A possible scenario of the next 2 years

Should have don that.
 
I'm just waiting until they start calling Stormy Daniels a trafficking victim. Or some kind of a crime victim. That will probably be next, naturally
 
Though a seemingly improbable hoax, Biden's unparalleled level of absurdity and incompetence should begin to make millions of Americans suspicious. It just feels like it has to be a joke.

I mean, what else do you do with a president coming out to talk about a mass shooting, and saying he's just there for the ice cream? He can't form sentences, gets lost at his own house, and waves at dead people. How is this real??
 
Well they've definitely learned something over the past few years. And from the spectacular failure of their January 6th movie series that nobody watched

One thing you can't say about the Democrats is that they haven't learned a little bit about whether people are or are not wanting to move on from trump.

They sure moved on from that Nashville killing fast! Gee whiz I've never seen such speed:cautious:
Screenshot_20230402-125018.png
 
Rationalizing Actions by disguising or confusing it with Identity is the oldest story in the world.

RationalLies

Libs are full of contradiction. If a college administrator dares to suggest that possibly just maybe a 20 year old girl should not become severely intoxicated and walk around in her underwear, God help that administrator. "Don't blame the victim!"

But when a trans activists murders Christian kids all of a sudden they want to make sure we don't talk about the identity of either and all the sudden it's the trans community that's under attack and need our sympathy.

Always, always, always explore the hateful motivation that led to a mass killing. Except just not this one, please!

If liberals didn't have double standards they would have no standards at all

On MSNBC they call this sort of thing selective outrage, but they can't seem to recognize it when they do it...ouch
 
Last edited:
Pat Hartman said:
@jpl458

Here's two examples of how the deep state undermined the Trump administration.
1. Trump told the military to remove troops from the Middle East as well as from Germany. ON TV, they admitted to shuffling troops around to look like they were complying but they knew better and so never actually removed the troops. Disobeying a direct and unambiguous order from their Commander in Chief. Miley and the other members of the Joint Chiefs should be court marshalled.
Joint Chiefs Chair Milley Undermined Trump, Pentagon Officials on Afghanistan: Report | Newsmax.com
2. The Muller report confirmed that the FBI lied to the FISA courts to conduct illegal surveillance on Trump associates even AFTER Trump won in 2016. The Muller report did not find any evidence of "collusion" between the Trump campaign and the Russians.

And NOW we know for a fact that Hillary paid for the Steele dossier that set this whole fiasco in motion and cost you and me millions of dollars because the DNC was fined over $100,000 for this misuse of campaign funds and Hillary was fined $8,000 very quietly last year. I didn't even see this bit of news until a week ago so if none of the talking heads on Fox picked it up, it sure wasn't carried on the nightly news:( Apparently this is somehow different from the campaign finance violation (paying $130, 000 of personal/corporate funds to an EXTORTIONIST) that they keep trying to prosecute Trump for. The difference is quite clear if you care to open your eyes. Trump would have paid off the porn actress even if he were not running for President to keep Melania from hearing about it. Whereas Clinton had no use for the Steele lies except to hurt the Trump campaign and therefore help her own so that was clearly a campaign finance violation. It is not ambiguous at all. The NDA, in the Trump case is at worst ambiguous which is why the feds didn't even consider attempting to prosecute or even fine, Trump at the time it came out.

Hillary Clinton campaign and DNC fined by FEC over Trump-Russia dossier research | CNN Politics
Click to expand...
Couldn't find anything regarding your first point about the troop withdrawals. But did find articles on your 2nd and 3rd points. I don't think the first indictment of Trump has much meaning, it's more of a circus, but the others are pretty serious. Also, I never thought much of Hillary either, but I probably would a voted for her because I knew how Trump operated, from personal experience 25 years ago. He always tries not to pay his bills, and has spent more time in court, suing and being sued than just about anybody. Look at the number in his inner circle that were hurt just by trying to help him. It is my personal belief that whatever happens in the courts that hurts DJT, he brought it on himself. He is a malignant narcissist and only cares about himself.
 
jpl458 said:
Couldn't find anything regarding your first point about the troop withdrawals. But did find articles on your 2nd and 3rd points. I don't think the first indictment of Trump has much meaning, it's more of a circus, but the others are pretty serious. Also, I never thought much of Hillary either, but I probably would a voted for her because I knew how Trump operated, from personal experience 25 years ago. He always tries not to pay his bills, and has spent more time in court, suing and being sued than just about anybody. Look at the number in his inner circle that were hurt just by trying to help him. It is my personal belief that whatever happens in the courts that hurts DJT, he brought it on himself. He is a malignant narcissist and only cares about himself.
Click to expand...
I just want to go on a record as saying that I agree to a large extent with much of your post. I have never said, at least I don't think so I hope not, but I thought Trump was a really good person or a person of really good exemplary character. He is what he is, like very many of our elected officials he is just the human face, the vehicle through which policies get implemented.

Of course it would be really cool if we could always elect a wonderful person of high character, but everybody knows there's very little chance of that, so I tend to focus on policies and motivations and outcomes and what's right or wrong to me for the country rather than personalities and individuals.

Do I wish I had someone other than Trump to represent the conservative cause right now? Absolutely.

But 90% of the conservative causes are still absolutely right and they are more desperately needed now than ever.

I agree that the Democrats have made substantial inroads in the last few years by focusing on Trump as a person. That's too bad, but embarrassment from that will not cause me to become confused about all the rest of it.

I would rather someone else was the nominee. Biden is corrupt as hell. But I do understand that many people don't care, they believe in the causes the Democrats are advancing and I can at least relate to that because I'm the same way with my candidate.
 
Do you think Merrick Garland is redacting the Trans killer's manifesto personally or is he having someone in the DOJ doing it? The Tennessee police seem to be derailed.
 
AccessBlaster said:
Do you think Merrick Garland is redacting the Trans killer's manifesto personally or is he having someone in the DOJ doing it? The Tennessee police seem to be derailed.
Click to expand...

Lol yeah.

With "love and tolerance" like that, who needs hatred??

Interesting how I see people endlessly pour over the details of other mass shootings with seemingly boundless effort to explore any kind of hateful motivation that led to such a terrible act.
Except Nashville. Suddenly it's all, "let's not talk about that. The killer's motivation is just a distraction. Please don't bring up ideology, hate".

That word that you're frantically searching for right now ... That will explain it all away? It's spelled
h-y-p-o-c-r-i-s-y
 
Isaac said:
I just want to go on a record as saying that I agree to a large extent with much of your post. I have never said, at least I don't think so I hope not, but I thought Trump was a really good person or a person of really good exemplary character. He is what he is, like very many of our elected officials he is just the human face, the vehicle through which policies get implemented.

Of course it would be really cool if we could always elect a wonderful person of high character, but everybody knows there's very little chance of that, so I tend to focus on policies and motivations and outcomes and what's right or wrong to me for the country rather than personalities and individuals.

Do I wish I had someone other than Trump to represent the conservative cause right now? Absolutely.

But 90% of the conservative causes are still absolutely right and they are more desperately needed now than ever.

I agree that the Democrats have made substantial inroads in the last few years by focusing on Trump as a person. That's too bad, but embarrassment from that will not cause me to become confused about all the rest of it.

I would rather someone else was the nominee. Biden is corrupt as hell. But I do understand that many people don't care, they believe in the causes the Democrats are advancing and I can at least relate to that because I'm the same way with my candidate.
Click to expand...
I have long thought that anyone that really wants that office is suspect, just by wanting it. It's just that some appear more trustworthy than others. The most damaging thing that Trump did was to not participate in the peaceful transition of power. Al Gore (who did not invent the internet) stopped any further action in the election where he won the popular vote, but not the electoral vote because he understood history, and the damage such a challenge could cause. He put the country first, not himself, or his party. And, that kind of thinking is in short supply these days.
 
Al Gore didn't accept anything.
The surpreme court put an end to Al Gore's shenanigans other wise we would still be debating hanging Chad's. Same with Hillary and host of others like Stacy Abrams.
 
jpl458 said:
I have long thought that anyone that really wants that office is suspect, just by wanting it. It's just that some appear more trustworthy than others. The most damaging thing that Trump did was to not participate in the peaceful transition of power. Al Gore (who did not invent the internet) stopped any further action in the election where he won the popular vote, but not the electoral vote because he understood history, and the damage such a challenge could cause. He put the country first, not himself, or his party. And, that kind of thinking is in short supply these days.
Click to expand...

I am less certain that Gore's legal decisions at any particular Point were quite so altruistic. I agree that kind of thinking is in short supply these days.

I'm still on the fence about the election and cheating. I reserved the right to suspect that many more things happened than could be proved. At least keep in mind the general fact of life that out of all the dishonest or manipulative things that people do, the vast super majority of them always go undetected. It is only a tiny fraction that are approved or exposed.

That said, I am certainly willing to let many things go if we could just move on in some kind of a way that's not just totally giving up on justice.

I am willing to assume that Trump has also gotten away with bad things as most famous and rich people have and that he probably has occasionally manipulated situations for his benefit. I definitely do not see it as if he is far worse or even at all worse than most other major politicians. I think his general policies were good but they were extremely disturbing and disruptive to too many people and so the laser focus on his behavior and actions made it seem like he was something especially bad, but I don't think he was any different than average, I think he was just under the focus. It's a matter of perception I guess or at least it could be?

The general trend of the world toward pursuing philosophies that justify whatever feels good or comforting rather than what is right/ true has not been good for us. And it has caused us to be extremely confused about even a semblance of the concepts of right and wrong to the point where two people who both have communities that think of them as very upstanding citizens can be diametrically opposed on dozens of issues.

It's a tough time in that sense.

Even though I have rarely found anyone who agrees with me on this, I remain very suspicious that it's possible the only viable future for the United States is to split into two countries.

Honestly? I don't think that statement is extreme nor violent nor inconsiderate. I think it is one of the kindest and softest possible outcomes.

If the country generally is divided among people who tend to think the other person's philosophies are exactly the opposite of what is best, I just struggle to see a whole bunch of other ways forward sometimes.

I think this viewpoint is actually the gentler softer way. My other option would be hoping that I can persuade or Force my way of thinking on everyone else, but isn't that considered less noble?

Does a culture ever get to such an distinctly divided point to where separation actually makes more sense and is kinder than all other options?

Think about a marriage...
 
Speaking of Gore didn't his wife give us the record label warning? So according to liberals kids have to shielded from offense lyrics but they can get lap dances from trannies, makes sense.
 
AccessBlaster said:
Speaking of Gore didn't his wife give us the record label warning? So according to liberals kids have to shielded from offense lyrics but they can get lap dances from trannies, makes sense.
Click to expand...

Does it seem like there is a trend where liberals invent pejorative terms and then totally live them out themselves?
Gaslighting has got to be near the top of that list!

I can't tell you how many articles I read recently with subtitles that read something like this
"You all have been being entertained by drag shows your whole life. Why start objecting now?"

I'm just like, pardon my french, but wtf??

Um, no we haven't.

That's how they see the 2020 election stealing I guess.

Ok. So conservatives have something that arguably is being repeated over and over with according to some people, no evidence.

But that persistent repeating of the most ridiculous untrue things ever, that's like a hallmark of a half dozen liberal philosophies right now!

I really think we have reached a certain point in this country. I just can't quite tell how to define it!
 
AccessBlaster said:
Speaking of Gore didn't his wife give us the record label warning? So according to liberals kids have to shielded from offense lyrics but they can get lap dances from trannies, makes sense.
Click to expand...
That's just an example of what I say about the moral anchor or the lack thereof and the constantly changing definitions. Everything is relative. They all thought she was right then, they all think the opposite now. And if you don't believe it's true and agree and if you don't pretend to think that it has always been that way, you're some kind of a bad person
 
Last edited:
I've started to warm up to your positions , @jpl458 and I continue re-examining my own to try to ensure they're not based on anything false or inappropriate amount of bias.
That said, I think it's safe to say you will get nowhere trying to convince most conservatives to compare and contrast things with other well known Democrat politicians. IMO there is enough evidence for 10 lifetimes to put the Clintons and the Bidens in prison for a long time.

The best I can hope to agree on is that there is corruption and dishonesty everywhere, which is why, again, I tend to focus on Policies rather than People. Sometimes I can't resist the temptation to adulate or eschew based on the Person, but I strive to avoid it as much as I can, as it leads nowhere as far as the national conversation.

We must try as hard as we can to think of "where is this POLICY leading", "where is this line-of-thought taking us as a nation", rather than, "do I like that person?"
 
Major news over the last few days of evidence of bribery by Joe Biden, but... @ColinEssex .... You won't know about it unless you watch or read a conservative outlet like Fox because all the other networks refuse to cover it even though he may be pretty close to charges.

This is why I say it's not like I'm married to or loyal to only Fox, but I'm sorry to say if you're not reading them, you're missing a lot of what's actually going on.

If you don't know that, then fine, now you know. If you do know that and still don't read them, that tells me quite a bit as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
When does the winning start?
5 6 7
Replies
125
Views
14,029
Steve R.
Steve R.
J
Interesting artical about what government can and can't do. It's a bit longish, but worth the read.
2
Replies
38
Views
4,988
AccessBlaster
A
Steve R.
Have the Democrats Made a Rare Tactical Blunder With the New Hampshire Primary?
Replies
4
Views
2,090
Isaac
Isaac
Isaac
Use Your Winter to Win Your Battles
Replies
3
Views
950
Sanchez Keaton
Sanchez Keaton
Cotswold
There is No Such Thing as Interest Free
Replies
7
Views
1,832
ebs17
E

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top Bottom