chuckd Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 (edited) Well, then, let's be certain that Hillary gets elected. SHE NEVER LIES. There are different degrees of lying. A person can lie about eating the last cookie or can lie about killing the neighbors dog with a claw hammer. They may both be untrue, but one is more grave (pun intended) than the other. Republican Attack Machine is excellent at character assassination. When it found out about Bill Clinton's sex-in-the-closet episode it exploded in glee. In reality, what Republican adult really gives a rat's ass what Bill did for a few minutes in a dark closet. Of if they did really care (in a TV preacher sort of way), why do they not go ballistic when a Republican congressman is caught soliciting gay sex in an airport bathroom, or when another Rep congressman solicits sex from boy pages? Some of Trump's lies have bigger ramifications than a clandestine blow-job in a closet. Trump has love-hate relations with everyone important. If he's president, he will have his finger on the trigger of the most powerful weapons systems the world has ever known. I don't want a hot-head 'love you one moment, hate you the next moment' with that much power, do you? In contrast, Hillary is cool-headed, seeks the advice of top aides, is more knowledgeable about world affairs, knows many world leaders personally. One example: Trump says he has met Putin, but that's yet another of his lies. He has never met Putin in person. Hillary is also well-liked and respected by many world leaders. Not so with Trump, ....not by a long shot. They see him as the pompous hot-headed braggart he is. It is certainly nice to know you are taking the liberal approach about lying. It seems to be OK as long as the dog isn't harmed by the hammer. To many people, a lie is a lie whether it be about the last cookie or the neighbor's dog. I come down on a "lie is a lie" side. Nice attempt at transferring the lies of Hillary to the lies of Bill. That's not what I posted nor was Bill a part of the ongoing side debate. It never upset me that Bill got a little on the side over the many years he has been unfaithful. If I had been married to Hillary I would have been looking for somebody compassionate as well. What got me about Bill was when he looked directly at the camera and said..."I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky". What got him impeached was when he made the same lie under oath. Now, back to Hillary. You have given me a target rich environment that is seldom provided. I am honestly confused where to go with Hilary's life of lies. Do I go back to her being fired by the Watergate Committee for her lies and unethical behavior, her time as the first lady of Arkansas and lost billing records, Whitewater, travelgate or take a more modern approach and only discuss her federal career? Her federal career, to name only a few, would include cattle futures, dead broke when leaving the White House, arriving under sniper fire, grandparents were immigrants, named after Sir Edmund Hillary, trying to enlist in the US Marines and the more egregious ones about her email account as Secretary of State and the many lies about Benghazi, to both the American people and the families of the dead Americans. The last one is thought to have influenced the reelection of Obama in 2012. It relegates your theoretical hammered dog lie into insignificance. Rather than detail any more of her lies, let me suggest that anybody that believes she is trustworthy and doesn't lie actually perform a quick Google search of "Hillary Clinton lies". There are literally hours of reading there. Has Trump lied? Sure he has, but how many were intentional? Have his lies been bigger than those made by Bill under oath or Hillary's hundreds of proven lies that have impacted world affairs? Not even close. Edited March 2, 2016 by chuckd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 There are different degrees of lying. A person can lie about eating the last cookie or can lie about killing the neighbors dog with a claw hammer. They may both be untrue, but one is more grave (pun intended) than the other. Republican Attack Machine is excellent at character assassination. When it found out about Bill Clinton's sex-in-the-closet episode it exploded in glee. In reality, what Republican adult really gives a rat's ass what Bill did for a few minutes in a dark closet. Of if they did really care (in a TV preacher sort of way), why do they not go ballistic when a Republican congressman is caught soliciting gay sex in an airport bathroom, or when another Rep congressman solicits sex from boy pages? Some of Trump's lies have bigger ramifications than a clandestine blow-job in a closet. Trump has love-hate relations with everyone important. If he's president, he will have his finger on the trigger of the most powerful weapons systems the world has ever known. I don't want a hot-head 'love you one moment, hate you the next moment' with that much power, do you? In contrast, Hillary is cool-headed, seeks the advice of top aides, is more knowledgeable about world affairs, knows many world leaders personally. One example: Trump says he has met Putin, but that's yet another of his lies. He has never met Putin in person. Hillary is also well-liked and respected by many world leaders. Not so with Trump, ....not by a long shot. They see him as the pompous hot-headed braggart he is. Perhaps. But you idolize Hillary too much. She's a career politician damn it so she's answerable to her donor masters and they've got you duped. You really think she's going to be working for you and your best interests or for Goldman Sachs and her own? Do continue to the below plse..... More of the same self-righteous and overbearing intrusions. Self-serving besides. Oh dear. Opinions that don't align with your own are self righteous and self serving "INTRUSIONS"? This is a forum ! Somehow that does not sound very democratic for a Democrat ....very good thx..... You are not simply posting an observation you may have. You are demanding this poster and others suddenly and because of you change that which we each believe is good, right, desirable, needed, necessary. Who are you? You blatantly presume to tell this poster what is good for him. You insist this poster revisit his entire world view of a lifetime to accept that you are in fact right, that this poster is wrong --for virtually all of my adult lifetime. In 1964 I supported Barry Goldwater for Potus, same separately as HRC did --she wuz a Goldwater Girl in her hometown Chicago y'know. By 1968 however I voted for Hubert Humphrey and I've been off to the races since. I am not evangelical about my world view. I respect you have your world view. I disagree with it and I let you know. I do not demand you accept my world view because that would be overbearing, intrusive, intolerant --entirely unrealistic and foolish. You'd need to know I post to the visiting reader of posts, not to the poster himself. I let the reader who I never meet decide for himself whether he is closer to my view or yours --the visiting reader especially and in particular. Realistically, all classic liberalism aside, writing to you to change your views is absolutely a complete waste of time and effort. Especially here where so many are extremely extreme and hard core harsh about it. I write instead off the common run of the mill hard core rightwhinge point of view. I write for others who read this kind of stuff to consider. I write to the reader, the visiting reader especially, the one who never or rarely posts. This is due to the fact no one posting from the moon and its dark side has ever said he's landed on planet earth because he'd been reading my posts. This post is in reply to your post, however, it is not written to change you. It is written to the visiting reader who may be undecided or leaning in his own world view. If however you cease being intrusive, overbearing and demanding, that would be a plus to everyone. Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWMcMurray Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Well, then, let's be certain that Hillary gets elected. SHE NEVER LIES. There are different degrees of lying. A person can lie about eating the last cookie or can lie about killing the neighbors dog with a claw hammer. They may both be untrue, but one is more grave (pun intended) than the other. Republican Attack Machine is excellent at character assassination. When it found out about Bill Clinton's sex-in-the-closet episode it exploded in glee. In reality, what Republican adult really gives a rat's ass what Bill did for a few minutes in a dark closet. Of if they did really care (in a TV preacher sort of way), why do they not go ballistic when a Republican congressman is caught soliciting gay sex in an airport bathroom, or when another Rep congressman solicits sex from boy pages? Some of Trump's lies have bigger ramifications than a clandestine blow-job in a closet. Trump has love-hate relations with everyone important. If he's president, he will have his finger on the trigger of the most powerful weapons systems the world has ever known. I don't want a hot-head 'love you one moment, hate you the next moment' with that much power, do you? In contrast, Hillary is cool-headed, seeks the advice of top aides, is more knowledgeable about world affairs, knows many world leaders personally. One example: Trump says he has met Putin, but that's yet another of his lies. He has never met Putin in person. Hillary is also well-liked and respected by many world leaders. Not so with Trump, ....not by a long shot. They see him as the pompous hot-headed braggart he is. It is certainly nice to know you are taking the liberal approach about lying. It seems to be OK as long as the dog isn't harmed by the hammer. To many people, a lie is a lie whether it be about the last cookie or the neighbor's dog. I come down on a "lie is a lie" side. Nice attempt at transferring the lies of Hillary to the lies of Bill. That's not what I posted nor was Bill a part of the ongoing side debate. It never upset me that Bill got a little on the side over the many years he has been unfaithful. If I had been married to Hillary I would have been looking for somebody compassionate as well. What got me about Bill was when he looked directly at the camera and said..."I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky". What got him impeached was when he made the same lie under oath. Now, back to Hillary. You have given me a target rich environment that is seldom provided. I am honestly confused where to go with Hilary's life of lies. Do I go back to her being fired by the Watergate Committee for her lies and unethical behavior, her time as the first lady of Arkansas and lost billing records, Whitewater, travelgate or take a more modern approach and only discuss her federal career? Her federal career, to name only a few, would include cattle futures, dead broke when leaving the White House, arriving under sniper fire, grandparents were immigrants, named after Sir Edmund Hillary, trying to enlist in the US Marines and the more egregious ones about her email account as Secretary of State and the many lies about Benghazi, to both the American people and the families of the dead Americans. The last one is thought to have influenced the reelection of Obama in 2012. It relegates your theoretical hammered dog lie into insignificance. Rather than detail any more of her lies, let me suggest that anybody that believes she is trustworthy and doesn't lie actually perform a quick Google search of "Hillary Clinton lies". There are literally hours of reading there. Has Trump lied? Sure he has, but how many were intentional? Have his lies been bigger than those made by Bill under oath or Hillary's hundreds of proven lies that have impacted world affairs? Not even close. There is something you are missing and may not understand... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace of Pop Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Perhaps another notorious Trump tell it like it is moment eh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWMcMurray Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 ID say he may be right... His numbers are looking pretty good so far.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linzz Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Do continue to the below plse..... More of the same self-righteous and overbearing intrusions. Self-serving besides. Oh dear. Opinions that don't align with your own are self righteous and self serving "INTRUSIONS"? This is a forum ! Somehow that does not sound very democratic for a Democrat ....very good thx..... You are not simply posting an observation you may have. You are demanding this poster and others suddenly and because of you change that which we each believe is good, right, desirable, needed, necessary. Who are you? You blatantly presume to tell this poster what is good for him. You insist this poster revisit his entire world view of a lifetime to accept that you are in fact right, that this poster is wrong --for virtually all of my adult lifetime. In 1964 I supported Barry Goldwater for Potus, same separately as HRC did --she wuz a Goldwater Girl in her hometown Chicago y'know. By 1968 however I voted for Hubert Humphrey and I've been off to the races since. I am not evangelical about my world view. I respect you have your world view. I disagree with it and I let you know. I do not demand you accept my world view because that would be overbearing, intrusive, intolerant --entirely unrealistic and foolish. You'd need to know I post to the visiting reader of posts, not to the poster himself. I let the reader who I never meet decide for himself whether he is closer to my view or yours --the visiting reader especially and in particular. Realistically, all classic liberalism aside, writing to you to change your views is absolutely a complete waste of time and effort. Especially here where so many are extremely extreme and hard core harsh about it. I write instead off the common run of the mill hard core rightwhinge point of view. I write for others who read this kind of stuff to consider. I write to the reader, the visiting reader especially, the one who never or rarely posts. This is due to the fact no one posting from the moon and its dark side has ever said he's landed on planet earth because he'd been reading my posts. This post is in reply to your post, however, it is not written to change you. It is written to the visiting reader who may be undecided or leaning in his own world view. If however you cease being intrusive, overbearing and demanding, that would be a plus to everyone. Carry on. Oh dear pot kettle springs to mind. Your postings are a condescending sneer, generalized or not, at anyone who doesn't agree with your world view Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linzz Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Perhaps another notorious Trump tell it like it is moment eh. Not so stupid after all then as the Left have been telling us for so long Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 (edited) Dissatisfied Americans find some solace in the Potus candidacy of Donald Trump. However, the extreme ideological rightwhingers are wildly enthusiastic about it. The extreme right are fierce and firm in their advocacy and defense of Donald Trump for the Republican party nomination for Potus. Reality is that whatever develops or occurrs in America, it is the uniquely American thing that presents itself. Which is why, as long as Americans have the vote, the far extreme fringe right can't ever rule or govern the nation. Here is one analysis of Trump and his most feverent advocates by Richard Steigmann-Gall who's an associate professor of history at Kent State University in Ohio and author of The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity... Fascism insists that the existing political authority is “illegitimate” and offers itself as a parallel authority, complete with paramilitary violence, which will restore the “true” nation against impostors. By articulating the Birtherism found in the Tea Party and Oath Keeper movements, Trump exploits and expands distrust of legitimate electoral politics among disaffected, downwardly-mobile white Americans. Trump doesn’t require uniformed followers in Congress when ideological allies in the Tea Party are doing all they can to render the legislative branch inoperable. When we apply “fascism” as a descriptive category, as most commentators are doing, we risk using external criteria like matching shirts or armbands to form a sterile check-list. But when we apply “fascism” as an analytical category, we understand its past social messages and following, and recognize the danger it poses today. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/12/donald-trump-fascism-islamophobia-nativism/ The link provides a rational discussion pro or con of the question: Is Donald Trump A Fascist? If Trump might be a uniquely American fascist, he certainly would not be a fascist of the European or East Asian mode as in the past. Nor would Trump match anything even remotely near the CCP Fascist Dictators in Beijing. This is instead the present, it is the USA and it is a limited minority of Americans who are being repudiated by the majority of the Republican party itself, former Gov. Mitt Romney most recently. Edited March 3, 2016 by Publicus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Perhaps another notorious Trump tell it like it is moment eh. Not so stupid after all then as the Left have been telling us for so long Trump's tell it like it is quote referenced in the post is like the monkey at a keyboard...sooner or later it will produce a word. Trump is actually and in fact a boastful swaggering braggart fraud of a conman and as will all criminals, he wants to let the authorities and the public know he gets away with it. Hubris helps to explain it as well. Carry on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lannarebirth Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Perhaps another notorious Trump tell it like it is moment eh. Not so stupid after all then as the Left have been telling us for so long Trump's tell it like it is quote referenced in the post is like the monkey at a keyboard...sooner or later it will produce a word. Trump is actually and in fact a boastful swaggering braggart fraud of a conman and as will all criminals, he wants to let the authorities and the public know he gets away with it. Hubris helps to explain it as well. Carry on... What you're describing sounds like the deliverer of every State of the Union address I've ever heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Perhaps another notorious Trump tell it like it is moment eh. Not so stupid after all then as the Left have been telling us for so long Trump's tell it like it is quote referenced in the post is like the monkey at a keyboard...sooner or later it will produce a word. Trump is actually and in fact a boastful swaggering braggart fraud of a conman and as will all criminals, he wants to let the authorities and the public know he gets away with it. Hubris helps to explain it as well. Carry on... What you're describing sounds like the deliverer of every State of the Union address I've ever heard. Some attitudes are healthy while others are unhealthy..... nihilism a viewpoint that traditional values and beliefs are unfounded and that existence is senseless and useless a doctrine or belief that conditions in the social organization are so bad as to make destruction desirable for its own sake independent of any constructive program or possibility http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nihilism cynical distrusting or disparaging the motives of others; like or characteristic of a cynic. bitterly or sneeringly distrustful, contemptuous, or pessimistic. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cynical Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lannarebirth Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I'm anything but a nihilist. I'm an optimist who doesn't see the sinking of America as inevitable. I'll let you and others fight over the lifeboats. I'll keep an eye out for the iceberg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linzz Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Some attitudes are healthy while others are unhealthy..... nihilism a viewpoint that traditional values and beliefs are unfounded and that existence is senseless and useless a doctrine or belief that conditions in the social organization are so bad as to make destruction desirable for its own sake independent of any constructive program or possibility http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nihilism cynical distrusting or disparaging the motives of others; like or characteristic of a cynic. bitterly or sneeringly distrustful, contemptuous, or pessimistic. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cynical Carry on. We have been given permission to carry on. Lectures delivered from imaginary academic lecterns giving definitions of words is off topic. Everyone has access to Merriam - Webster dictionary. It's interesting that some opinions on TV wish to sound "intellectual" but really are only visceral and dressed up as some kind of authority to qualify as profound rationality. In reality there is no more value or virtue in that than outright personal criticism of someone's looks and morality which is also indulged in with wanton delight. Funnily enough baseness is just what Trump is accused of. Everyone seems to be totally obsessed with irrelevancies. The focus is wrong. People should be trying to understand WHY Trump has shown up and what has caused the phenomenon of his popularity, not what the definition of nihilism or fascism is etc etc.etc. Could it be that the last 8 years of Democratic government has created the very situation so many seem to loath? But many will still remain loyal with so much whitewash of government and pour so much vitriol on the Trump situation they have helped to create.. In my view cynicism is alive and well when you have the situation with Republicans trying to ban Trump. Politicians don't want anything to change, and Trump is an outsider. He just might upset their apple cart. They would rather hand victory to Hillary than have Trump, and their moral outrage such as Mit Romney exemplified is pure BS cover for it. Career politicians have no intention of reforming Washington from either side of the political divide because they are far too comfortable. They assume they can just raise taxes when the deficit explodes next year (by their own estimation) but they are too busy looking after their own self interests than of that of the people. The Republicans could split and self destruct. Then what will happen to the economy when there is a collapse in confidence in government? And some think Trump will be a one-off? This could be the makings of a third party if the Republican establishment succeed in ousting Trump. Look out for a multitude of Trumps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 For anyone interested in American politics, here's a documentary which should be watched: Koch Brothers Exposed It shows many behind-the-scene things, not least: how billions of dollars spent on right-wing candidates, can effect legislation to favor the very rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 The Republicans could split and self destruct. Then what will happen to the economy when there is a collapse in confidence in government? And some think Trump will be a one-off? This could be the makings of a third party if the Republican establishment succeed in ousting Trump. Look out for a multitude of Trumps Republicans split and self destruct? Yikes, perish the thought! Maybe that would bring about one or two political parties which would be inclusive and fair-minded. A self-destructing Republican party doesn't necessarily mean the resultant reconfigurations would be even more mean-spirited and coddling-the-rich, would it? Maybe so if, as you suggest, there could be 'a multiple of Trumps.' Double yikes! Maybe some of those multiples could out-Trump Trump: like banishing all immigrants who came to the USA in the past 20 years. Or re-investigating Green-Card-applications for everyone who applied for and rec'd Green Cards in the past 10 years, and banishing anyone who told a lie on their application. A giant wall along the US/Mexican border not good enough for American right-wingers? How about a giant Trump-sized wall along Mexico's border with Belize and Guatemala - to keep other Latinos from migrating north. Q: Is Trump's wall going to go the entire length of the Rio Grande? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 This week (early March 2016), a group of more than 60 conservative foreign policy experts wrote an open letter denouncing Trump's statements, concluding that Trump is "fundamentally dishonest" and would "use the authority of his office to act in ways that make America less safe, and which would diminish our standing in the world." source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 The Republicans could split and self destruct. Then what will happen to the economy when there is a collapse in confidence in government? And some think Trump will be a one-off? This could be the makings of a third party if the Republican establishment succeed in ousting Trump. Look out for a multitude of Trumps Republicans split and self destruct? Yikes, perish the thought! Maybe that would bring about one or two political parties which would be inclusive and fair-minded. A self-destructing Republican party doesn't necessarily mean the resultant reconfigurations would be even more mean-spirited and coddling-the-rich, would it? Maybe so if, as you suggest, there could be 'a multiple of Trumps.' Double yikes! Maybe some of those multiples could out-Trump Trump: like banishing all immigrants who came to the USA in the past 20 years. Or re-investigating Green-Card-applications for everyone who applied for and rec'd Green Cards in the past 10 years, and banishing anyone who told a lie on their application. A giant wall along the US/Mexican border not good enough for American right-wingers? How about a giant Trump-sized wall along Mexico's border with Belize and Guatemala - to keep other Latinos from migrating north. Q: Is Trump's wall going to go the entire length of the Rio Grande? Indeed. One of my questions about the wall is whether the right prefers AC or DC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 The Republicans could split and self destruct. Then what will happen to the economy when there is a collapse in confidence in government? And some think Trump will be a one-off? This could be the makings of a third party if the Republican establishment succeed in ousting Trump. Look out for a multitude of Trumps Republicans split and self destruct? Yikes, perish the thought! Maybe that would bring about one or two political parties which would be inclusive and fair-minded. A self-destructing Republican party doesn't necessarily mean the resultant reconfigurations would be even more mean-spirited and coddling-the-rich, would it? Maybe so if, as you suggest, there could be 'a multiple of Trumps.' Double yikes! Maybe some of those multiples could out-Trump Trump: like banishing all immigrants who came to the USA in the past 20 years. Or re-investigating Green-Card-applications for everyone who applied for and rec'd Green Cards in the past 10 years, and banishing anyone who told a lie on their application. A giant wall along the US/Mexican border not good enough for American right-wingers? How about a giant Trump-sized wall along Mexico's border with Belize and Guatemala - to keep other Latinos from migrating north. Q: Is Trump's wall going to go the entire length of the Rio Grande? Indeed. One of my questions about the wall is whether the right prefers AC or DC. For a few entrepreneurs residing in AZ, NM or TX, now might be a good time to start a business selling razor wire. Coffin makers might also make a killing (pun intended). Just think of all the men women and children who will get fried or sliced while trying to climb over Trump's Wall. The world has the Great Wall of China, Hadrian's Wall, The Berlin wall, .....soon we'll have Trump's Wall. Will it be plated in brass with giant T-R-U-M-P signs overhead, like all his buildings? Some candidates want to put walls up (physical and psychic) to separate people, other candidates open their arms to embrace those who are different than themselves. In the late-1970's I drove up and down the US's west coast. I remember two conversations distinctly. Both were in roadside food stops, and both were with old men who corralled me and told how great things used to be in 'the old days.' One was outside of L.A., the other was in Oregon. Both old guys were angrily lamenting the days before there were so many Mexicans flooding the SW and western states. I just listened and nodded along, since they were twice my age, and I learned early on to "respect elders." They both had points, but the fact remains that things change. Most of the former Mexicans who came to the States were willing to do jobs which Americans didn't want to do. The Mexicans worked hard, and most wound up becoming Americans and raising American families. Some of them and their descendants have been in the U.S. for several generations. They pay taxes and, with few exceptions, are decent members of the community. I met a Latino in Las Vegas, 2 yrs ago, who was hired to put up stages for conventions. As a manager, he told me he liked to look for poor Latino men who had just got out of prison - to hire for his 9 man crew. All of whom got paid well. I thought that was an honorable thing to do: to give the most disadvantaged in society a chance to improve their lot in life. Note: if history had been a slight bit different (For example, if Pancho Villa had been content to just conquer the Alamo, and didn't stray further north to get smashed by Sam Houston), much of AZ, TX, NM and southern CA would possibly be part of Mexico. As it stands now, half of the people in those regions speak Spanish. Trumps Wall might have to be built 150 miles further north, if Mexico's army was better coordinated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lannarebirth Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 (edited) The Republicans could split and self destruct. Then what will happen to the economy when there is a collapse in confidence in government? And some think Trump will be a one-off? This could be the makings of a third party if the Republican establishment succeed in ousting Trump. Look out for a multitude of Trumps Republicans split and self destruct? Yikes, perish the thought! Maybe that would bring about one or two political parties which would be inclusive and fair-minded. A self-destructing Republican party doesn't necessarily mean the resultant reconfigurations would be even more mean-spirited and coddling-the-rich, would it? Maybe so if, as you suggest, there could be 'a multiple of Trumps.' Double yikes! Maybe some of those multiples could out-Trump Trump: like banishing all immigrants who came to the USA in the past 20 years. Or re-investigating Green-Card-applications for everyone who applied for and rec'd Green Cards in the past 10 years, and banishing anyone who told a lie on their application. A giant wall along the US/Mexican border not good enough for American right-wingers? How about a giant Trump-sized wall along Mexico's border with Belize and Guatemala - to keep other Latinos from migrating north. Q: Is Trump's wall going to go the entire length of the Rio Grande? Indeed. One of my questions about the wall is whether the right prefers AC or DC. For a few entrepreneurs residing in AZ, NM or TX, now might be a good time to start a business selling razor wire. Coffin makers might also make a killing (pun intended). Just think of all the men women and children who will get fried or sliced while trying to climb over Trump's Wall. The world has the Great Wall of China, Hadrian's Wall, The Berlin wall, .....soon we'll have Trump's Wall. Will it be plated in brass with giant T-R-U-M-P signs overhead, like all his buildings? Some candidates want to put walls up (physical and psychic) to separate people, other candidates open their arms to embrace those who are different than themselves. In the late-1970's I drove up and down the US's west coast. I remember two conversations distinctly. Both were in roadside food stops, and both were with old men who corralled me and told how great things used to be in 'the old days.' One was outside of L.A., the other was in Oregon. Both old guys were angrily lamenting the days before there were so many Mexicans flooding the SW and western states. I just listened and nodded along, since they were twice my age, and I learned early on to "respect elders." They both had points, but the fact remains that things change. Most of the former Mexicans who came to the States were willing to do jobs which Americans didn't want to do. The Mexicans worked hard, and most wound up becoming Americans and raising American families. Some of them and their descendants have been in the U.S. for several generations. They pay taxes and, with few exceptions, are decent members of the community. I met a Latino in Las Vegas, 2 yrs ago, who was hired to put up stages for conventions. As a manager, he told me he liked to look for poor Latino men who had just got out of prison - to hire for his 9 man crew. All of whom got paid well. I thought that was an honorable thing to do: to give the most disadvantaged in society a chance to improve their lot in life. Note: if history had been a slight bit different (For example, if Pancho Villa had been content to just conquer the Alamo, and didn't stray further north to get smashed by Sam Houston), much of AZ, TX, NM and southern CA would possibly be part of Mexico. As it stands now, half of the people in those regions speak Spanish. Trumps Wall might have to be built 150 miles further north, if Mexico's army was better coordinated. I once had a lovely visit with Pancho Villa's widow at her home in Ciudad Juarez. To my knowledge he never fought at the Alamo and Sam Houston was dead before Pancho Villa was even born. Perhaps you're thinking of General Santa Anna. Edited March 4, 2016 by lannarebirth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 (edited) Republicans split and self destruct? Yikes, perish the thought! Maybe that would bring about one or two political parties which would be inclusive and fair-minded. A self-destructing Republican party doesn't necessarily mean the resultant reconfigurations would be even more mean-spirited and coddling-the-rich, would it? Maybe so if, as you suggest, there could be 'a multiple of Trumps.' Double yikes! Maybe some of those multiples could out-Trump Trump: like banishing all immigrants who came to the USA in the past 20 years. Or re-investigating Green-Card-applications for everyone who applied for and rec'd Green Cards in the past 10 years, and banishing anyone who told a lie on their application. A giant wall along the US/Mexican border not good enough for American right-wingers? How about a giant Trump-sized wall along Mexico's border with Belize and Guatemala - to keep other Latinos from migrating north. Q: Is Trump's wall going to go the entire length of the Rio Grande? Indeed. One of my questions about the wall is whether the right prefers AC or DC. For a few entrepreneurs residing in AZ, NM or TX, now might be a good time to start a business selling razor wire. Coffin makers might also make a killing (pun intended). Just think of all the men women and children who will get fried or sliced while trying to climb over Trump's Wall. The world has the Great Wall of China, Hadrian's Wall, The Berlin wall, .....soon we'll have Trump's Wall. Will it be plated in brass with giant T-R-U-M-P signs overhead, like all his buildings? Some candidates want to put walls up (physical and psychic) to separate people, other candidates open their arms to embrace those who are different than themselves. In the late-1970's I drove up and down the US's west coast. I remember two conversations distinctly. Both were in roadside food stops, and both were with old men who corralled me and told how great things used to be in 'the old days.' One was outside of L.A., the other was in Oregon. Both old guys were angrily lamenting the days before there were so many Mexicans flooding the SW and western states. I just listened and nodded along, since they were twice my age, and I learned early on to "respect elders." They both had points, but the fact remains that things change. Most of the former Mexicans who came to the States were willing to do jobs which Americans didn't want to do. The Mexicans worked hard, and most wound up becoming Americans and raising American families. Some of them and their descendants have been in the U.S. for several generations. They pay taxes and, with few exceptions, are decent members of the community. I met a Latino in Las Vegas, 2 yrs ago, who was hired to put up stages for conventions. As a manager, he told me he liked to look for poor Latino men who had just got out of prison - to hire for his 9 man crew. All of whom got paid well. I thought that was an honorable thing to do: to give the most disadvantaged in society a chance to improve their lot in life. Note: if history had been a slight bit different (For example, if Pancho Villa had been content to just conquer the Alamo, and didn't stray further north to get smashed by Sam Houston), much of AZ, TX, NM and southern CA would possibly be part of Mexico. As it stands now, half of the people in those regions speak Spanish. Trumps Wall might have to be built 150 miles further north, if Mexico's army was better coordinated. I once had a lovely visit with Pancho Villa's widow at her home in Ciudad Juarez. To my knowledge he never fought at the Alamo and Sam Houston was dead before Pancho Villa was even born. Perhaps you're thinking of General Santa Anna. Just read 'Santa Anna' in stead of 'Pancho Villa'. The message remains the same. Ah, just notice you edited and reached the same conclusion. Edited March 4, 2016 by stevenl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 snip> Note: if history had been a slight bit different (For example, if Pancho Villa had been content to just conquer the Alamo, and didn't stray further north to get smashed by Sam Houston), much of AZ, TX, NM and southern CA would possibly be part of Mexico. As it stands now, half of the people in those regions speak Spanish. Trumps Wall might have to be built 150 miles further north, if Mexico's army was better coordinated. The rest of your post was simply more liberal hate speech so I snipped it. This quoted part was great. "Note: if history had been a slight bit different (For example, if Pancho Villa had been content to just conquer the Alamo, and didn't stray further north to get smashed by Sam Houston)" I don't know which history books you have read recently, if at all, but Pancho Villa could have easily conquered the Alamo had he tried to take it in 1916 when he invaded the US. By then it was a deserted mission in San Antonio. Sadly, General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna dispatched the Alamo in battle some 80 years earlier. The Battle of the Alamo occurred in 1836. Pancho Villa was born in 1878. Google is your friend and it is best to use your friend BEFORE you make such posts. After the fact merely causes you more embarrassment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 Ok, thanks guys, it's Santa Anna, not P.V. I'll do 30 push ups for punishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now