BoltProspects Community Forums  

Go Back   BoltProspects Community Forums > Miscellaneous > The Room

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #18241  
Old 06-11-2019, 09:49 PM
pete's Avatar
pete pete is offline
BP Staff
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,256
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LightningTdi View Post
Did you happen to catch the new information on the Obama/Biden administration's State Department? Gonna be interesting to watch!

You just know late night at Cheateau Tdi involves turning the lights down low, lighting some candles, turning on Hannity, and decimating a full jar of Vaseline.
__________________
S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-Stammermeter 2019-2020: 13

Last edited by pete; 06-11-2019 at 09:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18242  
Old 06-11-2019, 09:56 PM
dannybolt's Avatar
dannybolt dannybolt is offline
Bingo Bob's Intermission Contest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Pete
Posts: 1,768
Default

Sorry for the delay GP. Work has been busy.
Everyone else, sorry for the length.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
Racism
QUOTE “Giving comfort to the American Nazi Party, Alt-right dickheads and KKK assholes.” END QUOTE
I have zero support for any of those organizations and their members.
This is a worldwide issue which involves people that live throughout the UK, Europe and other countries who struggle daily because of their presence and influence today.
The point is that the standard bearer and man who sets the priorities for the Republican Party has opened the tent to include them, both directly and indirectly. As to your comment about it being a worldwide issue, I don’t disagree. My question would be, if you consider yourself a Republican, does this affect one iota your thoughts about voting for him? It isn’t like this was new information, although the scope is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
Trump is a piece of work. No doubt this makes many Americans including myself and a fair amount of those in leadership positions around the world a bit uneasy.
We can only rely on the people who serve in positions of authority to be responsible and act in accordance with their good judgement and the laws of our country.
No excusing it, but racism and bad temperament are not new issues to the presidency as I have read that LBJ, Nixon, Reagan, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Jackson, Johnson and Jefferson, to name a few had problems with handling those issues.
None of the guys you mention were President in the last 100 years though, except 2 Republicans (unless you meant LBJ, not Andrew Johnson and Teddy Roosevelt vs FDR). I assume you mean Teddy Roosevelt, a President who I have studied and I think was less racist than anybody you listed, save Reagan (not clear on his policies, but the war on drugs did African Americans no favors). I don’t put a lot of stock in looking backwards and recasting people as racists using current societal mores, however. I think those people should be looked at in the context of the times they lived in. Roosevelt comes out looking a lot better. Jefferson’s problems with race are well documented, as are Nixon’s, Jackson’s (trail of tears) and Johnson’s (civil war). Trump is old man racist. He makes comments about “the Blacks” liking him, and I don’t think he thinks that is racist. Most of current society thinks that language is problematic AT BEST, and the farther left you sit on the spectrum, the more of a racist you think he is. In 2019, racism of any stripe should be a disqualifying personal trait, IMO. You are not fit to govern a multiracial country if you think some races or religions are lesser than others. Because all men are created equal. Not just Christian white guys.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
Drain the swamp and replace with his own brand.
Appointing his daughter and son in law to major diplomatic position is unsettling for many, myself included. Trump must be extremely difficult to work for and with.
A quick search showed that other presidents have appointed family members to positions including Adams, Wilson and Eisenhower.
So did JFK. The difference I think is that those previously appointed family members were actually qualified for their jobs (RFK and Adams were anyways, not sure on Wilson/Ike). Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner are decidedly not. This goes back to the whole claim that he would surround himself with the best people. That was given as justification for voting for someone who has no governing experience. He has not surrounded himself with the best people. As has been shown. Repeatedly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
Continuing on you said QUOTE This is also evident in the competency levels of his cabinet. END QUOTE
I believe he recently said he has had some “clinkers” in his administration, pretty much acknowledging your concerns.
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-admits-...090000216.html
I’d be more impressed if he had any sort of track record from learning his mistakes. He doesn’t. I expect this to continue. Trump isn’t a guy who has shown any capacity for learning and improvement. It’s worth noting that in this article he says working in the White House is difficult. While I think that is true, he has an unprecedented level of turnover in his administration. That points to him being a shitty boss, not just working in the white house. You’ll also note, he accepts no responsibility for those decisions. He plays it off like it happens to everyone, or that people just can’t handle it. This is a fundamental flaw that people who tout his leadership skills miss. Effective leaders hoard blame and give away credit. Trump does the opposite. He is, demonstrably and evidentially, a terrible leader. This is also not new information, and this was evident prior to his election.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
Not divesting of his personal companies.
Tough one. There literally is no precedent that I can see. We have had other US presidents that were business owners but I don’t believe any of them were owners while in office.
I think Trump tried to pass on his interests to family members but there is no telling really how involved he is now while in office or how effective that was. Time will tell.
This particular issue should be addressed by Congress/Senate at some point.
As Pete mentioned, the litigation over the emoluments clause will shake this out. As for precedent, we have not historically had Presidents who had personal businesses that they could enrich through the office. It’s not like Jimmy Carter could have directly enriched himself by selling peanuts to Saudi Arabia for their help in freeing the Iran hostages. That was precisely why he needed to divest his interests. Pete mentions a few instances, but they are far from the only ones. This is all speculation at the moment, and I think Democrats are quick to get out over their skis on Trump, but as I noted in my previous post, a responsible executive would eliminate conflicts of interest, whether they are benign or not. One should not assume that his kids are running his businesses in a black box, because there is no evidence pointing towards that, and Trump has not done anything that should give him the benefit of the doubt. I gave you the China example with Jared and Ivanka. Do you think the patriarch isn’t aware or isn’t sanctioning the behavior? If not, what is your reasoning? I’ve not seen anything from Trump that would tell me otherwise.

As for Congress/Senate addressing it; the Republican Senate flat out refuses to check Trump on pretty much anything because of his popularity within the party. Further, this is one place where it isn’t Congress’ job. It’s the judiciary, which is where it is being litigated.
__________________
Ondrej Palat fan club member

Last edited by dannybolt; 06-11-2019 at 10:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18243  
Old 06-11-2019, 10:05 PM
dannybolt's Avatar
dannybolt dannybolt is offline
Bingo Bob's Intermission Contest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Pete
Posts: 1,768
Default

Yeah, there's more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
Tariffs and trade war.
Like many Americans, especially with a growing world market, this is disturbing to me and likely will simply end up costing us all more money. I hope their issues will be resolved diplomatically in a timely manner with a win-win solution otherwise we will end up paying more for that widget gidget.
A look back at the list of tariffs showed they go back starting to 1789 and there have been many.
Tariffs are lose-lose. They always have been. Time was that was one point where Republicans and Centralist Democrats were correct. Free Trade and Free Markets increase the standard of living when countries concentrate on their competitive advantages and trade accordingly. Republicans have retreated into a protectionist trade position, which, ironically, has more in common with labor union protectionism than it does their former orthodoxy. While yes, tariffs have been a thing since 1789, they were initially put in place as a way to finance the federal government as there was no income tax at the time. The last time we put tariffs in place at the size that Trump has done, it was the Smoot-Hawley act, which was disastrous, and is almost universally acknowledged as making the great depression far worse than it already was. It took 80 years for that wisdom to fade from the public view, so, in opposition of even his economic advisors, he has pushed ahead with them. And now we have to give a 12B bailout to farmers because of the retaliation that has always followed an initial tariff, just as night follows day.

You might wonder why you haven’t read any articles from economists or business journals touting the benefits of tariffs, and how they are helping the economy. This would be because they don’t. Sidebar: If Trump is the business genius he purports himself to be, is he that much smarter than every other businessman or economist, or is he the only man on the planet who understands global economics and trade? I have my opinion, see below.

Instead, you see a steady stream of articles in The Economist, The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg Businessweek, ad nauseum, all saying that the tariffs are hurting the US economy. More recently they’ve now been saying that leading indicators are that they are pushing the economy towards recession.

You’ll note, these tariffs have not been pitched as a way to shore up the federal deficit which has ballooned under the new tax cut. They have been pitched as a way to combat trade deficits, which they don’t do effectively. This is because IMO, Trump does not have the cognitive capacity to understand a globalized economy, the ways tariffs operate in a macro sense, or in a micro sense. This is not new information, and was evident prior to the election.

I should note here that I don’t completely disagree with Trump on the effects of free trade in the United States, and I don’t disagree with the idea that NATO should fund more of their own defense. That said, he goes about solving those problems in the exact wrong way, because when you are as dumb as a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Where Obama was too forgiving to the NATO countries, Trump has come in like a buzzsaw. Yes, Trump got those countries to increase their defense spending, but that came at the weakening of our relations with Europe. This is a national security concern, because it contributes to the destabilization of the western order put in place at the end of WWII. You have former staunch allies openly questioning US leadership globally, whether or not we can be relied on as a military ally, much less a reliable trading partner. Republicans claimed Obama made the US weaker with his open arms policy. I argue that Trump makes us much weaker than Obama ever did because he is alienating our historical and natural allies while cozying up to one of the three axis of evil countries (remember that Republican nomenclature? I sure as shit do), and Russia, who 4 years ago were considered Americas most dangerous enemy by the man running for President on the Republican ticket. How times have changed. Now you have dimwits saying they would rather be Russian than Democrat. They should read some Alexander Solzhenitsyn and get back to me on that one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
Cut Taxes
There are real benefits to our economy if people are spending money on goods and services they can afford.
Which is why the tax cut should have been higher for the middle/lower classes, or been a payroll tax cut and upper band increase to cover the corporate rate cut, instead of what has effectively been only an upper class tax cut. Upper class people don’t go buy a new TV because they got more money in their check. They already have disposable income. One thing I didn’t note in my previous post is that the tariffs are effectively a tax on consumers, so that tax cut has been further mitigated in the increase in cost of consumer goods.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
Health care as you say is a real issue. I think government and private industry need to work closely together to ensure we are as efficient as possible.
A few other presidents have cut taxes were Harding, Coolidge, Kennedy and Reagan.
Harding and Coolidge are not company a President should want to keep. I’d argue Trump may supplant Harding as the worst and most corrupt President in our history, although the jury is still out on that. He’s certainly doing his best to catch him as the most corrupt President in history (my speculation, to be determined).

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
I prefer a flat tax, a hybrid form of a tiered tax, and eliminating 99% of the deductions. Should take about 10 -20 minutes to review your personal income tax and send it in. Corporate / business taxes I defer to the experts.
Oh boy. I’m not going to rehash my opinions on flat taxes and simplified personal income taxes (my posts are long enough) except to tell you that both are a) politically impossible b) punish the poor c) naÔve to think most personal income tax returns are created equal.

On the personal income tax thing. I do mine in turbo tax. Takes about an hour. I know people who have tax returns that rival those of multinationals in their complexity. Just because your taxes are simple doesn’t mean everyone else’s are. The global economy for individuals and businesses small or large is infinitely complex. To think you can capture economic income on a postcard, even for individuals, beggars rational belief.

For more information, read my post in response to TDI’s question about a “fair tax” from a year or two ago.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
Wildly irresponsible fiscally.
I think any person who is responsible for handling taxpayer money (including creation of laws / programs which are not funded) and mishandles it to be a burden on the taxpayer should be held accountable for their actions.
Pretty good article here on presidents spending.
https://www.peoplespunditdaily.com/p...ern-president/
That’s a very interesting article, which points to Obama as one of the most fiscally responsible president of recent times. I can’t disagree. If only Republicans would be as concerned with their own spending under Trump as they were with Obama’s Administration. Their fighting for revenue neutrality may have made the recovery take longer, but it was more fiscally responsible. Unfortunately, all that good work is being undone by the Trump Administration’s poor choices. If you are a fiscal conservative, you have no business voting Republican right now. Republicans are the party of make your grandkids pay for it, because we don’t want to. Sidebar: It’s fitting that a boomer is doing this (cue Donnie D cursing me for taking another shot at the boomers. Sorry, not sorry.).

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
Paris Accord/Climate change
Bad idea to leave the accord. I feel negotiations should have occurred to revise the deal if he did not like it.
Concerning climate change, it would seem like moving forward on a more modern public transportation system, such as high speed trains would be high on the list of priorities in DC. An industry like that one would bring in a host of good jobs and other supporting infrastructure such as local transportation and lodging once you arrive at your destination.
Power. If you are into writing regulation, I always thought that building codes/laws in Florida and sunbelt states should consider mandating solar power on the roof (or on the property) of every new home built. Clean energy.
Vote Democrat. Republicans want none of the above (or do, but just put it behind any other priority they can think of).
__________________
Ondrej Palat fan club member

Last edited by dannybolt; 06-12-2019 at 04:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18244  
Old 06-11-2019, 10:27 PM
dannybolt's Avatar
dannybolt dannybolt is offline
Bingo Bob's Intermission Contest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Pete
Posts: 1,768
Default

Still more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
The Wall
You state QUOTE “Trump includes an absurd, and without serious data backed position, that illegal immigration/asylum seeking/migrant workers are the great scourge facing our country (build that wall!) Those are demonstrable racist policies and positions. END QUOTE

I grew up in a border state. I support border security. I crossed into Canada many times. Not once did I simply drive/walk through but was questioned by Canadian border officers, and American border officers on the return. No one should enter our country without our knowledge and permission.
It’s a problem. It’s a big money industry now because DC is paralyzed and cannot bring themselves to write common sense immigration laws.
I absolutely welcome legal entering tax paying non criminal immigrants who are not a burden to our country but are instead loyal, law abiding, hard working contributing potential/future US citizens.
I do not understand the resistance to increasing our border security.
Trump isn’t worried about the Canadian border, which is less secure than the Mexican border. Why do you think that is? I have some suspicions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
Congressman Phil Roe who represents the First Congressional District of Tennessee and a resident of Johnson City who is serving his sixth term in Congress has this to say in part.
QUOTE Illegal immigration is a serious threat to our national security, one that is very expensive and a burden to hardworking taxpayers. Furthermore, there is a national debate over what to do with the 12 million illegal immigrants in the country. Something needs to be done to solve this problem. The federal government needs a comprehensive solution to the problem of illegal immigration that starts with securing our borders. END QUOTE
Sounds substantiated to me.
Ironically, I’m from Johnson City, Tennessee. Got out of there though, thankfully. A statement from a Congressman is in fact not substantiation, unless there is peer-reviewed data and/or study to back it up. This is as much substantiation as if I told you I just polled 100% of the people sitting at my desk and that 100% of respondents found it to be bullroar.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
Separation of children from immigrant mothers
Against it. Totally. Should never happen.
But….not new. Obama did it, likely Bush and Clinton did it as well. Again the polarization of the Trump administration to shed light on a subject (pick any subject for that matter) we rarely if ever heard about before.
False. Snopes is your friend. That is spin from Trump and his supporters in order to muddy the waters and excuse an indefensible and monstrous policy.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ob...paration-meme/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/wa...s-passed-1997/

Further, if the argument is that I can do it because the guy before me did it is the argument, you are using the an argument that rises to the intellectual level of a six year old. Bad decisions by previous administrations do not excuse the bad decisions of the current administration. This is not a partisan issue, and pointing fingers at other administrations is an exceedingly weak argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
Health care costs
You said it was unfortunate my health care costs “went up” by $700.
No, let me clarify.
I got FINED by the IRS $700 when I filed my tax return. I had NO health care for several months when I was between full time jobs after moving to Maine and they fined me, and I am sure many others as well.
And no it didn't "break the bank" but tell me what did that really accomplish?
Well, the ACA added the requirement that you have to have health insurance or pay a fine in order to keep the ACA solvent. This was a Republican idea by the way, that as soon as it became adopted by Democrats its inclusion in the law became a threat to the Republic, if you listen to some of my relatives talk about it. The whole point of the requirement was to force younger, healthier people into the insurance pool, in order to subsidize older people; thereby driving down costs for everyone, the insurers needed it in order to keep costs down (their paraphrased words, not mine).

This requirement was widely reported, so upon switching jobs, it was incumbent on you to obtain your own health insurance or pay the fine if you didn’t have insurance at the end of the year. My understanding is that the government had resources available to help people without insurance find it, and there were health care exchanges set up for individuals to find insurance on the open market. Unfortunately, the IRS has never accepted ignorance as an excuse for not following rules, whether they are newly enacted or otherwise.

I think it is actually unconstitutional to force people to carry health insurance, since unlike owning a home or car, being alive is not a lifestyle choice (I guess if you want to pick nits, we have the capability to clock out if we want, but with our biological imperative to stay alive, lets just say it's a given, not a choice). I'm totally sympathetic to that argument. That said, I also think the government should offer the equivalent of citizens home owners insurance, basically a nuclear option for people who can’t afford basic coverage, or people like yourself who lose it temporarily. Republicans spiked that idea though. Democrats aren't blameless either though, they look out for health care providers over the citizenry.

Thanks for responding by the way. I know my writing style likely comes across like I think I know everything. I don't. I didn't see rural America improving under Trump, but everything I've seen and what I've heard talking to my relatives tells me it has. That's a good thing. And Trump should get credit for the lowered US corporate tax rate. It actually de-incentivizes moving money off-shore, because the benefits for shifting profits are not as beneficial. Is it going to completely stop it? Of course not, but it is much better than having the rate where it was. Some of the things in the tax code changes that were passed have incentivized moving business back to the US. That's also a good thing.
__________________
Ondrej Palat fan club member

Last edited by dannybolt; 06-11-2019 at 10:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18245  
Old 06-11-2019, 11:07 PM
the_narrow_way's Avatar
the_narrow_way the_narrow_way is online now
Cooper's Law
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 4,940
Default

Great posts dannybolt.
Reply With Quote
  #18246  
Old 06-12-2019, 12:33 AM
Puckhead's Avatar
Puckhead Puckhead is offline
Guy Boucher's One-Three-One
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 2,307
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dannybolt View Post
Still more.


Trump isnít worried about the Canadian border, which is less secure than the Mexican border. Why do you think that is? I have some suspicions.


Ironically, Iím from Johnson City, Tennessee. Got out of there though, thankfully. A statement from a Congressman is in fact not substantiation, unless there is peer-reviewed data and/or study to back it up. This is as much substantiation as if I told you I just polled 100% of the people sitting at my desk and that 100% of respondents found it to be bullroar.


False. Snopes is your friend. That is spin from Trump and his supporters in order to muddy the waters and excuse an indefensible and monstrous policy.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ob...paration-meme/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/wa...s-passed-1997/

Further, if the argument is that I can do it because the guy before me did it is the argument, you are using the an argument that rises to the intellectual level of a six year old. Bad decisions by previous administrations do not excuse the bad decisions of the current administration. This is not a partisan issue, and pointing fingers at other administrations is an exceedingly weak argument.


Well, the ACA added the requirement that you have to have health insurance or pay a fine in order to keep the ACA solvent. This was a Republican idea by the way, that as soon as it became adopted by Democrats its inclusion in the law became a threat to the Republic, if you listen to some of my relatives talk about it. The whole point of the requirement was to force younger, healthier people into the insurance pool, in order to subsidize older people; thereby driving down costs for everyone, the insurers needed it in order to keep costs down (their paraphrased words, not mine).

This requirement was widely reported, so upon switching jobs, it was incumbent on you to obtain your own health insurance or pay the fine if you didnít have insurance at the end of the year. My understanding is that the government had resources available to help people without insurance find it, and there were health care exchanges set up for individuals to find insurance on the open market. Unfortunately, the IRS has never accepted ignorance as an excuse for not following rules, whether they are newly enacted or otherwise.

I think it is actually unconstitutional to force people to carry health insurance, since unlike owning a home or car, being alive is not a lifestyle choice (I guess if you want to pick nits, we have the capability to clock out if we want, but with our biological imperative to stay alive, lets just say it's a given, not a choice). I'm totally sympathetic to that argument. That said, I also think the government should offer the equivalent of citizens home owners insurance, basically a nuclear option for people who canít afford basic coverage, or people like yourself who lose it temporarily. Republicans spiked that idea though. Democrats aren't blameless either though, they look out for health care providers over the citizenry.

Thanks for responding by the way. I know my writing style likely comes across like I think I know everything. I don't. I didn't see rural America improving under Trump, but everything I've seen and what I've heard talking to my relatives tells me it has. That's a good thing. And Trump should get credit for the lowered US corporate tax rate. It actually de-incentivizes moving money off-shore, because the benefits for shifting profits are not as beneficial. Is it going to completely stop it? Of course not, but it is much better than having the rate where it was. Some of the things in the tax code changes that were passed have incentivized moving business back to the US. That's also a good thing.
hmmm someone who has the rectitude to analyze rationally, think for himself based on his experience and eduction, give some credit where due, and speak at length to what seems to me to be the finest ideals and traditions of this great country...Damn, we've got some fine people on this frickin "hockey" board.
Reply With Quote
  #18247  
Old 06-12-2019, 03:37 PM
Sotnos's Avatar
Sotnos Sotnos is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: New Port Richey, FL
Posts: 13,603
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckhead View Post
hmmm someone who has the rectitude to analyze rationally, think for himself based on his experience and eduction, give some credit where due, and speak at length to what seems to me to be the finest ideals and traditions of this great country...Damn, we've got some fine people on this frickin "hockey" board.
Right? I love us. So many smart people
Reply With Quote
  #18248  
Old 06-12-2019, 06:04 PM
pete's Avatar
pete pete is offline
BP Staff
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,256
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sotnos View Post
Right? I love us. So many smart people
And Tdi, too!
__________________
S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-Stammermeter 2019-2020: 13
Reply With Quote
  #18249  
Old 06-12-2019, 06:24 PM
pete's Avatar
pete pete is offline
BP Staff
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,256
Default

Donald Trump with another, "Russia if you're listening..." moment.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/id-e...ry?id=63669304

Can you smell the desperation on this man? He knows he's going to lose re-election and shortly thereafter be indicted unless one of his scumbag pals from Russia, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, etc. swoop in to save him.
__________________
S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-Stammermeter 2019-2020: 13
Reply With Quote
  #18250  
Old 06-12-2019, 06:41 PM
pete's Avatar
pete pete is offline
BP Staff
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,256
Default

The opinion of a Republican consultant about Trump admitting on camera he sees nothing wrong with accepting dirt from a foreign government...

Quote:
1/ You know, I try to keep my anger over this shitbird lowlife peckerwood cocknozzle currently soiling the Oval Office under control. I really do. I know what and who he is. I understand it more than most. This is a whole new level of fuckery. And no one will do shit.

2/ Wray won't quit. He should. Coats won't quit. He should. Haspel won't quit. She should. They'll argue their replacement will be worse. This is a pleasant lie they tell themselves. They are powerless and enabling the destruction of our nation at his hands.

3/ They have become honorless, fearful men defending an honorless man. The "conservative" Trump commentariat will defend it with their usual pathetic moral and mental gymnastics, bleating about "but Obummer and Killary." A hard editorial "no" is the only response. None will.

4/ The "Justice" Department is utterly corrupted by Barr, and will do fuck-all nothing. No one in the GOP Senate will say shit. They should. In the House, the GOP Clown Caucus will run around with their dicks hard, roaring approval for pwning da libs with foreign intel.

5/ The President of the United States today invited an attack on this nation. He welcomed it. He begged for it, like a cur begging for treats. If we survive this, he'll be remembered first with derision, then with disgust, then with horror.

6/ He's asking for our politics to be truly unbounded and for all sides to go weapons-free. He's an agent of chaos and lawlessness. This will not end well. /fin
https://twitter.com/TheRickWilson/st...44536422563841
__________________
S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-Stammermeter 2019-2020: 13
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2005-2008, BoltProspects.com. All Rights Reserved.