4 minutes ago, heybruce said:

The "good old days" that many Trump supporters long for were a time of very high tax rates, money spent on education and infrastructure, and low deficits

You seem to think that money spent on education,infrastructure and keeping a low deficit was bad huh.  I think most people would like this but that is me.

 You appear to make a claim that these things you dislike in governance can only be done by high taxes . Do I have the right so far?

 Why do we not wait and see if Trump can offer education ,infrasturcture and low deficits in his approach to solving Ameriica's problems and making it great again. Or is that mature of a thing to ask?

  Or is the point to stop him before he does do it and shows every one he knew what was needed and stood up against the odds and did it.

5 minutes ago, lovelomsak said:

You seem to think that money spent on education,infrastructure and keeping a low deficit was bad huh.  I think most people would like this but that is me.

 You appear to make a claim that these things you dislike in governance can only be done by high taxes . Do I have the right so far?

 Why do we not wait and see if Trump can offer education ,infrasturcture and low deficits in his approach to solving Ameriica's problems and making it great again. Or is that mature of a thing to ask?

  Or is the point to stop him before he does do it and shows every one he knew what was needed and stood up against the odds and did it.

How much damage should we allow before we acknowledge the obvious?  Cutting taxes and increasing spending leads to higher budget deficits.    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-fiscal/u-s-budget-deficit-to-top-1-trillion-in-2019-budget-experts-idUSKBN1FI2P2

 

BTW, I think money spent on education and infrastructure, paid by taxes that keep deficits in line, is a good thing.  It's money spent maintaining our home without handing the bills to our children and grandchildren.

 

Money spent on walls that won't work and wars that can be avoided is a bad thing.  That should be a statement of the obvious, but apparently it isn't obvious to everyone.

17 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Money spent on walls that won't work and wars that can be avoided is a bad thing.  That should be a statement of the obvious, but apparently it isn't obvious to everyone.

I agree totally with you on this. I felt a wall was a symbolic gesture not an actual wall. Goes to show anyone can be mistaken.

  The war part the jury is still out on that one for me.

 The high budgets will be a real challenge but you have to take into account what was done previously by previous governments and what was waiting for him when he took office.

   You made very good valid points. No use going further Neither  one of us wish's to arque .

  We each got to state our opinion  I am happy with that. So lets sit back and see what the future holds. I am hoping for a turn around  for America and the people of America prosper. and get back to work.

On 3/23/2018 at 10:13 PM, lovelomsak said:

Only people who lived through the 50's even know how good America was and what it lost.

 

You cannot force the current generation to live through someone else’s fetishized approximation of “the good old days”. And that wish is standing in the way of constructing good new days that might turn into the young peoples’ good old days, one day. 

 

It’s worth asking, *who* were the “good old days” good for? Mostly straight white people, especially white men, and only if they didn’t care how the other half lived. As Tennessee Williams said, “the secret to happiness is: insensitivity.”

 

When you really come down to it, what’s *really* the difference between those fictitious good old days and today, is that the population today is less homogeneously white Christian, gays aren’t confined to the closet and women have a greater voice.

 

Self reflection is hard, but try it. If you lament the loss of the good old days, ask yourself: what am I truly lamenting?

Exactly. The "Again" in the fascistic phrase MAGA is a dog whistle to bigoted straight white Christian men who feel that their "God given" privilege has been eroded by advances in CIVIL RIGHTS for everyone else. As the "trump" says -- SAD. 

Edited March 24, 20188 yr by Jingthing

3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Exactly. The "Again" in the fascistic phrase MAGA is a dog whistle to bigoted straight white Christian men who feel that their "God given" privilege has been eroded by advances in CIVIL RIGHTS for everyone else. As the "trump" says -- SAD. 

Some people think civil rights is like cake—more for you means less for me.

1 minute ago, Thakkar said:

Some people think civil rights is like cake—more for you means less for me.

Some people would definitely include "trump." He's the poster baby man for zero sum games -- it's ONLY about winners and losers for his pea brained mentality. 

19 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Some people would definitely include "trump." He's the poster baby man for zero sum games -- it's ONLY about winners and losers for his pea brained mentality. 

You're now insulting all peas in the world. 

12 minutes ago, jenny2017 said:

You're now insulting all peas in the world. 

Aw shucks, let's not get all mushy about it.

On 3/24/2018 at 12:41 AM, heybruce said:

You are being too kind.  Trump was having sex with a porn star and a Playboy centerfold while his latest wife was recovering from childbirth and raising his newborn son.  Can any *sshole possibly be more on an *sshole than that?

Well, in Trump's defense, these women were really special.  Don't make something beautiful sound so sordid.

 

After they had sex, she alleged, he had offered her money. She said that hurt, and she told him: “I’m not that kind of girl.”

 

“Oh, you’re really special,” Trump replied.

It's sadly all a matter of strategic interests and sometimes dirty deals. Therefore, don't be surprised if a politician labelled as a hawk turns out to act mostly like a dove.

6 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Aw shucks, let's not get all mushy about it.

It took me a moment to get that processed.

On 3/23/2018 at 4:58 PM, Jingthing said:

It seems for the number of Fox "News" ("trump" regime propaganda network) "personalities" that "trump" has already poached (and no doubt more to come) that "trump" should be charged off fees!

When it comes to finding people to fill government posts, Fox News is Trump’s Tinder!

On 3/23/2018 at 5:31 PM, riclag said:

Bolton is a hero, a patriotic American who has served before and will use his experience of diplomacy with  help from others in the administration , in maintaining and sustaining  America and American values.

 

John Bolton was the UN Ambassador under Bush, so he has experience with incompetence.

~ Bill Maher

14 hours ago, heybruce said:

How much damage should we allow before we acknowledge the obvious?  Cutting taxes and increasing spending leads to higher budget deficits.    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-fiscal/u-s-budget-deficit-to-top-1-trillion-in-2019-budget-experts-idUSKBN1FI2P2

 

BTW, I think money spent on education and infrastructure, paid by taxes that keep deficits in line, is a good thing.  It's money spent maintaining our home without handing the bills to our children and grandchildren.

 

Money spent on walls that won't work and wars that can be avoided is a bad thing.  That should be a statement of the obvious, but apparently it isn't obvious to everyone.

This is not for an arquement ok just want your opinion because I get a sense you know what I refer to when I refer to 50's infrastructure education etc all tax based.

  I feel Trump is clearing the swamp so to speak. By getting rid of under the table illegal workers  and reversing the trade deficit so America exports more than it imports.More exports more jobs.

  But a big but. To attain this he must first stop illegals from entering there is a financial cost to this but one time cost. which can be recovered from taxes paid by the new employed.Thus given the time needed could have the cost of keeping illegals out paid back.by the Americans who would have their jobs back. Lowering the deficit.

  But all this can be for not when the lazy we can live for free no work Americans refuse to take the jobs and all is lost.

  Lower taxes could be given and maintained for American companies employing real Americans (I know I will attacked for that statement by others who have no other defence other than to attack). The tax would come from the employed who otherwise would be a tax burden as unemployed people. Because of a greater amount of employed each worker would pay less tax because the cost would be shared by many who are working.

  More people working less tax per individual, but total tax  collected is more.. Deficit bought down.. Exports up more work again..  infrastructure improves.

  America was great when the working class was working. So  I think Trump wants the working class back to work.

  Some times it is necessary to take debt to recover but once debt is paid off it is back to smooth sailing.

  The problem it seems to me is people now a days are fixated with get what they can right now and cannot fathom long term plans . 

  But then again perhaps the average American now is quite happy to lay around and do nothing but entertain them selves with  video games,computers and telephones.

 

 

  

Edited March 25, 20188 yr by lovelomsak

Please stay on topic.   This is about McMaster's appointment.  

 

This is getting even more scary. Bolton expected to clean the security council and replace it with his own people.

 

War eager person leading the change. Who are there to stop them starting the Big wars?

 

http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/23/bolton-expected-to-clean-house/

 

Quote

 

Incoming National Security Advisor John Bolton and people close to him are expected to launch a massive shake-up at the National Security Council, aiming to remove dozens of current White House officials, starting with holdovers from President Barack Obama’s administration, according to multiple sources.

 

Those targeted for removal include officials believed to have been disloyal to President Donald Trump, those who have leaked about the president to the media, his predecessor’s team, and those who came in under Obama.

 

 

17 hours ago, Thakkar said:

 

You cannot force the current generation to live through someone else’s fetishized approximation of “the good old days”. And that wish is standing in the way of constructing good new days that might turn into the young peoples’ good old days, one day. 

 

It’s worth asking, *who* were the “good old days” good for? Mostly straight white people, especially white men, and only if they didn’t care how the other half lived. As Tennessee Williams said, “the secret to happiness is: insensitivity.”

 

When you really come down to it, what’s *really* the difference between those fictitious good old days and today, is that the population today is less homogeneously white Christian, gays aren’t confined to the closet and women have a greater voice.

 

Self reflection is hard, but try it. If you lament the loss of the good old days, ask yourself: what am I truly lamenting?

AMEN.

14 minutes ago, oilinki said:

This is getting even more scary. Bolton expected to clean the security council and replace it with his own people.

 

War eager person leading the change. Who are there to stop them starting the Big wars?

 

http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/23/bolton-expected-to-clean-house/

 

 

In the days of Mao/Stalin/Hitler, this was called a purge.

On 3/23/2018 at 10:13 PM, lovelomsak said:

Then the 60's. Turn on , tune in , drop out. Drugs ,sex rock and roll. This decade could not deal with prosperity. They rebelled against the establishment.. They were privileged and felt very entitled but did not want responsibility.. thought  working at a factory was below them.But would not seek higher levels. All James Deans.

 

You are not the first old fogey to opine such. Socrates said the same of those snotty young whippersnappers of the Classical Greek era:

“The children now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority. They show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise.”

"Biden on Bolton: "It's a virtual disaster.""

 

 

John Bolton is a great addition to the White House: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/john-bolton-is-a-great-addition-to-the-white-house/2018/03/23/8bb5ffac-2ec2-11e8-b0b0-f706877db618_story.html?utm_term=.d1bb37a8f1af

 

"Critics charge that Bolton likes war — a ridiculous assertion. As he told me in one especially memorable two-hour interview back in 2007: “Nobody should want a war on the Korean Peninsula.” Chew on that, critics. What he is, however, is a Reagan realist. About Kim Jong Un’s father, Kim Jong Il, Bolton said that “He’s very good at negotiating about giving up his [nuclear] program. . . . He’s done it four or five times in the last 15 years.” That pointed to Bolton’s conclusion: “He’s not going to relinquish those nuclear weapons voluntary. No way.”"

 

"Over two decades, both talking with him on air and in private conversations, I am always impressed with his razor-sharp mind, vast knowledge and refusal to be shy about stating his positions. He’s usually been the smartest guy in the room when doing so. This of course triggers the standard Beltway reaction of jealousy followed by calumny. But Bolton’s Yale undergrad and law school education prepared him for boors and imbued in him a graciousness towards those less informed and definitely less polite."

 

Brilliant move by Trump.  Rumour has it that Bolton was overheard saying:  "anyone here during the Obama era should start packing their sh** now".  Smart money says he deliberately let himself be overheard - the easiest way to get rid of mice and cockroaches is to give them a reason to leave.

 

1 hour ago, ELVIS123456 said:

John Bolton is a great addition to the White House: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/john-bolton-is-a-great-addition-to-the-white-house/2018/03/23/8bb5ffac-2ec2-11e8-b0b0-f706877db618_story.html?utm_term=.d1bb37a8f1af

 

"Critics charge that Bolton likes war — a ridiculous assertion. As he told me in one especially memorable two-hour interview back in 2007: “Nobody should want a war on the Korean Peninsula.” Chew on that, critics. What he is, however, is a Reagan realist. About Kim Jong Un’s father, Kim Jong Il, Bolton said that “He’s very good at negotiating about giving up his [nuclear] program. . . . He’s done it four or five times in the last 15 years.” That pointed to Bolton’s conclusion: “He’s not going to relinquish those nuclear weapons voluntary. No way.”"

 

"Over two decades, both talking with him on air and in private conversations, I am always impressed with his razor-sharp mind, vast knowledge and refusal to be shy about stating his positions. He’s usually been the smartest guy in the room when doing so. This of course triggers the standard Beltway reaction of jealousy followed by calumny. But Bolton’s Yale undergrad and law school education prepared him for boors and imbued in him a graciousness towards those less informed and definitely less polite."

 

Brilliant move by Trump.  Rumour has it that Bolton was overheard saying:  "anyone here during the Obama era should start packing their sh** now".  Smart money says he deliberately let himself be overheard - the easiest way to get rid of mice and cockroaches is to give them a reason to leave.

 

That's one very conservative columnist's opinion. 

 

Funny that he didn't mention how the razor-sharp minded Bolton was a leading proponent of the Iraq War based on false intelligence. 

At least part of why McMaster just wasn’t working out for Trump:

“McMaster […] is an intensely focused intellectual whose detailed briefings, by all accounts, drove the president crazy. Trump took to mocking him openly in the Oval Office, asking other White House aides why McMaster was so serious.”

 

No doubt Bolton will do a far better job of amusing the toddler president. After all, he’s a Fox TV personality. He’ll simplify the president’s choices to:

1. Bomb 

2. Bomb harder, or,

3. just nuke ‘em

28 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

At least part of why McMaster just wasn’t working out for Trump:

“McMaster […] is an intensely focused intellectual whose detailed briefings, by all accounts, drove the president crazy. Trump took to mocking him openly in the Oval Office, asking other White House aides why McMaster was so serious.”

 

No doubt Bolton will do a far better job of amusing the toddler president. After all, he’s a Fox TV personality. He’ll simplify the president’s choices to:

1. Bomb 

2. Bomb harder, or,

3. just nuke ‘em

 

Ya never know. At this point in his first term Obama had been a Nobel Peace Prize recipient for 6 months already. He went on to command incursions that killed hundreds of thousands of people, many if not most, innocent civilians. Reagan was a big military talker, but not big on war as it turned out.

9 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Ya never know. At this point in his first term Obama had been a Nobel Peace Prize recipient for 6 months already. He went on to command incursions that killed hundreds of thousands of people, many if not most, innocent civilians. Reagan was a big military talker, but not big on war as it turned out.

"command incursions that killed hundreds of thousands of people"?  Could you be more specific?

18 minutes ago, heybruce said:

"command incursions that killed hundreds of thousands of people"?  Could you be more specific?

 

Sure,

https://www.cnn.com/2014/09/23/politics/countries-obama-bombed/index.html

 

48 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Sure,

https://www.cnn.com/2014/09/23/politics/countries-obama-bombed/index.html

 

Air strikes against terrorist targets in seven countries.  We know about that.  Where does your body count of hundreds of thousands come from?

7 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Air strikes against terrorist targets in seven countries.  We know about that.  Where does your body count of hundreds of thousands come from?

 

C'mon man. I didn't figure you for being disingenuous.

8 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

C'mon man. I didn't figure you for being disingenuous.

The only numbers in your source are "hundreds", not "hundreds of thousands".  I know of no credible source that accuses Obama of killing hundreds of thousands with his targeted bombings.