Law When Trump, Schumer, and Pelosi Meet...

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

Here’s Mikes orgasm face

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

what about not prosecuting drugs?

It’s more than that. Is this dingbat idea of free markets everywhere and corporations self regulating and all this other nonsense that has never existed in America and will never exist.

 

[Prutfis]

 

[Rational Poster]

I'll pay it for you if you agree to post the results. For 15 bucks, this is good entertainment either way lol

How about you spend that $15 on some clippers, get rid of the pedo stache, and make everyone happy that way?

 

[Greoric]

Make no mistake...this is what the argument is all about and what the Trump maga crowd is all about...ethno nationalism. The false assertion that America is a white country or for "white " looking people. The assertions that America is a post racial society is false and has been proven false these past few years.

Native Americans (Hispanics) need to take notice.

Why is that a false assertion again?

 

[Ripskater]

I would be especially interested in how to answer the 2nd question - how might we establish, or reestablish differences of opinion and reason in the fractured state of internal "tribal" discussions and divisions.

Real critical thinking and theory to those who do not want to listen, without reflexively thinking pro-Trump, anti-Trump, or anything about Trump, -- no Trump involved - but rather, "I want to convince the intellectuals, leaders, silent majorities of voters, and the open minded to influence, or push the partisans, and activists." How would you build that backbone? How would you instill that maturity? How would you have the order of political reason be restored over the wishes of the political ego? Please give any thoughts you have.

I think logic and reason is hard to come by today. Many issues are not driven by evidence and truth, they are driven by emotion. That is our society today. With calling names like "bigot, intolerant, racist etc."

Take the issue of promoting transgender behavior by Obama and the dems. We had Obama telling us how good, brave an courageous being a transgender was. You've now got states like California where it's illegal to counsel kids away from transgenderism. California now states that they will take your kid away from you and give them hormones for a sex change out there. Not due to biological facts, but due to "tolerance and social justice". The reasonable thin would be to counsel the kid on his mental, emotional and spiritual problems for why he is trying to dress and act like a girl.

There are many issues where the left will not discuss the evidence. They ride on emotion for social justice instead of looking at what is truth and what is right.

I can't align myself with a democrat party that promotes abortions and even brags and cheers people for killing unborn babies.
I can't align myself with the promotion of LGBTQ and the sexual deviancy that democrats have been promoting heavily since Obama. Because of the Obama and democrat worldview, we have trannies being promoted to little kids by trannies reading books and having story time in the libraries across the country.

And if I were to argue these issues today, I will instantly be accused of being a bigot. It's all driven by emotion.

My worldview is in direct opposition to the Leftist Democrat worldview.

 

[Rod1]

And you think that will be cheaper than 5 billion on "border security"? To charge/fine citizens who are looking for a cheap part-time and in my case once a year labor project? Sounds almost as promising as the war on drugs. Why stop or legalize drugs coming in, when you can scare the population with stiff fines and jail time. It's working out like you wouldn't believe.

I hope you see where the problem with that would be.

It wouldnt be cheaper but it would actually work.

 

[Rod1]

Nothing about ethno-nationalism requires isolation. Do you consider Japan to be isolationist? South Korea?

Japan and South Korea are hardly what i would call libertarian societies.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

I think logic and reason is hard to come by today. Many issues are not driven by evidence and truth, they are driven by emotion. That is our society today. With calling names like "bigot, intolerant, racist etc."

Take the issue of promoting transgender behavior by Obama and the dems. We had Obama telling us how good, brave an courageous being a transgender was. You've now got states like California where it's illegal to counsel kids away from transgenderism. California now states that they will take your kid away from you and give them hormones for a sex change out there. Not due to biological facts, but due to "tolerance and social justice". The reasonable thin would be to counsel the kid on his mental, emotional and spiritual problems for why he is trying to dress and act like a girl.

There are many issues where the left will not discuss the evidence. They ride on emotion for social justice instead of looking at what is truth and what is right.

I can't align myself with a democrat party that promotes abortions and even brags and cheers people for killing unborn babies.
I can't align myself with the promotion of LGBTQ and the sexual deviancy that democrats have been promoting heavily since Obama. Because of the Obama and democrat worldview, we have trannies being promoted to little kids by trannies reading books and having story time in the libraries across the country.

And if I were to argue these issues today, I will instantly be accused of being a bigot. It's all driven by emotion.

My worldview is in direct opposition to the Leftist Democrat worldview.

I don't think you're qualified to determine the cause of homosexuality and what type of treatment people should recieve. Your views are based on your own religious beliefs, which you're free to practice, but not compel others to follow.

 

[bobgeese]

I welcome a shutdown.


Force the political left to choose illegals over citizens.


And right before they need to garner support for a presidential nominee...

 

[LangfordBarrow]

I welcome a shutdown.


Force the political left to choose illegals over citizens.


And right before they need to garner support for a presidential nominee...

Another ahutdown would just be more proof that Trump isn't a great dealmaker.

 

[Ripskater]

I don't think you're qualified to determine the cause of homosexuality and what type of treatment people should recieve. Your views are based on your own religious beliefs, which you're free to practice, but not compel others to follow.

People can decide what treatement they want or if they want no treatment at all. But it should not be made illegal by democrats and leftists to counsel a kid out of his trans issues. Nor his gay issues if the parents and the kid want true mental health and true help.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

People can decide what treatement they want or if they want no treatment at all. But it should not be made illegal by democrats and leftists to counsel a kid out of his trans issues. Nor his gay issues if the parents and the kid want true mental health and true help.

You believe it's a mental health disorder but can't discount physiological causes like hormones or brain morphology. If someone is born as a hermaphrodite who gets to decide what gender they should be? Should physical characteristics take precedence over the feeling of the actual human being? I'm not familiar with the law you're referring to but why should school counselors be allowed to subject students to their own religious beliefs?

 

[kpt018]

So you say. I disagree with your self-assessment.



At this stage of the game, when you're clearly laying a trap (Pelosi within seconds of speaking about the wall, "the Trump Shut-down" almost under her breath) and up until now not showing any inkling of conversing "in good faith," then you'll see how this was a sham political stunt by Nancy and Chuck. Again, I went over this already. I'll link you back to the post I know you already read,
, but a direct quote from my third paragraph: "Finally, Pelosi, like any Democrat establishment member, demonstrates her bigotry of low expectations for the common person when she wishes to hide their discussion behind closed doors. Yup, the "everyone is a snowflake" movement, the "common person needs safe-spaces" came from Democrats make no mistake."

I think you're misunderstanding the facts. Trump is clearly the one who wants to initiate a shutdown if he does not get his wall. The "trap" was set to show the public that it is entirely on him. It's important because everyone knows that Trump would shut down the government and blame it on Democrats.

It is a good faith disagreement and Pelosi/Shumer just wanted to ensure the public knows who is shutting down the government, if that happens.

That wouldn't be good, hence the effort he is making to fulfill his promise. And, unlike his political opponents who wish he and his family harm for leaving a business career to enter into their sacred cash cow of politics that they run, he is actually doing what he is doing for the good of the people.

Obviously there is disagreement about whether a wall would be effective (I believe it would be a waste of resources). But Trump has gotten much richer as president and so has his family, so the idea he is only doing for the good of the country is just happy touchy feelings on your part.

And further to this, open-minded people aren't blind to him putting himself out there on this issue, so come on now - let's truly be nonpartisan here. He can rightly say he was opposed tooth-and-nail just like everything else he does and that will only get worse come January. And most everyone knows this.

Opposed to what?

Your pushing your own (or CNN's) interpretation of what political damage looks like.

It's my own but it's quite obvious. What do you think an alternative outcome is?

What the left doesn't seem to understand, is that yes, you've all finally wakened the right! This is why someone like Trump got voted in! Good job! And yet you are clueless, it seems, when it comes to your involvement lol. But I digress.

Meh, I'll pass on the emotional crap. Fact stands that Democrats had a huge win in the House in response to Trump.

Shutting down government shows courage and strength - if indeed it comes to that.

No, it shows stupidity and a dysfunctional White House. He is using funding to take Democrats hostage to get his wall. It's a bully tactic that backfired.

And again, as per my previous post somewhere in this thread, it was the transparent political aim to portray Trump as the unhinged tyrant - a CNN trope millions see through now with ease.

It was an attempt to show Trump as he is. It's pretty weird to see posts like this. Are you admitting that Trump is not intelligent or can't control himself? Or he's easily fooled? He's the fucking president!

It sounds like what I already posted, that it's hard for Dems to back down on the fascist Nazi they created for political purposes without care for the country, the POTUS' family and the POTUS himself.

What the hell are you talking about?

The war wasn't created by Republicans, it was created by a corrupt Democrat establishment funded and driven by deep state. That's the reality of the situation we're in.

We're now on to CT stuff?

So you didn't address my post here, just one part of it. Do you see any other outcomes as a result of yesterday's meeting? And why do you think those are plausible outcomes? Or do you think Democrats will just cave in? Try addressing the post next time and avoid partisan, crazy rants.

 

[bobgeese]

Another ahutdown would just be more proof that Trump isn't a great dealmaker.

It will be the consequence of democrats putting illegals before citizens.


Let’s see how America feels about Dems supporting illegal immigration.

 

[kpt018]

Interesting way to be a neverTrumper by voting for Trump.

I have no idea who he voted for but was going by his comments about Trump. I guess if he voted for Trump he's not a NeverTrumper.

@panamaican did you vote for Trump? Did your views change after the election?

 

[glenwo2]

The fact that he doesn't have the votes.

Oh I see.

You're referring to the Obstructionist Democrats.

Not the American People who actually WANT the Wall.

Got it.

 

[kpt018]

Oh I see.

You're referring to the Obstructionist Democrats.

Not the American People who actually WANT the Wall.

Got it.

You guys throw the word obstructionist around too freely.

When you fight against things you used to support for political gain, that is obstruction. Republicans refusing to approve of stimulus during a recession is a good example. Another would be refusing to do any infrastructure bill.

No one expects members of either party to agree with things they've fought against their whole careers. So when they vote accordingly that does not make them obstructionists, it makes them consistent and representing the views of their voters.

If DT wants to do a policy Democrats support and they refuse then you can call them obstructionists.

 

[Greoric]

Japan and South Korea are hardly what i would call libertarian societies.

Right. That's very much a caucasian oriented philosophy. Your charge was that ethnostates need be isolated. They verifiably are not.

 

[panamaican]

I have no idea who he voted for but was going by his comments about Trump. I guess if he voted for Trump he's not a NeverTrumper.

@panamaican did you vote for Trump? Did your views change after the election?

Yes. I did. I did with reservation. I'll explain as I always have. I'm a firm believer that you need a President with professional experience above and beyond being a politician. So, to be true to my own ethos, I voted for the business President. My hope, and I said this back before the election, is that someone can learn to apply private sector judgment to the public sector. And that the checks and balances of our system give the President time to grow into the job.

My initial concerns re:the election centered around what I considered foreign government intervention in our elections and what I thought was a cavalier response from people who claim to support our government and our independence. At the time, I didn't think the Trump administration was directly engaged in soliciting that outside intervention and my scorn was directed at those who didn't care that it was happening because it benefited them. It was benefitting me but that doesn't mean I should/could support it. Turning a blind eye to bad things for personal benefit means you lack character, in my opinion.

Trump was a Democrat for years, I partially assumed that most of his campaign performance was exactly that, a performance. Designed to maximize his electability. I even wrote multiple posts about how Trump was effectively speaking to the disenfranchised portion of the country and that was why the rest of the GOP field was floundering against him. I assumed that post election, he'd end up somewhere close to the middle.

Post election, I start evaluating whether or not the individual is living up to the gravitas of the role. Bush Jr. might not have been the smartest President but he took the job seriously. He genuinely wanted to be good at it. It didn't take long before I had to accept that Trump has no interest in being good at President. So, I call out bad behavior when I see it.

We all make bad analysis at times, that doesn't mean you ignore bad things because of it. You own your mistakes and try to get better.

People on here are too partisan in their thinking. They want to you to stand by shitty decisions no matter what. The guy has an R, defend everything or attack everything. It's okay to step back and say "I was wrong when I thought this would work out. I made some assumptions, they were incorrect."

I voted for Romney too if anyone cares. Same basic reason - I believe in professional experience beyond politics. But if Romney made shit-tier decisions, I'd criticize them. I criticized the ACA until I had enough information to make me change my mind - so I changed it.

Principles over politics. My ego isn't tied to who I voted for, I can admit I voted for someone and still think they're shitty at their job. In business, you hire people and later find out that they're a bad fit. You don't keep promoting them just because you won't admit a bad hiring decision - you evaluate their performance and if they don't get better, you fire them.

Trump, imo, has only gotten worse.