With Bannon on the outside, he can really start putting the screws to the feckless cowardly Republicans. Perhaps some positive shit will actually start coming out of Congress.

Why, when the president is publicly putting on a unified face of deterrence would Bannon say to a reporter that the US will do nothing and that NC has us? I suppose there could be some high level counter-counter-covert strategy about it. But, it seems more likely to me that Bannon was shooting his mouth off.

When Bannon said the Trump presidency is over without Bannon, it seems to me that he was shooting his mouth off. Maybe he was trying to signal that he was an exiting lightning rod so the press would give President Trump a fresh start - what with all the love in the room without him.

That Bannon states he will be a strong advocate for the administration from the outside is good. But, with his statements about how Bannon wants to lead the populist movement, he gives me pause. Bannon seems to think that the populist movement is his, expressing seemingly no confidence in what President Trump has achieved or desires.

Those middle class trucker hats came out long before Bannon because President Trump knew who his audience would be.

By all means, though, if Bannon can be more effective on the outside, great.

I thought a chief strategist was supposed to help with conceptualizing ways to have reelection, leadership and legislative success. I don't think he made it in that role.

One thing we know about President Trump is that he does find a way. He presses forward to find the right combination for success and I would not bet against him.

quote:

Originally posted by Tubetone:
What Bannon, Preibus and the early team helped deliver has been very good but it utterly failed to deliver key legislative accomplishments for the Trump agenda – our agenda. If that failure is gone, good riddance.

That's the conventional wisdom. Even the financial publications agree:

quote:

If Republicans in Congress start distancing themselves from Mr. Trump, it will be that much harder for him to push through his pro-growth agenda.

However, those concerns eased a bit on Friday after President Trump fired White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon, a decision that was well received by the market. Mr. Bannon was the chief executive of Mr. Trump's presidential campaign and has been described as perhaps the most polarizing figure within President Trump’s inner circle. Therefore, in the absence of Mr. Bannon, the thinking is that the president might dial back his rhetoric a bit, making it easier for the White House to work with Congress in passing the president's pro-growth agenda.

quote:

The House and Senate majorities have not helped on healthcare, taxes and the wall. Maybe the establishment will continue to stall things. In that case, it would not surprise me to see President Trump revise his coalition efforts to compromise with Democrats to see more things accomplished.

Now that's a scary thought.
It seems to me that the last thing we want to see happen is to move toward the Democrats. That's what happened under both Bush I and Bush II administrations. If you can't beat them, join them.

quote:

Bannon needed to go.

Maybe... but I agree with Para:

quote:

I'd like to think that this is a calculated move by Donald Trump, something that was thought up between him and Bannon and that Steve Bannon keeps his word, supports the President in the ways he can, and lays waste to Donald Trump's political enemies.

This is the most significant departure to date from the Trump administration.
There are multiple angles to this story and in this case I think both Trump and Bannon benefit.
There's no doubt that Bannon's influence was waning within the White House after the departure of Preibus and his feud with Kushner.
I think that he figured out that he had more power out of the WH than within. As he has said "I now have all my tools back".

quote:

Originally posted by Tubetone:
The House and Senate majorities have not helped on healthcare, taxes and the wall. Maybe the establishment will continue to stall things. In that case, it would not surprise me to see President Trump revise his coalition efforts to compromise with Democrats to see more things accomplished.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by chellim1:
Now that's a scary thought.
It seems to me that the last thing we want to see happen is to move toward the Democrats. That's what happened under both Bush I and Bush II administrations. If you can't beat them, join them.
[QUOTE]

I literally thought of you when I wrote that while thinking, "ole' chellim1's gonna love that." I know that embodies one of your longtime fears.

President Trump is driven by results. It doesn't really matter what philosophy will get results. He wants to get something done for the people so compromise is not a dirty word. More than once Trump said that he goes into negotiations with an eye to getting any number of acceptable conclusions to move his cause forward.

Finding a new coalition of some Democrats and some Republicans may help it move his agenda forward. Using the Republican only approach has been ineffectual.

Concluding that President Trump will be Bush I or Bush II seems to lack analytical nuance. There's a lot of other possibilities.

Being driven by the affliction of RESULTS is not something from which the Republicans have suffered.

It will be interesting to see what comes of all of this. President Trump started his purge after the failure to repeal Obamacare. If the Republicans can't muster enough cohesion on something they promised for 7 years, maybe they, when used as a majority, are not the path to results.

It is interesting that you say that the LAST thing we need is a move toward Democrats but say nothing about what will get legislative results for our side.

Are you advocating for Trump to leave the Republican Party?
It sounds like it. There are people pushing for him to run for reelection as an independent.

As far as getting legislative results ... you don't cave to McCain capito murkowski you go do rallies in their states and you shame them. If that doesn't work you find a way to get rid of them. You support their primary opponent.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Are you advocating for Trump to leave the Republican Party?
It sounds like it. There are people pushing for him to run for reelection as an independent.

chelim1 that is so much a Richter scale type of analysis.

Trying to pick off some Democrats to join with a subset of the Senate Republicans does not remotely imply that the President would no longer be a Republican.

The Republicans have failed to produce results on their own so the Republican president may need to figure out how to draw some Democrats to his side.

How, in your mind, does that imply that the president will become a Democrat? Or, that I in any way implied or suggested that?

RESULTS. The man wants results for the American people. Do you oppose that because he may have to deal with some Democrats? If so, you hold a fairly doctrinaire position - a position that advocates gridlock.

I suppose everyone could fight about the dockside air tank while the victim drowns before everyone's eyes. Better to not compromise than to save the victim. Right?

It was a question. It sounds like you always want him to move to the left.
I suppose the question for you is what are the REsults you want for the country? If you want to keep moving to the left then by all means work with the democrats.
Ivanka kushner gary Cohn and McMaster are all democrats. I'm sure they will push him in your direction.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Are you advocating for Trump to leave the Republican Party?
It sounds like it. There are people pushing for him to run for reelection as an independent.

The way the Republicans have treated him, it would serve them right. They have missed no opportunity to disrespect him nearly every moment, on every issue.

It is NOT the time for this right now, and it isn't going to happen, but the GOPe deserves it BIG TIME.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
It was a question. It sounds like you always want him to move to the left.

That is ridiculous. I want a very conservative agenda. I am not hung up on the process. I would like him to have results.

EPA - slash
State Department - slash
Regulation - slash
Size of government - slash
Protect 1st Amendment
Protect second Amendment
Conservative AG
International leadership
Traditional alliance with Israel
Economic Growth
Jobs
Repatriate Federal land
Gorsuch
Conservative federal judges
. . . and the list goes on.

I do not see those things as conservative philosophies. I see them as conservative results. I don't care who President Trump needs to deal with so long as we keep massing conservative RESULTS.

Gridlock is not helping us.

The alliance between the Republican Party and President Trump was/is a means to an end, the defeat of Hillary and the win for Donald and America. Further, the very continued survival of the Republican Party at all is only really happening because the current alternatives suck as badly and it's a monumental task to oust one, especially one in power.

For every way and instance the current Republican Party helps us somehow, legislatively or whatnot, there is likely an equal number of instances where they're fucking us over, too. The Republican Party and its leadership is a great deal like the NRA, better than nothing, and occasionally effective, but more fucked up than a football bat - in general.

And they're fighting for power, survival, and their generally globalist / big gov't intentions, for pork, for committee appointments, and stock tips, and so on. Fundraising galore. So of course they're not very effective - in Trump terms effective - like we wish they'd be - because they aren't really on the same team as us, labels aside, despite their assertions.

I'd like to see the Party itself die off and be reborn, but frankly, that takes a back seat to getting shit done, and right now - they're a means to an end, or at least some possible ends. No more, no less, a temporary vehicle, a convenient ally, a substitute for better one, maybe, if we're lucky. As it stands, being all tick and leech like, they're hard to get rid of. Bastards.

So for now we're still stuck with them, despite their disloyalty. Nothing new, really, so let's not be surprised at the difficulties President Trump is encountering, he's deep in enemy territory, surrounded on all sides, by snakes, liars, and politicians (from the Department of Redundancy Department). Be happy anything good gets done. It's nearly a miracle.

That's right 46and2. Draining the swamp isn't easy. But you don't do it by being like McCain Capito and Murkowski.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
If you want to keep moving to the left then by all means work with the democrats.
Ivanka kushner gary Cohn and McMaster are all democrats. I'm sure they will push him in your direction.

I seek very conservative results. You have this odd idea that I want the President to become some sort of Democrat.

Please see my previous post. I want him to be successful for all of us.

How we have arrived at the notion that Congress should just be expected to shut down the legislative process is beyond me.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
The enemies of the US are RITs, including Iranians, the NorKos of course, and world wide communism.
. . .

Now, apparently we are thought to be in the post modern era. You can jump into the weeds of this stuff.

quote:

Postmodernism describes a broad movement that developed in the mid- to late 20th century across philosophy, the arts, architecture and criticism which marked a departure from modernism.[1][2][3] While encompassing a broad range of ideas, postmodernism is typically defined by an attitude of skepticism, irony or rejection toward grand narratives, ideologies and various tenets of universalism, including objective notions of reason, human nature, social progress, moral universalism, absolute truth, and objective reality.[4] Instead, it asserts to varying degrees that claims to knowledge and truth are products of social, historical or political discourses or interpretations, and are therefore contextual or socially constructed. Accordingly, postmodern thought is broadly characterized by tendencies to epistemological and moral relativism, pluralism, irreverence and self-referentiality.[4]

Apparently it comes back around to Hesiod ~2500 years ago, quoted above! Moral relativism, yikes!

Postmodernism may claim to be the dominant philosophy of our time, but I do not see it that way. The Wiki overstates postmodernism’s dominance.

Without getting into the weeds, I still see Plato as the dominant underlying philosophy. One historian noted that all of western civilization is nothing but a footnote on Plato.

Sometimes Plato is noted as a transcendental because he spoke of “forms” that transcended what we existentially create for ourselves. We inherently know things like chairness, tableness and many other things. The one, the good and the God is arguably Plato’s reduction to the source and existence of objective truth.

The founders of our country and a huge majority of Americans live Platonic philosophy everyday. They just may not know it as such. Whether it’s logic or the concept of justice, fairness or freedom, Plato’s view of objective reality and truth still rules the day.

When President Trump made his recent defense of Western Civilization in Poland, he was, in a sense, extolling the value and primacy of Plato. What a wonderful set of statements, defenses and ideals. The left went nuts because they don’t want people to see the glory of Western Civilization.

Indeed, one commentator noted that Trump's speech was in contrast to "the more modern, liberal order that has developed in Europe, which places a greater stress on multiculturalism and internationalism and secularism …." Link

Many people nowadays don’t know the philosophical underpinnings of our society. Maybe it is like a fish not knowing it lives in water. Even Lockean philosophy abounds but people just don’t realize it.

What we miss and what has rotted is an experiential knowledge of the great advantages that our culture of capitalism, self-direction, individualism, religion, limited government and personal responsibility brought to our success as a nation.

Self-loathing leading to cultural despondency is now pushed in education as well as through political movements not because such things are good for our citizens but because it serves a culturally subversive purpose.

Lets face it, our children are not reading the McGuffey readers anymore. They are not learning of the great value of patriotism in their texts. They are not learning to read from value sources such as the Bible or other moral texts that instilled a basic sense of decency, honesty and integrity.

Many in our culture have glommed onto a more Continental European philosophy that, to me, replaces real thinking with narrative. In some ways, modern narratives seem less like classic philosophy and more like creative writing.

That is not, to me, postmodern philosophy at work but deliberate cultural alienation of our own people. ISIS would not convince our citizens to attack their own country if our citizens had a better sense of who we are and what hope we hold for the world.

For years, I have kept a book titled, “God in Freedom” at hand because although written by the Italian Prime Minister (published in 1930), it is thick with reasoning and real grappling with humans in their religious relationship to government. I don’t reread it because it reinforces conclusions but because it reminds me of quality scholarship and devotion to really thinking about a subject.

Today, we have tweets, Facebook and posts such as this where we cannot even scratch the surface of a subject. It has all produced a kind of rot that has taken us away from the best of ourselves. Many in our generations do not even know it.

Maybe when Franklin said we have a Republic “if we can keep it” he was warning of days such as these. We, not some externalities, are the greatest threat to our survival.

That President Trump focused a speech on defending Western Civilization tells me someone's on the ball in his circle.

It seems to me that President Trump zeroed in on something very important for our national future.

I'm reminded of "The Emperor Has No Cloths" but it's the "Emperor" who sees the truth.

Ha ha, Trump pulled a head fake when he praised the protesters.

The last thing ANTIFA wants is praise from Trump.
Funny, I bet it makes their blood boil.

Plus, the media cannot complain about Trump's remarks.
Even more hilarious.

The only surprise here is that someone went public with it Way to go Louie!

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan advised Republicans to run away from candidate Donald Trump before the election in order to save themselves and hold a future-President Hillary Clinton accountable, Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas revealed in an exclusive video interview with The Daily Caller New Foundation.

“Are you crazy? We haven’t held anyone accountable. You haven’t even let us hold the IRS commissioner accountable [for using government power to harm President Obama’s political adversaries],” an astonished Gohmert said to the speaker on a call.

Gohmert told TheDCNF he speaks so courageously because he wants the party to succeed and is appreciative of the prayers sustaining him. He struggles to find joy as he watches government leaders run from doing what is best for the nation at this critical time.

“We don’t want to go down in history as the generation that was fine with making the future for our kids much worse than we had it,” he said.

Gohmert added “there’s hope” for the future after the Republican disunity on display when Congress sought to repeal Obamacare, “but we have to make our case. We can’t let whoever gives millions of dollars dictate what we’re going to do, and not do, like has been going on.”

Commenting on the aftermath of the Sanders supporter shooting Republicans practicing for a baseball game, he said he was surprised by the Republican reaction, but not the Democrats’ response.

Democrats, he said, refused to acknowledge “the hate we’ve stirred up, the violence we’ve demanded,” but wanted to focus on “the gun.”

Republicans seem inclined to beef up their own protection as public officials, but Gohmert saw that it was guns, used by those trained to use them, that saved lives. Gohmert thinks the Republican leadership needs to step up and allow national reciprocity for concealed carry so people can protect themselves. “Stop forcing us to be sitting ducks,” he said.

He also spoke of the Mueller investigation about so-called Russian collusion, and endorses the call by some of his House Freedom Caucus colleagues for another special counsel to investigate Mueller and former FBI Director Comey. He calls Mueller “a mean, vindictive guy” who is looking for Republican scalps.


http://dailycaller.com/2017/08...-says-gohmert-video/

Paul Ryan is a piece of shit.

Missouri Democratic state senator apologizes for hoping Trump is assassinated

An apology is entirely appropriate, but far from sufficient in this instance. I suspect she knows that she's toast.

The hypocrite invoked Jesus. Nice. You're no Christian, lady. Come to think if it, you're no lady, either.

It may be too little too late, Maria.
I would like to thank my friend Mark Reardon for bringing this to national attention. And Para, of course, for not letting it go.

She said "My judge and my jury is my Lord Jesus Christ.”

That is true and God might use the Missouri Senate to do the right thing and impeach her.