Sunday Confessional

by Jack

I’ve never voted against a GOP president, but Trump is on course to be my first.

Why?  Because he constantly pushes my buttons and I can’t take it anymore!!!!   It’s not his policies, we agree in principal on most important things.  It’s his un-presidential behavior that reflects so poorly on his office and in turn on our country!

His judgement comes into question when  he can’t see how his stupid Tweets and his jabs at anyone over anything have hurt him and stalled his important agenda.  And yet he continues to do this despite all the strong warnings from his advisers and fellow republicans.  It seems like he can’t let any slight go without a public retort!  That’s infantile.

Sure, I can appreciate Trumps candor  and transparency, when it’s reasonable.  That’s just great, but acting stupid when he does it is another.

We’ve cut him a lot of slack because he was so instantly hated by the DNC and we didn’t like him being bullied.  And we cut him slack because of his S.C. appointments- all great.  We also made allowances because it looked like he could be good for the economy, that he might secure the border, that he might expose corruption in Washington, that he might get a handle on the runaway spending and so on, but geez his bizarre behavior has a lot of worried and now we had mixed results on too many planks in his platform and the deficit spending looks pretty bad.

Let’s face it, he’s a jerk.  I could live with that if he remained effective, but he’s losing his effectiveness every day because he doesn’t know when to shut up.   He might surround himself with great advisors, but if nobody can tell him anything, what’s the point?  There’s no logic in supporting a captain who keeps steering his ship into icebergs instead of around them.

There must be better choices for voters.  There must be people who can do this job far better than Trump.  He’s really lowered the bar.  I sure hope he improves his job performance soon, because if he doesn’t, I’m looking for a new president.

I say this at the risk of upsetting some really good folks who want to see Trump’s agenda move foreword and keep the presidency out of the hands of the far left kooks.  I want that too, but right now I can’t see how Trump is the man to do it.    Your thoughts?

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

86 Responses to Sunday Confessional

  1. J Soden says:

    This morning on Twitter: https://dailycaller.com/2019/04/16/cnn-ratings-plummet-all-year-low/
    TheDonald tweets: Congratuations!

    Classic!

    • Chris says:

      This comment reveals a divide between those like Jack and Harold who support Trump despite his petty tweets and those like J Soden who support him at least in part because of them.

      Jack, the things that you can’t stand about Trump are the things that people like J Soden love about him, and Trump couldn’t have beaten every other Republican primary opponent if a lot of people didn’t think just like J. I don’t think good Republicans like yourself have really reckoned with the fact that a huge number of your party really did want a mean Internet commenter for president…but here we are. The only question remaining should be what to do about the moral and intellectual rot that led us here.

      • J Soden says:

        ASSumptions are dangerous.
        One hopes that any of Chris’ “students” come to class with noseplugs and hip boots to ward off the barnyard residue he spews.

      • Tina says:

        Re: “…mean Internet commentor”

        Since Trump is the first “internet commentor” we have no idea if others will follow nor do we know just how “mean” they might be.

        If we look at “mean” commenting in general there are plenty of examples in our recent history. Obama tended to be covert in his meanness insinuating horrible character in others for political gain or to gin up violence. At other times he just went for the insult…and no one cared in Chris’s world.

        If Chris really cared about moral and intellectual rot he’d show utter contempt for members of his own party and a media that serves as the “nasty” commentator arm of his party. Civility is a two way street. Democrats aren’t required to be civil.

        I don’t need to give examples of intellectually and morally rotten commentary of the MSM throughout Trumps time…Dems have watched it and cheered…including insults and slights toward the First Lady and Baron Trump. Those of us old enough to have watched through the years since Nixon know it started in the emboldened Democrat Party and continues to this day. It’s taken decades but finally, finally, someone speaking for the morals and values we cherish as Americans has stepped up to the plate to defend all of us.

        Good to be back, guys, if only on a limited basis at first.

        • RHT447 says:

          Tina,
          Welcome back. Hope you are enjoying your escape and new found freedom.

        • Chris says:

          Tina! I’ve missed you. You always made an effort to respond to my arguments, and as you’ve probably noticed…most others here aren’t doing that. So thank you.

          Since Trump is the first “internet commentor” we have no idea if others will follow nor do we know just how “mean” they might be.

          Not sure what you mean here. Are you saying he’s the first mean internet commenter to become president?

          I don’t agree that Obama ever intentionally tried to stir violence. Trump has, at rallies, directly advocated it. He’s told cops to be more violent when putting arrestees in their cars. He’s endorsed torture. I don’t think this is a fair comparison.

          I also don’t think it’s fair to compare “covert insults,” which have always been a part of politics, to Trump’s daily string of personal attacks…it isn’t just a difference in degree, it’s a difference in kind. And if the covert insults bothered you with Obama, why do Trump’s much more clear (and often profane) insults not bother you more? Is it just because you agree on his feelings about the targets?

          Dems are required to be FAR more civil…lefties fairly rebuked Kathy Griffin when she did that stupid beheading stunt. But the right did not similarly distance itself from Ted Nugent when he told Obama to “suck on my machine gun.” And I can’t recall anyone prominent on the left going after Melania or Barron; can you give examples? Rush Limbaugh constantly referred to the previous First Lady as “Moochelle;” who is the equivalent speaker on the left who has gone after Melania, and what is the slur?

          Those of us old enough to have watched through the years since Nixon know it started in the emboldened Democrat Party and continues to this day.

          If your problem with the Nixon era is how it “emboldened the Democrat [sic] Party,” you may need to re-examine your biases. (Please don’t take this as an insult; I think everyone should re-examine their biases. I try and do it daily, hence why I’m here.)

          It’s taken decades but finally, finally, someone speaking for the morals and values we cherish as Americans has stepped up to the plate to defend all of us.

          But…Trump does not speak for morals and values, and he wouldn’t be a credible speaker if he did so. That’s why Jack wrote this article.

          Again, I’m glad you’re back, and I hope we can disagree civilly.

        • Peggy says:

          Hey welcome back Tina. We’ve missed you. Hope all is well wherever you are and whatever your doing. I’m assuming you moved out of state.

      • Pie Guevara says:

        Evidently Chris thinks that Trump supporters should dump him of his petty tweets. Should Post Scripts dump Chris because of his petty (and puerile, nasty) comments?

  2. Harold says:

    How does one select a candidate for office, a younger me once thought it was to find a better direction for the government, country and of course me.

    I have voted for candidates from both major parties, never one from a 3rd party because I felt why throw your vote away.

    Today I seem to have to choose between the best of the worst, hold my nose and pray, how’s that working for me?, I like you Jack, I am no longer sure of anything political other than one glaring realization, they don’t seem to give a damn about us, only themselves.

    I believe today’s Liberal Dems are willing to give the country away, either economically by supporting those who feel entitlements are the American dream, or ignoring immigration and promoting unregulated border security.

    I feel that if the current Congress (House mostly) really wanted to protect America it could easily do so, but their agenda is far from providing us with secure borders. All we see coming out of the House is ‘destroy Trump’, nothing at all about compromise and resolution.

    We voters have the power and the solution, (which was a basic goal of Trump), we need to rid congress of the political tyrants created by longevity, a task we voters fail at time after time. Our voting style only seems to fluctuate between parties in power, and in doing so, we preserve people who have served beyond their usefulness.

    So if we won’t do it then the answer at some point is term limits!

    I watched as Trump started out strong, completing his campaign promises, which did some things for us here at home that made a positive change, and did somethings for the world. I felt he made a difference, by just a being non conventional President.

    But Jack, Like you, I never have agreed with his need to tweet things in the manner he does. I justified his use of twitter, rationalizing it knowing the opposition only wanted to destroy him through the media and I know if he didn’t tweet a lot of the time, the media would not have acknowledged a damn thing in a positive manner.
    Such is the disease of politics today, destroy the opposition first.

    So with the elections of 2020 coming up, I am right back to holding my nose on Trump, because so far the opposition hasn’t presented anyone of substance in my opinion.

    But thanks for the chance to vent.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Yeah Harold I hear you, it’s a Hobson’s choice… I just don’t know what to do anymore. Everyone that gets into that office seems to be either a crook or a dope. I’m really disappointed with what is running for office these days.

    • Chris says:

      How does one select a candidate for office, a younger me once thought it was to find a better direction for the government, country and of course me.

      Shouldn’t that still be the criteria? We haven’t lowered our standards so far that this seems like an impossible task, right?

      Today I seem to have to choose between the best of the worst, hold my nose and pray, how’s that working for me?, I like you Jack, I am no longer sure of anything political other than one glaring realization, they don’t seem to give a damn about us, only themselves.

      I don’t think that’s true. Warren, Buttigieg, and Booker all seem like candidates who care deeply about the plight of the poor, in my opinion.

      But Jack, Like you, I never have agreed with his need to tweet things in the manner he does. I justified his use of twitter, rationalizing it knowing the opposition only wanted to destroy him through the media and I know if he didn’t tweet a lot of the time, the media would not have acknowledged a damn thing in a positive manner.

      In my opinion it’s the opposite–if he didn’t tweet (and say) so much negativity all the time, the media would probably begin praising him as acting more “presidential” than they expected. In 2017 the media was itching for stories like this because of their novelty value; there were lots of times mainstream media sources proclaimed that Trump had “pivoted” and was taking a more presidential stance, only to see him say something ridiculous and hateful a few hours later. Those stories stopped because the media learned that such a pivot just wasn’t going to happen.

      So with the elections of 2020 coming up, I am right back to holding my nose on Trump, because so far the opposition hasn’t presented anyone of substance in my opinion.

      The candidates I’ve mentioned so far all have more “substance” than Trump, you just don’t like the substance. Look, if Republicans had ran Ted Cruz in 2016 against someone ridiculous on the left…let’s say, Jay-Z or Michael Avenatti…I’d have voted for Cruz. But you guys ran the reality star with no government or military experience…it is the height of hypocrisy to claim that the left isn’t offering anyone of substance now. Criticize their policies and personalities all you want, but they bring far more experience and knowledge than Trump brought when you voted him into office, so “lack of substance” cannot possibly be the critique.

      • Harold says:

        Your summery of my post as how I feel are so far off the mark it is humorous to read.

        Thanks for the chuckle, but you would be better served to just relay your own feelings (which you did in misrepresenting mine) and stop analyzing and putting your spin on of those of others, your not that good at it.

        I like J see you as a tool of the left, and wonder if you do preach in that manner in your classes. Should that be the case, I feel for the class as a whole.

        • Chris says:

          Harold, I just re-read my response to you and there are only three points in it that could possibly be read as a “summary” of your post and feelings:

          1) When I asked if your standards for electing politicians had changed as much as it seemed you were saying they had.
          2) When I said you didn’t like the substance of Democrats running for office—something you couldn’t possibly dispute.
          3) When I said you were criticizing the Dem candidates for lack of substance, which you were, and I pointed out that was hypocritical given your support for Trump.

          None of this was unfair. Certainly none of it was uncivil, yet you took it as a call to criticize my teaching ability, something you couldn’t know anything about.

          This has been a common technique from you and many other posters the past few weeks. Led by Pie, you are all choosing to attack my ability to do my job instead of attacking my arguments. A rational observer could only conclude that you do that BECAUSE you can’t attack my arguments. No one wants to acknowledge the serious concerns about the president’s fitness that Jack and I brought up, so you focus on making me a target. Maybe if I weren’t here you’d have to fess up to how bad things have gotten on your side, since you wouldn’t have me around to distract you as an object of hate.

          • Harold says:

            Chris, please don’t take offence to comments made here about you, just take notice and adjust your interaction on Post Scripts, it will serve everyone better in the long run.

            Also, weather you or Libby are here or not would not alter my opinion of how undesirable politics have become for the average person.

            Given the nature of today’s politics I hold the view the only people benefiting from anything in office are those in office.

            We don’t post here to argue, at least I try not too, however you calling people like Peggy a “Liar” , lead me in a direction that your intentional is in wanting to argue.

            As to your profession, I was just hypothesizing, and my comment was based solely on your rudeness to others here.

            No one on the boards today that I can recall started calling you or anyone else out until you began the practice. You have the ability to change how we respond to you by showing respect to us.

            I hope you will consider my explanation, and help put a end to the personal attacks being generated on these boards.

            If you will, eventually we can get back to posting our thoughts in a manner of bickering, not berating.

  3. Chris says:

    Great post, Jack. Speaking of tweets, the president spent most of Easter Sunday whining about how persecuted he is. Even his obligatory Easter message was him bragging about economic trends that started under Obama and taking credit for it. So much for “the most Christian president of our lifetimes” as that kook Michele Bachmann called him this week.

    You’re right to call out his selfishness, but I’m afraid the issue goes much deeper than tweets and words. Thanks to the Mueller report—which Trump originally claimed showed “total exoneration” and now claims is “total bullshit”—we have proof of what has long been clear: Trump knew of the Russian hacking and meddling and knew that it was designed to benefit him. Instead of speaking out against this, or encouraging his staff to report their contacts and offers of Russian dirt to the FBI, he lied about it and denied there was any such meddling, while at the same time actively encouraging it. There’s no evidence any of this rose to the level of criminal conspiracy, but it is still, as Mitt Romney was right to point out, appalling behavior from a president. I would go further than Romney and say it violates Trump’s oath of office. Mueller also documented ten acts that could be construed as obstruction, but explained that he chose not to bring any such charges due to guidelines that say the DOJ cannot indict a sitting president. He also points out that a lot of those acts were unsuccessful because his staff simply refused his orders.

    I hope Romney and you will join in calls for impeachment. Trump is unfit to be president, as your post explains quite well. Don’t think of it as a choice between Trump and the left—think of it as a choice between Trump and Pence. I have plenty of problems with the latter as well, but at least he would behave as an adult and would not lower the dignity of the office with every statement.

  4. Libby says:

    “I could live with that if he remained effective, ….”

    What “effective”? His presidency thus far consist of two things: the ACA is strengthen, not repealed; the corporatocracy got a tax break, but you didn’t; and the national debt is growing like a weed which will shortly commence to sap the economy.

    And Trump will spend the rest of his presidency fighting subpoenas … and carping, whining and squealing: “Nobody disobeys my orders!”

    What a schmuck.

  5. Libby says:

    But the people I REALLY despise are the Ryans and McConnells, who thought they would be able to use Trump as a front for all manner of nefarious policy making … and still do to an extent. McConnell is busily trying to staff the federal courts with Neanderthals.

    But we is putting up a fight.

    • Pie Guevara says:

      Wherein Lippy insults Neanderthals!

      Neanderthals were labeled as backwards, dim-witted brutes first by German biologist Ernst Haeckel who failed to convince his fellow scientists to name the species Homo stupidus.

      Early on Neanderthals were described as incapable of moral or theistic conceptions and were depicted as knuckle-dragging apemen incapable of creating art or developing sophisticated tools.

      Evidence to the contrary now abounds. They created art and buried their dead (indicators of theism), took care of the sick and elderly who could not care for themselves and used tools similar to the ones used by other early humans, including blades and scrapers made from stone flakes.

      DNA research shows the Neanderthal’s genomes and those of Homo sapiens are more than 99.5 percent identical, differing by only about 3 million bases. It appears that we and Neanderthals diverged from a common ancestor about 700,000 years ago, and split permanently some 300,000 years later.

      Other DNA research indicates that Neanderthals interbred with humans and that many humans carry Neanderthal genes, but this is disputed.

      So, even YOU Lippy may have some Homo neanderthalensis in you given present day DNA research, though I imagine you have more Equus africanus asinus than anything else.

  6. Peggy says:

    Jack, as you know I didn’t vote for Trump in 2016, because of his personality. I thought he was crude, not well spoken and extremely unpresidential. Not someone I’d want as a friend.

    Since then I’ve changed my mind based on his past acts of very generous charity giving and acts of giving to help complete strangers. His acts showed me a very caring private man behind the public tough one he presents to the world. He’s said he wants everyone to have a better life and I believe it.

    What he’s done for the economy and the jobs market for every industry is historical and he did it in about two years. He’s done this while under constant attacks from the left, right and the media. It’s not a fair fight, three against one while one hand tied behind his back. I can’t fault an innocent man fighting to convince a country he’s not guilty of the bogus charges against him. He did/is doing what any human would, declare he’s innocent.

    This Mueller investigation should have never happened. The Dems have tried to destroy Trump to cover up for their own illegal acts. The truth will come out and many of the concerns you and others have will be explained. Follow John Solomon, Sarah Carter and Tom Fitton, who are exposing the truth each week tracing the origin to those involved. Lindsey Graham, his committee and republicans in both houses are doing research into the Russian/Mueller investigation.

    Trump’s language and personality also remind me of LBJ and Churchill. It’s well know what LBJ said about his racist attitude for blacks and his hatred of churches for not supporting his senate run. He made them both pay out of revenge and are still paying today. Churchill was forced to leave as PM, then begged to return during WWII to save England. Churchill’s personality is very similar to Trump’s and they both came from wealth and considered elites.

    Will history someday state the similarities between the two men? Time will tell. I’m voting that it will. Americans wanted a fighter, who would stand up against the Dems plowing ahead with their socialist agenda. Trump will win in 2020. No republican can beat him. Biden won’t win because of his ties to Obama’s Russian Collusion/Mueller Investigation. Sanders won’t unless every freedom loving adult stays home, and the rest of the field so far are jokes.

    • Chris says:

      Jack, as you know I didn’t vote for Trump in 2016, because of his personality. I thought he was crude, not well spoken and extremely unpresidential. Not someone I’d want as a friend.

      Since then I’ve changed my mind based on his past acts of very generous charity giving and acts of giving to help complete strangers.

      Peggy, that doesn’t even make sense…someone can be extremely charitable and also crude, not well spoken and unpresidential.

      And Trump is not charitable. His charity was literally shut down for being fraudulent!

      https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+chairty&oq=trump+chairty&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l2j69i61j0l2.1396j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

      Now you’ve been able to find a few isolated instances of Trump being charitable, but you could find the same from any rich person. There’s no evidence that Trump is exceptionally charitable for someone of his wealth, and there’s a lot of evidence showing the opposite (such as the many stories of him using his charity improperly, and his public selfish and greedy behavior).

      I could show you as many examples of Hillary Clinton being charitable as you can show of Trump doing the same…but that wouldn’t change your opinion of her, since you’re not straining to find reasons to like her.

      What he’s done for the economy and the jobs market for every industry is historical and he did it in about two years.

      No, he didn’t. Show me a graph that indicates he did this. Literally any graph! Because I can show you these, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

      https://www.bbc.com/news/business-42748243

      Which clearly show that Trump inherited a good economy with consistently falling unemployment. You can argue that Trump’s policies have kept these trends going strong, but you cannot pretend that the trends did not exist prior to his inauguration just because you don’t like his predecessor.

      I can’t fault an innocent man fighting to convince a country he’s not guilty of the bogus charges against him. He did/is doing what any human would, declare he’s innocent.

      Except he didn’t just say he was innocent; he kept saying that Russia was innocent of their crimes against our country, even though he knew they were guilty. He ignored and denied an attack on our country because he personally benefited from it, Peggy. He didn’t work directly with the Russian government because he didn’t have to–they helped him, and he helped them, as I’m sure they knew he would–that’s the kind of person he’s been his whole public life.

      This Mueller investigation should have never happened.

      Ridiculous. Re-read what I wrote above. The Mueller investigation happened because Trump fired the FBI director and said he did so in anger over the director investigating his ties to Russia. His ties to Russia had to be investigated given the many, many, many contacts between the government and the campaign, and Trump’s constant denials that Russia meddled at all.

      It strikes me as absurd to argue that this investigation was unnecessary given how many Trump campaign staffers and other officials have either pleaded or been found guilty of lying about their interactions with Russia…why would they do that if there was nothing to investigate?

      That no crime was found on Trump’s part, and no collusion was found at all, does not change the grave national security concerns raised by the report, concerns that those of us on the left have had all along: Trump and his campaign gratefully accepted the aid of Russia. How anyone can argue that such an investigation was unnecessary after the Mueller report confirms that fact is beyond me.

      A failure to investigate Trump’s links to Russia would have been negligent given only what we knew at the time about his campaign’s relations with that country and the country’s attack on ours. In hindsight the necessity of the investigation is only more clear.

      The Dems have tried to destroy Trump to cover up for their own illegal acts.

      The investigation was led by Republicans the whole way through, and there was no illegal conduct in the process of the investigation. Even Bill Barr himself said the investigation was conducted appropriately…is he in on it too?

      Trump’s language and personality also remind me of LBJ and Churchill. It’s well know what LBJ said about his racist attitude for blacks and his hatred of churches for not supporting his senate run. He made them both pay out of revenge and are still paying today.

      This is just not true. LBJ was extremely aggressive and successful at fighting against segregation in schools and hospitals. And his war on poverty caused a huge fall in the black poverty rate:

      https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/28/lbj-great-society-josh-zeitz-book-216538

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/07/11/poverty-in-the-50-years-since-the-other-america-in-five-charts/?utm_term=.f1ab40734c8a

      I have no idea what the “punishing churches” thing is all about.

      And neither LBJ nor Churchhill spoke in public the way Trump does.

      Americans wanted a fighter, who would stand up against the Dems plowing ahead with their socialist agenda.

      But he isn’t a “fighter,” he’s a whiner. He doesn’t even have control of his own staff.

      Trump will win in 2020. No republican can beat him. Biden won’t win because of his ties to Obama’s Russian Collusion/Mueller Investigation. Sanders won’t unless every freedom loving adult stays home, and the rest of the field so far are jokes.

      You’re defending a reality TV star who won with zero government or military experience, who, by the way, thinks noise from wind farms causes cancer. Where do you get off calling any of the Dem candidates “jokes?”

    • Libby says:

      Peggy, people who pick Presidents for their personalities are killing our republic … with their … we’ll just call it “shallow” understanding of their responsibilities as citizens.

      Hils is not a charmer, but she does have brains that work, nor would she be fattening the corporatocracy at your expense.

      Geeez.

  7. Peggy says:

    Levin’s full Sunday night show.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77_fbAsxPv4

    Byron York on Levin’s show Sunday night also.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ybv2HjRQGNU

  8. Pie Guevara says:

    Re: “Let’s face it, he’s a jerk. I could live with that if he remained effective, but he’s losing his effectiveness every day because he doesn’t know when to shut up.”

    Ditto.

    With all of Trump’s valid faults the left simply cannot stop themselves from speciously calling him a Nazi or a Hitler or xenophobic sexist, racist bigot. These knee-jerk accusations are always their fallback position and are as equally obnoxious and asinine as Trump shooting his mouth off on Twitter.

    If there is a plus for the big fat mouth, it is only that he drives Democrats and the rest of the left completely nuts as noted by J Soden above. Trump congratulating CNN was classic.

    • Chris says:

      Just to take one of those…why is it “specious” to call Trump sexist? That’s the least debatable label you included there. Trump’s sexist remarks to Republican women alone in 2016 are a long list…Heidi Cruz, Carly Fiorina, Megyn Kelly…you must know this, so why are you pretending not to?

      • Libby says:

        “… speciously calling him a Nazi or a Hitler or xenophobic sexist, racist bigot.”

        Finally! Something resembling independent thought!

        But Pie … we will unpack it, and we will argue with it.

        1) I have never seen or heard a lefty pundit of any serious reputation compare Trump to “a Nazi or a Hitler”. Any number of doofus blog commentors probably do, but who cares? We all know that it’s simple-minded name-calling and without merit. And you make the assertion because you want to make the other side look feeble (which we can be) but this does not in any way take away from Trump’s aggregiousness.

        2) Xenophobe … The Muslim Ban, The “Immigration” Boogie
        3) Sexist … The Access Hollywood Tape,
        4) Racist … The Muslim Ban, The Big Birther
        5) Bigot … The Muslim Ban, The Big Birther

        I know how much the NYT upsets you, but

        https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/15/opinion/leonhardt-trump-racist.html

        Some things are just not arguable.

      • Common Sense says:

        Shall we add this to the above statement as well !

        Every woman has the right to be safe and believed… Unless you are raped by Bill Clinton, beaten by Keith Ellison, groped
        by Joe Biden and Cory Booker or killed by Ted Kennedy.

        I think we shall.

        • Chris says:

          No woman has ever accused Cory Booker of groping her. He admitted he did so, himself, at age 15. I’m not sure how that fits into the idea of Dems not believing women. (And, of course, Dems always believed that Ted Kennedy was responsible for Mary Jo’s death–they just didn’t think it should be disqualifying for him. That was wrong, and wouldn’t fly today.)

          • Pie Guevara says:

            Re: “No woman has ever accused Cory Booker of groping her. He admitted he did so, himself, at age 15.”

            Cory Booker lied about his age in that op-ed confessional. He was actually 18 (if you actually read his confessional, you can figure that out for yourself, the clue is there) which would have made him eligible for criminal prosecution if he had been caught.

            Of course, I do not expect that Chris can figure it out. Close analysis and critical thinking is beyond him.

            Cory Booker is running for President.

          • Chris says:

            Ok, I read it.

            https://stanforddailyarchive.com/cgi-bin/stanford?a=d&d=stanford19920219-01.2.16

            Are you talking about the Top Gun reference? That could easily be read as either faulty memory or just editorialization—the idea that referring to a jokey line from a movie that hadn’t come out yet at the time he claims the incident happened proves that he deliberately lied about his age is silly.

          • Common Sense says:

            There goes this Chris again, trying to separate Crap from used tissue.

            Watching the left come up with schemes to “catch Trump” is like watching Wile E. Coyote trying to catch the Road Runner.

  9. Cherokee Jack says:

    Jack. I agree pretty much with Peggy.
    I also agree that Trump is a horses’ butt, and I wouldn’t want to be seen with him in public. But he is getting some good stuff done.
    One of the most important jobs of a president is selecting jurors for the Supreme Court and the appellate courts. Just look at the damage done by the Warren Court, and the messes created by the ninth circuit.
    I’d vote for Nero if he’d fill Ginsburg’s upcoming vacancy with an originalist.

    • Peggy says:

      Thanks Cherokee Jack, one of the things I love that Trump has done is making Democrats eat their own words, like he is doing with the southern border. At first everyone of them denied there was a crisis. It was all a manufactured crisis made up in Trump’s head. Now, that there are thousands arrested each day he forced them to admit it was a very real crisis and he threatened to send them to sanctuary city and states.

      To do all of this and to get the news out he had to use his Twitter account, with 50 million followers. The biased MSM wouldn’t have covered it. Without Trump bringing everyone’s attention to the border situation we’d still be in the dark. He’s using every means possible and turning the tables on those after him is why his supporters agree with what he’s doing and his opponents go after him even more. Heard just now on the news Dems are filling a whole new bunch of lawsuits against him. They can’t, for various reasons impeach him so they’re going to pull out the old get Palin playbook to drive him out of office.

      If you missed Mark Levin and Byron York video I posted above it’s really good and worth watching.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Thanks Jack, I get it and thanks to you and Peggy for saying it here. It’s just that he really ticks me off at times and I had to spout off. I suppose if he never did anything else, (good or bad) except to appoint a good Supreme Court that’s more than most president have done and it really will help shape our country for years to come. I’m with you on Ginzburg.

  10. Pie Guevara says:

    Re Chris above: ” I don’t think good Republicans like yourself…”

    From the Sometimes-You-Just-Have-To Laugh Department! Chris instructing Republicans and Post Scripts fans on what “good Republicans” are! I love it! The arrogance and pomposity is palpable, but there is more…

    While very close to the “No True Scotsman” logical fallacy, I would like credit Chris with coming inventing his own logical fallacy. As a sibling of the “No True Scotsman” fallacy, I shall dub it the “Good (Insert Any Group Here)” fallacy.

    Example: Good Republicans would not want Trump for President.
    Converse Example: Bad Republicans would want Trump for President.

    For further information see: No True Scotsman Fallacy

    Chris — who has in these pages violated every single logical fallacy known to man (his favorite being ad hominem) — has actually managed to construct a logical fallacy of his own!

    Congratulations Chris! I knew you had it in you buddy! Your education as an English major has born fruit.

    • Chris says:

      Pie, can you explain why you think distinguishing between good members of a group and bad members of a group is fallacious?

      While you’re at it, can you rebut any of the points I raised in my reply to Jack?

      • Pie Guevara says:

        Chris, read the link and get an education.

        I have no interest whatsoever in “debating” a laughably pompous, arrogant, moronic, and consistently fallacious ***hole who calls me and everyone he disagrees with bigots, racists, sexists and xenophobes (etc. ad nauseam) by way of “rebuttal.”

        What passes for “debate” in your mind wouldn’t get past a junior high school debate team. No debate team worth a squat would want a loser who is so stupid that he cannot open his big fat yap without spewing out a logical fallacy.

        I have told you this before on many, many occasions. How thick is that skull of yours? Get clue, pal. Do I need a hammer to get through to you? Would you prefer claw hammer or ball peen? 10 or 16 ounce?

        I rather would try to teach a dog numerical solutions of non-linear systems than “debate” an ignorant fool like you. I cannot help but wonder what your peers think to themselves when a nudnik like you enters the teacher’s lunchroom. The internal cringing must be massive.

        But thanks for the entertainment, dude. 😀

        • Chris says:

          The link is about the No True Scotsmen fallacy, not the “Good (Insert Group Here) Fallacy,” because that is not a fallacy. You made it up.

          You won’t explain why what I said was fallacious because you can’t explain why it’s fallacious. Because it isn’t fallacious.

          Meanwhile, you routinely ignore far more illogical arguments made by people here who support the same policies and politicians as you.

          And you think you came off looking great here.

          Amazing.

          • Pie Gievara says:

            “And you think you came off looking great here.”

            Projection Chris. You really think a clueless Twithole like you could possibly know what is in my mind? Really? Hahahahahaha! Pompous fool.

          • Chris says:

            Thank you for conceding, in your lack of ability to defend the imaginary fallacy that you made up, that no such fallacy exists.

            I was completely right to differentiate between good and bad Republicans. Jack is a good Republican, and a good person. You are neither, as you demonstrate with each deranged, unhinged post.

  11. Chris says:

    “So often, the president would say here’s what I want to do and here’s how I want to do it and I would have to say to him: ‘Mr President, I understand what you want to do but you can’t do it that way. It violates the law.” —Former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/rex-tillerson-trump-illegal-things-violate-law-secretary-state-mike-pompeo-a8673111.html

  12. Pie Guevara says:

    Re Chris: “The link is about the No True Scotsmen fallacy, not the “Good (Insert Group Here) Fallacy,” because that is not a fallacy. You made it up.”

    They are obviously related you nitwit. Siblings. If you had any capacity to even understand the True Scotsman fallacy you would see the close relationship. You should be proud of your invention! Instead you are too dang thick to figure it out. I no longer believe you ever play at being intentionally obtuse, you ARE obtuse.

    Half a year ago (more?) when I pointed out that you (and probably some phony alter-ego of yours that joined in) committed the “No True Scotsman” fallacy in exactly the same manner on the same issue in the same thread, you didn’t even recognize that, Mr. Master(de)bater!

    I do so enjoy watching you make an ass of yourself.

    Well, no more wasting my time with fools and ignoramuses like Chris and Lippy, I’m off to watch another installment of Sir Richard Attenborough narrating “Planet Earth.” The species covered there are far more interesting than the species of progressive dolts who frequent this blog in the comments section.

    • Chris says:

      “They are obviously related you nitwit.”

      And yet somehow, no one has ever labeled this fallacy before you, and I’m the first person you’ve ever seen make it.

      Or, alternately, it isn’t a fallacy at all.

      Which is more likely?

      The latter, of course. Calling Jack a “good Republican” wasn’t fallacious at all. You keep repeating that it is and not explaining why it is because you know you can’t defend your argument.

  13. Chris says:

    “I was a Trump transition staffer, and I’ve seen enough. It’s time for impeachment.”

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/gop-staffer-advocates-trumps-impeachment/587785/

    The Mueller report was that tipping point for me, and it should be for Republican and independent voters, and for Republicans in Congress. In the face of a Department of Justice policy that prohibited him from indicting a sitting president, Mueller drafted what any reasonable reader would see as a referral to Congress to commence impeachment hearings.
    Depending on how you count, roughly a dozen separate instances of obstruction of justice are contained in the Mueller report. The president dangled pardons in front of witnesses to encourage them to lie to the special counsel, and directly ordered people to lie to throw the special counsel off the scent.

  14. Peggy says:

    Bad news for Hillary and Obama.

    Judicial Watch: FBI Found Clinton Emails At Obama White House

    “A top FBI official has confirmed Hillary Clinton’s missing emails were found in the Obama White House.

    Assistant FBI Director Bill Priestap admitted under oath the bureau had found 49,000 Clinton emails at the Executive Office of President Obama.”
    https://www.oann.com/judicial-watch-fbi-found-clinton-emails-at-obama-white-house/?fbclid=IwAR08I3XgmE72y-u2PuBrh6DJG1jvwZ8BI_6MEZMXp9tWCxpbEwyJqa5wJxw

    • Harold says:

      Peggy, that was a interesting find and read, Thank You.

      I have suspected the notion that it is clear, Robert Mueller quit digging when all of the tunnels led back to Hillary and Obama.

      Just keep this thought people, Liberals are not after Trump, their after you!. Trump is just in their way.

      • Peggy says:

        Thanks Harold, Rush is saying the whole Mueller Investigation was a coverup attempt to hide the illegal activities the Obama administration did before, during and after the 2016 election. They were so sure Hillary was going to win that everything they did would remain unknown. But, Trump won and they had to use the “Insurance Policy” by discrediting, lying and constantly attacking him to remove him from office by any means.

        The below is an unproven situation that took place after Hillary’s after her forum interview with Matt Lauer. We’ve heard for years about her out of control temper tantrums and throwing things a Bill and others. So, this situation is highly probable based on her past behaviour, IMHO. Trump is a choir boy compared to her.

        Hillary, “If that f – – – ing bastard wins we all hang from nooses! Lauer’s finished…and if I lose it’s all on you ass – – – – s for screwing this up.”

        Hillary to Donna Brazile, “I’m so sick of your face. You stare at the wall like a brain dead buffalo, while letting that f – – – ing Lauer get away with this. What are you good for, really? Get the f – – – to work janitoring this mess – do I make myself clear?”

        ———

        NBC Associate Producer of Forum:

        “Behind the scenes, NBC technicians and cameramen at the Wednesday night, Commander-in-Chief Forum (Sept 7) report that Hillary Clinton was so angry and incensed that she had been ‘blind-sided’ by one question she was not prepared for and had not approved in advance.

        “When her time in front of the cameras ended, Clinton shook the hand Lauer extended to her and smiled once more for the wide camera shot and then Hillary proceeded to pick up a full glass of water and threw it at the face of her assistant and the screaming started. She was in a full meltdown and no one on her staff dared speak with her – she went kind of manic and didn’t have any control over herself at that point. How these people work with this woman is amazing to me. Most of the small military audience were cordoned off, their seating not close to Mrs. Clinton, but certainly they heard her screaming because it was loud…and she really didn’t seem to care who heard any of it.”

        ……. According to people working on the sidelines, “When Matt posed the one legitimate question about the FBI investigation concerning her homemade server and the unsecured emails, we could see she was beginning to boil and her eyes looked to pop.”

        “It was toward the end of her interview so she was becoming unglued by the time Lauer finished with questioning. Hillary went ballistic, throwing a huge tantrum and screaming at her staff, “you f – – – ing idiots, you were supposed to have this thing set up for me and you’ve screwed it up! If that f – – – ing bastard wins we all hang from nooses! Lauer’s finished…and if I lose it’s all on you ass – – – – s for screwing this up.”

        Clinton finally stormed off the military ‘set’ and the assistant producer said she was screaming that she wanted to talk to “the idiot who set this mess up…you do not blindside me – ever!” and continued to demand to speak with executives at Comcast, parent company to NBC Universal.

        Her dozen or more aides were visibly disturbed and tried to calm her down when she started shaking uncontrollably. That did not stop her from demanding an executive “on the phone, now!” She was told the executive-in-charge of the forum was ready to talk with her and she was led away by two rather large aides who appeared to help her walk.

        The TV executives got the message with all of the censuring headlines that followed over the next couple of days when it seemed the entire media turned on Matt Lauer for behaving in a “partisan” manner and “being grossly unfair and critical of the former secretary of state.”

        Matt Lauer was heavily criticized on air by the Clinton campaign the rest of the week with most of the mainstream media joining in. The media appeared to frame Matt’s one serious question as the Clinton campaign was doing…”an unfair and partisan attack on Mrs. Clinton.”

        Matt Lauer is still facing major backlash following his 23 minutes with Hillary Clinton. Privately, many reporters said Matt handed the Democrat nominee the expected softball questions, but made the decision to ask about the emails because, “the American people deserve an answer from the former secretary of state.”

        Calls were made to New York Times, Washington Post and Huffington Post and Twitter executives with orders to “Crush Matt Lauer”. As you can easily see with all the headlines from these MSM sources, they did as they were told by the Clinton campaign.

        Hillary also screamed that she would be “treated with respect at the debates or heads will roll.” Staffers at the Clinton campaign report that they fear her wrath and uncontrollable outbursts, and one described Hillary as “an egotistical psychopath”.

        Since Hillary does not allow any staff to have cell phones when she is in their presence, no footage is available, but Hillary will never let this rest. She has made it clear that she wants Matt Lauer to be “persona non grata – for putting her on the spot.”

        Interim DNC chairman Donna Brazile, the first black woman to hold the position, was singled out by Hillary during the rant. She screamed at Donna, “I’m so sick of your face. You stare at the wall like a brain dead buffalo, while letting that f – – – ing Lauer get away with this. What are you good for, really? Get the f – – – to work janitoring this mess – do I make myself clear?”

        A female NBC executive said that Donna Brazile looked at Mrs. Clinton and never flinched, which seemed to enrage Hillary all the more. The executive continued, “It was the most awful and terrible…and racist display – such a profane meltdown I have ever witnessed from anyone, and I will never forget it. That woman should never see the inside of the oval office I can tell you that. She was unhinged and just continued to verbally abuse everyone – she was out of control.”

        http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=52621

        Reported by various sources.
        https://www.reddit.com/r/HillaryForPrison/comments/58bz0g/she_was_in_full_meltdown_hillary_unleashed_on/

        “Unproven” by TruthorFiction
        https://www.truthorfiction.com/hillary-clinton-meltdown-matt-lauer-interview/

        • Chris says:

          You spread baseless rumors about a woman who will never be president while ignoring proven facts about our actual president–namely, that he knew Russia had attacked the nation in order to benefit himself, and gladly accepted that help while lying about it to the public.

          And yet you insist that you not be treated as the kind of person who would do this.

          Amazing.

  15. Pie Guevara says:

    Re LudiChris: “You’re “wasting time” because you took a common figure of speech and debated the literal value of it rather than the content. No one made you do that. Don’t blame Libby for it. This is the way you choose to behave to people you disagree with. Own it.”

    Ooooooh! Another 19th century throwback chimes in the ignorant Lippy one! “Own it.” Hahahahahahaha! Where did you learn that one? On the playground at Witless Stooge Elementary?

    You have ten tons of gall trying to chastise me for my behavior towards you and Lippy, you hypocritical ass. You’re wasting YOUR time.

    ALL I HAVE EVER done is to toss the steady stream of crap you and Lippy toss at other folks in these pages right back in your faces. Own it, chump. All you two chimps ever do in these pages is blow snot and toss your feces at others with a steady stream of insults, ad hominem attacks and juvenile sneers you ridiculous, vile ass.

    Cry me a river you imbecilic hypocrite! Stop lying to yourself! Cease YOUR OWN ways and I might stop stuffing the feces you and Lippy throw around in here back in your faces. Or better yet, just drop dead.

    No wonder you and Lippy hate Trump so much. You are just as rude, crude and socially unacceptable as he is! Your projection, LudiChris, projection. Take a good hard look in the mirror some day if you have the guts, you pathetic poltroon. 😀

    • Chris says:

      ALL I HAVE EVER done is to toss the steady stream of crap you and Lippy toss at other folks in these pages right back in your faces

      No. There is a clear distinction between the comments Libby and I have left on this post and the comments you have made against us. You can’t see it because your self-image depends on you not seeing it. You insist we’re just as bad as you because it’s the delusion that justifies your behavior.

      I have made actual counter-arguments against those I disagree with in this thread. I do that in almost every thread. You haven’t done that in a while. You’re not up to the task.

      • Pie Gievara says:

        You two need to get a damn clue. I am NOT addressing ANY arguments you or Lippy make (which, often, are so much witless crap too). That is not the crap I speak of you oblivious twit! It is the steady stream of berating, insults and ad hominem attacks you two engage in against ANYONE who participates here and disagrees with you (or anyone in politics who displeases you, for that matter), you oblivious moron.

        If you and Lippy were to change yours ways and treat others in a civil, polite and respectful manner, I would not stuff the ***t you sling right back in your face.

        As far as “debate” goes —

        1) I tend not to waste me time engaging in “debate” with any ***hole who calls me and others racists, sexists, bigots, xenophobes etc. ad nauseam and whose modus operandi is puerile, snotty berating and engaging in the most vile form of name calling. Jerks like you and Lippy are a dime a dozen on Twitter. If you cannot be civil, drop dead.

        2) What makes you think anything you post here is worthy of debate? That is a fantasy of yours. Many who visit here could not give a hoot what a horrid little jerk like you — or Lippy — thinks about anything.

        GET IT?

        Own it. 😀

        Next. 😀

    • Harold says:

      Pie’s response to Chris, “You are just as rude, crude and socially unacceptable as he is! ”

      Well that about sums up a lot of feeling most have about Chris and Libby.

      My thinking is their need to berate our opinions is a indication of the anger and hated they still carry over Hillary’s loss, and Trumps (America’s) victory.

      Pie and J pretty much are succinct about it. It may not solve or help matters but sometimes you need to mirror the situation just to point out the sycophancy posted by Chris and Libby.

      Especially Libby’s inference to suggest that Hillary would make a great President. Thank God to high heaven we don’t have to have a deal with or have discussions about Hillary if she were in office.

      There are a lot of us that just understand the need of today’s liberals to go negative on anything Trump and ignore most of their posts. No matter how we feel about Trumps manner, us Trump supporters are grateful he is in there and working on improving America.

      Jack, you opened the proverbial can of worms on this one, the two liberals here just couldn’t pass on trying to lowering the bar on people given a chance to express their likes or dislikes about Trump in regards to his use of Twitter, I expected as much when I first read it. They had the same chance to post their opinions, but people like Chris (especially) and Libby will only be critics and misuse others opinions.

      Lastly, there were people who read this post who got upset with you and told me so, they didn’t respond to you about it, and they had some valid reasons not to do so. I can’t say I disagree with them.

      • Chris says:

        Lastly, there were people who read this post who got upset with you and told me so, they didn’t respond to you about it, and they had some valid reasons not to do so. I can’t say I disagree with them.

        I’ve noticed that lots of Trump supporters get upset when other Republicans say things about the president that are undeniably true.

        Not one person here has disputed a single point in Jack’s post.

        What is it that Ben Shapiro says about facts not caring about your feelings? Why should Jack care that people are “upset” with him if those people won’t even explain why they’re upset? If no one can explain why they should be?

    • Libby says:

      ALL I HAVE EVER done is to toss the steady stream of crap you and Lippy toss at other folks in these pages right back in your faces.

      Calling things crap … is not an argument. All you ever say is “crap”. This is not effective, or in anyway persuasive … of anything … but your inability to form ideas (of anything but “crap”).

      • Pie Gievara says:

        See my response to Chris above and try to get a clue, Lippy.

        • Chris says:

          If this is your response, then why respond to us at all? Everyone here is aware of your blinding contempt for us. You’ve clearly run out of new and original ways to express that contempt. Either address the arguments–like we do, even when we do use insults to punctuate our point–or shut up. Your current approach is useless and makes you look terrible.

          • Pie Guevara says:

            And your vile **** smells like roses and you look like a champ, no?

            I knew my response would fall on deaf ears. No doubt you and Lippy think your approach actually works as a form of “debate.” Keep believing that, nudniks.

            Chris, you (and Lippy) behave like an ***holes because you are ***holes. There is no changing that and I have no expectations of either of you two clowns actually trying to engage in civil discourse. It is beyond you.

          • Chris says:

            I try to engage in civil discourse all the time, including with you. And I’ll keep trying.

  16. Chris says:

    Today the president shared a baseless conspiracy theory that the UK helped Obama spy on his campaign.

    The theory originated from a guy who baselessly accused John Kerry of committing war crimes and claimed that the GOP had a tape of Michelle Obama raging against “whitey.” (The tape did not exist.)

    The theory is considered so stupid that Fox News suspended Andrew Napolitano for spreading it on his show last year.

    The president has no judgment and no ability to tell reliable information from unreliable information.

    But you can all ignore all of that and go back to talking about what a terrible teacher I must be for disagreeing with you.

    • Chris says:

      Here’s the UK’s intelligence agency’s response to Trump’s conspiracy theory:

      The allegations that GCHQ was asked to conduct ‘wire tapping’ against the then president-elect are nonsense. They are utterly ridiculous and should be ignored.

      The intelligence agency of our greatest ally calling the words of the President of the United States “nonsense” that “should be ignored” would have been unheard of prior to Trump’s presidency. And they’re right.

      How low we have fallen.

  17. Peggy says:

    I’m an “uncovered.”

    Trump’s army of ‘the uncovered’:

    “A funny thing happened on the way to the 2016 presidential election. The unelectable, uncouth, unintelligent, unpolitical, unlikeable, and utterly unthinkable guy won. Clearly, the “deplorables” assisted, as did the “bitter clingers” — owners of guns and Bibles — and the so-called uneducated, unsophisticated, and ridiculed patriotic swath of the American people.

    But it took more. The uncovereds carried President Trump over the finish line to unbelievable victory.

    In 2019, going into the upcoming presidential election cycle, the uncovereds’ reticence stems from far more profound fears. There is a fear of violence. There is a fear of being fired. There is a fear of grade retribution. There is a fear of a car with a pro-Trump bumper sticker being vandalized. This fear radiates in America. Incredibly, the Democratic Party has created an atmosphere of free speech suppression — “if you disagree with us, we will silence you.”

    The Democrats, with their anarchistic thug minions, blackmail serial con artists, and monolithic control of public education and social and print media, have terrorized many Trump aficionados into diving underground and undercover. By doing so, they have perpetuated the inevitability of their second and seemingly more comprehensive demise. That is because, by pushing more uncovereds underground, they don’t know how many uncovereds exist.”

    https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/04/trumps_army_of_the_uncovered.html#ixzz5m1R6odc0

  18. J Soden says:

    With the gaggle of Demwits vying for the nomination for 2020 with their plans to confiscate guns, open borders, free tuition for all, infanticide, PC BS and flat-out Socialism, we get to choose.
    And if you can’t decide whom to vote FOR, then figure out whom to vote AGAINST!

  19. Pie Guevara says:

    Re Chris: “I try to engage in civil discourse all the time, including with you. And I’ll keep trying.”

    Denial isn’t just a river in Africa. The moment you stop being an abusive, slur mongering and insulting cretin, I just might believe it. But we both know that is not going to happen.

  20. Pie Guevara says:

    Re Chris:”Ok, I read it.

    https://stanforddailyarchive.com/cgi-bin/stanford?a=d&d=stanford19920219-01.2.16

    Are you talking about the Top Gun reference? That could easily be read as either faulty memory or just editorialization— the idea that referring to a jokey line from a movie that hadn’t come out yet at the time he claims the incident happened proves that he deliberately lied about his age is silly.

    No comment necessary.

  21. Don Johnston says:

    As long as we have 2 main choices for president (assuming we will again in 2020), we who love this nation as founded and wish it to remain “the land of the free and the home of the brave”, must hold our nose (if we have to) and vote for Donald Trump. He was last of my preferences of the 17 who were running in 2016, but Trump was the last man standing and was the Republican nominee. I have been pleasantly surprised by his conservative policies and agenda, and he is surrounded by some good people whom he actually listens to. Yes, in public and in some of his tweets, he often comes across as a jerk, but many attest to how charming and generous he can be in private. Most will not give him the credit that is due, but in 3 crucial areas he stands as tall or taller than any president in history; 1) Putting America first, 2) the Sanctity of Life, 3) Supporting Israel. There’s much more he is doing (immigration, war on drugs, etc.), but because of the 3 above-mentioned priorities, America is prospering and God is blessing this nation. Psalm 33:12.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *