quote:

Originally posted by colomtn:
Straight from the horses mouth (Reince Priebus) "Don't believe the garbage you read"

Apparently Reince and I agree on something, who'd a thunk it.

quote:

Why is it so difficult to focus on the positive for some of you?

One of us continues to bring up Ted Cruz... and it's not me.
It's negative. It's needling. It's an attack on those with whom you ought to ally.
Sure, I think other candidates would have done better against Hillary. You think only Trump could beat Hillary. Neither one of us will ever know because there is only one nominee to run against Hillary.

When I discuss the money raised or the statements made by Mr. Trump it's not because I don't want him to win. I do want him to win but I'm not going to bury my head in the sand. The media is biased... against Trump (now) and against Republicans, especially conservatives. It's a fact of life. How a candidate deals with it is up to them.

quote:

One of us continues to bring up Ted Cruz... and it's not me.

Well the other one certainly isn't me. I only brought him up because it's pretty obvious that's exactly what's going on.

What do all of those who constantly play this game on the forum have in common? Any guesses?

quote:

It's negative. It's needling. It's an attack on those with whom you ought to ally.

No, it's an accurate observation. Nothing else.

I don't think the Trump people need to coddle the Cruz people. I do believe that the Cruz people should stop acting like petulant children who need their hands held to be led down the path. Trump or Hillary. If you want to act negatively, then act negatively towards your enemy. Quit attacking your friends.

quote:

When I discuss the money raised or the statements made by Mr. Trump it's not because I don't want him to win. It's because I do want him to win but I'm not going to bury my head in the sand.

My 5 year old is currently having this problem. He refuses to bury his head in the sand too, and everything is "yeah, but" with him. Did you have a good day at school? Yeah, but recess wasn't long enough. Do you like these shoes? Yeah, but I like sandals better.

We get it. You'll vote for Trump, but (insert negative crap here). So will my 5 year old.

OK, guys. Kum-bah-yah, aight?

Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya!

My friend Ed Martin just wrote a book (with Phyllis Schlafly), The Conservative Case for Trump.

quote:

If you want to act negatively, then act negatively towards your enemy. Quit attacking your friends.

Say this to Trump, and have a good day.

There is an interesting array of Trump detractors in this election. Some such groups are from the Republican Party. The doctrine-oriented detractors remind me of another time in our history and I cannot help but wonder if there are some lessons which detractors would do well to learn. One such lesson comes from the War of 1812: Do not turn into a perceived traitor to the cause.

The War of 1812 was fought, for the overwhelming part, without the aid of the New England states. New Englanders were the political center of the United States. Indeed, the party most associated with New England was the Federalist Party. That party coalesced around the notion that the United States Constitution should be adopted by the various states.

Federalist was the party of John Jay, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington and etc. They were seen as the intellectual elite and protagonists of the liberty promised under the United States Constitution.

By the time the Federalist party made it into the War of 1812, the intelligentsia of the Constitution did not reflect the thoughts of average American citizens. The country had grown west but the Federalists failed to keep in step. They argued for “principles” that they held dear and believed those expanding west should bow to their superior view of what was right.

New England and the Federalists refused to join arms with the rest of the country when England landed troops in New England to fight to take the United States back as an English satellite. In fact, New England forbade their militias from fighting off the British and gave them safe passage from New England to the rest of the country. New England even gave the English gold and supplies to help them attack the rest of the country – more aid than they supplied to their fellow Americans. In New England, they called the action “Mr. Madison’s little war” and were content to let him and others fight it because they didn’t believe they were adequately represented in the decision.

After quite some time, New England put together a meeting called the Hartford Convention where they discussed their grievances in how the Constitution was being interpreted and applied by the rest of the country. After all, the Federalists saw themselves as the true keepers of the Constitution. After writing and circulating the Federalist Papers to intellectually support adopting the Constitution, one might think that such intellectual superiority was justified.

When the Federalists sent a delegation from the Hartford Convention to Washington DC to air their grievances, they arrived to a still burning capital after the British had decimated the structures at the end of the war. For their part, the Federalists were seen as traitors by a majority of the country. Federalist actions in undercutting a unified response to a national threat – even though the Federalists were the intellectual progenitors of the Constitution – brought their influence as a party to an end. To average voters and people with walking around sense, the Federalist were so focused on their self-perceived superiority that they destroyed their force in American politics and leadership.

In fact, the Federalist party died due to their actions during the war. Never more would the Federalists be a leading force. Never again would the Federalists win elections. And, never again would the people of the United States look to the Federalists for intellectual or political leadership on the Constitution. The party ceased to exist shortly thereafter.

I wonder if the current crop of “leaders” who think they are intellectually superior to the will of the voters will find themselves in a similar situation as the Federalists. There is already some evidence that political realignment is irreversibly underway. Party and national politics have changed and the elitists who, thankfully, fought to keep one view of liberty alive in the past may be putting themselves in the position of being left behind. Parties have come and gone in our history and those who believed that politics revolved around their particular views have often been surprised. Oh, the ideas will live but the conglomerated power of those ideas will be diffused into some other team leader or inclusive movement.

So, the various 70 and others who self-identify their misalignment with the voters along with the donors who withhold funds for the fight or even give money to the opposition will likely have a reckoning. It looks traitorous to the cause of protecting the country from Hillary as she promises to veer from a path to prosperity, respect, and security. That is not to mention what Supreme Court Justice appointments will mean. And, what will happen if the education system is not returned to patriotic and academic success. And, etc. The voters on the right and in the independent ranks will view the policies enacted under a far left agenda with disdain. The obstructionists showing themselves now, whether originating in doctrine or just political patty cake, will stick in the voters’ craw. Obstructionists will be blamed.

Will this be the end of them? I do not know, but history teaches that failure to stay in step with the voters and appearing to work against the team while the country is threatened just may destroy the long term aspirations of even the most ardent self-appointed keepers of what they see as the correct flame. Whether establishment RINO or doctrinaire right, there are dismissed margins waiting for obstructionists this time around.

You swing the word elitist as if it were a cudgel, insulting people that disagree with you.

We are rapidly approaching the point where the values of self reliance and individual liberty are no longer held by a majority of the populace. Almost two generations of people educated via the progressive left's iron hold on public education, destroying the very concepts that "Make America Great."

Instead, the populace wants a strong arm leader that will use the Governments monopoly on force to MAKE others give them things. Whether its the welfare estate promised by Hillary Clinton, or the punitive tax measures proffered by Donald Trump, both spell continual doom for the nation.

You're right; those of us that are struggling with the prospect of having to vote for Trump against Hillary are at odds with the rest of the people flying the Republican Flag. However, I didn't leave the Republican Party; it left me, transitioning into populist nationalism.

quote:

Originally posted by domcintosh:
. . . transitioning into populist nationalism.

For a time. There is no one to succeed Trump because he is so unique on the political stage. This is an election where we have a binary decision to track the country in a different direction. I'm enthusiastically for that. Are you?

Historically, populism will give way to its own form of status quo and we will adjust again. I do not see Trump as anything but a current permutation of our political cycles. Populism will give way to other views given events and people involved. Populism has problems and those will no doubt be seen along the way. But, I'd much rather have those problems than those offered by Hillary and her ilk.

Being obstructionist is not, to me, the best path. Those who have leadership potential in the future would do well to be perceived as team players. As in the Federalists, an unrecoverable black eye stuck even though we did not lose the war. Obstructionists now would do well to take heed of the lesson.

If you are an elitist, you should not be in my view. Elitism is not something about which to be proud. Elitists are, for the most part, out of touch with average Americans. I do not see that as something to relish. Perhaps you have some other definition of an elitist. I'm wondering if you misread my post.

Trump supporters want self-reliance and individual liberty. You know, things like free speech and the the right to keep and bear arms are important to Trump supporters.

It is hard for me to see how lower taxes for average Americans in Trump's tax plan are "punitive."

Trump wants to return education control back to local communities. Your post is curious in regard to education. Centralization has been a boondoggle of non-success and inadequate results. As a retired professor/instructor from various colleges and universities, I always liked the home-schooled and charter-schooled students because they tended to be better educated and more intellectually inquisitive.

The strong arm leader allegation is also interesting. I believe a lot of people mistake resilience in the face of opposition for strong arm oppression. Trump gets things done. With the wandering policies and actions of government we've seen for so long, it would be nice to see that something gets done on time and under budget.

No one is currently herding the cats and Congress has, what, an 11% approval rating? Trump desires to get Congress going again in the way it is supposed to function under the constitution. Mike Pence was selected to help Trump do just that. He seems like a fine selection to me. He has the proven chops to help get things done.

I understand that the Republican Party left you sentiment, but these things are not for the faint of heart. It reminds me of the old joke that if you find the perfect church, don't join it because you'll ruin it.

The point now is to send our country in a better direction. That's Trump not Hillary or anyone else. Carry your influence into the next election without unnecessarily harming your prospects is the overall message of my post. Those who wish to lead in the future should be team players now.

Populism is inherently bad; people arguing to give the government more power is always bad.

I'd love to be a team member against Hillary. If we had Tom Cruise in Days of Thunder, I'd sign up for the pit crew. Instead, we have Ricky Bobby of Talladega Nights. Man can't stay out of his own way long enough to win the race.

No, I am not an elitist. I'm a recently married, financially well of sailor; a member of that other 1% that people praise when something sad or cool happens. It is the mercurial nature of that the definition for elitist and Globalist, and that each has been used as a club against people that don't support Trump. Don't like him; boom, you're an elitist member of the "Establishment." Object to his trade policies? You must be a Globalist. Much like the progressive's embrace of racist, it is designed to reject and silence the person making the argument rather than confront the argument.

Trump talks about individual liberties, yet says he's going to expand libel laws so that he can sue journalists who are mean to him. Recently, there is the bone headed, unrefined statement on the Second Amendment that was tantamount to dropping his pants and bending over for the media that undoubtedly wants him to lose.

Honestly, what we've heard of his tax plan is good. It's the destructive trade tariffs, and penalizing companies for doing business that I was referring to. Works wonders to stoke that populist anger if you rant about the corporations who left to make money. That wouldn't happen if he were in charge. It's like he borrowed the speech notes of the SEIU boss.

Trump wont' be able to get things done, either on time or under budget, with a cooperative Congress. He doesn't have the authority to do much of what he wants, what he would do as a business executive, as the President, without the consent of Congress. 4 Seats, and the senate majority changes. 4 Seats, and we're back to Democratic filibustering and obstructionism that we'll never be reported.

I'd really like to vote for Trump, Against Hillary, but he keeps COCKING it up. Driving conservatives away, and punching at anyone other than Hillary Clinton, is disastrous for everyone else on a ballot with him. I understand the arguments to vote for him over Clinton; it would be a whole lot easier if he wasn't the fat kid at the pool party with explosive diarrhea.

Alex Soros (Geo Soros's son)





http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...rrifies-world-elite/

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton’s running mate, dined exclusively with the son of progressive billionaire George Soros on Thursday evening,

Alex Soros’ Tim Kaine summit comes after a litany of other high-profile meetings he has had with top Democrats. In fact, during the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in Philadelphia, he got a coveted meeting—and photograph—with Hillary Rodham Clinton herself.

In the past few months, he’s gotten at least a couple of meetings with the sitting president of the United States—Barack Obama

Alex Soros has also got photos with his father, George Soros, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY)—the likely next Democratic leader in the U.S. Senate since Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid is retiring—House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Al Franken (D-MN), Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards, Muslim congressman Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and the highly controversial Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Alex Soros (Geo Soros's son)

Now where have I seen that face before? Oh yeah....

Forget about what Trump says or does, don't even like him if you don't want to.

But vote for Trump for one all important reason.

The Establishment in Washington must be broken up for the good of the country. They are ruining the country and not abiding by the Constitution. Plus, they are not living up to their oaths of office.
How shameful and pathetic is that that these human beings can live with themselves being as unAmerican as they are. They are downright amoral and sociopathic. It's a national disgrace.

This isn't the America that is supposed to be.
Judges legislate regarding their biased issues du jour with no legal basis in law.
Politicians are only in it for the money in office and once out office.

All of this must be stopped and the Elitists have to go.
The best way to accomplish this would be to vote someone in who hates them and will do their best to try to make sure they end up in the Dustbin of History.
A fitting place for people who are truly unAmerican.

I will tell you what needs to be done.
If I were president, I would call congress into session and have them tend to the budget expenses. Once that was done, they would go home.
They couldn't come back until the next year and do the same for 4 years.

If congress decided to stay in session as usual, I would not sign one law, not matter if I was for or against it. Congress would be neutered.
I would stop all federal agencies from writing and implementing any new regulations whether good or bad and roll back a whole bunch of them.

This country needs a moratorium on laws and regulation. The dust needs to settle for 4 years so we can access the damage and fix it in the next 4 years thereafter.

That's the real answer to saving this great country.

It's too bad my lifespan is such that I cannot be that president. Apparently, I am the only one willing to grab the bull by the tail and face the situation.

That's what is needed.

quote:

Originally posted by domcintosh:
Populism is inherently bad; people arguing to give the government more power is always bad.

I'd love to be a team member against Hillary.

Rather than repost your many paragraphs, I will respond to them in turn to save thread space . . .

I can see that we do not share the same definition of terms. The American Heritage Dictionary defines populism as follows: "A political philosophy supporting the rights and power of the people in their struggle against the privileged elite." So, your definition that populism somehow gives "more power" to the government is at odds with the dictionary and my definition.

Populism gives power to all the people over the desires of the elite group who believe that the elites should decide for and act for the mere people below them.

You seem to have taken that I accuse you of being elitist. Frankly, I do not know anything about you other than the few things you wrote. Are you an elected official or donor power broker in the Republican or Democrat Party? Average people, even those who are well to do, are not necessarily elitist. So, unless you are one of the elitists I described in my post, it was not directed at you.

According to Dictionary.com, an elitist is "a person having, thought to have, or professing superior intellect or talent, power, wealth, or membership in the upper echelons of society." Do you put yourself in that group by having wealth? If so, then my post is directed at you if you wield economic power over the people who you see as beneath you. If not, I was not addressing you. Hence, I am not sure if I wielded anything against you. Elitism, to me, is also an attitude coupled with power not responsive to the people. If you see yourself as the political elite, then it would be interesting to me to ask you a few questions if you are of a mind.

You say that you are not an elitist but you seem to take offense to a discussion of elitists. You stated that you thought I wielded 'elitist" as a weapon against those with whom I do not agree. I do not agree with the elitism of doctrinal or establishment elitists. That is true. Again, if you are not an elitist, are you trying to defend one or two or more? If so, which ones? I'd like the doctrinaire and establishment elitists removed from control. They have done more than enough.

Ricky Bobby? Cute. Trump is not perfect but no candidate is. Why is a person who is believed to be a liar and filled with a corrupt history of self dealing from public office a better choice? I'd rather have someone who may be ridiculed for his speech than someone who subverts the Constitution by promising to pack the court and eliminate long-held values about free speech and the Second Amendment.

If you are not a globalist but oppose Trump's trade policies, pray tell what do you want instead? In the current debate, most who do not want Trump's trade policies are Globalists. I'm sure people would listen to your non-globalist views if you aired them in any discussion that may offend you. Breitbart has had some thorough articles on trade policies and Levin, in my view, doesn't have the right view. Reagan used targeted trade policies to achieve more equitable results and, so far, it appears that Trump intends to renegotiate and fix what has been so lopsided.

I'm afraid that Trump's Second Amendment statement does not appear to be a threat as I reviewed it. Bend Over or Lean Forward or whatever in the Sam Hill MSNBC's latest motto is seems more in line with what the media has been trying to position Trump supporters into. We shouldn't offer ourselves as goats.

Libel laws have been litigated under the Constitution and have been so for many years. To promote the most robust discussion of issues, the New York Times vs. Sullivan case has been the standard. Many decades ago,I competed in a court competition at the John Marshall School of Law in Chicago. I scored the highest single round numbers of any competitor so I have spent some time considering the subject. The competition centered on the Sullivan case that year. I just want to say that there is a balancing of interests in libel cases as it relates to the press. Trump can't do something on his own. There will be plenty of others who will have much more control than he does on the issue. So, to me, a concern over libel laws is often overblown. Just what would anyone be afraid of anyway? No one wants to do away with freedom of the press but making journalists more accountable for outright known falsehood may be a laudable goal. The actual malice standard may need a tweak or two in our age.

Insofar as bringing companies back to the United States. Nehlen, although not victorious against Ryan, talked of several successes during his campaign recently. Hillary for her part gave a speech in India, if memory serves, saying that companies could not be brought back to the United States. I'd prefer an effort to the capitulation that Hillary offers.

I believe you are jumping to an errant conclusion when you say that Trump should not go after companies just because they left to make money. I believe Trump wants to bring the companies and jobs back so both could make money - but here.

A divided Congress, even with different majorities, does not mean that nothing gets done. Remember, we have had years in the past where things got done. Pence has a proven track record of being well regarded in a way that he can help shepherd things through tough waters. In what seems to be a rather glum assessment by you, if the numbers flip, then Hillary will surely give us much worse.

You say that you dislike Trump's "explosive diarrhea" but isn't taking cyanide worse? One smells but the other could kill us.

It would be great for each of us to feel inspired and proud of our candidate for office. But, that may be a rare case for most. Reagan's affable and philosophical qualities made him very likable for me but none of our potential nominees this time had his qualities. Trump is not my ideal but he may be ideal for these times. Sometimes I see him as akin to the manager that the corporation sends in to clean house, knowing that his work is necessary but won't be welcomed.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Tubetone,

I'm behind the curve here, and I'm now listening to the Milo Yionappolus show from 07/08/2016 where he has Ann Coulter on...

Now, I'm so/so on Milo (I love his anti SJW stuff but find him a bit abrasive) and I generally despise Ann Coulter, but this is good stuff.

If you guys haven't listened to Milo's podcast, you should. (just have a sense of humor)

I kind of feel the "trump train" just grabbed my shirt tail and ripped me along....

I feel dirty and kinda like it.

quote:

Now where have I seen that face before? Oh yeah....

good comparison.

some of the things the young Soros says in the article:

“There can only be one #womancrushwedensday today and that is of course @hillaryclinton"

“A special #july4th #mancrushmonday for president @barackobama! Had European leaders and voters taken his advice they wouldn’t be in this current mess,”

“Love this man!” Alex Soros wrote along with a photograph of him with the vice presidential hopeful.

pajama boy all the way

quote:

Originally posted by lbj:
Forget about what Trump says or does, don't even like him if you don't want to.

But vote for Trump for one all important reason.

The Establishment in Washington must be broken up for the good of the country. They are ruining the country and not abiding by the Constitution. Plus, they are not living up to their oaths of office.
How shameful and pathetic is that that these human beings can live with themselves being as unAmerican as they are. They are downright amoral and sociopathic. It's a national disgrace.

This isn't the America that is supposed to be.
Judges legislate regarding their biased issues du jour with no legal basis in law.
Politicians are only in it for the money in office and once out office.

All of this must be stopped and the Elitists have to go.
The best way to accomplish this would be to vote someone in who hates them and will do their best to try to make sure they end up in the Dustbin of History.
A fitting place for people who are truly unAmerican.

I will tell you what needs to be done.
If I were president, I would call congress into session and have them tend to the budget expenses. Once that was done, they would go home.
They couldn't come back until the next year and do the same for 4 years.

If congress decided to stay in session as usual, I would not sign one law, not matter if I was for or against it. Congress would be neutered.
I would stop all federal agencies from writing and implementing any new regulations whether good or bad and roll back a whole bunch of them.

This country needs a moratorium on laws and regulation. The dust needs to settle for 4 years so we can access the damage and fix it in the next 4 years thereafter.

That's the real answer to saving this great country.

It's too bad my lifespan is such that I cannot be that president. Apparently, I am the only one willing to grab the bull by the tail and face the situation.

That's what is needed.

Very well said, it amazes me that so many conservatives have such a hard time seeing this.

quote:

I will tell you what needs to be done.
If I were president, I would call congress into session and have them tend to the budget expenses. Once that was done, they would go home.
They couldn't come back until the next year and do the same for 4 years.

If congress decided to stay in session as usual, I would not sign one law, not matter if I was for or against it. Congress would be neutered.
I would stop all federal agencies from writing and implementing any new regulations whether good or bad and roll back a whole bunch of them.

This country needs a moratorium on laws and regulation. The dust needs to settle for 4 years so we can access the damage and fix it in the next 4 years thereafter.

That's the real answer to saving this great country.

Right... and I would vote for you.
But at this point it's Trump or Hillary.
I want to hear Trump say it. I want to hear it from the guy I'm planning to vote for.
All we get is distractions and tangents.

quote:

It's the destructive trade tariffs, and penalizing companies for doing business that I was referring to.

Do you mean tariffs are destructive when WE put them on other coutries goods, but somehow it's ok for them to place massive tariffs on our goods in their country? By "doing business" I assume you mean company's that shut down & fire everyone here, only to move overseas where they pay peons pennies & then import the same goods without tariffs here?

I just don't understand people who pick apart Trumps trade plans. Free trade isn't free, if your trading with foreign government sponsored companies that hire slaves for a few pennies a day. I don't wanna compete for jobs with peons. I'm sure you don't either.

America first.

quote:

Originally posted by colomtn:

quote:

Originally posted by lbj:
Forget about what Trump says or does, don't even like him if you don't want to.

But vote for Trump for one all important reason.

The Establishment in Washington must be broken up for the good of the country. They are ruining the country and not abiding by the Constitution. Plus, they are not living up to their oaths of office.
How shameful and pathetic is that that these human beings can live with themselves being as unAmerican as they are. They are downright amoral and sociopathic. It's a national disgrace.

This isn't the America that is supposed to be.
Judges legislate regarding their biased issues du jour with no legal basis in law.
Politicians are only in it for the money in office and once out office.

All of this must be stopped and the Elitists have to go.
The best way to accomplish this would be to vote someone in who hates them and will do their best to try to make sure they end up in the Dustbin of History.
A fitting place for people who are truly unAmerican.

I will tell you what needs to be done.
If I were president, I would call congress into session and have them tend to the budget expenses. Once that was done, they would go home.
They couldn't come back until the next year and do the same for 4 years.

If congress decided to stay in session as usual, I would not sign one law, not matter if I was for or against it. Congress would be neutered.
I would stop all federal agencies from writing and implementing any new regulations whether good or bad and roll back a whole bunch of them.

This country needs a moratorium on laws and regulation. The dust needs to settle for 4 years so we can access the damage and fix it in the next 4 years thereafter.

That's the real answer to saving this great country.

It's too bad my lifespan is such that I cannot be that president. Apparently, I am the only one willing to grab the bull by the tail and face the situation.

That's what is needed.

Very well said, it amazes me that so many conservatives have such a hard time seeing this.

Very poorly thought out, though.

The center piece of our government of 3 equal branches is Congress. The President can "lead," harangue from the bully pulpit, cajole, knock heads, but things have to start in Congress.

The biggest bitch we have all had, out of a great many to chose from, is those God Damned executive orders, ignoring Congress, to do what HE thinks is right, doing what HE wants.

You can't have that. If Congress's only role is to vote money and go home, we might as well forget Presidential elections in favor of a hereditary monarchy.

Another thing. Real conservatives ought to have nothing to do with any of this. Everyone concentrates on how government can do more. Real conservatives believe that government must do a lot less. Trouble is, there is no money in it, no "jobs for the boys," no vast armies of staff to manage. The government led by Calvin Coolidge had a tiny fraction of the employees, departments and agencies existing now. Some of the supposedly "conservative" administrations have been the biggest promoters of government bloat in post WWII history. In fairness, the Congress has been in God Damned Commie control most of that time, especially in the early days of that period. The problem has been those guys keep getting the most votes.