Sign in to follow this  
Shortforbob

Will Cohen Flip?

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, TMSAIL said:

Sorry you must be talking to someone else.  I never called for her to be locked up.  

And what’s with the swearing in every post?   You sound like a middle school kid that just learned some new words. Just saying 

 

57 minutes ago, TMSAIL said:

Politics are making some forget the fundamental rule of this country “innocent until proven guilty, “ but I’m the  traitor.  Fuck off 

 

You are on a hypocrisy roll lately.

 

Besides, by our President's stated standard, Cohen plead the fifth, has something to hide, and is probably guilty. And we've got to respect the President now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TMSAIL said:

I sure as hell have a problem with any country interfering with our election.   I just haven’t seen the part were Trump was directly involved.  

I’ve said it before if Trump colluded with the Russians to interfere with the election he should be impeached. 

Politics are making some forget the fundamental rule of this country “innocent until proven guilty, “ but I’m the  traitor.  Fuck off 

Yes, you and your elk are the traitors. Trump may very well have done “nothing,” although his associates are falling pretty darn quick. By attacking Mueller and the rule of law, you spit on American traditions. Yes, a traitor to American ideals.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TMSAIL said:

I sure as hell have a problem with any country interfering with our election.   I just haven’t seen the part were Trump was directly involved.  

I’ve said it before if Trump colluded with the Russians to interfere with the election he should be impeached. 

Politics are making some forget the fundamental rule of this country “innocent until proven guilty, “ but I’m the  traitor.  Fuck off 

Even if Trump were not directly involved with any collusion, the man is unfit for office, he lies. he has no idea of international ecconomic balance, he hangs loyal public servants out to dry, he has no interest in being a president for all Americans, he is self obsessed, wasteful. crude and totally untrustworthy, lazy and vainglorious. and yet you defend him as your rightfully elected representative.

Why?

In the corporate world, hiring mistakes are made. YOU as one of the board of directors would get rid of such a miss hire faster that you could say "we fucked up" 

He'd have security guard standing at his desk with a cardboard box watching him pack and marching him out the door.
 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Even if Trump were not

Why can't the English teach their children how to speak?  (yes, you should hear music)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Cal20sailor said:

Why can't the English teach their children how to speak?  (yes, you should hear music)

Oh dear.

Subjunctive Mood

was and were grammarThe subjunctive mood is a verb form that is used for unreal or hypothetical statements. It is made up of the phrases I were, he were, she were, it were, etc. You often use this form when you are being wishful. For example,

  • I wish I weren’t so shy.
  • I wish it were warmer outside.
  • If I were taller, I could dunk a basketball.
  • If John were a rich man, he could drive a fancy car.
  • He acts as if he were the one in charge.
  • John spends money as if he were a millionaire.

All of the above sentences use the verb were because they aren’t true; they do not describe reality.

Don't thank me, always happy to oblige our grammar challenged American friends  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you then believe that Trump was not involved in any collusion?  Say what you will about American grammar, but we typically don't use pig Latin to make a point....well, too often we do.  And I forgot to add a smiley to my earlier post so you get two this time.  :lol::D

A.  I taught math (unsuccessfully after a long successful career in engineering)

B.  I promise to teach them subjunctive mood terms when they quit aksing me questions and realize that Miami is not a state.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Cal20sailor said:

So you then believe that Trump was not involved in any collusion?  Say what you will about American grammar, but we typically don't use pig Latin to make a point....well, too often we do.  And I forgot to add a smiley to my earlier post so you get two this time.  :lol::D

No you fool, you do know what a hypothetical is?

"Even if Trump were not.."

No need to apologise after your crack at MY grammar. After all , you're never wrong are you?:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Shortforbob said:

No you fool, you do know what a hypothetical is?

"Even if Trump were not.."

No need to apologise after your crack at MY grammar. After all , you're never wrong are you?:rolleyes:

I'm wrong all the time.  The fastest way to learn is to make mistakes and learn from them.  My ego left town years ago.  You did get my original comment?  Never watch Pygmalion as you will start to sing when they don't.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Cal20sailor said:

I'm wrong all the time.  The fastest way to learn is to make mistakes and learn from them.  My ego left town years ago.  You did get my original comment?  Never watch Pygmalion as you will start to sing when they don't.  

Pygmalion is a play by George Bernard Shaw, My fair lady is the musical. :rolleyes:

I'd give up on the literary challenge if I were you. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Shortforbob said:

Pygmalion is a play by George Bernard Shaw, My fair lady is the musical. :rolleyes:

I'd give up on the literary challenge if I were you. :D

Bob, I just said that.  Seeing the play (made into a movie) makes you want to sing.  Fuck you, bring it on.  And I'm an engineer, not a librarian but I will win.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Cal20sailor said:

Bob, I just said that.  Seeing the play (made into a movie) makes you want to sing.  Fuck you, bring it on.  And I'm an engineer, not a librarian but I will win.  

That's really pathetic :)

As to the hypothetical, Trump's a control freak and a micro manager.

anyone who believes he had no knowledge of what his campaign team were up to has to be either stupid or so desperate to keep face despite all indications that they've inadvertently elected a criminal, that they'd sell their children for a spot on The Apprentice  :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

That's really pathetic :)

As to the hypothetical, Trump's a control freak and a micro manager.

anyone who believes he had no knowledge of what his campaign team were up to has to be either stupid or so desperate to keep face despite all indications that they've inadvertently elected a criminal, that they'd sell their children for a spot on The Apprentice  :rolleyes:

I don't get the pathetic part...I wish I viewed you as an intellectual.  

Trump is the epitome of my old boss.  One of his favorite expressions was "make it happen."  I have zero doubt that Trump had a similar pet phrase and can deny, deny, deny.  

Be patient my Australian foe, Mueller is going to wrap this up in a bow and the term disgraced former President Trump will be part of our lexicon.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Seeing the play (made into a movie) makes you want to sing.

that's the pathetic bit :)

And I'm far from an intellectual, though my intellect is pretty robust. 

If you want to challenge my spelling? go for it, I'm a rotten speller, But my grammar is pretty sound. 

As To Trump? He's a dead man walking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

that's the pathetic bit :)

And I'm far from an intellectual, though my intellect is pretty robust. 

If you want to challenge my spelling? go for it, I'm a rotten speller, But my grammar is pretty sound. 

As To Trump? He's a dead man walking.

I thought pathetic was aimed at me...sorry.  Can we agree that if we want to attack spelling or grammar, there are much easier targets?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Cal20sailor said:

I thought pathetic was aimed at me...sorry.  Can we agree that if we want to attack spelling or grammar, there are much easier targets?

it was aimed at you :D , Anyone who want's to break into a " all I want is a room somewhere" or "Just you wayt 'enry iggins , just you wayt" in the middle of Pygmalion deserves an escort to the foyer.

And I do a mean Eliza Doolittle :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Yes, you and your elk are the traitors. Trump may very well have done “nothing,” although his associates are falling pretty darn quick. By attacking Mueller and the rule of law, you spit on American traditions. Yes, a traitor to American ideals.

Except I didnt  attack Mueller.  I talked about Comey and McCabe.  Supporting The rule of law was exactly what my Post was about.  Try and keep up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Raz'r said:
16 hours ago, hermetic said:

if comey, like mccabe, is found to have lied under oath, should they not both face charges?  regardless of their past positions and performance

Well, duh.

philly doesn't seem to think along those lines

does the whole rule of law, american traditions, and traitor to american ideals apply to him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hermetic said:

philly doesn't seem to think along those lines

does the whole rule of law, american traditions, and traitor to american ideals apply to him?

Some on the left have lost their minds.  Now even discussing a factual story makes you a traitor.  Any rebuttal of their view of what the  “facts” are makes you un-American.    Chose their side or else!   The rhetoric has that dictatorship sound to it.   If they take over power will it be the guillotine or firing squads for members of the other party.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TMSAIL said:

Some on the left have lost their minds.  Now even discussing a factual story makes you a traitor.  Any rebuttal of their view of what the  “facts” are makes you un-American.    Chose their side or else!   The rhetoric has that dictatorship sound to it.   If they take over power will it be the guillotine or firing squads for members of the other party.  

Trying the doggie backpeddle? Why don’t you go back to slobbering Trumps knob. Bunch of old “I got mine, so fuck toy” generation traitors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Yes, you and your elk are the traitors. Trump may very well have done “nothing,” although his associates are falling pretty darn quick. By attacking Mueller and the rule of law, you spit on American traditions. Yes, a traitor to American ideals.

I want to support this post.

At the point where one is undermining both LE and the DOJ, it is no longer harmless spin. If the facts show that Trump is lilly white on collusion, influence peddling, and money laundering, so be it. Still, he and his supporters were obstructors of justice...on a grand scale of high crimes which didnt exist. 

Even saying "I will challenge the election results if I lose" is traitorous IMO. Chanting "lock her up" was treasonous. Associatin with Roger Stone/Manafort, the same.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just this morning Trump is threatening to “intervene” at Justice....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The public reaction may enforce the system by granting cajones to the house and senate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Cal20sailor said:

Why can't the English teach their children how to speak?  (yes, you should hear music)

A tip Cal - Americans should never criticize the use of English by Colonials.

You are almost guaranteed to be wrong. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Cal20sailor said:

 Mueller is going to wrap this up in a bow and the term disgraced former President Trump will be part of our lexicon.  

From your lips to God's ear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I am very disappointed in my Justice Department," Trump said.

From an interview with Trump on Fox and Friends.

Someone want to tell this idiot that it is not "his" DOJ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/04/attorney-michael-avenatti-hints-1-6-million-abortion-payout-trump-not-gop-donor/

“So, Mika, you are familiar with the fact that a week ago, Judge (Kimba) Wood ordered Michael Cohen’s attorneys to disclose all of his clients for the last three years,” Avenatti said, “and there were three clients listed — three clients listed. Do you recall which three?”

Brzezinski listed Trump, Fox News host Sean Hannity and Republican donor Elliott Broidy — but Avenatti said she was making the same mistake everyone else had.

“No, no, no,” he said. “Mr. Trump, the Trump organization and Sean Hannity. Mr. Broidy was not disclosed in open court as one of Michael Cohen’s clients.”

 

I'm trying to find where the actual revealing of the "3" clients happened in court, and I'm not finding that specifically.  There's lots of "it was previously revealed" regarding the donor/abortion payment, but not the actual court comments.  Everybody was so shocked about the Hannity part that that's all that's being mentioned in the news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, phillysailor said:

Nah, what I don't like about what the right has done is to make Swiftboating the new campaign strategy. To throw mud instead of rolling out policy. There is no coherent domestic policy direction right now, and that's basically ok with Republicans because Trump campaigned on hatred... Hatred of Mme Clinton, of blacks (criminals), of Mexicans (rapists) and of the disenfranchised (freeloaders.) Getting a crowd to chant "Lock her Up" about your competitor reduces the standard of our political debate that the animus between us is no surprise.

Basically, now Democrats have to argue for civility and discussion, before we even get to discussing policy ideas. The tax cut for the wealthy is one of THE DUMBEST national decisions since we went to war with Saddam. But here we go, and once again, the GOP is driving the bus.

It is entirely true that that "people had a negative reaction to the candidate herself" because a negative PR campaign which cost untold millions of dollars via FOX News hammered the points home incessantly over many, many years. And yes, I resent the hell out of that campaign. 

But Trump is a shyster of another magnitude, and it is Hillary's unlucky fate to forever have to be compared to him. She is diminished, as are the rest of us, by his shtick and his lies and his lack of morals. He is the new GOP, and true patriots have to fight them both.

Pick your side with care, my friends.

I'm of the same mindset about political discourse in general - the Rs are indeed guilty of that.  The Ds are too - with the identity/victim politics, putting SJW causes at a higher priority than national economics/stability/defense.   SO - when the pendulum swings, do you think that the Ds will behave any differently than the Rs are now - in terms of using vilification as a message instead of pushing policy?   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

I'm of the same mindset about political discourse in general - the Rs are indeed guilty of that.  The Ds are too - with the identity/victim politics, putting SJW causes at a higher priority than national economics/stability/defense.   SO - when the pendulum swings, do you think that the Ds will behave any differently than the Rs are now - in terms of using vilification as a message instead of pushing policy?   

 

Firstly, I’d point out that given recent administrations, your charge that Dems are associated with fiscal mismanagement is not borne out by oft-repeated evidence. 

Furthermore, unless you are willing to stand by Bush and Trumps major foreign policy decisions, your saying that Dems are weak on defense also is unsupported by the evidence. 

The State Dept has been gutted and we are alienating our allies. We’ve fought wars with no thought to the outcome scenario costing us trillions of dollars and at the expense of far too many lives thx to GOP decisions.  But you want to criticize the Democrats on national security?

wtf

As to your final question, we’ve got to unpack these items before we go further. I’m not gonna start accusing Democrats of some future possible overstepping until the colossal debacle of the Iraq War is acknowledged in a mea culpa by the GOP as hugely causal to our current fiscal deficit. 

If there is no after action report, no assessment of what is working on a large scale by the GOP, and then creating real change in how they approach future decisions, I’m not going to limit or judge the appropriateness of Democrats possible future responses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Firstly, I’d point out that given recent administrations, your charge that Dems are associated with fiscal mismanagement is not borne out by oft-repeated evidence. 

Furthermore, unless you are willing to stand by Bush and Trumps foreign policy decisions, in the century your saying that Dems are weak on defense also is unsupported by the evidence. 

The State Dept has been gutted and we are alienating our allies. But you want to criticize the Democrats on our national security?

wtf

As to your final question, we’ve got to unpack these items before we go further. I’m not gonna start accusing Democrats of some future possible overstepping until the colossal debacle of the Iraq War is acknowledged in a mea culpa by the GOP as hugely causal to our current fiscal deficit. 

If there is no after action report, no assessment of what is working on a large scale by the GOP, and then creating real change in how they approach future decisions, I’m not going to limit or judge the appropriateness of Democrats possible future responses. 

No - we don't have to unpack or caveat anything.  We've seen increasingly divisive, party matters most BS increasing on both side of the aisle, and when the majority switches, instead of the behavior moving back towards a sensible, accommodating middle ground? We've seen each build upon the "new norms" established by the prior majority to increase their partisan power.   The Rs did it this time by taking the victim politics that the Ds have mastered and taking that to an absurd level - likewise, the R's pushing the rule changes that the D's implemented for cabinet/judicial nominees to the point that minority balance of the majority is all but gone. 

I'm interested in seeing balance and cooperation restored, or at least sought as a goal, rather than continuing to change the rules to reduce the minority party's ability to constrain the behavior of the majority party.  I'm asking you which way you think that the Ds who will likely take at least one house of congress will go.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Firstly, I’d point out that given recent administrations, your charge that Dems are associated with fiscal mismanagement is not borne out by oft-repeated evidence. 

Furthermore, unless you are willing to stand by Bush and Trumps foreign policy decisions, in the century your saying that Dems are weak on defense also is unsupported by the evidence. 

The State Dept has been gutted and we are alienating our allies. But you want to criticize the Democrats on our national security?

wtf

As to your final question, we’ve got to unpack these items before we go further. I’m not gonna start accusing Democrats of some future possible overstepping until the colossal debacle of the Iraq War is acknowledged in a mea culpa by the GOP as hugely causal to our current fiscal deficit. 

If there is no after action report, no assessment of what is working on a large scale by the GOP, and then creating real change in how they approach future decisions, I’m not going to limit or judge the appropriateness of Democrats possible future responses. 

Classic  You are fucking blind to any critisism of your party, yet you rant about others not engaging in honest debate.    Obama added 10 trillion to the Debt ,but you are calling the tax cut that might add 1 trillion over the next ten years the biggest mistake ever.   Talk about partisan blinders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TMSAIL said:

Classic  You are fucking blind to any critisism of your party, yet you rant about others not engaging in honest debate.    Obama added 10 trillion to the Debt ,but you are calling the tax cut that might add 1 trillion over the next ten years the biggest mistake ever.   Talk about partisan blinders.

Correction, the Republican Congress added $8T to the debt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

No - we don't have to unpack or caveat anything.  We've seen increasingly divisive, party matters most BS increasing on both side of the aisle, and when the majority switches, instead of the behavior moving back towards a sensible, accommodating middle ground? We've seen each build upon the "new norms" established by the prior majority to increase their partisan power.   The Rs did it this time by taking the victim politics that the Ds have mastered and taking that to an absurd level - likewise, the R's pushing the rule changes that the D's implemented for cabinet/judicial nominees to the point that minority balance of the majority is all but gone. 

I'm interested in seeing balance and cooperation restored, or at least sought as a goal, rather than continuing to change the rules to reduce the minority party's ability to constrain the behavior of the majority party.  I'm asking you which way you think that the Ds who will likely take at least one house of congress will go.  

 

Now that he is expanding it to the Bush years he considers 150,000,000 Americans unworthy to even be part of the discussion   Pick your side or watch out is the new mantra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

A tip Cal - Americans should never criticize the use of English by Colonials.

You are almost guaranteed to be wrong. ;)

Get serious.  You're from a country where every sentence has to be answered by eh?  Funniest thing I ever heard was Steve Yzerman being interviewed from Europe during a World Championship.  There was a delay in the line so the handshake vs saying over was to say eh.  Talk about a clusterfuck.  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chessy,

That’s a good question, and I guess it would at least partially depend on your answer to this one. 

Unless the GOP has a “come to Jesus” moment, and not some charlatan TV Evangelist, but a real soul-shaking, we’ve hit-bottom feeling, would you trust them to be suddenly trustworthy and thoughtful stewards of America?

Sorry, but right now I think the GOP is a moral vacuum. The Jeff Flakes & Bob Corkers are heading for the exits saying the same thing. John McCain is very ill. Who exactly is left we can trust?

I would LOVE to get back to responsible bipartisan leadership. But we need opposition not led by the aristocracy, FOX News and Breitbart. Kellyanne Conway’s influence needs to be removed from all discussions between the parties. Right now, her talking points are “winning” the GOP soundbite wars but she is poison to democracy. 

It’s  an uphill climb at this point to restoring our union. Damage has been done by successive GOP administrations which have severely weakened our nation’s fiscal and national security. We need an assessment and consequurnces before we can move on together. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Chessy,

That’s a good question, and I guess it would at least partially depend on your answer to this one. 

Unless the GOP has a “come to Jesus” moment, and not some charlatan TV Evangelist, but a real soul-shaking, we’ve hit-bottom feeling, would you trust them to be suddenly trustworthy and thoughtful stewards of America?

Sorry, but right now I think the GOP is a moral vacuum. The Jeff Flakes & Bob Corkers are heading for the exits saying the same thing. John McCain is very ill. Who exactly is left we can trust?

I would LOVE to get back to responsible bipartisan leadership. But we need opposition not led by the aristocracy, FOX News and Breitbart. Kellyanne Conway’s influence needs to be removed from all discussions between the parties. Right now, her talking points are “winning” the GOP soundbite wars but she is poison to democracy. 

It’s  an uphill climb at this point to restoring our union. Damage has been done by successive GOP administrations which have severely weakened our nation’s fiscal and national security. We need an assessment and consequurnces before we can move on together. 

Yours is a good question too - and in answer - i don't trust most people in EITHER party to be trustworthy and thoughtful stewards of America's resources and capabilities.  There are a few on both sides that I trust, even if I don't agree with their approach or priorities.  McCain, Bernie Sanders, Bob Casey, Joni Ernst are a few that come to mind.  Most of the others?   They seem to me to be more interested in gratifying their base w/political grandstanding and screaming at the other side than they are in establishing good policy and figuring out how to get that policy implemented.   

I understand your ire - but, your approach is part of the problem, in that you seem to be incapable of seeing beyond R=BAD!!!! , when we need to instead be looking at what IS good for the nation, and ignore the divisive party apparatchik, and call it for what it is even if we enjoy the jabs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When enough get bored enough, outrage & distraction might lose their charm-  maybe then things will change.  That said, turning the other cheek usually works best when the other guy’s arm tires, but face it, with the success of mass digital cheek-smiting,  fight or flight is overwhelming Belief.  And that is the business model, no?  Will voting even count, or will it come down to whoever shouts the loudest about a rigged system while piously wearing a cloak of tricky clever-by-half constitutional sophistry?

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m just stuck trying to find a sweet center to the GOP. Where are the policy proposals to help America and Americans? 

I’m looking for some big ticket infrastructure ideas, other than the wall. I’m looking for business stimulus, not just for big oil and big banks (deregulation and killing the CFPB) but for Main Street via broad tax initiatives or projects. 

I’m looking for tax cuts, not for the wealthy, but for the common man, so they end up with more spending power.

Im looking for a simplified tax code that brings corporate tax bills into the realm of reasonable, not some opaque scheme which rewards tax cheats and lobbyists more than responsible sharing of America’s expenses. 

Im looking for protectionism in terms of responsible diplomacy and a hesitance to use force. 

I’m looking for responsible jurisprudence working with all sides of the issues, not cruel immigration choices punishing families struggling to make a living or Muslim bans.

For holding the levers of power, the GOP Really hasn’t delivered on fiscal conservatism or responsible statescraft.  

Sure, you may have been forced to change doctors, but fundamentally Romneycare and its mimic, Obanacare were attempts to responsibly address one of the biggest financial crises facing America.

We need the GOP to step up their game and really engage social problems. Not just stoke racism via Trumptweet or return to for-profit federal pens and encourage more gun ownership. Taking money from social safety nets without commensurate decrease in military funding is just asinine given the recent tax cuts. It’s gonna make next year, the next decade more expensive for the rest of us. 

Sure, Dems have been caught up in SJW battles, but at least they are fighting for people. I’m not sure who the GOP is fighting for other than white gun owners and the very rich. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Philly - sounds like a rational, reasonable basis for a national platform.  I'd personally support anyone and everyone who would push that agenda.  (except the last sentence - I am one of the white gun owners, and don't think I oughta get left out because I am) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TMSAIL said:

Classic  You are fucking blind to any critisism of your party, yet you rant about others not engaging in honest debate.    Obama added 10 trillion to the Debt ,but you are calling the tax cut that might add 1 trillion over the next ten years the biggest mistake ever.   Talk about partisan blinders.

When the Dems actually have a say, you can blame the dems. 

The budget for the last 8 years? R

the investigation of the Prez? R

The ridiculous tax cut? R

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

you seem to be incapable of seeing beyond R=BAD!!!

you get the Republicans - who control the government right now - to stop shitting all over the living room floor and I'll move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Philly - sounds like a rational, reasonable basis for a national platform.  I'd personally support anyone and everyone who would push that agenda.  (except the last sentence - I am one of the white gun owners, and don't think I oughta get left out because I am) 

Wait, you still agree with me. 

 

54 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

I’m not sure who the GOP is fighting for other than white gun owners and the very rich. 

They are fighting for you, and believe me, that’s a big part of the population that deserves representation. 

But I think the rest of the platform I described is allowed to be ignored BECAUSE of the last sentence. 

That, in essence, is how I see the GOP platform. Designed to win the support of rich guys and white guys with guns. I just don’t think that’s enough to make America better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

you get the Republicans - who control the government right now - to stop shitting all over the living room floor and I'll move on.

I'll do what I can - but, I'm just one voice in the cacophony.  Brudda SOL has an idea for getting undue $$ outta campaigns,  and I fully intend to start a petition drive to get that in front of Comstock or whoever's in office in my district at that time. 

I'll save this post - and hold ya to it, though I suspect we'll still have some differences of opinion as to whether something is "shit on the floor" or "fertilizer for the garden". 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Wait, you still agree with me. 

 

They are fighting for you, and believe me, that’s a big part of the population that deserves representation. 

But I think the rest of the platform I described is allowed to be ignored BECAUSE of the last sentence. 

That, in essence, is how I see the GOP platform. Designed to win the support of rich guys and white guys with guns. I just don’t think that’s enough to make America better. 

Right now?   I can't support most of the GOP's agenda priorities.   I do believe that several enforcement agencies, especially the EPA, were overstepping their authority and needed to be reigned in..  I do believe that the ACA is an abomination, and have shared how the larger part of it could be achieved without the ACA, and y'all know my stance on the 2nd.  I see the current GOP priorities paying little more than lip service to those topics, while being completely deficient in addressing most of the real issues facing the country.    So - my constant reminder of D foibles isn't intended to be a defense of the current GOP field of dreams, but to point out that simply having Ds in the majority won't fix anything unless they change how they approach governance - 

That change is what I want, and I don't care who does it first - I'll back 'em. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Right now?   I can't support most of the GOP's agenda priorities.   I do believe that several enforcement agencies, especially the EPA, were overstepping their authority and needed to be reigned in..  I do believe that the ACA is an abomination, and have shared how the larger part of it could be achieved without the ACA, and y'all know my stance on the 2nd.  I see the current GOP priorities paying little more than lip service to those topics, while being completely deficient in addressing most of the real issues facing the country.    So - my constant reminder of D foibles isn't intended to be a defense of the current GOP field of dreams, but to point out that simply having Ds in the majority won't fix anything unless they change how they approach governance - 

That change is what I want, and I don't care who does it first - I'll back 'em. 

 

Do you think it would be possible for the Dems to regain control of the house and Senate and be able to push through a progressive -ish agenda without running roughshod over the current crop of GOP leaders? I don't see any degree of bipartisanship developing anytime soon, nor a sudden interest in serving the needs of the common man. I see, instead, the desire to play gotcha in the headlines, the talk shows and in the Congress. 

Unless...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Do you think it would be possible for the Dems to regain control of the house and Senate and be able to push through a progressive -ish agenda without running roughshod over the current crop of GOP leaders? I don't see any degree of bipartisanship developing anytime soon, nor a sudden interest in serving the needs of the common man. I see, instead, the desire to play gotcha in the headlines, the talk shows and in the Congress. 

Unless...

I believe the Dems, if they win in Nov, will try to play smart and let Trump do their dirty work for them.


Of course, there is no Dem leader, so there will be stupidity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Raz'r said:

I believe the Dems, if they win in Nov, will try to play smart and let Trump do their dirty work for them.


Of course, there is no Dem leader, so there will be stupidity.

That's kind of the Democratic shtick... not an organized political party, but they all want to "do good". Obama put a kind, educated face on leadership, but the Clintons had a different take on what passed for responsible. I'm sure they both set it up with the fundamental decision: who do I want around me? 

Obama set up a squeaky clean administration by insisting on strict vetting and a moral standard from the outset. Ok, they ended up brainy and not as effective as Slick Willy, but as a consequence, no major personnel scandals.

Trump, on the other hand, has set himself up for misery by the choices made very early in his campaign & his presidency. His financing, his personnel and his goals have led him (and us) to this stage. 

There are a new crop of ex-military Dems to keep an eye on. No seniority, yet, but give them time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think an example of Dems playing to get along is Pompeo. He will get Dem support and be confirmed.

 

Another example is Ronnie. What you say? He's gone!  Yes, but was moving along until Rs on the committee started getting cold feet. Once that happened, the Ds happily brought out the knives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"That's kind of the Democratic shtick... not an organized political party, but they all want to "do good"."

Since Van Buren, the Democrats have been a party of coalitions with the Republicans being more ideologically cohesive (excepting the Progressive movement). Reagan marked the banishment of Roosevelt (and Taft) and Eisenhower Republicans along with the recruitment of the Dixiecrats.  The modern Republican party is an amalgamation of the Dixiecrats and the Tea Party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this