Topic ClosedGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools |
| Thank you Very little  |
yes | |||
|
Bad dog! |
Yes. Remember Marie Antoinette's "Let them eat cake"? It happens. When told "The people have no bread," she wasn't being sarcastic, or cruel, she was so out of touch that she really thought that they could just for a while substitute cake for bread. Yesterday I was going to post an article about George Will, the main pull quote of which was, "Trumps supporters need to join the Republican Party on our terms, not theirs." Can you believe that? Over and over I hear these people say things that sound just like "Let them eat cake". Completely and totally dense and out of touch. ______________________________________________________ "You get much farther with a kind word and a gun than with a kind word alone." | |||
|
Member |
http://patriotvideos.net/this-...-people-re-consider/ a 27 year old interview, very interesting.... _________________________ | |||
|
| Peace through superior firepower  |
Please feel free to post that item in this thread. I'd like to see it. | |||
|
| Bad dog! |
Here ya go: http://theconservativetreehous...ur-terms-not-theirs/ ______________________________________________________ "You get much farther with a kind word and a gun than with a kind word alone." | |||
|
Member |
Bwaa more Kool-Aid please. Whatever the establishment flavor is. ------------------------------ Knowing is half the battle! "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson | |||
|
| Bad dog! |
Remember when Will threw a big dinner for Obama in '08? Along with other "conservative" pundits. That' when David Brooks drooled over the crease in Obama's fucking pants, and said he was sure this man would be a great president? These people live in a world as removed from ours as the French aristocracy's was from the peasantry. ______________________________________________________ "You get much farther with a kind word and a gun than with a kind word alone." | |||
|
| Banned |
Fuckin EXACTLY! That's 1 reason the "aristocracy" of the GOP is so bent on making illegals legal. They don't have to compete with them for jobs/work, don't have them move into their neighborhoods, don't have their kids go to the same schools, & don't go to the same hospitals. Jeb! Bush does not live in the same world as the majority of Repub voters. I'm tired of hearing a-holes spout off about only "low information voters" want Trump. I have enough information to know how bad the RINO Repubs have fucked us over in the past, & wanna fuck us over in the future. So I'm willing to take a chance & vote for anybody different. quote: “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.” “You know, it really doesn’t matter what the media write as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of ass.” On exporting goods to China: “Listen you m—–f——, we’re going to tax you 25 percent!” "The U.S. will invite El Chapo, the Mexican drug lord who just escaped prison, to become a U.S. citizen because our "leaders" can't say no!" “The only kind of people I want counting my money are little short guys that wear yarmulkes every day.” “If I were running ‘The View,’ I’d fire Rosie [O’Donnell]. I mean, I’d look her right in that fat, ugly face of hers, I’d say, “Rosie, you’re fired.” ".@ariannahuff is unattractive both inside and out. I fully understand why her former husband left her for a man- he made a good decision." “If you can’t get rich dealing with politicians, there’s something wrong with you.” I see nothing wrong with anything Trump said here. Too bad other Repubs can't be so straightforward. | |||
|
Info Guru |
Trump 1988: Link: https://youtu.be/SEPs17_AkTI “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams | |||
|
| Lawyers, Guns and Money  |
Just based on that clip.... he should have run in 1992. Of course, that was the year Ross Perot ran... "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." -- Justice Janice Rogers Brown "The United States government is the largest criminal enterprise on earth." -rduckwor | |||
|
| Member! |
The Bushioisie Is Wrong: Ross Perot Didn’t ‘Cost’ G.H.W. Bush the White House in 1992 http://spectator.org/articles/...ush-white-house-1992 Republicans should stop deluding themselves — Perot took votes primarily from Clinton Just because a political maxim has been repeated ad nauseam for more than 20 years doesn’t make it so. Contrary to the two-decade-old insistence of the Bushioisie — GOP uberlobbyist Haley Barbour’s Sunday appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union” being only the latest example — Ross Perot did not “cost” George H.W. Bush his 1992 reelection; rather, Perot’s campaign saved George H.W. Bush from an ignominious and humiliating loss, a defeat that likely would have rivaled Franklin Roosevelt’s 1932 drubbing of Herbert Hoover. Consider: On November 3, 1992, Bill Clinton defeated George H.W. Bush and Ross Perot for the presidency by a margin of 43-37-19 percent. Ever since that loss to Bill Clinton, it has been the standard operating procedure of Bush supporters everywhere to blame the loss on Perot’s independent run, and the 19 percent of the electorate he won that November — “a majority of those voters would probably have gone Republican in a two-party race,” wrote Bush’s vice president, Dan Quayle, in this Washington Post piece from April, 2010, before concluding, “Speaking on behalf of the Bush-Quayle campaign, to this day we firmly believe that Perot cost the Republican Party the White House.” Barbour replayed this canard as recently as Sunday’s episode of CNN’s “State of the Union,” when, commenting on the possibility of an independent run by Donald Trump, Barbour said, “But the big question for me is, most important question, will Donald Trump say to the Republican audience, I will not run as a third party candidate. I will not run as an independent. I understand what happened in 1992, that Ross Perot gave the Clintons the White House.” First, Perot’s campaign was not the cause of the malady that afflicted the 1992 Bush-Quayle campaign, it was but a symptom. Perot didn’t even appear on Larry King’s CNN show declaring that he would consider running (if the American people put him on 50 state ballots!) until February 20, two days after Pat Buchanan had scared the bejeebers out of the Bush operation by holding Bush to just 53 percent of the vote in the New Hampshire primary. Second, the polling data at the time simply does not support the contention that Perot’s 19 percent of the vote came largely out of Bush’s hide. In fact, it shows just the opposite. The 1992 Battleground Survey — conducted and analyzed on a bipartisan basis by The Tarrance Group (a fabled GOP firm) and Lake Research Partners (a storied Democratic firm) — shows the following: On September 30 — the last day before Perot re-entered the race — Clinton led Bush by an 11-point margin, at 49-38 percent, with Perot taking six percent. One day later — the day Perot re-entered the race — Clinton’s lead shrank to nine points, 47-38 percent, with Perot nudging up a point to seven percent. Thirty days later, on November 1 — the last day the survey was fielded — Clinton’s lead had shrunk further, to just four points, at 40-36 percent over Bush, with Perot polling at 19 percent. So, during the course of Perot’s late-season charge, Clinton’s support dropped from 49 percent to 40 percent (a significant nine-point drop), while Bush’s support dropped from 38 percent to 36 percent (a mere two-point drop, inside the margin of error of the survey). Meanwhile, Perot was gaining 13 points on the ballot — nine points of which came from Clinton, two points of which came from Bush, and two points of which came from previously undecided voters. In other words, to the extent voters left Bush and Clinton for Perot, those who left Clinton for Perot outnumbered those who left Bush for Perot by more than 4-to-1. Worse for the Barbour/Quayle argument, the remaining five percent of voters who remained undecided right up until the election split 3-1-1 for Clinton-Bush-Perot on Election Day. That’s another way of saying that on the day before the election, 80 percent of the remaining undecided voters had, in fact, decided — they had decided they were not going to vote for Bush. They just hadn’t decided whether they would ultimately cast their vote for Clinton, or for Perot. And Clinton ended up getting 75 percent of them. Do the math. Had Perot not been in the race, Clinton’s final tally likely would have been 13 points higher than it was, while Bush’s likely would have been just three points higher. Without Perot in the race, the final outcome likely would have been 56-40 percent, Clinton over Bush. That would have been the worst loss by a Republican President seeking reelection since 1932, when Franklin Roosevelt crushed Herbert Hoover by a 57-40 percent margin. So, can we put this shibboleth to rest, once and for all? | |||
|
| Peace through superior firepower |
Ha! Love that. | |||
|
| Member! |
I hate when Para comments right after I post something. I always think the watchful Eagle is about to rip my head off for doing it incorrectly or something! :-) | |||
|
| Bad dog! |
Correct. Neither does John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham-- and about 90% of all the politicians in Washington of both parties. When they are out of the world of politics, whether by choice or election loss, their fallback is the elite world of political lobbyists-- indistinguishable from the world of professional politicians. They are the "Let them eat cake" aristocracy. And they don't give a shit about the world they hand down to us, because they are not part of it at all. ______________________________________________________ "You get much farther with a kind word and a gun than with a kind word alone." | |||
|
| Oh stewardess, I speak jive.  |
^ because our representative democracy isn't truly representative, nor has it been for ages. it's a public service job, an honor, more like carrying a coffin than an excuse to get rich. instead it's been perverted, run by fat cat professional politicians and special interests. it ought to run more like the Texas model, a part time assignment with limited reach. | |||
|
| Bad dog! |
Apparently Rupert Murdoch handed over control of his empire to his two left-leaning sons. This article attributes Thursday's debate performance to that fact, suggesting the three "stars" are trying to please their new bosses. I don't know whether that is true, but the handover of power is apparently true. http://canadafreepress.com/article/74409 ______________________________________________________ "You get much farther with a kind word and a gun than with a kind word alone." | |||
|
Member |
Para, I believe the heads of the RNC haven't a clue. I watched some beltway republican and Ann Coulter talk about Trump. Ann Coulter, basically said as long as Trump "is saying what he is saying" he will lead in the polls. She is dumfounded that the GOP can't pick-up on this. The beltway GOP strategist called Trump lucky (that he was still polling so good, and a one trick pony. (just talking about immigration) Then I turned on CNN and the GDC strategists was blasting Trump about his comment on how Megyn Kelly had blood coming out of her eyes and the GOP strategist was agreeing with her. I am truly at a loss at why the GOP is having such a hard time figuring this out. ______________________________________________________________________________ My grandfather voted republican until the day he died, now he votes democrat. | |||
|
Lighten up and laugh |
http://www.politico.com/story/...ze-trump-121241.html | |||
|
| Peace through superior firepower |
I guess they know that as long as Trump is around, the RNC heads aren't driving the bus, and they just can't accept such an idea. IOW, they're in denial. Very good. Pay attention, RNC, ya nimrods.  ____________________________________________________ "I am your retribution." - Donald Trump, speech at CPAC, March 4, 2023 | |||
|
Alienator |
Smart man. He continues to impress and will definitely have my vote. He's one of the few that stays the course. SIG556 Classic P220 Carry SAS Gen 2 SAO SP2022 9mm German Triple Serial P938 SAS P365 FDE P322 FDE Psalm 118:24 "This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it" | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ... 1312 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
Topic Closed© SIGforum 2024