when he was editor of NR. "Call me a crypto-Nazi one more time and I'll break your face."
@Cyber Liberty
I plead chemo brain. You are probably right. It's been a while since Buckley was on the air.
-
NEVER vote for politicians; it only encourages them.
That’s why for me it’s Trump 2020, and forever.
happy77
-
Same for me. Donald Trump the candidate confounded me like no other. After the first debate, I remember the otherwise brilliant and insightful Charles Krauthammer remarking it was the end of Trump experiment. Instead, he rose in the polls. The whole run-up to his nomination was so un-Presidential, so unstatesman-like, it truly baffled me. The general campaign was more of the same and it tested me. The toxic debates between pro and never made it worse. For me, at least.
But, given the alternative(s), I voted for him. I did.
He continues to drive me nuts with his style, his rhetoric, and his total lack of a filter. Despite that, it is working and it is driving my political opposites crazy. I will let the Almighty judge whether he is worthy or not. Just as He will for any of us. But in the meantime...
I will vote for President Trump again.
I did not vote for him in primaries as native son Ted Cruz was still available to pull the lever on.
However, I also voted for Trump when it came down to him or the Hildabeast
-
Despite being accused of being a NT, I backed Trump from the get-go. I didn't like or dislike the guy (and I still don't), it just seemed clear to me that he was the only one who had even a slim chance of beating Clinton. When he won it was like winning the lottery - even if he didn't accomplish anything, saving me from a Clinton nightmare was more than enough to earn my undying gratitude.
When I'm critical of him now, it's only because I desperately want him to win again but fear he's not going about it as well as he could.
-
I would not say Reagan "had it easy," my point would be the times are not comparable.
Let's talk about "the times," shall we??
Are we, as Conservatives, supposed to buckle to the changing times? Are we not, indeed, if we are true to our values, supposed to make an effort to return to a time when there was more genuine patriotism, when there was a more civil society, when God was still permitted inside schools, when only men and women could marry each other, when babies weren't being slaughtered until and after the day they were born, when 4 year old children didn't use as foul a language as longshoremen??? And a whole slew of other things that have changed with "the times," but have harmed this culture and this country??
My answer to these are different times so our behavior has to be different is a resounding NO IT DOESN'T!!
When we buckle as we have done with Trump, we are saying that the times rule us rather than that we have power to turn the ship around and make things right again.
What Reagan stood for is still what works. It works against rampant socialism, and it works against cultural rot.
Giving in by saying "the times are different" is just that........ giving in.
And I, for one, don't believe that is ever the right thing to do........ and I have been shocked to realize how many who claim to be Conservative are so quick to give in and have "us" become no different that "them."
@Cyber Liberty
-
NEVER vote for politicians; it only encourages them.
That’s why for me it’s Trump 2020, and forever.
happy77
The problem with your analysis is that Trump IS a politician.
Thinking he is anything else is denial of reality.
-
Let's talk about "the times," shall we??
Are we, as Conservatives, supposed to buckle to the changing times? Are we not, indeed, if we are true to our values, supposed to make an effort to return to a time when there was more genuine patriotism, when there was a more civil society, when God was still permitted inside schools, when only men and women could marry each other, when babies weren't being slaughtered until and after the day they were born, when 4 year old children didn't use as foul a language as longshoremen??? And a whole slew of other things that have changed with "the times," but have harmed this culture and this country??
My answer to these are different times so our behavior has to be different is a resounding NO IT DOESN'T!!
When we buckle as we have done with Trump, we are saying that the times rule us rather than that we have power to turn the ship around and make things right again.
What Reagan stood for is still what works. It works against rampant socialism, and it works against cultural rot.
Giving in by saying "the times are different" is just that........ giving in.
And I, for one, don't believe that is ever the right thing to do........ and I have been shocked to realize how many who claim to be Conservative are so quick to give in and have "us" become no different that "them."
@Cyber Liberty
@musiclady
There are three things we must always keep in mind:
1) Where we want to be. Keeping conservative values is the goal, always as envisioned by the Founders and Christ.
2) Where we are. We don't live in a conservative world.
3) How do we get from here to there? That is 100% of the differences of opinion on this Forum.
-
The problem with your analysis is that Trump IS a politician.
Thinking he is anything else is denial of reality.
Trump is now a politician, but only learned to become one since first running for office.
I agree there are almost zero non-politicians one would ever see on a ticket. People like Ralph Nader and Ross Perot, both independents, are a few most would not consider to be politicians.
What we really need to see is less lawyers voted into office, especially in Congress. Congress should reflect the people they represent, and having over 50% of Congress lawyers does not reflect constituencies.
-
Let's talk about "the times," shall we??
Are we, as Conservatives, supposed to buckle to the changing times? Are we not, indeed, if we are true to our values, supposed to make an effort to return to a time when there was more genuine patriotism, when there was a more civil society, when God was still permitted inside schools, when only men and women could marry each other, when babies weren't being slaughtered until and after the day they were born, when 4 year old children didn't use as foul a language as longshoremen??? And a whole slew of other things that have changed with "the times," but have harmed this culture and this country??
My answer to these are different times so our behavior has to be different is a resounding NO IT DOESN'T!!
When we buckle as we have done with Trump, we are saying that the times rule us rather than that we have power to turn the ship around and make things right again.
What Reagan stood for is still what works. It works against rampant socialism, and it works against cultural rot.
Giving in by saying "the times are different" is just that........ giving in.
And I, for one, don't believe that is ever the right thing to do........ and I have been shocked to realize how many who claim to be Conservative are so quick to give in and have "us" become no different that "them."
@musiclady , I cannot even begin to tell you how brilliantly that was stated. Absolutely excellent! Three beers for you!
:beer: :beer: :beer:
-
@musiclady
There are three things we must always keep in mind:
1) Where we want to be. Keeping conservative values is the goal, always as envisioned by the Founders and Christ.
2) Where we are. We don't live in a conservative world.
3) How do we get from here to there? That is 100% of the differences of opinion on this Forum.
1. The struggle is, we don't all want to be in the same place which requires compromise to keep from eating each other.
2. We don't even agree on where we are....
3. If we cannot agree on where we are and where we are going then there is no how to get there.
The reason we did so well up until obama was we were willing to accept the no one is the expert but now every one knows everything about everything.There was a real transformation after 911 and thru the obama administration and that is what we need to come to grips with.What happened?
-
@musiclady
There are three things we must always keep in mind:
1) Where we want to be. Keeping conservative values is the goal, always as envisioned by the Founders and Christ.
2) Where we are. We don't live in a conservative world.
3) How do we get from here to there? That is 100% of the differences of opinion on this Forum.
I’ve come to grips, as difficult as it was, with the fact that we each see reality differently and we waste each other’s time trying to make them see what we see. Leftists, NTers, Trump supporters.
Up until just recently opinions fell into two or three basic categories. And it was still possible to get a ‘I dont agree but I know where you’re coming from’ from the opposition. That seems no longer possible. Some attribute beliefs to others they do not have. No one is listening everyone talking. Everyone is dogmatic and unyielding.
I don’t know why or how we got here, but here we are.
-
1. The struggle is, we don't all want to be in the same place which requires compromise to keep from eating each other.
2. We don't even agree on where we are....
3. If we cannot agree on where we are and where we are going then there is no how to get there.
The reason we did so well up until obama was we were willing to accept the no one is the expert but now every one knows everything about everything.There was a real transformation after 911 and thru the obama administration and that is what we need to come to grips with.What happened?
Both Parties used 9/11, caused primarily by holdover institutionalized incompetence from the Clinton Administration, to advance totalitarian measures ostensibly for our protection.
Many of those measures lie dormant, even though codified (such as parts of the Patriot Act, which allow summary confiscation of virtually anything).
Unfortunately that momentum has carried into sectors beyond national security, with the useless gestures with the full weight and gravity of law, to searching little old ladies in airports, a 3 oz. maximum on personal care products, empty your pockets, disarm completely, etc. Even the police shows on TV have the air of "you are going to be searched, whether you like it or not"--something intolerable just 20 years ago, as would have been being summarily handcuffed on a traffic stop.
Now, we aren't as free as we should be, I think we all agree on that. Some just don't want to be as free as others, but I think we can agree on a general direction we'd like to take things, Smaller (more Constitutional) Government, less regulation, and less infringement of our Civil Rights. We might not agree on how far that needs to go, but I think once people have a taste of Liberty, their thirst will not be quenched until they have more.
-
...
Now, we aren't as free as we should be, I think we all agree on that. Some just don't want to be as free as others, but I think we can agree on a general direction we'd like to take things, Smaller (more Constitutional) Government, less regulation, and less infringement of our Civil Rights. We might not agree on how far that needs to go, but I think once people have a taste of Liberty, their thirst will not be quenched until they have more.
But the first thing out of a "conservatives" mouth is BAN ABORTION... and that kills the entire conversation... The next thing you hear is BAN GUNS and that destroys the conversation....
-
But the first thing out of a "conservatives" mouth is BAN ABORTION... and that kills the entire conversation... The next thing you hear is BAN GUNS and that destroys the conversation....
We ban murder anywhere but death row for those convicted of heinous crimes, and in a mother's womb. One group are innocent, yet have neither due process nor conviction.
This despite nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law (Amendment 14).
It is incongruous at best that anyone claiming to be conservative can claim to reconcile the slaughter of innocents with being conservative.
I have never heard a Conservative advocate banning guns. Banning firearms (or even a class thereof) and Conservatism are mutually exclusive.
-
Both Parties used 9/11, caused primarily by holdover institutionalized incompetence from the Clinton Administration, to advance totalitarian measures ostensibly for our protection.
Many of those measures lie dormant, even though codified (such as parts of the Patriot Act, which allow summary confiscation of virtually anything).
Unfortunately that momentum has carried into sectors beyond national security, with the useless gestures with the full weight and gravity of law, to searching little old ladies in airports, a 3 oz. maximum on personal care products, empty your pockets, disarm completely, etc. Even the police shows on TV have the air of "you are going to be searched, whether you like it or not"--something intolerable just 20 years ago, as would have been being summarily handcuffed on a traffic stop.
Now, we aren't as free as we should be, I think we all agree on that. Some just don't want to be as free as others, but I think we can agree on a general direction we'd like to take things, Smaller (more Constitutional) Government, less regulation, and less infringement of our Civil Rights. We might not agree on how far that needs to go, but I think once people have a taste of Liberty, their thirst will not be quenched until they have more.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin
Ol Ben was not prescient. It is ever thus, and why voting in fear - The lesser evil thing - Is always the wrong mindset. It is fear that licks the hand of the master.
-
But the first thing out of a "conservatives" mouth is BAN ABORTION... and that kills the entire conversation... The next thing you hear is BAN GUNS and that destroys the conversation....
The dichotomy between Conservative and liberal positions is not the problem.
The problem is the argument between supposed conservatives. Too many have fallen prey to moderate slogans and fail to think it through to the end. Conservatism has always been factional. Thus the old saying that herding conservatives is like herding cats.
But now that big moderate tent has so confused many that they have forgotten Reagan altogether.
The only way we win is together.
The only way we are together is when no one gets thrown under the bus.
That is no longer happening.
Speak truth to Conservatives and they will hear you. when every Conservative principle is held high, that is the raised banner. That is the clarion call. That is what causes the Conservative juggernaut to rise up, unstoppable.
That is not what is happening.
-
The dichotomy between Conservative and liberal positions is not the problem.
The problem is the argument between supposed conservatives. Too many have fallen prey to moderate slogans and fail to think it through to the end. Conservatism has always been factional. Thus the old saying that herding conservatives is like herding cats.
But now that big moderate tent has so confused many that they have forgotten Reagan altogether.
The only way we win is together.
The only way we are together is when no one gets thrown under the bus.
That is no longer happening.
Speak truth to Conservatives and they will hear you. when every Conservative principle is held high, that is the raised banner. That is the clarion call. That is what causes the Conservative juggernaut to rise up, unstoppable.
That is not what is happening.
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH!
Do you have a Burning Bush up there, Mountain Man?
We deal in the actual world everyday. Try it.
-
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH!
Do you have a Burning Bush up there, Mountain Man?
We deal in the actual world everyday. Try it.
A full third more Conservative votes for fiscal conservatism and civil libertarians for pulling em out of under the bus. Another full half of Christian conservatives. Importng the Libertarian vote because conservative civil libertarianism is something they can settle for.
But yall'd rather bow to big gov and pilfer votes from the democrats, rather than toe the line for what you supposedly stand for... There's your 'actual world everyday', @DCPatriot *****rollingeyes*****
-
We ban murder anywhere but death row for those convicted of heinous crimes, and in a mother's womb. One group are innocent, yet have neither due process nor conviction.
This despite nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law (Amendment 14).
It is incongruous at best that anyone claiming to be conservative can claim to reconcile the slaughter of innocents with being conservative.
I have never heard a Conservative advocate banning guns. Banning firearms (or even a class thereof) and Conservatism are mutually exclusive.
My point was that banning something does not eliminate the activity, it merely drives it into the uncontrolled, unsafe shadows.
Murder is already "banned"...
Drug abuse is already "banned"...
Speeding is already "banned"...
Prohibition anyone?
We fall into this false security that when we ban something then it disappears... not true, it merely gives society the legal tools to prosecute someone who violates the ban..
-
My point was that banning something does not eliminate the activity, it merely drives it into the uncontrolled, unsafe shadows.
Murder is already "banned"...
Drug abuse is already "banned"...
Speeding is already "banned"...
Prohibition anyone?
We fall into this false security that when we ban something then it disappears... not true, it merely gives society the legal tools to prosecute someone who violates the ban..
It won't eliminate it, but I seriously believe (especially in today's morally bankrupt society) that the onus of criminality does deter at least some of those undesired activities.
Just imagine if there were no laws against stealing or murder. How many more thefts, how many more murders would occur? The only disincentive would be fear of God or reprisal, and far too many don't know Him.
-
Let's talk about "the times," shall we??
Are we, as Conservatives, supposed to buckle to the changing times? Are we not, indeed, if we are true to our values, supposed to make an effort to return to a time when there was more genuine patriotism, when there was a more civil society, when God was still permitted inside schools, when only men and women could marry each other, when babies weren't being slaughtered until and after the day they were born, when 4 year old children didn't use as foul a language as longshoremen??? And a whole slew of other things that have changed with "the times," but have harmed this culture and this country??
My answer to these are different times so our behavior has to be different is a resounding NO IT DOESN'T!!
When we buckle as we have done with Trump, we are saying that the times rule us rather than that we have power to turn the ship around and make things right again.
What Reagan stood for is still what works. It works against rampant socialism, and it works against cultural rot.
Giving in by saying "the times are different" is just that........ giving in.
And I, for one, don't believe that is ever the right thing to do........ and I have been shocked to realize how many who claim to be Conservative are so quick to give in and have "us" become no different that "them."
Well said, @musiclady . In his SOTU I have seen a glimpse of what Donald Trump could achieve if he absorbed the lessons of Ronald Reagan. This can be a pivot point, away from the ditch. I'm dismayed that so many seem to have normalized/rationalized the boorish behavior and want him to keep it up just to match the Dems.
Why not aspire to that shining city?
-
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin
Ol Ben was not prescient. It is ever thus, and why voting in fear - The lesser evil thing - Is always the wrong mindset. It is fear that licks the hand of the master.
Franklin's quote is definitely something to think long and hard about. :patriot:
-
@musiclady , I cannot even begin to tell you how brilliantly that was stated. Absolutely excellent! Three beers for you!
:beer: :beer: :beer:
That is high praise coming from you, sir!
THANK you!!
I only wish that there were more of us and fewer who have thrown up their hands and given up.
@roamer_1
-
Well said, @musiclady . In his SOTU I have seen a glimpse of what Donald Trump could achieve if he absorbed the lessons of Ronald Reagan. This can be a pivot point, away from the ditch. I'm dismayed that so many seem to have normalized/rationalized the boorish behavior and want him to keep it up just to match the Dems.
Why not aspire to that shining city?
Because it's easier to seek revenge than to seek a shining city, I guess.
The problem with revenge is that it accomplishes absolutely nothing. It doesn't destroy the enemy. It destroys us.
-
Because it's easier to seek revenge than to seek a shining city, I guess.
The problem with revenge is that it accomplishes absolutely nothing. It doesn't destroy the enemy. It destroys us.
There's "revenge," and then there's "retribution." And if there are still Obama holdovers stymieing Trump they need to be out of there. Removing insubordinate employees isn't revenge, nor retribution, it's called staffing with like-minded people.
Whether Trump is a "moral man" is not the issue.
-
That is high praise coming from you, sir!
THANK you!!
I only wish that there were more of us and fewer who have thrown up their hands and given up.
@roamer_1
Jesus H. Christ!
The only ones giving up are the ones hiding behind their 'principles'.
$1.79, plus all of those principles will get you a 16oz. coffee at your local 7-11.
-
Jesus H. Christ!
The only ones giving up are the ones hiding behind their 'principles'.
$1.79, plus all of those principles will get you a 16oz. coffee at your local 7-11.
Thank you. You've made her point.
-
Because it's easier to seek revenge than to seek a shining city, I guess.
The problem with revenge is that it accomplishes absolutely nothing. It doesn't destroy the enemy. It destroys us.
You may call it revenge if you wish, I call it enforcing the law.
-
You may call it revenge if you wish, I call it enforcing the law.
Another example of looking at the same thing and drawing two diametrically opposite conclusions.
Debating is a waste of time.
I agree with you, BTW. Why would Trump leave someone hostile to his presidency in such a sensitive post.
-
Because it's easier to seek revenge than to seek a shining city, I guess.
Oh, for cripes sake @musiclady @Jazzhead @Cyber Liberty this isn't about "revenge" or "retribution" ... it's draining the swamp.
Bigger than Vindman: Trump scrubs 70 Obama holdovers from NSC
Washington Examiner, Feb 10, 2020
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/bigger-than-vindman-trump-scrubs-70-obama-holdovers-from-nsc (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/bigger-than-vindman-trump-scrubs-70-obama-holdovers-from-nsc)
-
Thank you. You've made her point.
De nada! You make mine. :beer:
-
De nada! You make mine. :beer:
888high58888
-
Oh, for cripes sake @musiclady @Jazzhead @Cyber Liberty this isn't about "revenge" or "retribution" ... it's draining the swamp.
@Right_in_Virginia I don't give a rat's patootie what it's called. Call it "changing the drapery" for all I care.
-
The dichotomy between Conservative and liberal positions is not the problem.
The only way we win is together.
The only way we are together is when no one gets thrown under the bus.
That is no longer happening.
@roamer_1
I would need a chainsaw to cut THAT irony.
-
@roamer_1
I would need a chainsaw to cut THAT irony.
It is not irony @sneakypete . It's the truth.
-
We fall into this false security that when we ban something then it disappears... not true, it merely gives society the legal tools to prosecute someone who violates the ban..
@EdinVA
Not true. It also allows "The Master of Morality" feel good about themselves because they managed to use the force of government to punish other people they don't approve of.
-
Call it "changing the drapery" for all I care.
That would certainly be more accurate.
-
Jesus H. Christ!
The only ones giving up are the ones hiding behind their 'principles'.
$1.79, plus all of those principles will get you a 16oz. coffee at your local 7-11.
I'm not giving up, and I'm keeping my principles. Plenty of other folks seem perfectly happy with "settling" though, as if that alone was the goal.
Who drinks 7-11 coffee anyway? Y'all are worse off than I thought. **nononono*
-
@EdinVA
Not true. It also allows "The Master of Morality" feel good about themselves because they managed to use the force of government to punish other people they don't approve of.
LOL! Now THERE's your irony, @sneakypete
-
I'm not giving up, and I'm keeping my principles. Plenty of other folks seem perfectly happy with "settling" though, as if that alone was the goal.
If I thought it were possible to get everything I want right now I wouldn't be happy 'settling' either.
But it's not possible.
-
Because it's easier to seek revenge than to seek a shining city, I guess.
The problem with revenge is that it accomplishes absolutely nothing. It doesn't destroy the enemy. It destroys us.
This is not the Democratic Party of 1984. There isn't a Tip O'Neill in the Speaker's Chair, no Robert Byrd leading the Senate Minority. This Democratic Party of 2020 is the Party of Pelosi, Schumer, Sanders, Warren and the "The Squad". Barbarians who wipe their posteriors with the U.S. Constitution.
Reagan would be steamrolled today if he took the "cheerful Conservative" approach he did in the 80s. This is Civil War. Trump is a War President. He needs to be more Churchillian than Reaganesque. More like George Patton than Colin Powell.
-
It won't eliminate it, but I seriously believe (especially in today's morally bankrupt society) that the onus of criminality does deter at least some of those undesired activities.
Just imagine if there were no laws against stealing or murder. How many more thefts, how many more murders would occur? The only disincentive would be fear of God or reprisal, and far too many don't know Him.
@Smokin Joe
I don't know,but I can tell you that I have no desire to steal anything or murder anyone,so I honesty think most people share the same beliefs. Yes,it IS true that some people will do this,but the law NEVER prevents them from doing it because not a single one of them ever thinks THEY will be caught and punished. The laws against murder and theft,for example,must be kept in place to punish the people who do those things,but it is ridiculous to think they,or any other laws,keep people from doing what they want.
The problem is teaching morality to small children so they know right from wrong and don't grow up to become dangerous felons USED to be imprinted on those young minds by their mothers who remained at home to raise them,and mostly enforced by their fathers,who worked every day to support his family.
This no longer applies in the modern world because the gooberment has now taken over dominion over YOUR children,and WILL punish you severely if you even restrict them to the house for a week or so for violations,never mind put your ass in JAIL for spanking one of your princes or princesses.
Unfortunately for society,which really means all of us in this case,the government refuses to punish our children for disobedience to our wishes/laws,and in FACT encourages it "so the child can grow creatively",or some such shit. They even take it one step further by punishing YOU via fines,jail time,or both,for any crime the child then violates!
It is truly a "Catch-22" world we all live in today, it's getting worse every year,and it is going to CONTINUE to get worse every year as long as loons continue to get on their high horse and insist on "Perfection or NOTHING!" Know anybody like that?
-
The dichotomy between Conservative and liberal positions is not the problem.
The problem is the argument between supposed conservatives. Too many have fallen prey to moderate slogans and fail to think it through to the end. Conservatism has always been factional. Thus the old saying that herding conservatives is like herding cats.
But now that big moderate tent has so confused many that they have forgotten Reagan altogether.
The only way we win is together.
The only way we are together is when no one gets thrown under the bus.
That is no longer happening.
Speak truth to Conservatives and they will hear you. when every Conservative principle is held high, that is the raised banner. That is the clarion call. That is what causes the Conservative juggernaut to rise up, unstoppable.
That is not what is happening.
The Rats have been more successful advancing their socialist agenda than Pubs have been in protecting our liberty in large part because they will take small steps forward instead of expecting everything at once. The never trumpers should learn from this. Trump has done more to advance conservative causes than any POTUS in recent history. What do we see from the never trumpers the same complaint over and over, "it isn't enough", or "it's not conservative enough".
It's long past time for the never trumpers to admit they were wrong about Trump and admit he is advancing conservatism despite his enemies and the purists.
-
If I thought it were possible to get everything I want right now I wouldn't be happy 'settling' either.
But it's not possible.
I don't expect, even if every step were in the right direction, we'll get back to the Republic in my lifetime.
That doesn't mean I'm giving up on what should be there. What should be there is based on principles.
I'm not giving those up.
I'm happier every time we get closer to those, but i see it as a just step along the way, not the end of the journey.
We didn't get here overnight, it took over a century and a half of deviating from the original idea. We won't get back quickly, short of upheaval, and with the state of affairs out there, I don't think that would go very well.
-
The Rats have been more successful advancing their socialist agenda than Pubs have been in protecting our liberty in large part because they will take small steps forward instead of expecting everything at once. The never trumpers should learn from this. Trump has done more to advance conservative causes than any POTUS in recent history. What do we see from the never trumpers the same complaint over and over, "it isn't enough", or "it's not conservative enough".
It's long past time for the never trumpers to admit they were wrong about Trump and admit he is advancing conservatism despite his enemies and the purists.
It's "Hey, look at ME!!!" narcissism. They're noisy eunuchs.
-
I don't expect, even if every step were in the right direction, we'll get back to the Republic in my lifetime.
That doesn't mean I'm giving up on what should be there. What should be there is based on principles.
I'm not giving those up.
I'm happier every time we get closer to those, but i see it as a just step along the way, not the end of the journey.
We didn't get here overnight, it took over a century and a half of deviating from the original idea. We won't get back quickly, short of upheaval, and with the state of affairs out there, I don't think that would go very well.
Yes. This is why we should all be grateful for and celebrate every step in the right direction, however small. Regardless of who's responsible for it.
-
The Rats have been more successful advancing their socialist agenda than Pubs have been in protecting our liberty in large part because they will take small steps forward instead of expecting everything at once. The never trumpers should learn from this. Trump has done more to advance conservative causes than any POTUS in recent history. What do we see from the never trumpers the same complaint over and over, "it isn't enough", or "it's not conservative enough".
It's long past time for the never trumpers to admit they were wrong about Trump and admit he is advancing conservatism despite his enemies and the purists.
The rats are headed in the same direction.
I'm not so sure he is advancing conservatism, but stopping the leftward slide is progress, and necessary before we are headed in the right direction, so that's a plus. No, damnit, it isn't enough, and don't forget it, or the whole idea will go dead in the water with people patting each other on the back about how the Communists were thwarted this time. As soon as they get a chance, they'll be at it again, and all that will result is a pause.
Is that concept so hard for people to wrap their heads around? This isn't the end, it isn't the beginning of the end, it's barely the end of the beginning--but only if people keep absolute Conservative goals in mind. Otherwise, it's just a brief pause in the slide to global totalitarianism.
-
The Rats have been more successful advancing their socialist agenda than Pubs have been in protecting our liberty in large part because they will take small steps forward instead of expecting everything at once.
No they don't. Are you kidding me?
The never trumpers should learn from this. Trump has done more to advance conservative causes than any POTUS in recent history.
Mostly baloney, but even if true for the sake of the argument, that is a damn low bar.
What do we see from the never trumpers the same complaint over and over, "it isn't enough", or "it's not conservative enough".
No, it isn't Conservative at all.
It's long past time for the never trumpers to admit they were wrong about Trump and admit he is advancing conservatism despite his enemies and the purists.
Like I said before, I see nothing to vote for in this movement. I have no dog in this hunt.
-
Yes. This is why we should all be grateful for and celebrate every step in the right direction, however small. Regardless of who's responsible for it.
I will when it's headed in the right direction, which it ain't.
-
There's "revenge," and then there's "retribution." And if there are still Obama holdovers stymieing Trump they need to be out of there. Removing insubordinate employees isn't revenge, nor retribution, it's called staffing with like-minded people.
Whether Trump is a "moral man" is not the issue.
What I'm talking about is far greater than whether or not Trump is a "moral man," (though I understand why some of his supporters narrow it down to that...... it makes it easier to attack the people pointing it out, and attack they do). The problem of a lack of integrity.... dishonesty and corruption.... is a real issue when you have a leader who can't be trusted. His immorality is no more now than a weird talking point for his supporters. His seeming inability to tell the truth and his corrupt business practices remain problematic. But he does give those old Dems a tongue lashing, and that makes a lot of "conservatives" gleeful.
The point being that it has been clear since Trump was nominated and elected that there is a great deal of vengeance going on..... not just retribution or replacing bad people. There are plenty of people who are glad the Dems are getting smacked around verbally (no matter that it isn't harming them one bit, but rather giving them ammunition against what they now perceive to be conservatism, but what is clearly not).
If you don't see the element of vengeance going on now in the right, perhaps the rose colored glasses should be removed where your peers are concerned. YOU are not expressing emotional revenge (at least not that I've seen), but there are plenty of Trump supporters who are.
I just don't believe one should give up on the greater goal of integrity because the "times" have changed.
And that's exactly what I believe has happened........ and is being verbalized on a daily basis.
@Cyber Liberty
-
What I'm talking about is far greater than whether or not Trump is a "moral man," (though I understand why some of his supporters narrow it down to that...... it makes it easier to attack the people pointing it out, and attack they do). The problem of a lack of integrity.... dishonesty and corruption.... is a real issue when you have a leader who can't be trusted. His immorality is no more now than a weird talking point for his supporters. His seeming inability to tell the truth and his corrupt business practices remain problematic. But he does give those old Dems a tongue lashing, and that makes a lot of "conservatives" gleeful.
The point being that it has been clear since Trump was nominated and elected that there is a great deal of vengeance going on..... not just retribution or replacing bad people. There are plenty of people who are glad the Dems are getting smacked around verbally (no matter that it isn't harming them one bit, but rather giving them ammunition against what they now perceive to be conservatism, but what is clearly not).
If you don't see the element of vengeance going on now in the right, perhaps the rose colored glasses should be removed where your peers are concerned. YOU are not expressing emotional revenge (at least not that I've seen), but there are plenty of Trump supporters who are.
I just don't believe one should give up on the greater goal of integrity because the "times" have changed.
And that's exactly what I believe has happened........ and is being verbalized on a daily basis.
@Cyber Liberty
I can certainly understand the "fruit of a poisoned tree" aspect. There is nothing Trump can do that is positive, because obviously he's doing it for evil purposes. I would not argue with adherents to that principle, it's pointless.
-
This is not the Democratic Party of 1984. There isn't a Tip O'Neill in the Speaker's Chair, no Robert Byrd leading the Senate Minority. This Democratic Party of 2020 is the Party of Pelosi, Schumer, Sanders, Warren and the "The Squad". Barbarians who wipe their posteriors with the U.S. Constitution.
Reagan would be steamrolled today if he took the "cheerful Conservative" approach he did in the 80s. This is Civil War. Trump is a War President. He needs to be more Churchillian than Reaganesque. More like George Patton than Colin Powell.
I don't disagree with your assessment of the Dem party, Arne.
I DO disagree that the strength and resolve to fight them requires a lack of integrity and childish petulance. There are plenty of people out there who are both strong and decent, who are involved in business, in leadership elsewhere.
I understand why you have settled for the lesser 'good' rather than the greater good by saying Trump is your man.
Just know that there are plenty of people out there who are disgusted by his methods because they hate those methods in the Dem party and don't want the Republican party to sink to the level for which we have always had a disdain.
We haven't given up on the principles on which the country was founded.
-
I will when it's headed in the right direction, which it ain't.
I disagree with your opinion.
-
I can certainly understand the "fruit of a poisoned tree" aspect. There is nothing Trump can do that is positive, because obviously he's doing it for evil purposes. I would not argue with adherents to that principle, it's pointless.
And I will repeat in response to that analysis, that there are very few if any, who have said "there is nothing Trump can do that is positive." He has most certainly done things that are positive (whoever thought that nothing he would do would be right? No thinking person).
That's just a cop out comment to try to dismiss the argument being made....... and saying that discussing the issue with people who have a problem with a corrupt man's being President is "pointless" is even more of a cop out.
It is NEVER pointless to discuss the importance of integrity in leadership and maintaining founding principles and Conservative values.
Just easier for those who want to dismiss the problem
-
Just know that there are plenty of people out there who are disgusted by his methods because they hate those methods in the Dem party and don't want the Republican party to sink to the level for which we have always had a disdain.
"Never Wrestle with a Pig. You Both Get Dirty and the Pig Likes It" -Mark Twain (?)
We haven't given up on the principles on which the country was founded.
That's right.
-
I will when it's headed in the right direction, which it ain't.
Narcissus didn't really get a full view of the world when he was admiring his image in the reflecting pool.
-
I disagree with your opinion.
Yeah. The Bushies did too.
-
Narcissus didn't really get a full view of the world when he was admiring his image in the reflecting pool.
Are you speaking of yourself?
-
Yeah. The Bushies did too.
The Bushies believe Trump is taking us in the wrong direction, too.
-
The Bushies believe Trump is taking us in the wrong direction, too.
Nah. Not with McConnell at the helm
-
And I will repeat in response to that analysis, that there are very few if any, who have said "there is nothing Trump can do that is positive." He has most certainly done things that are positive (whoever thought that nothing he would do would be right? No thinking person).
That's just a cop out comment to try to dismiss the argument being made....... and saying that discussing the issue with people who have a problem with a corrupt man's being President is "pointless" is even more of a cop out.
It is NEVER pointless to discuss the importance of integrity in leadership and maintaining founding principles and Conservative values.
Just easier for those who want to dismiss the problem
I can easily name some who have never had a good word to say about Trump, but that's not quite what I was driving at. I'm not sure what I was after, anyway. This is a long, long thread that has gone into so many different directions.
I don't think people are dismissing the moral nature of the President, it just doesn't always factor heavily enough to have them decide they can't vote for him. What does matter is we'd be in big trouble if the country elects someone who threatens the gains that have been made by an imperfect man.
-
What does matter is we'd be in big trouble if the country elects someone who threatens the gains that have been made by an imperfect man.
That is inevitable.
-
I can easily name some who have never had a good word to say about Trump, but that's not quite what I was driving at. I'm not sure what I was after, anyway. This is a long, long thread that has gone into so many different directions.
I don't think people are dismissing the moral nature of the President, it just doesn't always factor heavily enough to have them decide they can't vote for him. What does matter is we'd be in big trouble if the country elects someone who threatens the gains that have been made by an imperfect man.
It doesn't really matter if there are a few you can name who have never said anything nice about Trump. You are talking with me, and I happen to agree with some of the things he's done (as I knew I would, and said so even before the election).
My point in saying what I did was that you seem to be dismissing the argument itself as "pointless" because of some you can mention, when the people who are actually discussing this with are not in that category.
IOW, you are dismissing the argument I am making because of somebody else.
My point continues to be, if the President is lacking integrity, though he may do things we as moral people agree with (I presume morality among the members of this forum, Trump voters or not), it is still important to keep the issue of his lack of integrity front and center.
Because people who lack integrity cannot be relied on to continue on any given path, even one we may agree with, when it no longer brings him the acclaim (or votes?) he seeks.
The man is self-centered and dishonest. That matters. I happen to be one of the apparent dinosaurs who continues to put who a person IS above what he or she DOES. Because who they are inside is eternal, and what they happen to do, for whatever self-absorbed reason they happen to do it, is at best transient.
So even if one says BRAVO for the revenge, the future doesn't bode well for those who are seeking vengeance and not righteousness.
-
It doesn't really matter if there are a few you can name who have never said anything nice about Trump. You are talking with me, and I happen to agree with some of the things he's done (as I knew I would, and said so even before the election).
My point in saying what I did was that you seem to be dismissing the argument itself as "pointless" because of some you can mention, when the people who are actually discussing this with are not in that category.
IOW, you are dismissing the argument I am making because of somebody else.
My point continues to be, if the President is lacking integrity, though he may do things we as moral people agree with (I presume morality among the members of this forum, Trump voters or not), it is still important to keep the issue of his lack of integrity front and center.
Because people who lack integrity cannot be relied on to continue on any given path, even one we may agree with, when it no longer brings him the acclaim (or votes?) he seeks.
The man is self-centered and dishonest. That matters. I happen to be one of the apparent dinosaurs who continues to put who a person IS above what he or she DOES. Because who they are inside is eternal, and what they happen to do, for whatever self-absorbed reason they happen to do it, is at best transient.
So even if one says BRAVO for the revenge, the future doesn't bode well for those who are seeking vengeance and not righteousness.
I can agree with this, with the note that I misspoke in suggesting the argument is pointless, certainly it is not. What I meant was there is not a lot of point in arguing about it on this thread. Minds aren't changing. :shrug:
-
The Rats have been more successful advancing their socialist agenda than Pubs have been in protecting our liberty in large part because they will take small steps forward instead of expecting everything at once. The never trumpers should learn from this. Trump has done more to advance conservative causes than any POTUS in recent history. What do we see from the never trumpers the same complaint over and over, "it isn't enough", or "it's not conservative enough".
It's long past time for the never trumpers to admit they were wrong about Trump and admit he is advancing conservatism despite his enemies and the purists.
Paraphrasing Reagan, he said he would gladly take the 80 percent win, anytime ...then come back later for the other 20.
-
Paraphrasing Reagan, he said he would gladly take the 80 percent win, anytime ...then come back later for the other 20.
Nope. Not how the Left has been doing it. Move the goalposts and go for another 80. Lather, rinse, repeat.
-
I can agree with this, with the note that I misspoke in suggesting the argument is pointless, certainly it is not. What I meant was there is not a lot of point in arguing about it on this thread. Minds aren't changing. :shrug:
I'll concede your point, while disagreeing with your assumption that "minds aren't changing," (one cannot possibly know that), and offering the thought that the only goal of stating ones views is not to change intransigent minds, but to make sure the archaic views about the importance of integrity aren't entirely forgotten...... on this board, or elsewhere.
-
This is not the Democratic Party of 1984. There isn't a Tip O'Neill in the Speaker's Chair, no Robert Byrd leading the Senate Minority. This Democratic Party of 2020 is the Party of Pelosi, Schumer, Sanders, Warren and the "The Squad". Barbarians who wipe their posteriors with the U.S. Constitution.
Reagan would be steamrolled today if he took the "cheerful Conservative" approach he did in the 80s. This is Civil War. Trump is a War President. He needs to be more Churchillian than Reaganesque. More like George Patton than Colin Powell.
:beer: Amen!
-
Nope. Not how the Left has been doing it. Move the goalposts and go for another 80. Lather, rinse, repeat.
That's right. Come out screaming and kicking if you take an inch, and then go on to socialize 1/7th of the economy, shoving it down everybody's throat...
Look at what they are doing now with gun control. They don't stop, and they go for yardage every time.
And we're supposed to be overjoyed with Tumpy piddlin around the edges. *****rollingeyes*****
-
That's right. Come out screaming and kicking if you take an inch, and then go on to socialize 1/7th of the economy, shoving it down everybody's throat...
Look at what they are doing now with gun control. They don't stop, and they go for yardage every time.
And we're supposed to be overjoyed with Tumpy piddlin around the edges. *****rollingeyes*****
It's the whole idea that we only have to go "x" far, when that is a small step in a much larger trip.
The left might take a big bite and only get a nibble, but next time they are out for another full bite, not just what was left behind the first time. That's how they have made progress, and we'd better fight fire with fire if we're going to reverse that.
-
It's the whole idea that we only have to go "x" far, when that is a small step in a much larger trip.
The left might take a big bite and only get a nibble, but next time they are out for another full bite, not just what was left behind the first time. That's how they have made progress, and we'd better fight fire with fire if we're going to reverse that.
That's right. And that takes real unity. You know, the kind that comes from ideals... from principles.
That's the banner that has always brought Conservatives running.
The big orange Tumpy the Clown Show banner ain't one I recognize.
-
:beer: Amen!
And, it cannot be forgotten that the Reagan "cheerful/Shining City" approach STILL landed him in the middle of a wholly contrived "Iran-Contra Scandal" that consumed most of his second term.
You fight wars to win. We're at war for our Republic.
-
Are you speaking of yourself?
It's your vanity tour, bruh. I just stumbled into it.
-
John Anderson opposed Reagan, in 1980.
He would be the current equivalent, of Romney, Flake, McMuffin. The 2-3 percent that currently poll as being Republicans not in approval of Reagan.
In the Iowa GOP primary last week Trump got 98%
Through the decades, we have witnessed Perot, who deprived GHW Bush of a 2nd term, and Buchanan, who could have cost GW Bush his 2000 win.
I am just a simpleton, that likes to win instead of playing purist, so somebody gets attention, sells books.
Tracking these 3rd party kooks, you wind up with Anderson later supporting Ralph Nader, Libertarian Harry Browne blaming America for 9-11-2001.
Even at 3 percent, far to many GOPs/Conservatives are gullible, purists, attention seekers.
-
It's your vanity tour, bruh. I just stumbled into it.
ROTFLMAO!!! Nah... No vanity.
But I will forever insist upon Conservative principles, because in fact, and by definition, it ain't Conservatism without em. And in this Conservative forum, on this very thread, those principles are heckled and considered to be without value by avid Tumpists.
If anything, that would be the vanity.
-
John Anderson opposed Reagan, in 1980.
He would be the current equivalent, of Romney, Flake, McMuffin. The 2-3 percent that currently poll as being Republicans not in approval of Reagan.
In the Iowa GOP primary last week Trump got 98%
Through the decades, we have witnessed Perot, who deprived GHW Bush of a 2nd term, and Buchanan, who could have cost GW Bush his 2000 win.
I am just a simpleton, that likes to win instead of playing purist, so somebody gets attention, sells books.
Tracking these 3rd party kooks, you wind up with Anderson later supporting Ralph Nader, Libertarian Harry Browne blaming America for 9-11-2001.
Even at 3 percent, far to many GOPs/Conservatives are gullible, purists, attention seekers.
GHWB's "Read my lips" renege cost him that election. I read his lips, but that wasn't what happened.
-
Paraphrasing Reagan, he said he would gladly take the 80 percent win, anytime ...then come back later for the other 20.
My point exactly.
Trump has really done well with little support. He has moved the economy in the right direction with a four key actions; lowered taxes, reduced regulation, promoted energy production, and better trade deal. He did this by reducing govt control over private enterprise, not by expanding it. He has nominated strict constructionists to the federal courts, not judicial activists. He has begun the process of building an actual wall on our southern border, partnered with Mexico and Central American countries to reduce illegal immigration. He has ended catch and release. He has advanced the Pro-Life cause at every opportunity including being the first POTUS to address the March for Life in Person. I'm sure other posters can add to the list, the point is he has really advanced conservatism.
-
And, it cannot be forgotten that the Reagan "cheerful/Shining City" approach STILL landed him in the middle of a wholly contrived "Iran-Contra Scandal" that consumed most of his second term.
You fight wars to win. We're at war for our Republic.
You're right and Trump is actually fighting.
I made the mistake of not voting for him in 2016. I won't make that mistake again.
-
John Anderson opposed Reagan, in 1980.
He would be the current equivalent, of Romney, Flake, McMuffin. The 2-3 percent that currently poll as being Republicans not in approval of Reagan.
In the Iowa GOP primary last week Trump got 98%
Through the decades, we have witnessed Perot, who deprived GHW Bush of a 2nd term, and Buchanan, who could have cost GW Bush his 2000 win.
I am just a simpleton, that likes to win instead of playing purist, so somebody gets attention, sells books.
Tracking these 3rd party kooks, you wind up with Anderson later supporting Ralph Nader, Libertarian Harry Browne blaming America for 9-11-2001.
Even at 3 percent, far to many GOPs/Conservatives are gullible, purists, attention seekers.
In 2016 I didn't vote for Trump. I didn't believe he would do what he said he would. I thought because Trump was a lifelong Rat who lived in NY and did a lot of business there that once he was in office he would cut deals with the Rats and things would just get worse. I was wrong. He has done what he said he would do (how unusual is that?) and fought his enemies tooth and nail all the way. If I can't support him now knowing his history I'm letting my stubborn pride blind me.
-
My point exactly.
Trump has really done well with little support. He has moved the economy in the right direction with a four key actions; lowered taxes, reduced regulation, promoted energy production, and better trade deal. He did this by reducing govt control over private enterprise, not by expanding it. He has nominated strict constructionists to the federal courts, not judicial activists. He has begun the process of building an actual wall on our southern border, partnered with Mexico and Central American countries to reduce illegal immigration. He has ended catch and release. He has advanced the Pro-Life cause at every opportunity including being the first POTUS to address the March for Life in Person. I'm sure other posters can add to the list, the point is he has really advanced conservatism.
NO!
Take the 80%, but when you come back, don't just come back for the 20%. Move the goalposts and come back for a full bite. Otherwise, you'll never get the 20 (you'll only get 80% of that, until diminishing returns apply).
The Dems have been doing this for decades, and it's time to fight fire with fire.