[TheRealThing]

I read it but I didn't see much news in the article. I follow the news very closely, TRT. I am aware that there are conservatives that elected not to vote for Trump in the election and that some of them very actively oppose parts of Trump's agenda, and a few seem bent on opposing everything that he tries to do. I don't find that surprising at all. Obama had opposition in his own party who didn't think that he was liberal enough. No president manages to win 100 percent support within his own party.

So, it is not a matter of me finally seeing the light. I was never a William Krystol fan before the 2016 campaign and I believe that he has acted in a very petty way since the election. The same goes for many of the other well known NeverTrumpers. But as a conservative American, I respect their right to support or oppose whomever they choose. What purpose does it serve to call them names and disparage them as if they have any real influence over the general electorate?

Donald Trump is a very polarizing figure, not because his agenda is extreme - in most cases I don't find him conservative enough - but because he and so many of his supporters go out of their way to offend people who agree with his agenda 80 percent or more of the time. I know that you and JP do not see Trump as a divider, but the fact that millions of Republicans do see him that way is a problem for him, and it is not a problem that NeverTrumpers, RINOs, the media, or Democrats created.

As the greatest Republican president in the modern era said, a person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally, not a 20 percent traitor.

Kind of seems like you're being a little petty yourself there Hoot. Instead you might try properly assessing the sloth and covetousness with which the traditionally convicted of this land are beset. Our national slide is being presided over by somebody, someplace, and it certainly isn't the President. Any remote possibility it could be the oppositionist political establishment? Instead of the honest governance of their charge for which they are being paid, the left and RINO's choose to spend all their time rather in pursuit of the resistance. They disguise their continual Trump attacks, as informed critiques of the one man in modern times with the courage to identify our ills and speak out irrespective of the fusillade of incoming he has been willing to endure. And he hasn't done this because of ego or any other selfish motivation. On the contrary, he has suffered the afore mentioned indignities on behalf of the millions being force fed the monkey puke now for decades. Dan Coats comes to mind. I thought he should have been fired for the comments he made following the Helsinki Summit. Last eve I heard several of the Congress say Coats should now be canned for the Intelligence Assessment he made to the Senate.

And for the record, I saw the unvarnished truth in that article.

From the bolded onward, I disagree with you completely. Liberals are the ones fomenting divide. They as you point out, have had the microphone now in this land for decades. Their base are those who like to lay in bed till noon, and lay the blame for their personal ills on others. And their leaders all like to lay the same sort of stuff usually associated with cattle. You already mentioned Huntley, Brinkley, Cronkite and all those coming after, of the media. They hated the mindset of the right, which I firmly believe emanated down through time directly from the founders themselves. Further, I believe the present state of rabidity characterized by the extreme left of state and federal government, was encouraged by the efforts of the media as their openly hostile opposition to our traditionally conservative origins have clearly and steadfastly demonstrated.

I don't know how conservative Trump really is, but any rational minded man knows for this land to thrive we must strike a reasonable balance with our opposites. The idea being, those from the left very often at some point choose of their own volition to come to the light. Unfortunately that choice has become far more problematic owing to the greatly exacerbated level of contempt. Said contempt is in vogue in every imaginable venue, from the indoctrination campaign being waged in our educational system, to many Churches, to the Academy Awards, to late night TV, to Union Halls, to stand up comedy. We are awash in it. Now, you can blame President Trump for all of this and you no doubt will, but it's just a shade larger an issue than the character and attitude of one man. However, if you want to hang blame on the one man to whom blame could reasonably be confirmed, you might try some remedial refresher therapy regarding the actions of one micro managing Barack Obama. Nonetheless, Kristol et-al were cooing contentedly in the Bush backwaters with they're delicate sensitivities untroubled for the 8 years of his moderacy. And frankly, I didn't say much and I don't remember you saying a lot either.

I like what Reagan said too, and agree with him completely. But your analysis that the particulars of the impasse we face, revolves around Trump as if he caused the impasse, doesn't hold water. It's because he's the one tasked by the people to take the fight to those who are causing the problem. It's called an election. It's no secret though that every cause needs a face, and the left's propaganda campaign as of Nov 8, 2016 has been to make that the face that of MR Trump. Logical. But if pressed to identify some of the players, I might start with the ones already mentioned here, along with the likes of George Soros. Not the only guy in modern times with the courage to even mention the root causes and name some of the actors in a public setting. In contrast for example, Obama foreign policy shot warnings out like unguided drones into the cybersphere without naming names. Not only did those to whom he invisibly referred completely ignore his warnings, they laughed him to scorn. And he totally deserved it BTW.

No, you go ahead and rationalize on, my Guile-O-Meter is pegged.

[TheRealThing]

[SIZE="1"]I read it but I didn't see much news in the article. I follow the news very closely, TRT. I am aware that there are conservatives that elected not to vote for Trump in the election and that some of them very actively oppose parts of Trump's agenda, and a few seem bent on opposing everything that he tries to do. I don't find that surprising at all. Obama had opposition in his own party who didn't think that he was liberal enough. No president manages to win 100 percent support within his own party.

So, it is not a matter of me finally seeing the light. I was never a William Krystol fan before the 2016 campaign and I believe that he has acted in a very petty way since the election. The same goes for many of the other well known NeverTrumpers. But as a conservative American, I respect their right to support or oppose whomever they choose. What purpose does it serve to call them names and disparage them as if they have any real influence over the general electorate?

Donald Trump is a very polarizing figure, not because his agenda is extreme - in most cases I don't find him conservative enough - but because he and so many of his supporters go out of their way to offend people who agree with his agenda 80 percent or more of the time. I know that you and JP do not see Trump as a divider, but the fact that millions of Republicans do see him that way is a problem for him, and it is not a problem that NeverTrumpers, RINOs, the media, or Democrats created.[/SIZE]

As the greatest Republican president in the modern era said, a person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally, not a 20 percent traitor.

I'm an 80/20 Trump guy myself Hoot. I believe what we have to do is bite our tongue on the 20% and not bash him. Doing so only helps the Dems. You never see Dems bashing elected Dems do you?

I have no control over what Democrats do. If I did, we would only have two types of politicians in this country, conservative Republicans and conservative Democrats. I am just not the type to bite my tongue when I see elected officials behaving stupidly, even if that is only 20 percent of the time.

So much for that Reagan quote. :biggrin:

[jetpilot]

Kind of seems like you're being a little petty yourself there Hoot. Instead you might try properly assessing the sloth and covetousness with which the traditionally convicted of this land are beset. Our national slide is being presided over by somebody, someplace, and it certainly isn't the President. Any remote possibility it could be the oppositionist political establishment? Instead of the honest governance of their charge for which they are being paid, the left and RINO's choose to spend all their time rather in pursuit of the resistance. They disguise their continual Trump attacks, as informed critiques of the one man in modern times with the courage to identify our ills and speak out irrespective of the fusillade of incoming he has been willing to endure. And he hasn't done this because of ego or any other selfish motivation. On the contrary, he has suffered the afore mentioned indignities on behalf of the millions being force fed the monkey puke now for decades. Dan Coats comes to mind. I thought he should have been fired for the comments he made following the Helsinki Summit. Last eve I heard several of the Congress say Coats should now be canned for the Intelligence Assessment he made to the Senate.

And for the record, I saw the unvarnished truth in that article.

From the bolded onward, I disagree with you completely. Liberals are the ones fomenting divide. They as you point out, have had the microphone now in this land for decades. Their base are those who like to lay in bed till noon, and lay the blame for their personal ills on others. And their leaders all like to lay the same sort of stuff usually associated with cattle. You already mentioned Huntley, Brinkley, Cronkite and all those coming after, of the media. They hated the mindset of the right, which I firmly believe emanated down through time directly from the founders themselves. Further, I believe the present state of rabidity characterized by the extreme left of state and federal government, was encouraged by the efforts of the media as their openly hostile opposition to our traditionally conservative origins have clearly and steadfastly demonstrated.

I don't know how conservative Trump really is, but any rational minded man knows for this land to thrive we must strike a reasonable balance with our opposites. The idea being, those from the left very often at some point choose of their own volition to come to the light. Unfortunately that choice has become far more problematic owing to the greatly exacerbated level of contempt. Said contempt is in vogue in every imaginable venue, from the indoctrination campaign being waged in our educational system, to many Churches, to the Academy Awards, to late night TV, to Union Halls, to stand up comedy. We are awash in it. Now, you can blame President Trump for all of this and you no doubt will, but it's just a shade larger an issue than the character and attitude of one man. However, if you want to hang blame on the one man to whom blame could reasonably be confirmed, you might try some remedial refresher therapy regarding the actions of one micro managing Barack Obama. Nonetheless, Kristol et-al were cooing contentedly in the Bush backwaters with they're delicate sensitivities untroubled for the 8 years of his moderacy. And frankly, I didn't say much and I don't remember you saying a lot either.

I like what Reagan said too, and agree with him completely. But your analysis that the particulars of the impasse we face, revolves around Trump as if he caused the impasse, doesn't hold water. It's because he's the one tasked by the people to take the fight to those who are causing the problem. It's called an election. It's no secret though that every cause needs a face, and the left's propaganda campaign as of Nov 8, 2016 has been to make that the face that of MR Trump. Logical. But if pressed to identify some of the players, I might start with the ones already mentioned here, along with the likes of George Soros. Not the only guy in modern times with the courage to even mention the root causes and name some of the actors in a public setting. In contrast for example, Obama foreign policy shot warnings out like unguided drones into the cybersphere without naming names. Not only did those to whom he invisibly referred completely ignore his warnings, they laughed him to scorn. And he totally deserved it BTW.

No, you go ahead and rationalize on, my Guile-O-Meter is pegged.

So did I. 100%.

[plantmanky]

Had congress approved all their appropriations in the fall, there couldnt be a government shutdown.

Wonder why no one says anything about that?

Hmmmmm.

[TheRealThing]

Had congress approved all their appropriations in the fall, there couldnt be a government shutdown.

Wonder why no one says anything about that?

Hmmmmm.

Most are with you Plantmanky. Ryan didn't include wall funding, right?

[jetpilot]

Had congress approved all their appropriations in the fall, there couldnt be a government shutdown.

Wonder why no one says anything about that?

Hmmmmm.

According to Hoot, because Trump didn't force them to.

[Hoot Gibson]

Tunnel vision. So we can expect you to continue to help Dems and put most of Rep failures on Trump. Not surprised at all. I was crazy to go around the same block with you for the 100th time.

If pointing out Trump's obvious blunders to an audience of about a half dozen forum regulars who have already decided who they will be voting for in 2020 is your idea of helping Democrats, then I would guess that tens of millions of other Republicans who also fit that description.

In fact, enthusiastic Trump supporters represent a minority of those who voted for him in 2016. Most of us voted for him because he was a Republican and/or he was not a criminal. Maybe Democrats will nominate another crook to run against him in 2020. I hope so.

[Hoot Gibson]

So much for that Reagan quote. :biggrin:

Reagan never said that people who disagreed with him should keep their thoughts to themselves. In fact, many in his inner circle strongly disagreed with his strategy to escalate the arms race and break the Soviet economy. I don't remember Reagan ever publicly trashing his own people. He welcomed a lively political debate. Insecure people try to stifle political debate through intimidation or ridicule.

[jetpilot]

If this headline is right, I would be madder than Hoot gets

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-bad-judge...1548807717

[jetpilot]

https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/01/tr...y-isnt-he/

[jetpilot]

^^I know if true Trump would demand much in return, but I have no trust in Dems so I say tell them to pound sand.

[TheRealThing]

Reagan never said that people who disagreed with him should keep their thoughts to themselves. In fact, many in his inner circle strongly disagreed with his strategy to escalate the arms race and break the Soviet economy. I don't remember Reagan ever publicly trashing his own people. He welcomed a lively political debate. Insecure people try to stifle political debate through intimidation or ridicule.

Understand, I do not post the things I do in an effort to change your mind. I post so others, be they ever so small in number, can understand how the minds of the Billy Kristol's of this world work. Or don't as the case may be. But one minute you're planting your flag on some recently claimed high ground as in post #57, only to do your best Pee Wee Herman', "I meant to do that." when you get called on it.

Reagan did not need to "trash" his own people as you say, because one of his inner circle would never dare to go before the full Senate in an attempt to undermine his foreign policy positions. Thereby embarrassing the US President and exposing any perceived (real or not) flaws in our national intelligence function and strategies to our enemies. And all in a concisely compiled format no less. Nor did any of them come on the nightly news to sew the seeds of doubt and unrest in the minds of the Americans listening. And that would be on any occasion to include the time Reagan addressing the Kremlin from West Berlin said, "MR Gorbachev tear down this wall." I know for a fact Reagan speech writers took that line out more than once. But if his own people had acted like the rats of the present administration act, I would bet he would set the record straight.

[Hoot Gibson]

Kind of seems like you're being a little petty yourself there Hoot. Instead you might try properly assessing the sloth and covetousness with which the traditionally convicted of this land are beset. Our national slide is being presided over by somebody, someplace, and it certainly isn't the President. Any remote possibility it could be the oppositionist political establishment? Instead of the honest governance of their charge for which they are being paid, the left and RINO's choose to spend all their time rather in pursuit of the resistance. They disguise their continual Trump attacks, as informed critiques of the one man in modern times with the courage to identify our ills and speak out irrespective of the fusillade of incoming he has been willing to endure. And he hasn't done this because of ego or any other selfish motivation. On the contrary, he has suffered the afore mentioned indignities on behalf of the millions being force fed the monkey puke now for decades. Dan Coats comes to mind. I thought he should have been fired for the comments he made following the Helsinki Summit. Last eve I heard several of the Congress say Coats should now be canned for the Intelligence Assessment he made to the Senate.

And for the record, I saw the unvarnished truth in that article.

From the bolded onward, I disagree with you completely. Liberals are the ones fomenting divide. They as you point out, have had the microphone now in this land for decades. Their base are those who like to lay in bed till noon, and lay the blame for their personal ills on others. And their leaders all like to lay the same sort of stuff usually associated with cattle. You already mentioned Huntley, Brinkley, Cronkite and all those coming after, of the media. They hated the mindset of the right, which I firmly believe emanated down through time directly from the founders themselves. Further, I believe the present state of rabidity characterized by the extreme left of state and federal government, was encouraged by the efforts of the media as their openly hostile opposition to our traditionally conservative origins have clearly and steadfastly demonstrated.

I don't know how conservative Trump really is, but any rational minded man knows for this land to thrive we must strike a reasonable balance with our opposites. The idea being, those from the left very often at some point choose of their own volition to come to the light. Unfortunately that choice has become far more problematic owing to the greatly exacerbated level of contempt. Said contempt is in vogue in every imaginable venue, from the indoctrination campaign being waged in our educational system, to many Churches, to the Academy Awards, to late night TV, to Union Halls, to stand up comedy. We are awash in it. Now, you can blame President Trump for all of this and you no doubt will, but it's just a shade larger an issue than the character and attitude of one man. However, if you want to hang blame on the one man to whom blame could reasonably be confirmed, you might try some remedial refresher therapy regarding the actions of one micro managing Barack Obama. Nonetheless, Kristol et-al were cooing contentedly in the Bush backwaters with they're delicate sensitivities untroubled for the 8 years of his moderacy. And frankly, I didn't say much and I don't remember you saying a lot either.

I like what Reagan said too, and agree with him completely. But your analysis that the particulars of the impasse we face, revolves around Trump as if he caused the impasse, doesn't hold water. It's because he's the one tasked by the people to take the fight to those who are causing the problem. It's called an election. It's no secret though that every cause needs a face, and the left's propaganda campaign as of Nov 8, 2016 has been to make that the face that of MR Trump. Logical. But if pressed to identify some of the players, I might start with the ones already mentioned here, along with the likes of George Soros. Not the only guy in modern times with the courage to even mention the root causes and name some of the actors in a public setting. In contrast for example, Obama foreign policy shot warnings out like unguided drones into the cybersphere without naming names. Not only did those to whom he invisibly referred completely ignore his warnings, they laughed him to scorn. And he totally deserved it BTW.

No, you go ahead and rationalize on, my Guile-O-Meter is pegged.

There are too many shady straw man arguments in this post to waste my time on, TRT. So, I will address only one of them. I have never even remotely blamed Trump for the impasse over border wall funding. I have, in very plain terms, blamed Democrats and Mitch McConnell for the impasse. I have criticized Trump for not making a good faith effort to get the funding at a time when there was some hope of forcing McConnell's hand.

Also, I am still waiting for you and JP to explain how you expected Trump to secure funding for a border wall and get Mexico to pay for it, when the conditions when he took officer were exactly the conditions that existed when he made the promise. No more filibusters and mischaracterizations of my positions, please. Just tell me how you expected Trump to get border wall funding through the Senate without 60 votes for a cloture action.

IMO, the only chance that Trump had of succeeding was to lean on McConnell to suspend the filibuster rule in the Senate. That was not done and now Republicans don't have the votes in the House to get such a bill to the Senate.

Personally, I really thought that Trump would battle Ryan and McConnell over illegal immigration but it did not happen. He is obviously not responsible for the impasse but he also did not take his best shot at breaking that impasse when he had the best chance of success.

Obama twisted arms, bribed senators with earmarks, and found away to get what he wanted without 60 votes. Democrats even struck a deal with Republicans to get judges confirmed without having 60 votes to bring confirmation votes to the floor of the Senate.

What did you and JP expect Trump to do to get the funding for a border wall?

[Hoot Gibson]

Understand, I do not post the things I do in an effort to change your mind. I post so others, be they ever so small in number, can understand how the minds of the Billy Kristol's of this world work. Or don't as the case may be. But one minute you're planting your flag on some recently claimed high ground as in post #57, only to do your best Pee Wee Herman', "I meant to do that." when you get called on it.

Reagan did not need to "trash" his own people as you say, because one of his inner circle would never dare to go before the full Senate in an attempt to undermine his foreign policy positions. Thereby embarrassing the US President and exposing any perceived (real or not) flaws in our national intelligence function and strategies to our enemies. And all in a concisely compiled format no less. Nor did any of them come on the nightly news to sew the seeds of doubt and unrest in the minds of the Americans listening. And that would be on any occasion to include the time Reagan addressing the Kremlin from West Berlin said, "MR Gorbachev tear down this wall." I know for a fact Reagan speech writers took that line out more than once. But if his own people had acted like the rats of the present administration act, I would bet he would set the record straight.

Trump appointed his inner circle. Those are his rats and they reflect poorly on Trump's leadership skills and on his judgment. Reagan did not just get lucky when he hired people who remained loyal to him until the day he died.

[Hoot Gibson]

^^I know if true Trump would demand much in return, but I have no trust in Dems so I say tell them to pound sand.

I think that this is another example of Mitch McConnell being so scared of being the Minority Leader again that he is preserving old Senate traditions such as the blue slips that are really killing Republicans politically. I agree with you that Trump should not be negotiating with Democrats, but there would be no need if McConnell would grow a spine and stop worrying about sitting in his Senate Majority Leader seat until death do them part.

BTW, I didn't realize until recently that the Majority and Minority Leaders in both the House and Senate are paid a higher salary than anybody else in Congress, except the Speaker of the House. I think that is an outrage myself. Those are party positions, not constitutional positions. I have no problem with the Speaker being paid a higher salary as the third in line of succession to the presidency, but taxpayers should not be funding Democrat and Republican party positions.

[TheRealThing]

There are too many shady straw man arguments in this post to waste my time on, TRT. So, I will address only one of them. I have never even remotely blamed Trump for the impasse over border wall funding. I have, in very plain terms, blamed Democrats and Mitch McConnell for the impasse. I have criticized Trump for not making a good faith effort to get the funding at a time when there was some hope of forcing McConnell's hand.

Also, I am still waiting for you and JP to explain how you expected Trump to secure funding for a border wall and get Mexico to pay for it, when the conditions when he took officer were exactly the conditions that existed when he made the promise. No more filibusters and mischaracterizations of my positions, please. Just tell me how you expected Trump to get border wall funding through the Senate without 60 votes for a cloture action.

IMO, the only chance that Trump had of succeeding was to lean on McConnell to suspend the filibuster rule in the Senate. That was not done and now Republicans don't have the votes in the House to get such a bill to the Senate.

Personally, I really thought that Trump would battle Ryan and McConnell over illegal immigration but it did not happen. He is obviously not responsible for the impasse but he also did not take his best shot at breaking that impasse when he had the best chance of success.

Obama twisted arms, bribed senators with earmarks, and found away to get what he wanted without 60 votes. Democrats even struck a deal with Republicans to get judges confirmed without having 60 votes to bring confirmation votes to the floor of the Senate.

What did you and JP expect Trump to do to get the funding for a border wall?

The two bolds - You fill Urban Sombrero's shoes nicely, might as well use his material too while your at it, right? You did lay the blame for the failure of the border wall squarely on Trump, saying he should have forced Ryan and McConnell to comply with border funding at the start of his Presidency when he had a strong hand.

I mischaracterize YOUR posts: :hilarious: Again taking a page from TUS's play book, you always sift through the weightier points to find some insignificant aside on which to focus your own slurve balls. Now let's hear another tirade in which you claim you're being personally insulted.

[jetpilot]

There are too many shady straw man arguments in this post to waste my time on, TRT. So, I will address only one of them. I have never even remotely blamed Trump for the impasse over border wall funding. I have, in very plain terms, blamed Democrats and Mitch McConnell for the impasse. I have criticized Trump for not making a good faith effort to get the funding at a time when there was some hope of forcing McConnell's hand.

Also, I am still waiting for you and JP to explain how you expected Trump to secure funding for a border wall and get Mexico to pay for it, when the conditions when he took officer were exactly the conditions that existed when he made the promise. No more filibusters and mischaracterizations of my positions, please. Just tell me how you expected Trump to get border wall funding through the Senate without 60 votes for a cloture action.

IMO, the only chance that Trump had of succeeding was to lean on McConnell to suspend the filibuster rule in the Senate. That was not done and now Republicans don't have the votes in the House to get such a bill to the Senate.

Personally, I really thought that Trump would battle Ryan and McConnell over illegal immigration but it did not happen. He is obviously not responsible for the impasse but he also did not take his best shot at breaking that impasse when he had the best chance of success.

Obama twisted arms, bribed senators with earmarks, and found away to get what he wanted without 60 votes. Democrats even struck a deal with Republicans to get judges confirmed without having 60 votes to bring confirmation votes to the floor of the Senate.

What did you and JP expect Trump to do to get the funding for a border wall?

That's easy. I thought with a Republican Congress it was a slam dunk. Now the ugly secret that plenty of Republicans are fine with open borders is being exposed.

[WideRight05]

While we can agree on most things with Donald Trump, that lesser percent that we don't agree on is an important lesser percent. If Kavanaugh turns out to be another Kennedy, that SCOTUS is still in trouble until somebody else retires and hopefully Trump will nominate somebody like Barrett or Willett by then. But that's just one of the big issues.

It actually works out better when the Republicans are causing an uproar on their party and holding them accountable than if they aren't. Trump is much more likely to listen to people in his own party pounding the doors down than people in the Democratic Party. I can tell you one thing - if the people aren't holding Trump's feet to the fire, we will see mostly conservative legislation but we will see occasional major things slide by with positions like the EEOC and/or some of Trump's nominees for the lower and mid-level courts and maybe even the SCOTUS. We will also see planned parenthood continue to get funded, something which passed over and over and over again through the house, senate, and president these past two years.

There are many ways to voice displeasure. Sure, getting your like-minded friends together and talking with them about it is one thing. They are more likely to listen to you anyways than the other side. Then you have petitions, e-mails which are also important. Having spoken with people high up at places like the American Family Association and Family Foundation I can assure you that these types of campaigns have worked.

I do believe Donald Trump getting elected is a sign that the Republican Party continues to drift closer to the center but if conservatives can take on that brash nature Trump has and use it to advance the cause maybe we'll see the country swing to the right for once on an issue instead of the left. I will say, I do believe that if the people hold Trump accountable he will listen. But the people have to step it up - and not just Trump either. That goes for local, state, and national positions. Part of the reason we don't see the Democratic politicians caving as much on issues is because their constituents are obsessed on ensuring their liberal agenda gets pushed through.

[Hoot Gibson]

The two bolds - You fill Urban Sombrero's shoes nicely, might as well use his material too while your at it, right? You did lay the blame for the failure of the border wall squarely on Trump, saying he should have forced Ryan and McConnell to comply with border funding at the start of his Presidency when he had a strong hand.

I mischaracterize YOUR posts: :hilarious: Again taking a page from TUS's play book, you always sift through the weightier points to find some insignificant aside on which to focus your own slurve balls. Now let's hear another tirade in which you claim you're being personally insulted.

Still no answer for how you expected Trump to secure funding for a border wall. None. I have laid out a scenario where Trump could have possibly persuaded Republicans to fund a border wall. You, OTOH cannot even muster a theory of how Trump could have fulfilled that promise.

I don't respond to most of what you fancy as "points" because most of what you write is either nonsense or pure fiction. Not everybody has the free time or desire to type page after page after page of drivel that hardly anybody reads but you seem to have nothing better to do with your time.

Your total devotion to President Trump is admirable. I am sure that he appreciates sycophantic followers like you, TRT.

[Hoot Gibson]

While we can agree on most things with Donald Trump, that lesser percent that we don't agree on is an important lesser percent. If Kavanaugh turns out to be another Kennedy, that SCOTUS is still in trouble until somebody else retires and hopefully Trump will nominate somebody like Barrett or Willett by then. But that's just one of the big issues.

It actually works out better when the Republicans are causing an uproar on their party and holding them accountable than if they aren't. Trump is much more likely to listen to people in his own party pounding the doors down than people in the Democratic Party. I can tell you one thing - if the people aren't holding Trump's feet to the fire, we will see mostly conservative legislation but we will see occasional major things slide by with positions like the EEOC and/or some of Trump's nominees for the lower and mid-level courts and maybe even the SCOTUS. We will also see planned parenthood continue to get funded, something which passed over and over and over again through the house, senate, and president these past two years.

There are many ways to voice displeasure. Sure, getting your like-minded friends together and talking with them about it is one thing. They are more likely to listen to you anyways than the other side. Then you have petitions, e-mails which are also important. Having spoken with people high up at places like the American Family Association and Family Foundation I can assure you that these types of campaigns have worked.

I do believe Donald Trump getting elected is a sign that the Republican Party continues to drift closer to the center but if conservatives can take on that brash nature Trump has and use it to advance the cause maybe we'll see the country swing to the right for once on an issue instead of the left. I will say, I do believe that if the people hold Trump accountable he will listen. But the people have to step it up - and not just Trump either. That goes for local, state, and national positions. Part of the reason we don't see the Democratic politicians caving as much on issues is because their constituents are obsessed on ensuring their liberal agenda gets pushed through.

Very well said. When elected leaders disregard the needs and desires of their own supporters, then those supporters ditch them for somebody else or just stay home on election day. Unfortunately, socialists control most of our educational system in this country and Democrats are fulfilling the wishes of freshly minted young socialists.

With socialist failures like Cuba and Venezuela in our own backyard, Republicans have to start making a much better case for our form of government and our capitalist economy. If Republicans don't start converting more young voters, they will continue to lose ground to Democrats.

[jetpilot]

Still no answer for how you expected Trump to secure funding for a border wall. None. I have laid out a scenario where Trump could have possibly persuaded Republicans to fund a border wall. You, OTOH cannot even muster a theory of how Trump could have fulfilled that promise.

I don't respond to most of what you fancy as "points" because most of what you write is either nonsense or pure fiction. Not everybody has the free time or desire to type page after page after page of drivel that hardly anybody reads but you seem to have nothing better to do with your time.

Your total devotion to President Trump is admirable. I am sure that he appreciates sycophantic followers like you, TRT.

That statement could have been typed by any number of deranged, foaming at the mouth liberal Democrats. Pelosi and Schumer would be especially proud of you. You are either beyond-help stupid or have a terminal case of TDS. I never dreamed it was the former but I can no longer swear to it. Last time I address any of your Trump posts.

[Hoot Gibson]

That statement could have been typed by any number of deranged, foaming at the mouth liberal Democrats. Pelosi and Schumer would be especially proud of you. You are either beyond-help stupid or have a terminal case of TDS. I never dreamed it was the former but I can no longer swear to it. Last time I address any of your Trump posts.

:biglmao: Roger, Dodger. Still no response to my question about how you thought Trump would keep his promise to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it without standing up to McConnell. All hat and no cattle, as they say in Texas.

Like TRT, you must realize Trump was not serious when he made that promise but you hold him blameless for not even trying to keep the promise. It's not Trump's fault that you took his campaign slogan seriously - it's your's.

I made the same mistake when George Bush, The Elder, said to read his lips when he promised no new taxes. Politicians lie and they sometimes go wobbly when the rubber meets the road. It's unfortunate when voters never realize that they have been played.

[TheRealThing]

Still no answer for how you expected Trump to secure funding for a border wall. None. I have laid out a scenario where Trump could have possibly persuaded Republicans to fund a border wall. You, OTOH cannot even muster a theory of how Trump could have fulfilled that promise.

I don't respond to most of what you fancy as "points" because most of what you write is either nonsense or pure fiction. Not everybody has the free time or desire to type page after page after page of drivel that hardly anybody reads but you seem to have nothing better to do with your time.

Your total devotion to President Trump is admirable. I am sure that he appreciates sycophantic followers like you, TRT.

:biglmao: Roger, Dodger. Still no response to my question about how you thought Trump would keep his promise to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it without standing up to McConnell. All hat and no cattle, as they say in Texas.

Like TRT, you must realize Trump was not serious when he made that promise but you hold him blameless for not even trying to keep the promise. It's not Trump's fault that you took his campaign slogan seriously - it's your's.

I made the same mistake when George Bush, The Elder, said to read his lips when he promised no new taxes. Politicians lie and they sometimes go wobbly when the rubber meets the road. It's unfortunate when voters never realize that they have been played.

To me, the problem of this discussion deserves just a tad more sobriety than just sitting around calling people who obviously care about the direction America has taken, slick names. But you being such a patriot and all, must have a rich history of service to the country, right?

You pulled that border wall funding line out the thin air, and at the very last of an 80 post long conversation. So you're still waiting huh? You're not on here to debate, you're here to quibble and cast aspersions in an attempt to make yourself look big. Ever the grand master of knowledge and statecraft, your chiding rants start slow but containing that poison in your soul never lasts long. Despite the fact that you continually project charges of personal insult everybody else's way on here, past and present, the real culprit in that department is Hoot Gibson.

The country is tanking in my view, and that's due directly to the moral collapse I have driveled on about in the posts that nobody reads. Past that no attachment to how things used to be done in the halls of government, will ever again mean the first darn thing. Society changed, corrupt politicians realized they could buy votes with the people's money, game set match.

Now, do continue to tell us driveling lowbrows more about why we'll never have a wall, or about how the tariffs will never work, or how Trump was just a stalking horse for Hillary, or how you know all about why he'll never be reelected in 2020. :popcorn:

[jetpilot]

:biglmao: Roger, Dodger. Still no response to my question about how you thought Trump would keep his promise to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it without standing up to McConnell. All hat and no cattle, as they say in Texas.

Like TRT, you must realize Trump was not serious when he made that promise but you hold him blameless for not even trying to keep the promise. It's not Trump's fault that you took his campaign slogan seriously - it's your's.

I made the same mistake when George Bush, The Elder, said to read his lips when he promised no new taxes. Politicians lie and they sometimes go wobbly when the rubber meets the road. It's unfortunate when voters never realize that they have been played.

That's not the question you asked. I answered the question you did ask in 1 short sentence. That one short very simple sentence demolishes your Trump wall rants. Middle sentence here:

http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/sho...stcount=77

[jetpilot]

The wall will be built people.

[Hoot Gibson]

That's not the question you asked. I answered the question you did ask in 1 short sentence. That one short very simple sentence demolishes your Trump wall rants. Middle sentence here:

http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/sho...stcount=77

You are right, I overlooked your answer. Apparently you did not understand the filibuster rules of the Senate during the campaign. I did, which is why I never expected Trump to get the wall fully funded. His only chance to do so was to persuade McConnell to suspend the cloture rules. That should have been Trump's plan A, with use of defense funding his last resort, IMO.

[Hoot Gibson]

To me, the problem of this discussion deserves just a tad more sobriety than just sitting around calling people who obviously care about the direction America has taken, slick names. But you being such a patriot and all, must have a rich history of service to the country, right?

You pulled that border wall funding line out the thin air, and at the very last of an 80 post long conversation. So you're still waiting huh? You're not on here to debate, you're here to quibble and cast aspersions in an attempt to make yourself look big. Ever the grand master of knowledge and statecraft, your chiding rants start slow but containing that poison in your soul never lasts long. Despite the fact that you continually project charges of personal insult everybody else's way on here, past and present, the real culprit in that department is Hoot Gibson.

The country is tanking in my view, and that's due directly to the moral collapse I have driveled on about in the posts that nobody reads. Past that no attachment to how things used to be done in the halls of government, will ever again mean the first darn thing. Society changed, corrupt politicians realized they could buy votes with the people's money, game set match.

Now, do continue to tell us driveling lowbrows more about why we'll never have a wall, or about how the tariffs will never work, or how Trump was just a stalking horse for Hillary, or how you know all about why he'll never be reelected in 2020. :popcorn:

The answer was a simple one and it is a fair one. I explained why I believe that Trump missed his best opportunity to secure funding for the wall. You responded with nothing but insults.

I missed JP's explanation of why he believed that Trump would keep his campaign promise about building a wall. Maybe in skimmimg through one of your painfully long posts, I overlooked your answer as well. If so, please point me toward your answer. You must have had some idea of how Trump would overcome the Senate cloture vote hurdle if you think facing off with
McConell would have been a big mistake.

[jetpilot]

You are right, I overlooked your answer. Apparently you did not understand the filibuster rules of the Senate during the campaign. I did, which is why I never expected Trump to get the wall fully funded. His only chance to do so was to persuade McConnell to suspend the cloture rules. That should have been Trump's plan A, with use of defense funding his last resort, IMO.

I understand filibuster rules completely. I also know the longest filibuster in history is just over 24 hours. Let Dems filibuster until they are blue in the face. Senators are old, lazy and work short hours. Defeat filibuster if necessary. Threat of filibuster is just an excuse. Too many republicans are fine with open borders.

But the wall will be built despite horrible Congress by the guy you trash daily, the same guy that is our only hope.

[Hoot Gibson]

I understand filibuster rules completely. I also know the longest filibuster in history is just over 24 hours. Let Dems filibuster until they are blue in the face. Senators are old, lazy and work short hours. Defeat filibuster if necessary. Threat of filibuster is just an excuse. Too many republicans are fine with open borders.

But the wall will be built despite horrible Congress by the guy you trash daily, the same guy that is our only hope.

The lack of 60 votes in favor of cloture the reason why the issue never reached the floor for a vote. McConnell and the Republicans have the power to force a vote by suspending the rule, which is exactly what Trump should have demanded in 2017. I remember a lot of talk about draining the swamp and taking on the establishment during the campaign. That talk came from the only guy who had a chance of making it happen after Republicans nominated him.

You concern for McConnell is touching, but he is one of the biggest alligators in the swamp.

[jetpilot]

So yes or no, can the Senate defeat filibuster or not. And I loathe McConnell but I vote for him because he keeps running against Democrats.