quote:

Hillary is where charisma goes to die.

^^ ^^

quote:

Hillary is where charisma goes to die.

Things are rarely as they seem. Trumps spokesperson Katrina Pierson seems to be a hack for hire. I'm disappointed in seeing this.







Normally I'd say this is nothing but a hit piece but she obviously said these things with the tweets to prove it.
Social media is a digital historical record of your life for all to see and use.

Link

We all have seen and heard Trumps liberal views in the not so distant past.
Seems he and Katrina have experienced a conservative rapture of sorts.

If you are a poll believer.

quote:

Limiting the results to polls taken since New Year's Day, the margins are a bit greater. Clinton leads Trump by 4 points—48 to 44 percent. Rubio leads Clinton by the same 4 points—48 to 44 percent. And Cruz leads Clinton by 2 points—48 to 46 percent.

Link

I think a good many folks have changed their view of politics over the years. I know mine have as I get older. I was pretty radical when young and have grown more conservative with age. Like fine wines, we need time to mellow.

I fully agree that as time goes by you soften on some views and take a harder stance on others.
It's a very rare occasion however when one changes nearly all of their pholosophical outlook in a matter of a couple years.
Unless there is some other motivation for doing so that is.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackks:
If he ends up losing I'd love to see him there too, but good luck getting him through the Senate. They would love nothing more than to get revenge.

True, but we must not forget that 1/3 of the senate is up for re-election. With the anti-establishment anger in the country, how many of them would be tossed out?

Americans are pissed off at the establishment. That must be obvious to at least a sizable portion of the establishment politicraPs.

Among other things, I figure that what happened to the tea party folks who were elected and went to DC has pissed off a LOT of Americans.

The establishment simply ignored them and never gave a single one of them the chance to do what they were sent there to do.

The professional politicraPs are scared and with good reason. For that reason they are frantic to get anybody but Trump in there.

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
Guys baby steps...say this to yourself "Chief Justice Cruze"...got a ring to it huh?

But remember, we need President Trump to nominate him first!

Yeah, CJ Cruz has a nice ring, and I would really, really like to see him there. Unfortunately, Roberts is young and appointed for life. So . . . . . .

A little background info on Katrina:

http://www.teapartyexpress.org/7799/katrina-pearson


"During her years as an activist, Katrina has never been shy about taking on the Republican or Democrat Party establishment. She has aligned with fellow citizens to push back against government overreach at all levels, from the White House all the way down to city council."

quote:

Things are rarely as they seem. Trumps spokesperson Katrina Pierson seems to be a hack for hire. I'm disappointed in seeing this.

So she's like Trump and many of us, having views shared by groups on both sides of the fence. So what?

We have seen many complaints that Trump isn't a Conservative, and now some Tweets showing that she isn't a hard right liner. But despite that, neither of them is a hard left commie either, and that's what the Democrats are offering.

I have some people that I know very well. Some of which I consider friends. They happen to be Democrats by registration and self-description. And although we do not agree on some things, we do agree on an awful lot in the middle. They also tend to hate Obama, hate Clinton, and like Trump.

So instead of wringing our hands about how we can't go 180 degrees from far left to far right, how about we find that common ground and fight for what almost all of us, regardless of party affiliation, can agree on. One of those things being that our politicians are a problem.

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:

quote:

Things are rarely as they seem. Trumps spokesperson Katrina Pierson seems to be a hack for hire. I'm disappointed in seeing this.

So she's like Trump and many of us, having views shared by groups on both sides of the fence. So what?

We have seen many complaints that Trump isn't a Conservative, and now some Tweets showing that she isn't a hard right liner. But despite that, neither of them is a hard left commie either, and that's what the Democrats are offering.

I have some people that I know very well. Some of which I consider friends. They happen to be Democrats by registration and self-description. And although we do not agree on some things, we do agree on an awful lot in the middle. They also tend to hate Obama, hate Clinton, and like Trump.

So instead of wringing our hands about how we can't go 180 degrees from far left to far right, how about we find that common ground and fight for what almost all of us, regardless of party affiliation, can agree on. One of those things being that our politicians are a problem.

I hear what you're saying. But these are some pretty wide and wild swings in a short period of time. Not just the middle of the road common ground stuff.

That's some pretty radical stuff she tweeted just a couple years ago.
We would all be kicking the verbal shit out of somebody on the left for having inconsistencies like this. Just sayin'.

quote:

That's some pretty radical stuff she tweeted just a couple years ago.

I bet none of those are nearly as radical as they seem if put into full context.

Not saying this is the case here, but fake and false tweets seem to be quite the rage of late. Guess its pretty easy to put anything in and call it legit.

Social media is the bane of a civilized society.

quote:

Originally posted by entropy:

Social media is the bane of a civilized society.

Amen brother...

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:

quote:

That's some pretty radical stuff she tweeted just a couple years ago.

I bet none of those are nearly as radical as they seem if put into full context.

It's usually the case isn't it. Not sure here but I have heard her before and when I have watched the full interviews I mostly agreed with her.

Are we still searching for the Goldilocks republican? Tip for you all there isn't one. Let's just go for a win this time. Trump, Cruz or Paul has my vote in the end period against any Democrap.

For those of you that still do not understand the appeal of Donald Trump I suggest you read this article by Don Stuber National Review Hoists White Flag, Defiantly Rows To Outcast Island

Maybe you might not have noticed but wherever Trump goes he fills the place to maximum capacity. As far as I know there is no other candidate having the huge turnouts that Trump is. Also take a look at the crowds that show up. They are not a bunch of burnt out hippies, hipster’s, or gen Xs, its middle class America.

As Don Stuber points out in his article Karl Rove, George Will and the rest of them have had had their chance for the past 28 years and they blew it.


National Review Hoists White Flag, Defiantly Rows To Outcast Island

George Will was all gloom and doom on the Hugh Hewitt radio show this week: "If the election is Hillary Clinton against Donald Trump, this will be the first election since God knows when, there was no real conservative candidate. And I don't both of us who have started our political careers, and I cast my vote for Barry Goldwater."

Meanwhile, the National Review went all in against Trump in its latest edition, drawing praise from Washington insiders. The magazine lined up 22 writers who railed against Trump, repeating the same arguments they have made the last six months, arguments which have hurt The Donald about as much as Whoopi Goldberg's threat to leave the USA. Chris Christie will help you pack.

The cover delighted Jeb Bush.
Welcome to the fight, all. Trump is not a conservative. pic.twitter.com/Fri8reAEx1
— Jeb Bush (@JebBush) January 22, 2016

But the real winner was The Donald. He got another news cycle out of the deal, and gets to shed conservative baggage at the same time. True, he lost 22 votes there, but Mona Charen and Ed Meese were never going to vote for him.

However, I am not saying the race is over. Ted Cruz is hanging in there, and Marco Rubio still has a shot at it. I am not calling this race for anyone. Let me make that clear.

But the editors at the National Review are.

This is a White Flag edition that shows the people at the National Review now believe the Republican presidential race has become a referendum on Donald Trump -- which is exactly what he wants it to be. In a field of 17 candidates, The Donald rose to the top. He is the only one anyone talks about. That has been the case since June 16, 2015, when he entered the race. The magazine cover is a tribute to his success, and a concession of defeat because those writers -- from Glenn Beck to Cal Thomas -- have been through too many presidential elections not to be able to see and read the handwriting on the wall.

All summer and fall and winter, everyone at The Weekly Standard and the National Review screamed to conservatives that Donald Trump is not a conservative.

Guess what? That's fine. This year many conservative voters don't care. Certainly moderates and liberals don't.

It is not that these conservatives are sellouts, or stupid, or mesmerized by a carnival barker, or racist, or whatever other label that conservative writers in Washington, D.C., wish to pin upon those who dare have the nerve to support someone who is not a conservative.

Let us look at this from a conservative voter's perspective. Not a conservative pundit, who gets paid win, lose or draw.

Having elected Bush 43 in 2000, what did conservative voters get? Another Cabinet office -- the Department of Homeland Security -- and a doubling of the national debt, after having spent the 1990s finally getting the budget balanced again. Oh and they got that jackass John Roberts as the chief justice and chief defender of Obamacare.

I left out No Child Left Behind, which further expanded federal control of local schools. Also, Bush championed the right to home ownership in 2006, which resulted in mortgages for the unworthy in 2007, which led to the financial collapse of the Western world in 2008, which led to President Obama and the restoration of the House of Lyndon Baines Johnson.

Then, came 2010. Tea Party conservatives flipped the House with the best showing in 64 years for Republicans -- a net gain of 63 seats in the House and 7 in the Senate. And what did the Tea Party get? The blame for not taking the Senate -- an effort that would have required an 11-seat gain. That slur -- that slam -- came after the Republican Party abandoned Christine O'Donnell, Sharron Angle, and John Raese.

Many conservative voters no longer care to play by the rules set down by George Will, who derided Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnell for drawing the wrath and ridicule of the cast of "Saturday Night Live."

Oh dear. Oh my.

This time, many conservatives just want the wall built. Trump has not always been pro-life and pro-guns, but he is now and that is what counts. He also is unapologetically politically incorrect, to the point of being rude, but being polite has not gotten conservatives a damned thing. Trump is bringing Democrats, independents and unregistered people into the party. Losing just to meet some conservative purity test is a luxury Republicans no longer can afford.

Washington conservatives -- Cable News Conservatives -- overlook the fundamental principle of conservativism, and that is giving everyone the same opportunity. America is best when she is a capitalistic society that builds railroads and industry. The idea that only career politicians are qualified to hold public office is not conservative.

But this year's election is not about conservativism or liberalism. The survival of the nation is. It's not about entitlements or foreign policy or balancing the budget. It is about protecting the borders. We are reduced to that basic an issue because Washington has failed to protect the nation from two simultaneous invasions. Trump's response to Muslim terrorism in San Bernardino led to a chorus of clucked tongues on cable TV, but the people watching at home cheered.

American Lives Matter.

Trump is forming a third party. It is called the Republican Party. His plan is to have his coalition of conservatives, moderates and liberals take over the party. If he wins and Will and the National Review don't like it, too damned bad. They had their chance for 28 years after Reagan departed. They blew it. Maybe Karl Rove can milk a few million more from the trust fund saps and form a third party. Call it the Milk Party, and use a cash cow as a mascot.

Throwdown: The Donald Says Megyn Must Go



GOP front-runner Donald Trump argues that Fox News’s Megyn Kelly shouldn’t moderate the upcoming debate on January 28 in Iowa, three days before the Iowa caucus.

“Based on @MegynKelly’s conflict of interest and bias she should not be allowed to be a moderator of the next debate,” Trump posted to Twitter on Saturday.

Kelly was criticized for being unfair to Trump following the first GOP primary debate. And two days ago, Kelly was charged with unleashing “on Donald Trump and Sarah Palin,” who recently endorsed the GOP frontrunner.

“Breaking tonight, a moment with the potential to change the Republican race for the White House — or not,” Kelly sarcastically announced, referencing Palin’s endorsement of Trump.

Kelly also featured the “National Review Against Trump” story, having several of the anti-Trump commentators on her show, which resulted in the National Review being dumped from co-hosting an upcoming GOP primary debate.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g.../2016/01/23/2843660/

It is finally coming clear just how biased Fox News really is.

I have a real heartburn with "newscasters" that spend several times more time pontificating on their favorite topic, or against their current whipping boy.

I refuse to watch Foxnews because of the blatant partisanship they have shown for some time now.

OANN sells itself as a NEWS channel. AFAIK, they have only one opinion show. Graham Ledger on the "Ledger Report". He tells it like it is, including the part about his show is there to comment, not present it as news.

What all these establishment clowns seem to miss is that what used to be called the republican party has transformed it self into the RINO party.

At a minimum, the outrage at the RINO party and their constant whining about how bad things are, and then they vote right in line with the GDCAIC.

Given a chance to shift the direction of the House, they put in another obamabot like Ryan.

Ryan, who by the way got that insane funding bill through the House, and McConnel let the democraPs in the senate carry it out for the GDCAIC's signature.

Some may actually believe that Trump is an ass clown, but I submit that he has a helluva lot more on the ball than anyone in the current administration.

You do not build personal wealth to more than 10B dollars being a dummy, or without knowing how to get things done.

Among other things, he knows when to pull the plug on a losing proposition.

George Will is the smart alec little sissy who always had his nose up the teacher's butt. Now, all grown up, he's defining "conservatism." If it's him, I want no part of it.

quote:

Originally posted by justjoe:
George Will is the smart alec little sissy who always had his nose up the teacher's butt. Now, all grown up, he's defining "conservatism." If it's him, I want no part of it.

I agree, justjoe.
How about this one?:

A Simple Conservative Litmus Test
By Mario Loyola — January 23, 2016

For me the choice facing Republicans and Americans in this election is very simple. Eighty years of progressive government have left us with a system of government that doesn’t work and is not sustainable. The reason this happened is that progressives, in their admirable commitment to help the downtrodden and disadvantaged, unintentionally opened the government up to capture by special interests across the board and at every level. The most basic reason to be “anti-establishment” is that today’s GOP establishment serves special interests every bit as much as the Democrats do. Both parties have bought into the progressive scheme of government for special interest, and sooner or later the American people were going to start losing trust in government, as I argued a few days ago on the homepage.

So the simple question to ask of a politician is this: Is that person in favor of government for special interests, or government for all the people? What it means to be in favor of government for special interests is to embrace subsidies for special groups, and hidden forced transfers in the form of protections from competition, for the benefit of special groups. What it means to be in favor of government for the public interest is to embrace a competitive economy of free exchange, with regulations to protect health and safety and to protect third parties against negative effects of those transactions, such as pollution. The former requires unequal protection of laws, and different rules for different people — in other words, progressive government. The latter requires equal protection of the laws, and the same rules for everyone — in other words, conservative government.

The ethanol issue is a perfect illustration of the proper way to view this question. In Iowa there are ethanol subsidies and ethanol mandates. Both are examples of government for the benefit of special interests, but subsidies are better than mandates because in the case of on-budget subsidies at least you know how much working families are paying out the nose to pad profits of agribusiness in Iowa. With mandates and other protections from competition, the massive losses that society suffers are almost impossible to calculate — in fact they are hidden from public view, often for the very purpose of protecting the politicians who sell out to special interests from the fury that should fall on them for defrauding the public.

The bottom line is this: If you are angry at the establishment, and you embrace a candidate who openly champions ethanol mandates, I have to tell you with all respect that you’re missing something, and you’ve wound up on the opposite end of where you should be.

Conservatives have fought for decades, from the founding of NR through the careers of Milton Friedman and Barry Goldwater, to our present day of tea-party constitutional revival, to reverse the damage that the progressive and New Deal movements inflicted upon our Constitution. We have fought to build a consensus for economic liberty and property rights, for freedom of exchange, for limiting the power of government to serve special interests, so we can restore the society the Constitution originally envisaged — a society of self-reliance, self-government, and freedom. Conservatives have fought for these things because we believe that those who need opportunity the most are getting screwed a million different ways with our present system of government, namely the progressive system of government, which both parties have bought into for far too long.

If a politician then comes along who cares not a whit for any part of that conservative consensus, and who on the contrary proudly proclaims his willing membership in this progressive scheme of government of, by, and for special interests, and his intention to continue and even expand it, and the American people start following that person in droves, movement conservatives will hopefully see the danger and sound the alarm. In the meantime, people should focus on the critical litmus test that all conservatives can embrace: Does the politician believe in elevating special interests above the people?

If that politician supports ethanol mandates, you know the answer already.

Trump says he won't vote for Cruz if he is the nominee...I guess he will either vote for Hillary or stay home if he doesn't get the nomination.

https://twitter.com/SaraMurray...s/691024861787987969

Sara Murray Verified account
‏@SaraMurray

"Maybe he’ll win," Trump says, as he lays out his argument against Cruz. "But I won’t vote for him."