Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« As Much As I Hate Seeing A Nazi Win Something... | Main | Corporate Fascism, But In A Good Cause! »

March 22, 2018

Comments

Jane

Dowd is out, and the people on Fox Business are so far out on the ledge they are about to fall off.

Tariffs to be announced at noon.
'

Threadkiller

Satiating oneself over the omnibus because of the wall funding is a capitulation too far for me.

Obama fought the Libyan war with discretionary funds. Trump could hammer out his dog and pony show wall the same way.

Looks like the treasury robbing continues. This time with the applause of red meat voters.

henry

I'm not applauding. But I'm not shoveling snow either.

Miss Marple the Deplorable

Here, TK, you might be interested in this:

https://americandigitalnews.com/2018/01/26/can-we-now-discuss-where-barack-obama-was-born/#.WrPXKGEh3ct

Dave (in MA)

In the past thread early this AM RG expressed his disbelief upon encountering "Russian propaganda" (RT) on US cable.

I don't suppose anyone remembers this?

As I recall, Pozner's commentary was from the pro-Soviet point of view, and Donahue's was from the left.

Captain Hate

I'm not applauding either and I'm sure Ol' Yeller isn't as well.

Threadkiller

From MM's 12:21

https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/forms-of-citizenship2.jpg

I forgot that Sundance is a Birther.

Threadkiller

I assume that most non-redmeat voters are not applauding, CH and Henry.

Miss Marple the Deplorable


Mark Knoller
‏Verified account @markknoller
7m7 minutes ago

Pres Trump to direct US Trade Rep to propose $50-billion in tariffs on China to offset its gains through unfair trade practices against US including theft of intellectual property. Tariffs to be published in Federal Register for public comment.

henry

$50 billion in trade tarriffs with China.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/22/trump-moves-to-slap-china-with-50-billion-in-tariffs-over-intellectual-property-theft.html

henry

Vicki McKenna @VickiMcKenna

At California Fundraiser, WI Court Candidate Dallet Says She wishes Wisconsin Were More Like San Francisco

https://rightwisconsin.com/2018/03/21/at-california-fundraiser-dallet-says-san-francisco-progressive-values-are-wisconsin-values/

Captain Hate

9,000 cases of female genital mutilation in the UK last year and not a single arrest. Say goodbye to that dump.

henry

Famous-Quote.net @famousquotenet
5m

Oppressors can tyrannize only when they achieve a standing army, an enslaved press, and a disarmed populace. - James Madison

Old Lurker

Rush commenting/worrying that Trump signing the spending omnibus bill might begin the unraveling of Trump's Base.

Old Lurker

Sounds like I need to add a Penthouse on the Ledge for Rush.

Miss Marple the Deplorable

Tariff remarks by President Trump, live stream:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCVpnS9R6lw

Should start shortly.

I will go back and get the video of the Mulvaney briefing on the Omnibus, which just soncluded.

Threadkiller

Rush is correct.

Trump would have 24hrs after signing it to announce how he is going to withhold the spendthrift portions of the bill and return the excess to the treasury as soon as Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell are demoted to dog catchers and true conservatives send him a one page bill that authorizes it.

#ReadMyLipsNoNewTaxes2020

Miss Marple the Deplorable


Reuters Politics
‏Verified account @ReutersPolitics
11m11 minutes ago

UPDATE: Republican chairman and top Democrat of House Energy and Commerce Committee call on Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to testify

Threadkiller

I am so glad there will be another hearing.

#Gleeful

Old Lurker

Oh TK. You are just happy because Congressional Hearings are so, so useful and productive.

henry

TK's happy Gowdy isn't on this committee

Miss Marple the Deplorable

Threadkiller,

Perhaps it would be good to wait to see if it passes, since several disparate caucuses oppose it.

In addition, if he is going to withhold some of the spending or reallocate it, it would be wise not to say so before the thing passes.

Everyone always jumps the gun and forecasts disaster. So far none of these gloomy predictions have been accurate.

rich

so does Soros have a big short position in FB, and as is typical, calling on his ngo pets, media toadies, and politicians he gives rides to in his vest pocket to knife them in the back?

Threadkiller

Perhaps it would be good to wait to see if it passes, since several disparate caucuses oppose it.

"Pass it to see what is in it" becomes "pass it to see what will be done with it?"

Threadkiller

Everyone always jumps the gun and forecasts disaster.

And here I thought everyone jumps the gun and forcasts big shiny walls and Hillary locked up.

Different groups of everyones..

Captain Hate

I can only speak for myself, MM, but I'm not so much upset at DJT as the GOP big spenders.

Miss Marple the Deplorable

Look, TK, I have watched Trump for 3 years.

He does things his own way within the law. He is NOT going to telegraph his moves. Period.

I am comfortable with it because I have seen him get results. He has been moving towards smaller government, lower taxes, lower regulations, curtailing illegal immigration.

He has done this stuff while be under constant attack by the GOPe, the democrats, and 90% of the media.

I trust what he's doing and you don't. Simple as that.

So I am not going to get into a glad vs. gleeful argument with you. It is not productive.

Threadkiller

In addition, if he is going to withhold some of the spending or reallocate it, it would be wise not to say so before the thing passes.

I agree. That is the 24hr leash I referred to.

henry

Hilligula unhinged in the Netherlands:

https://twitter.com/irootsorg/status/976865150153166848?s=12

Tom R

Tom R. "The budget bill gave Trump the amount of money he was asking for to build the wall."

BS.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/02/12/trumps-dhs-budget-requests-seek-1-8-billion-budget-wall-2019/

This article is from last month.

Trump got what he asked for in 2019 funding. That is enough money to fund one year's worth of construction. That gives Trump flexibility to get the construction started before the November 2018 midterms while still holding out hope that Mexico will help pay for some of the wall by way of the NAFTA renegotiations. IMO bad move politically for Trump to ask American taxpayers pay for all $18 billion of construction costs.

Miss Marple the Deplorable

The live stream on YouTube is crap and keeps going to error. I can only conclude that this is because the President is doing something which will make him look good to average people.

I will see if I can find a video later.

Old Lurker

MM "Everyone always jumps the gun and forecasts disaster. So far none of these gloomy predictions have been accurate."

Because the National Debt has not already passed $21T; Because the possibility of no Wall and amnesty for millions and millions of illegals is not still a possibility; Because the one thing the world knows for sure that in the US, one system of justice applies to EVERY citizen equally; Because by golly that Constitution Thingy which defines budget and spending authority sure has been reinstated big time.

So many gloomy predictions proven wrong.

Miss Marple the Deplorable

Captain Hate,

Your anger to the GOPe is properly directed. Those weasels know that Trump supporters will support them because they don't want to lose the majority. Trump knows it as well.

That is why I am pretty sure that all of this money won't be spent. You can allocate money for personnel, but if you don't hire anyone then the money says in the bank.

He is having to outwit both the dms AND a good portion of his own party.

Kevlar Kid

Are we discussing a "budget" or an "appropriations" bill?

Threadkiller

I do not blindly trust anyone. For the record I have been watching him closely since he stepped into the Birther scene. I know full well what he has done while under attack. I predicted his ability to win long, long before anyone else on this board.

I am ready for him to telegraph Ryan's testicles into an intersecting path with Voyager I.

So are a lot of people.

Game time is coming to a close and if he doesn't feel the pressure from my side of the fan base he will have no incentive to do more for you side.

Miss Marple the Deplorable

Old Lurker,
\
OK. Accepting your premise, what are you going to DO?

I don't care to listen to non-stop gloom and doom without a solution.

Since the YouTube feed is screwed up, I can't even listen to the President, so I think I will go do laundry.

Captain Hate

JackStraw, almost always a voice of reason, has said that in order to increase spending for the military, spending elsewhere had to be increased or face a lengthy shutdown.

Threadkiller

I don't care to listen to non-stop gloom and doom without a solution.

Solution:

Build wall with discretionary funds.

Shut Government down.

Tell the world that Ryan is a fag.

Kevlar Kid

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
Got $1.6 Billion to start Wall on Southern Border, rest will be forthcoming. Most importantly, got $700 Billion to rebuild our Military, $716 Billion next year...most ever. Had to waste money on Dem giveaways in order to take care of military pay increase and new equipment. 8:00 PM - Mar 21, 2018

He's going to THUMP those bitches repeatedly over wasteful spending... one more baseball bat wrapped in concertina wire to nail their azzes. Channel your Inner Negan, Mr. President.

Make sausage out of their skulls and feed them to their cronies. MMMMM... eat it.

Old Lurker

Tom R I have learned the hard way that arguing with you about big things is useless.

Just as I know that MM will always trust that Trump is doing everything just right and therefore should be assumed to doing it right this time.

How "always doing it under the law" reconciles with following Regular Order under the Constitution for spending taxpayer money can be seen as "under the law" except in the narrowest of narrow - Tom R level - parsing of the English Language escapes me.

Sorry, MM, not picking a fight. Just stating the other way things might appear to some of us who pay attention too.

Comanche Voter

Will Hillary never go away and simply STFU?

If she didn't have millions stolen from and by the Clinton Foundation, she would be headed to a life as a bag lady pushing stolen shopping cart and ranting nonsense at the top of her lungs.

Well she's not a bag lady, and she doesn't have a shopping cart--yet--but otherwise she fits the description.

Tom R

JackStraw, almost always a voice of reason, has said that in order to increase spending for the military, spending elsewhere had to be increased or face a lengthy shutdown.

In other words, standard Art of the Deal negotiation where both sides, or in this case three sides (Trump, GOP Establishment, Democrats) get something they want.

There is no way for an austere fiscal conservative budget that actually cuts spending to ever get passed without 60+ Freedom Caucus/TEA Party conservatives in the Senate.

Threadkiller

Giving the bank robbers their fair share of the vault because they didn't steal your ATM withdrawal doesn't strike me as a thumping.

henry

Bad ideas from a local guy that is usually sane.

WI REPUBLICAN proposing Universal Background Check and ending private party sales. Question: How do you enforce universal background checks without a national gun registry? And how many felons are gonna go register their sales?

https://twitter.com/wisconsincarry/status/967451174994694144

Tom R

Tom R I have learned the hard way that arguing with you about big things is useless.

I have also noticed you ignore facts when they prove you wrong. How hard is for you to admit Trump got the amount of 2019 funding for the wall that he asked for?

JimNorCal

CH: "I'm not so much upset at DJT as the GOP big spenders."
Yeah, not sure what action an ordinary citizen can take. No reason to send money to RINOs or RNC. What's the point of voting for them? Yet dread at increased Dem viciousness.

"Increased spending for the military" ... caused increases in SJW spending.

I think Reagan made a similar tradeoff but with a Dem Congress.

Porchlight

IMO bad move politically for Trump to ask American taxpayers pay for all $18 billion of construction costs.

Tom R,

Pretty sure Trump never said Mexico would pay for it up front.

Whither NAFTA, the future savings on so very many things will be enormous once the wall is built. Will easily surpass the cost of the wall.

Right now I don't care who pays for it as long as it gets built. 18 billion is chump change these days. Wish it weren't true but it is.

There is no way for an austere fiscal conservative budget that actually cuts spending to ever get passed without 60+ Freedom Caucus/TEA Party conservatives in the Senate.

Stop that crazy reality talk. :)

Old Lurker

MM "what are you going to DO? I don't care to listen to non-stop gloom and doom without a solution."

Nobody makes you read me, MM. And you, like Maryrose, have no right to demand any critic remain silent until he can provide a solution.

Have you ever noticed that you get most defensive when Trump is doing something that even you (were you to tell the truth) did not expect but seem to be forced to pretend it is all good in some dimension?

Do you really really think that the millions who voted for Trump based on a Wall, Draining the Swamp, Regular Order Spending, and Equal Law & Order" are more likely to ever get those things by remaining silent or whistling past the graveyard? Is there no time in your book where a voter and supporter can say "Wait...what?"

You have to lighten up and not snap so when Trump supporters express what they thought would be different. Frankly, if everybody took your position, Trump would never have to worry about losing his base. Then you are left with a Despot, just one you happen to like.

Read the above or not.

Matters not to me.

Dave (in MA)
Dowd is out, and the people on Fox Business are so far out on the ledge they are about to fall off.
Maybe he can hire Dershowitz for when he talks to Mueller.
Miss Marple the Deplorable

https://dailycaller.com/2018/03/22/james-clapper-inconsistent-testimony/

Old Lurker

Tom R. Thought I did that pretty well by speculating about the conversation of Trump, Schumer & Ryan which led to that "fact" for you to relish. Precisely my point of your wont to focus on the limb of a single tree while missing the existence of the entire forest.

Old Lurker

I was responding to Tom R's "I have also noticed you ignore facts when they prove you wrong. How hard is for you to admit Trump got the amount of 2019 funding for the wall that he asked for?"

Miss Marple the Deplorable

Old Lurker,

I understand your frustration but really, you say positively depressing things and then when I answer, you accuse me of being too sensitive and snapping at you.


Maybe I do get too defensive. I don't know. I feel obligated to defend the ONE person in my long life who has actually done something for the average American, and continues to do so, especially since he is under such constant attack.

I yield. I just will maintain radio silence and you can have the floor. There's no point to constant arguing.

Dave (in MA)

How high it the ledge, OL? Clearing out my father's house I remembered that we have a magnesium stepladder.

Threadkiller

Here is the WH presser on whether or not Trump will sign the bill. Fast forward to about 24min mark:

https://youtu.be/oQo5Vqpvf9Y

Mulvaney makes it clear that Trump will sign it. Then he starts pissing on Americans and telling them it is rain.

Old Lurker

MM, I don't want you to be silent at all, and being able to see positive where others do not is not a bad thing. But the reverse is also true.

And I only snap at you when you cross a line that either is ad hominem against a poster (me or others), or becomes Rule Setting like demanding critics have a duty to solve something.

I am the first to admit that my perspective is gloomy, but that is because I fear we are a lot closer to collapse than more optimistic people do. To tell you the truth, I blame the "it's all OK" chunk of our population as much as I do the LIV chunk for the trajectory we are on because the Hard Left, plus the LIV, plus the "Isn't it all grand" groups taken together will indeed defeat those who know from history where this is all going.

Davod

"Wear like iron, are absorbant, and come in non-faggy colors like black, navy blue, brown, gray, etc"

I would think brown could be seen as tobacco like.

clara

MM, I like hearing from you and do not want you to observe radio silence. I also like hearing from OL. So there!

Davod

I don't want anyone to miss my 1:32 pm post.

"
I just flicked on FBN Cavuto's show. He had on Paul Ryan's former chief-of-staff. Who said what this budget does is gives them time to really develop the budget correctly over the next year/months (paraphrasing).

WTF, WTF. They had the f.........g time to do it before and they did not."

Old Lurker

Dave "magnesium stepladder"

Bring it with you to the ledge, Dave. Each morning I can feed a few inches of it into the Theromax as smoothies are being prepared for the Dwellers.

Threadkiller

I say we burn the ladder and huff the magnesium.

henry

Holder found a judge... in Dane County (aka Madison).

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2018/03/22/eric-holder-lawsuit-against-gov-scott-walker-over-wisconsin-special-elections-hits-snag/448743002/

Old Lurker

She knows that Clara. She and I are like an old married couple.

narciso

Yes but he wAs a walker appointee fwiw. What is the actual precedent here?

henry

narciso... probably should have had an election in February. At this point, why bother?

Tom R

Bear with me to the end.

One of my Poli Sci professors back in the early 1980s told the class something I have never forgotten. This was around the timeframe Tip O'Neills famous quote "all politics is local" became popular. At the time Democrats had been in control of the House for several decades. One way they maintained control of the House is because Democrat Congressmen kept bringing home the pork barrel spending projects which benefitted their home district and helped them get re-elected. That was the fundamental truth behind O'neill's quote.

For all the decades the Democrats controlled the House the GOP ran on the platform promising fiscal conservatism because they knew all of the pork barrel spending was helping Democrats maintain control the House. What the professor said is that whichever party is the minority party in the House will always advocate for fiscal conservatism in the hopes it helps them regain control of the House. He went on to say the chances of either party in the House ever actually practicing fiscal conservatism was close to zero because of the "all politics is local" fundamental truth. Congressmen know the best way for them to get re-eelcted is to bring home the pork to their district so while they may claim to be fiscal conservatives to get elected, they will always seek to get pork barrel spending projects that benefit their home district.

This IMO is also why the GOP eventually forced Newt out as Speaker. Newt actually tried to enforce fiscal conservatism but the GOP Establishment types flipped flopped. Pork barrel spending continued the only change was now most of it was going to GOP districts instead of Democrat districts.

I point all this out because there are a substantial number of conservatives (myself included) who advocate for limited government, low taxes, fiscal conservatism. That is an idealistic point of view. Unfortunately the pragmatic "all politics is local" point of view is the reality of how Congress operates. The problem for conservatives is that we have a tendency to punish our Congressmen (by not voting for them to get re-elected) who make idealistic fiscal conservative campaign promises to get elected and when they get to DC abandon those because pragmatism rules. The people who benefit the most from conservatives punishing their own party members are Democrats.


narciso

That's a fair assessment, but conservatives can't discipline liberal members effectively.

Threadkiller

Tom McClintock might disagree, Tom. But I do think that you are correct from the thinking of the campaign money handlers.

Ralph L

Not to mention being exclusive w my mate since he was a lad of 18...
Posted by: anonamom

Five years is nothing.

maryrose

Agree with OL.
It looks like President Trump like President Bush before him does authorize big spending.
And no, I put the blame squarely on the person signing the bill.President Trump isn’t perfect.
He sees this as half a loaf instead of nothing and wants to avoid a shutdown.
MM:
We can like you and disagree with you at the same time.

Tom R

Tom R. Thought I did that pretty well by speculating about the conversation of Trump, Schumer & Ryan which led to that "fact" for you to relish. Precisely my point of your wont to focus on the limb of a single tree while missing the existence of the entire forest.

Sorry but due to your constant negativity and pessimism that wasn't how I read your response.

Trump got exactly what he asked for in 2019 spending for the border wall. IMO no reason for any Trump supporter to criticize that specific aspect of the spending bill.

Your speculation as to what Ryan and Schumer will do in future years is immaterial to the reality of this year. The dynamics of power in DC is going to change once the Horowitz IG report comes out. The exact impact of that is TBD. One possible outcome is that Trump does a lot of damage to the Swamp and has more power and leverage over Congress next year than he does now. There is also the possibility your pessimistic view is how things turn out. Regardless of how things turn out in the future, Trump will partially deliver on his biggest campaign promise and we will have at least 100 miles of new border wall.

Old Lurker

That is a fair assessment, I agree with Narc.

The problem is Tom set his mind frame in the 80's and I did mine reading Milton Friedman in the 60's-70's. The problem for both of us that in his time as in mine, politicians in DC tended to be of the Depression & WWII generation when a reluctant populus collectively did really good things and defeated really really bad people. Fast forward to now, and that generation is dead, the current generation has survived no such existential challenges, and the government's balance sheet is no burdened with so much more debt as a percent of our total productivity, and that balance sheet does not even score the present value of future promises in counting that debt...so that even in WWII it was much easier to afford government and its promises than it is now - by a huge amount. Finally, as that ball has been rolling downhill, what we thought were two opposing parties actually was one big party opposing us!

Appalled

Tom R:

Granted this is all true. What do you do? How do you break the cycle? Give more power to the executive? Concentrate less on spending, and more on things like cultural stuff, civil liberties, and federalism?

Maybe one way to do this is vote to move large hunks of the Federal government out of DC. Say, HHS moves to Detroit. HUD moves to Memphis. Getting a piece of the Federal Government (with jobs and economic impact) instead of some expensive project.

maryrose

Henry:
Doesn’t it waste taxpayer money to hold an extra election?
I think they should appeal the ruling.
They only have to wait a few more months until the November election.

henry

maryrose, elections cost money... true. However the law should be followed (and Walker tried to be sneaky here). On the other hand, Holder wants to waste even more money in redistricting for the next election (which will happen for 2022 anyway once new census numbers come out). It is a lose/lose/lose deal.

Old Lurker

How to get anybody to give a damn about your opinion. Start it out "Sorry but due to your constant negativity and pessimism that wasn't how I read your response."

How often have I wanted to start a post "Sorry, but due your obvious stupidity and the constantly silly asine things you say..."

henry

Forbes Tech News Retweeted
iblametom's avatar
Thomas Fox-Brewster @iblametom
3h

New -- Yes, Cops Are Now Opening iPhones With Dead People's Fingerprints forbes.com/sites/thomasbr…

And it'll be the same with Face ID, if it hasn't been used already...
=====
eff their firewall. but no surprise on the use of biometrics after death.

Buckeye

"Wear like iron, are absorbant, and come in non-faggy colors like black, navy blue, brown, gray, etc"

I would think brown could be seen as tobacco like.

Speaking of tobacco, I just made a run to the Cigar store. Arturo Fuente, Davidoff and Punch are going camping with me.

Some top shelf Bourbon is on the way and I need bartering leverage. True to my Injun heritage:)

While the kids are marching on DC for gun control, we will be practicing it. Handguns, long guns (OK, icky assault weapons) and shotguns.

Always in the morning before the drinking commences:)

Threadkiller

How often have I wanted to start a post "Sorry, but due your obvious stupidity and the constantly silly asine things you say..."

That is how the afterbirthers did it. .

boatbuilder

While I agree with Rush that the Omnibus spending bill is fiscally unsound, I disagree that Trump is going to alienate his base by signing it. For one thing it isn't his spending bill. More importantly Trump never positioned himself as a deficit hawk. I distinctly recall that one of my objections to him early on was that he never said anything about reducing the deficit or cutting spending.

Old Lurker

Largely true, Boatbuilder.

But "it's not his spending bill" goes no farther with people in the street who are told "it's not his FBI or his AG". And that's counting people who took civics in the 7th grade; think of those who never even learned that much.

maryrose

Boatbuilder:
Good points.
When I think conservative I always equate that with less government spending.
It wouldn’t change my vote because we were never promised less spending.
However I don’t think Republicans can be blamed without taking into consideration who is signing the bill.
There is plenty of blame to go around.
I do like the Wall money and the military increase.
OL:
Your posts make me laugh.

Old Lurker

TK "That is how the afterbirthers did it..."

Indeed and precisely why I never do it.

Kevlar Kid

"
Giving the bank robbers their fair share of the vault because they didn't steal your ATM withdrawal doesn't strike me as a thumping.
"

It was a dreadful compromise for red meat eating base people.

My opinion is that it sets up POTUS' opposition for a thumping.

Where he can create his own momentum (Tax Cut) he does so. Where there is pre-existing Swamp momentum he does what he can to benefit the American people from such a desperate sitch.

Ya, I wish he'd do everything i think he should do. But in all of my years studying how landmark federal laws have been created over the centuries, this bunch forces me to shower twice after reading about all of the slime we taxpayers are forced to swallow.

Representation In Name Only.

Old Lurker

:-) Maryrose.

Davod

The spending bill sets up Reps for defeat at the polls. The Dems will campaign like Lamb in PA. As principled center Dems and against Hillary's excess comments and Nancy's craziness.

The Republicans will have nowhere to go.

Porchlight

Last night I watched a really interesting YouTube video made by a Cuban-American artist.

Many small items painted in the same color soon become invisible background.

I think it may be the same with blog comments.

Just saying. :)

(The artist was recommended by Jordan Peterson, incidentally. His name is Cesar Santos. He's a very modern looking dude, but his art is mostly representative and he is atelier-trained. He encourages artists to learn by traditional methods.)

Kevlar Kid

This is a blog, right? ;) Real people with real opinions. Let's do our best to file our own edges and let the Devil take the hindmost.

Peace.

Kev

PS: Now back to this infernal launch. ;) Cha-chingy ringy dingy, Baby!

JimNorCal

Appalled, nothing wrong with relocating chunks of Fed Gov to the hinterlands but it does seem rather a bandaid for a more deeply rooted problem.

boatbuilder

Davod--Rush pointed out yesterday that one of the reasons that Lamb was able to run as a centrist candidate was because there was no primary. He didn't have to go way left to satisfy the hardcore base of the Democratic party.

Tom R

How often have I wanted to start a post "Sorry, but due your obvious stupidity and the constantly silly asine things you say..."

You are more than welcome to think I'm stupid. At least I was smart enough to understand Trump got exactly what he asked for with his border wall funding.

GUS

Old Lurker, Tom R, has a lot to say, it's just like THEO.

henry

My world doesn't revolve around whether Trump gets what he wants. I worry about whether the policy is helpful or harmful. This spending bill is the latter.

Jane

This will make everyone happy:

https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/deep-state-deep-trouble/

Threadkiller

Tom R argues from an honest perspective, IMO. I don't see how he has a different stance than RG.

I am not the person to request a style change so I won't. But all I see is an issue over style.

My opinion.

Jane

The argument for the funding of the wall is that it is a 6 month budget, and Trump got more than he asked for in that time period.

Who knows?

GUS

""You are more than welcome to think I'm stupid""

Not at all TOM R.. You're really smart.

Captain Hate on the iPhone

Zuck unmasked:

https://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=374447

Tom R

Granted this is all true. What do you do? How do you break the cycle? Give more power to the executive? Concentrate less on spending, and more on things like cultural stuff, civil liberties, and federalism?

Implementing a conservative agenda requires winning elections. What you do is whatever it takes to keep winning elections.

Actually enforcing fiscal conservatism policies historically defeats whoever tries to promote it. All you have to do is look at what happens anytime anyone in the GOP starts talking about Medicare and Social Security reform. Everyone knows the two systems are financially broken and need to be fixed but everyone knows if the GOP were to somehow cut spending on those programs they would get destroyed in the next election.

This is why pragmatism always wins out in DC over idealism. Fiscal conservatives have to decide what is more important to them. Winning elections or punishing Republicans who don't keep campaign promises that everyone should know by now are pretty much impossible to keep.

GUS

{{This is why pragmatism always wins out in DC over idealism. }}

See Tom R. You're not stupid. That was brilliant.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame