Let's make fun of Trump, bash him, etc. while we can!

[Classic-Xer]

(08-15-2018, 02:23 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Worth a little review. Hilarious! Let's clean that coal!

I can't stand that dude. He looks annoying and sounds annoying and he acts like a fucking jerk.

[Classic-Xer]

(08-14-2018, 04:13 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: We had the plurality in 2016 for President and still lost. We had the plurality for the US House and Senate in 2012 and still lost. Your side's luck may be running out because it lacks the decency to hold onto adequate support.

Millions show in approval polls that they already regret voting for Donald Trump

I'd say one side isn't as attached to it's politicians like the other side seems to be to theirs.

[pbrower2a]

(08-16-2018, 12:57 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(08-14-2018, 04:13 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: We had the plurality in 2016 for President and still lost. We had the plurality for the US House and Senate in 2012 and still lost. Your side's luck may be running out because it lacks the decency to hold onto adequate support.

Millions show in approval polls that they already regret voting for Donald Trump

I'd say one side isn't as  attached to it's politicians like the other side seems to be to theirs.

Democrats are more closely tied to the post-WWII heritage. Government exists to do good for as many as possible, and legal precedent overpowers the passion of the moment. Republicans are post-modern in their rejection of logical conventions, exaltation of impulse and anger, disdain for the Other Side. Republicans used to be for community, logical thought, self-restraint, and moderation. As conservatives they believed that excessive zeal in reforming the economic order and social structure would lead to the destruction of the proverbial goose that lays the golden eggs (capitalism) which foster economic, technological, and even social progress. They also believed that the family was the model to imitate in social organization.

Republicans have taken nearly sixty years (Eisenhower had the wisdom to let Joseph McCarthy implode politically, and did not resist the Supreme Court decisions against segregation) to go from being rational alternatives to overzealous reformers to deciding that anger, superstition, and dishonesty are legitimate tools of political leadership. This is so marked that Dwight Eisenhower is more similar to Barack Obama than to Donald Trump.

Donald Trump is not a conservative; he is a revolutionary. He stands for a pervasive revolution that casts out all of the benign knowledge of the past (except perhaps technical knowledge) if it runs contrary to his whim. Such is folly.

[Eric the Green]

(08-16-2018, 08:25 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(08-16-2018, 12:57 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(08-14-2018, 04:13 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: We had the plurality in 2016 for President and still lost. We had the plurality for the US House and Senate in 2012 and still lost. Your side's luck may be running out because it lacks the decency to hold onto adequate support.

Millions show in approval polls that they already regret voting for Donald Trump

I'd say one side isn't as  attached to it's politicians like the other side seems to be to theirs.

Democrats are more closely tied to the post-WWII heritage. Government exists to do good for as many as possible, and legal precedent overpowers the passion of the moment. Republicans are post-modern in their rejection of logical conventions, exaltation of impulse and anger, disdain for the Other Side. Republicans used to be for community, logical thought, self-restraint, and moderation. As conservatives they believed that excessive zeal in reforming the economic order and social structure would lead to the destruction of the proverbial goose that lays the golden eggs (capitalism) which foster economic, technological, and even social progress. They also believed that the family was the model to imitate in social organization.

Republicans have taken nearly sixty years (Eisenhower had the wisdom to let Joseph McCarthy implode politically, and did not resist the Supreme Court decisions against segregation) to go from being rational alternatives to overzealous reformers to deciding that anger, superstition, and dishonesty are legitimate tools of political leadership. This is so marked that Dwight Eisenhower is more similar to Barack Obama than to Donald Trump.

Donald Trump is not a conservative; he is a revolutionary. He stands for a pervasive revolution that casts out all of the benign knowledge of the past (except perhaps technical knowledge) if it runs contrary to his whim. Such is folly.

Yes, and as we know, the goal of the folly, whether realized or not by all his followers, is empowerment by elites.

[Eric the Green]

(08-16-2018, 12:09 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(08-15-2018, 02:23 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Worth a little review. Hilarious! Let's clean that coal!

I can't stand that dude. He looks annoying and sounds annoying and he acts like a fucking jerk.

At least he's willing to admit that he's a pickle with glasses. And if he were to run for president, which he can't, his 7-8 horoscope score shows he could not beat Trump (9-4). But he does point out what is happening to our civil discourse because of The Donald being the president, and exposes the techniques that your side uses to confuse the issues. He annoys people who defend those who are seeking to hold on to their privileged or elite positions in society, whom Trump upholds--- and because he speaks truth to power and makes the powerful look ridiculous; which nowadays, they are.

[Classic-Xer]

(08-16-2018, 08:25 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(08-16-2018, 12:57 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(08-14-2018, 04:13 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: We had the plurality in 2016 for President and still lost. We had the plurality for the US House and Senate in 2012 and still lost. Your side's luck may be running out because it lacks the decency to hold onto adequate support.

Millions show in approval polls that they already regret voting for Donald Trump

I'd say one side isn't as  attached to it's politicians like the other side seems to be to theirs.

Democrats are more closely tied to the post-WWII heritage. Government exists to do good for as many as possible, and legal precedent overpowers the passion of the moment. Republicans are post-modern in their rejection of logical conventions, exaltation of impulse and anger, disdain for the Other Side. Republicans used to be for community, logical thought, self-restraint, and moderation. As conservatives they believed that excessive zeal in reforming the economic order and social structure would lead to the destruction of the proverbial goose that lays the golden eggs (capitalism) which foster economic, technological, and even social progress. They also believed that the family was the model to imitate in social organization.

Republicans have taken nearly sixty years (Eisenhower had the wisdom to let Joseph McCarthy implode politically, and did not resist the Supreme Court decisions against segregation) to go from being rational alternatives to overzealous reformers to deciding that anger, superstition, and dishonesty are legitimate tools of political leadership. This is so marked that Dwight Eisenhower is more similar to Barack Obama than to Donald Trump.

Donald Trump is not a conservative; he is a revolutionary. He stands for a pervasive revolution that casts out all of the benign knowledge of the past (except perhaps technical knowledge) if it runs contrary to his whim. Such is folly.

I don't view Obama and Eisenhower as being in the same league as far as Presidents go. Whatever you say about Trump, I can easily say about you or any partisan blue. The Republicans are more powerful  today than they were back when the Democrats were the dominant party (post WWII era) . What's happened? America has advanced and has become more educated, more independent and more financially able to fend/provide for itself across the spectrum with the exception of low end/ ignorant blue voters that idiots like Eric and demagogues/political hacks like yourself tend to draw in and appeal to in places like this . As you hit 4,000 posts, I completed my umpteenth thousand installation in exchange for several thousand dollars that you get a tinch of for doing nothing constructive, doing nothing that's viewed as beneficial to me and doing nothing good as far as I can see here. So, you better fucking pray that the crisis doesn't boil down to the blue or us as far as survival goes because we will eliminate the blues.

[Classic-Xer]

(08-16-2018, 10:56 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(08-16-2018, 12:09 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(08-15-2018, 02:23 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Worth a little review. Hilarious! Let's clean that coal!

I can't stand that dude. He looks annoying and sounds annoying and he acts like a fucking jerk.

At least he's willing to admit that he's a pickle with glasses. And if he were to run for president, which he can't, his 7-8 horoscope score shows he could not beat Trump (9-4). But he does point out what is happening to our civil discourse because of The Donald being the president, and exposes the techniques that your side uses to confuse the issues. He annoys people who defend those who are seeking to hold on to their privileged or elite positions in society, whom Trump upholds--- and because he speaks truth to power and makes the powerful look ridiculous; which nowadays, they are.

He looks and sounds like a jerk.

[pbrower2a]

(08-16-2018, 09:14 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I don't view Obama and Eisenhower as being in the same league as far as Presidents go. Whatever you say about Trump, I can easily say about you or any partisan  blue. The Republicans are more powerful  today than they were back when the Democrats were the dominant party (post WWII era) . What's happened? America has advanced and has become more educated, more independent and more financially able to fend/provide for itself across the spectrum with the exception of low end/ ignorant  blue voters that idiots like Eric and demagogues/political hacks like yourself  tend to draw in and  appeal to in places like this . As you hit 4,000 posts, I completed my umpteenth thousand installation in exchange for several thousand dollars that you get a tinch of for doing nothing constructive, doing nothing that's viewed as beneficial to me and doing nothing good as far as I can see here. So, you better(vile word redacted) pray that the crisis doesn't boil down to the blue or us as far as survival goes because we will eliminate the blues.

You may not see them in the same league, but I see Obama and Eisenhower similar in temperament, respectful of legal precedent and diplomatic protocol, similarly cautious, associated with one big-spending project (Interstate Highway System or Obamacare), and free of scandals. Their curriculae vitae may be very different, but both show signs of being the best sorts of Reactive Presidents possible -- mellowed and mature, able to control their tempers, and tending to not cause trouble.

In the 1950s, Eisenhower won the won highly-educated voters in America by a landslide. Obama won a majority of them, which may suggest that in many respects the Democratic and Republican Parties have largely shifted in support.

Barack Obama, had he chosen to get a start in the Service Academies, would have been a fine general officer by now.  On the other side -- I am satisfied that Ike would have been a fine legal mind.

I'm biding my time until the schools open. Substitute teaching is a demanding, if not well-paying job.

In case you are scared of me -- I have no intention of war against Tea Party - Trump supporters. I have no desire to exterminate anyone. If anything, I want to defuse any Crisis similar to the dissolution of Yugoslavia. Should you think 'elimination' of people opposite you in your views, then you have a problem.

[Classic-Xer]

(08-16-2018, 09:58 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(08-16-2018, 09:14 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I don't view Obama and Eisenhower as being in the same league as far as Presidents go. Whatever you say about Trump, I can easily say about you or any partisan  blue. The Republicans are more powerful  today than they were back when the Democrats were the dominant party (post WWII era) . What's happened? America has advanced and has become more educated, more independent and more financially able to fend/provide for itself across the spectrum with the exception of low end/ ignorant  blue voters that idiots like Eric and demagogues/political hacks like yourself  tend to draw in and  appeal to in places like this . As you hit 4,000 posts, I completed my umpteenth thousand installation in exchange for several thousand dollars that you get a tinch of for doing nothing constructive, doing nothing that's viewed as beneficial to me and doing nothing good as far as I can see here. So, you better(vile word redacted)  pray that the crisis doesn't boil down to the blue or us as far as survival goes because we will eliminate the blues.

You may not see them in the same league, but I see Obama and Eisenhower similar in temperament, respectful of legal precedent and diplomatic protocol, similarly cautious, associated with one big-spending project (Interstate Highway System or Obamacare), and free of scandals. Their curriculae vitae may be very different, but both show signs of being the best sorts of Reactive Presidents possible -- mellowed and mature, able to control their tempers, and tending to not cause trouble.

In the 1950s, Eisenhower won the won highly-educated voters in America by a landslide. Obama won a majority of them, which may suggest that in many respects the Democratic and Republican Parties have largely shifted in support.

Barack Obama, had he chosen to get a start in the Service Academies, would have been a fine general officer by now.  On the other side -- I am satisfied that Ike would have been a fine legal mind.

I'm biding my time until the schools open. Substitute teaching is a demanding, if not well-paying job.

In case you are scared of me -- I have no intention of war against Tea Party - Trump supporters. I have no desire to exterminate anyone. If anything, I want to defuse any Crisis similar to the dissolution of Yugoslavia. Should you think 'elimination' of people opposite you in your views, then you have a problem.

Don't worry, I'm not scared of you or the blues in general. As far as Ike and Obama, other than some of the political comparisons and an S&H term that you mentioned, there is little to no comparison between the two of them as far as their previous accomplishments and their leadership style. At this point, you can pretty much scrap the S&H theory and the terminology associated with it for now. As far as spending projects, Ike initiated a massive spending project to build a national freeway system that we all see and use today. Obama initiated two spending projects ( The Stimulus and Obama) which didn't/haven't turned as well as his.

[pbrower2a]

(08-17-2018, 12:05 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(08-16-2018, 09:58 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(08-16-2018, 09:14 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I don't view Obama and Eisenhower as being in the same league as far as Presidents go. Whatever you say about Trump, I can easily say about you or any partisan  blue. The Republicans are more powerful  today than they were back when the Democrats were the dominant party (post WWII era) . What's happened? America has advanced and has become more educated, more independent and more financially able to fend/provide for itself across the spectrum with the exception of low end/ ignorant  blue voters that idiots like Eric and demagogues/political hacks like yourself  tend to draw in and  appeal to in places like this . As you hit 4,000 posts, I completed my umpteenth thousand installation in exchange for several thousand dollars that you get a tinch of for doing nothing constructive, doing nothing that's viewed as beneficial to me and doing nothing good as far as I can see here. So, you better(vile word redacted)  pray that the crisis doesn't boil down to the blue or us as far as survival goes because we will eliminate the blues.

You may not see them in the same league, but I see Obama and Eisenhower similar in temperament, respectful of legal precedent and diplomatic protocol, similarly cautious, associated with one big-spending project (Interstate Highway System or Obamacare), and free of scandals. Their curriculae vitae may be very different, but both show signs of being the best sorts of Reactive Presidents possible -- mellowed and mature, able to control their tempers, and tending to not cause trouble.

In the 1950s, Eisenhower won the won highly-educated voters in America by a landslide. Obama won a majority of them, which may suggest that in many respects the Democratic and Republican Parties have largely shifted in support.

Barack Obama, had he chosen to get a start in the Service Academies, would have been a fine general officer by now.  On the other side -- I am satisfied that Ike would have been a fine legal mind.

I'm biding my time until the schools open. Substitute teaching is a demanding, if not well-paying job.

In case you are scared of me -- I have no intention of war against Tea Party - Trump supporters. I have no desire to exterminate anyone. If anything, I want to defuse any Crisis similar to the dissolution of Yugoslavia. Should you think 'elimination' of people opposite you in your views, then you have a problem.

Don't worry, I'm not scared of you or the blues in general. As far as Ike and Obama, other than some of the political comparisons and an S&H term that you mentioned, there is little to no comparison between the two of them as far as their previous accomplishments and their leadership style. At this point, you can pretty much scrap the S&H theory and the terminology associated with it for now. As far as spending projects, Ike initiated a massive spending project to build a national freeway system that we all see and use today. Obama initiated two spending projects ( The Stimulus and Obama) which didn't/haven't turned as well as his.

This discussion is not about personalities other than those of Donald Trump and those around him. It should not be about ourselves.

...Was the Obama stimulus was worthless and ineffective?



I dislike recessions, but those that culminate in mortal peril to modern capitalism are worse than those that astute leadership put to an end. For the sake of the common man I would prefer the New Deal to an abortive era of reforms that well-heeled heels put an end to when they buy the political process and lead in the end to the rise of Donald Judas Trump, a bad businessman and an even worse politician. Of course, the New Deal came after three years of economic meltdown and Obama started his recovery program after about a year and a half of a similar meltdown. Maybe the difference is that Obama took office when the corrupt bankers still had some assets  -- enough with which to buy the political process -- and FDR took office when everyone had been ravaged so that nobody could buy the political process. I would not be surprised if we had a crash similar to those of 2007 or 1929 again; we have the 'perfect' President for that.

I prefer the blue curve to the gray curve -- don't you? On the other hand, we may need another great economic meltdown just to bring some humanity to the pathological narcissists who seem to dominate public and private institutions alike.





The Obama recovery is not inflation, but as Trump mucks things up we could easily get stagflation -- or worse.

[pbrower2a]

Editorial by someone who worked against his campaigns in 2008 and 2012:

Quote:Now I miss Barack Obama.

And I say that as someone who worked to defeat him: I was a foreign policy adviser to John McCain in 2008 and to Mitt Romney in 2012. I criticized Obama's “lead from behind” foreign policy that resulted in a premature pullout from Iraq and a failure to stop the slaughter in Syria. I thought he was too weak on Iran and too tough on Israel. I feared that Obamacare would be too costly. I fumed that he was too professorial and too indecisive. I was left cold by his arrogance and his cult of personality.


Now I would take Obama back in a nanosecond. His presidency appears to be a lost golden age when reason and morality reigned. All of his faults, real as they were, fade into insignificance compared with the crippling defects of his successor. And his strengths — seriousness, dignity, intellect, probity, dedication to ideals larger than self — shine all the more clearly in retrospect.

Those thoughts are prompted by watching Obama's speech in South Africa on the 100th anniversary of Nelson Mandela's birth. I was moved nearly to tears by his eloquent defense of a liberal world order that President Donald Trump appears bent on destroying.

The first thing that struck me was what was missing: There was no self-praise and no name-calling. Obama has a far better claim than Trump to being a "very stable genius," but he didn't call himself one. The sentences were complete and sonorous — and probably written by the speaker himself. (Imagine Trump writing anything longer than a tweet — and even those are full of mistakes.) The tone was sober and high-minded, even if listeners could read between the lines a withering critique of Trump's policies.

Obama denounced the “politics of fear and resentment,” the spread of “hatred and paranoia and propaganda and conspiracy theories,” and “immigration policies based on race, or ethnicity or religion.” Gee, wonder who he had in mind? He rightly noted that “we now stand at a crossroads — a moment in time at which two very different visions of humanity's future compete for the hearts and minds of citizens around the world.” He then rejected the dark vision propagated by Trump and the dictators he so admires.

“I believe in Nelson Mandela's vision,” Obama said. “I believe in a vision shared by Gandhi and King and Abraham Lincoln. I believe in a vision of equality and justice and freedom and multiracial democracy, built on the premise that all people are created equal, and they're endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. And I believe that a world governed by such principles is possible and that it can achieve more peace and more cooperation in pursuit of a common good.” Even though I was thousands of miles away, I felt like cheering those stirring words.



No, I haven't forgotten the shortcomings of Obama's administration, but I've gained a new perspective on them.

Can you believe that an Obama-era scandal was that the president wore a tan suit or put his feet up on the desk? (Actual Washington Times headline from Sept. 4, 2013: “Obama's foot on Oval Office desk sends shockwaves around the world.") Oh, to have those days back again — before we had a president who was involved in indecent relationships with a Russian despot and (allegedly) a porn star.

What was supposedly the worst abuse of power committed by the Obama administration — the IRS investigations of conservative organizations — has been revealed as "fake news": It turns out that the IRS was also investigating liberal organizations. By contrast, evidence continues to accumulate about Trump scandals, from alleged campaign collusion with Russia to violations of the emoluments clause. Obama may have told a few fibs, like any politician, but he was not a pathological liar.

Conservatives accused Obama of hating America and going on an “apology tour.” Obama never claimed, however, that poor relations with Russia were the fault of “U.S. foolishness and stupidity” rather than Russian wrongdoing. Obama may have been naive in trying to “reset” relations with Moscow, but he did not say that Russian President Vladimir Putin is a "fine" person — and he did not endorse the Russian's lies over the truths unearthed by the U.S. intelligence community. The Iran nuclear deal was flawed, but it was infinitely stronger than the non-agreement Trump reached with North Korea. Obama even looks like a fiscal conservative compared with Trump, who is ushering in trillion-dollar deficits.

It can be depressing to think about our current predicament under a president whose loyalty to America is suspect but whose racism and xenophobia are undoubted. However, Obama's speech gave me a glimmer of optimism — and not only because he cited Mandela's “example of persistence and of hope.” He reminds me that just 18 months ago — can you believe it was so recently? — we had a president with whom I could disagree without ever doubting his fitness to lead. We can have one again.

The Washington Post

Max Boot is a Washington Post columnist.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opini...story.html

The best President that a conservative could imagine is Barack Obama with a conservative agenda.

[Classic-Xer]

(08-17-2018, 10:36 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Editorial by someone who worked against his campaigns in 2008 and 2012:

Quote:Now I miss Barack Obama.

And I say that as someone who worked to defeat him: I was a foreign policy adviser to John McCain in 2008 and to Mitt Romney in 2012. I criticized Obama's “lead from behind” foreign policy that resulted in a premature pullout from Iraq and a failure to stop the slaughter in Syria. I thought he was too weak on Iran and too tough on Israel. I feared that Obamacare would be too costly. I fumed that he was too professorial and too indecisive. I was left cold by his arrogance and his cult of personality.


Now I would take Obama back in a nanosecond. His presidency appears to be a lost golden age when reason and morality reigned. All of his faults, real as they were, fade into insignificance compared with the crippling defects of his successor. And his strengths — seriousness, dignity, intellect, probity, dedication to ideals larger than self — shine all the more clearly in retrospect.

Those thoughts are prompted by watching Obama's speech in South Africa on the 100th anniversary of Nelson Mandela's birth. I was moved nearly to tears by his eloquent defense of a liberal world order that President Donald Trump appears bent on destroying.

The first thing that struck me was what was missing: There was no self-praise and no name-calling. Obama has a far better claim than Trump to being a "very stable genius," but he didn't call himself one. The sentences were complete and sonorous — and probably written by the speaker himself. (Imagine Trump writing anything longer than a tweet — and even those are full of mistakes.) The tone was sober and high-minded, even if listeners could read between the lines a withering critique of Trump's policies.

Obama denounced the “politics of fear and resentment,” the spread of “hatred and paranoia and propaganda and conspiracy theories,” and “immigration policies based on race, or ethnicity or religion.” Gee, wonder who he had in mind? He rightly noted that “we now stand at a crossroads — a moment in time at which two very different visions of humanity's future compete for the hearts and minds of citizens around the world.” He then rejected the dark vision propagated by Trump and the dictators he so admires.

“I believe in Nelson Mandela's vision,” Obama said. “I believe in a vision shared by Gandhi and King and Abraham Lincoln. I believe in a vision of equality and justice and freedom and multiracial democracy, built on the premise that all people are created equal, and they're endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. And I believe that a world governed by such principles is possible and that it can achieve more peace and more cooperation in pursuit of a common good.” Even though I was thousands of miles away, I felt like cheering those stirring words.



No, I haven't forgotten the shortcomings of Obama's administration, but I've gained a new perspective on them.

Can you believe that an Obama-era scandal was that the president wore a tan suit or put his feet up on the desk? (Actual Washington Times headline from Sept. 4, 2013: “Obama's foot on Oval Office desk sends shockwaves around the world.") Oh, to have those days back again — before we had a president who was involved in indecent relationships with a Russian despot and (allegedly) a porn star.

What was supposedly the worst abuse of power committed by the Obama administration — the IRS investigations of conservative organizations — has been revealed as "fake news": It turns out that the IRS was also investigating liberal organizations. By contrast, evidence continues to accumulate about Trump scandals, from alleged campaign collusion with Russia to violations of the emoluments clause. Obama may have told a few fibs, like any politician, but he was not a pathological liar.

Conservatives accused Obama of hating America and going on an “apology tour.” Obama never claimed, however, that poor relations with Russia were the fault of “U.S. foolishness and stupidity” rather than Russian wrongdoing. Obama may have been naive in trying to “reset” relations with Moscow, but he did not say that Russian President Vladimir Putin is a "fine" person — and he did not endorse the Russian's lies over the truths unearthed by the U.S. intelligence community. The Iran nuclear deal was flawed, but it was infinitely stronger than the non-agreement Trump reached with North Korea. Obama even looks like a fiscal conservative compared with Trump, who is ushering in trillion-dollar deficits.

It can be depressing to think about our current predicament under a president whose loyalty to America is suspect but whose racism and xenophobia are undoubted. However, Obama's speech gave me a glimmer of optimism — and not only because he cited Mandela's “example of persistence and of hope.” He reminds me that just 18 months ago — can you believe it was so recently? — we had a president with whom I could disagree without ever doubting his fitness to lead. We can have one again.

The Washington Post

Max Boot is a Washington Post columnist.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opini...story.html

The best President that a conservative could imagine is Barack Obama with a conservative agenda.

Well, he sounds like a liberal to me today. There is nothing worse than a PUSSY who has been GIVEN some clout. Yeah, he fits right in with the rest of our worthless political class.

[pbrower2a]

So you defend Mr. "I grab them by their (kitty-cats)" with male chauvinism!

I prefer Presidents who do not wallow in scandal, who don't sell out our democracy, who consider law and order a virtue, who don't praise bad behavior, who acknowledge the validity of science over ideology, whose arguments don't lose credibility under a simple exercise of grammatical parsing or fact-checking, who recognizes the Constitution as the ultimate Law of the Land and something not to be resisted for temporary advantage... and who do not consort with whores. I prefer Presidents who exude conservative family life without hypocritical calls for it.

The next effective conservative President will behave far more like Barack Obama than like Donald Trump.

[Cynic Hero '86]

(08-18-2018, 09:52 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: So you defend Mr. "I grab them by their (kitty-cats)" with male chauvinism!

I prefer Presidents who do not wallow in scandal, who don't sell out our democracy, who consider law and order a virtue, who don't praise bad behavior, who acknowledge the validity of science over ideology, whose arguments don't lose credibility under a simple exercise of grammatical parsing or fact-checking, who recognizes the Constitution as the ultimate Law of the Land and something not to be resisted for temporary advantage... and who do not consort with whores. I prefer Presidents who exude conservative family life without hypocritical calls for it.

The next effective conservative President will behave far more like Barack Obama than like Donald Trump.

Conservative or Liberal, it is up to the American people to decide what our interests are and to advance our interests. Not Boomer ideologues like yourself dictating to us what YOU consider to be the "right thing". Citizens are demanding that the government govern constitutionally, something your generation refuses to accept.

[Bad Dog]

Manafort and Cohen. Both guilty within a half-hour of each other.

Yup, today is just another doomsday.

[pbrower2a]

A basic rule for an attorney: do not get ensnared in the criminal acts of your client. There is just too much to lose, even if the crook eventually becomes President of the United States.

Michael Cohen will be a case study in how not to practice law.

[David Horn]

Hey Wally, good to see you back.

(08-21-2018, 06:37 PM)Bad Dog Wrote: Manafort and Cohen. Both guilty within a half-hour of each other.

Yup, today is just another doomsday.

As the Chinese say: "... interesting times."  How and when this plays out will make a huge difference in this 4T outcome.

[Bad Dog]

(08-22-2018, 10:42 AM)David Horn Wrote: Hey Wally, good to see you back.

(08-21-2018, 06:37 PM)Bad Dog Wrote: Manafort and Cohen. Both guilty within a half-hour of each other.

Yup, today is just another doomsday.

As the Chinese say: "... interesting times."  How and when this plays out will make a huge difference in this 4T outcome.

I'm sorry I had a meltdown on returning. Bad day.

Trump just had one of *my* days yesterday.

Nothing of note will really occur until the 2019 House of Representatives takes it's seats. Even then, it's all noise, as the Senate will not convict. And, there will be two more Supreme Court seats filled. The 2020 general election is the next 4T event to look forward to.

Until the next Twitter, that is. Remember Reagan joking that he had ordered nuclear release?

[David Horn]

(08-22-2018, 06:55 PM)Bad Dog Wrote: I'm sorry I had a meltdown on returning. Bad day.

Trump just had one of *my* days yesterday.

Nothing of note will really occur until the 2019 House of Representatives takes it's seats. Even then, it's all noise, as the Senate will not convict. And, there will be two more Supreme Court seats filled. The 2020 general election is the next 4T event to look forward to.

Until the next Twitter, that is. Remember Reagan joking that he had ordered nuclear release?

I don't see any of this resolving in any fashion that might be called progress.  The game is rigged to favor rural over urban and small states over large ones.  As someone noted recently in the NY Times, 50% of the Senate represents 18% of the people.  The chance that this will change is a negative number.

So that leaves disaster as the primary motivator … just as it did in the last 4T.  I don't see another major war -- too risky.  An economic collapse, on the other hand, seems inevitable  I may live to see the collapse, but I doubt I'll see the renewal.

[pbrower2a]

After the President suggests that flipping on him should be illegal...