TRUMP and Project 2025

Space Cowboy

Member
Local time
Today, 22:44
Joined
May 19, 2024
Messages
245

(The Conservative PROMISE)

Project 2025 Looks like "The Idiots guide to Forming an authoritarian Government"

Do normal right minded Americans think this is the way forward or the way backwards?

Of course Trump Lies about Knowing anything about this document, even though he disagrees with "some of the things" contained in it.

Yet again Trump Lies, if it is so disgusting that you have to lie about "knowing anything about it" then what are normal regular folk to think?
 
Anything someone posts on the internet or is shown to you by left wing nuts must be true. Sheeesh
 
LOL, this sounds ominous. 🍿
This work, Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, is a collective effort of hundreds of volunteers who have banded together in the spirit of advancing positive change for America.

Our goal is to assemble an army of aligned, vetted, trained, and prepared conservatives to go to work on Day One to deconstruct the Administrative State. The project is built on four pillars.

Pillar I—this volume—puts in one place a consensus view of how major federal agencies must be governed and where disagreement exists brackets out these differences for the next President to choose a path.

Pillar II is a personnel database that allows candidates to build their own professional profiles and our coalition members to review and voice their recommendations. These recommendations will then be collated and shared with the President-elect’s team, greatly streamlining the appointment process.

Pillar III is the Presidential Administration Academy, an online educational system taught by experts from our coalition. For the new comer, this will explain how the government functions and how to function in government. For the experienced, we will host in-person seminars with advanced training and set the bar for what is expected of senior leadership.

In Pillar IV—the Playbook—we are forming agency teams and drafting transition plans to move out upon the President’s utterance of “so help me God.” As Americans living at the approach of our nation’s 250th birthday, we have been given much. As conservatives, we are as much required to steward this precious heritage for the next generation. On behalf of our coalition partners, we thank you and invite you to come join with us at project2025.org.Paul Dans Director, Project 2025

Even more ominous. 🍿
1. Restore the family as the centerpiece of American life and protect our children.
2. Dismantle the administrative state and return self-governance to the American people.
3. Defend our nation’s sovereignty, borders, and bounty against global threats.
4. Secure our God-given individual rights to live freely—what our Constitution calls “the Blessings of Liberty.”

My guess is that Trump will not go along with everything being suggested in the project. Most of it is good, some of it will piss off the left because they love killing humans whenever it suits them and call that living freely. It's time to right the ship and do what is right for the country as a whole and be respected again.

There are definitely some important things being hashed out at HF, this is necessary so everything can move forward as smoothly as possible on day one. The incoming president is not required to do everything exactly as outlined, he's smart enough to do what is right for the people. Yours and others attempts at undermining the good things being done won't work. This is just morons trying to convince other morons why they need to stick with the failed country destroying policies of the democrat party. Good luck with that. You had your chance and failed miserably.
 
PdqHYDX6avmm.png
 
@Space Cowboy: This trope has zero credibility. Democrats have a proven record of gaslighting the gullible public and using anti-democratic policies such as lawfare to implement a Stalinist dictarship.
 

(The Conservative PROMISE)

Project 2025 Looks like "The Idiots guide to Forming an authoritarian Government"

Do normal right minded Americans think this is the way forward or the way backwards?

Of course Trump Lies about Knowing anything about this document, even though he disagrees with "some of the things" contained in it.

Yet again Trump Lies, if it is so disgusting that you have to lie about "knowing anything about it" then what are normal regular folk to think?

I like about 60% of their content.
 
Honestly a part of me wanted to type, something more like, 80 or 90%, but I thought I better err on the side of caution because I haven't read it all either - I only read MSNBC's highlights. Judging from that is interesting, because while you might think "but that's just their cherry picked stuff" - Yeah, but they cherry picked the stuff they think is the WORST - and I agreed with even a majority of THAT.

I don't agree with outlawing the abortion "morning after" pill. I think that from the standpoint of legislation and government, we should go ahead and let people make their own decision about whether they want to terminate a few cells the morning after the pregnancy, or the week after. Like Pat, I am looking for balance on the abortion issue (regardless of the moral thing I might think privately).

Outlawing pornography is a great idea, as long as it doesn't create a black market underworld that represents a bigger problem than the previous problem - but then again, that's the excuse to legalize everything, and too often used as an excuse, since we could say that about anything that's illegal and should be
 
I don't agree with outlawing the abortion "morning after" pill.
The abortion issue is and has always been a point of contention. The problem with that pill, is it makes it easier for anyone to break the law in states that have stricter abortion laws. So I don't agree with an all out ban on it, just in states where the law prohibits abortions. I'm pretty sure Trump is much more on the liberal side of that issue and would never go for an overall ban, that is just political suicide.

I'm looking for other items in the document other than abortion issues, what else does anyone have a problem with? I did not see any of the msnbc highlights of it. I'm just reading the document myself. I'm on the section about reforming the civil service jobs to go back to the merit system and cut down on the large expense of too many civil service jobs that simply are not needed. In other words, go in and strip things down to what is needed like Elon did with twitter when he downsized to only the jobs that were actually needed. Brilliant.
 
Outlawing pornography is a great idea, as long as it doesn't create a black market underworld that represents a bigger problem than the previous problem - but then again, that's the excuse to legalize everything, and too often used as an excuse, since we could say that about anything that's illegal and should be
Freedom?
 
LOL, this sounds ominous. 🍿


Even more ominous. 🍿


My guess is that Trump will not go along with everything being suggested in the project. Most of it is good, some of it will piss off the left because they love killing humans whenever it suits them and call that living freely. It's time to right the ship and do what is right for the country as a whole and be respected again.

There are definitely some important things being hashed out at HF, this is necessary so everything can move forward as smoothly as possible on day one. The incoming president is not required to do everything exactly as outlined, he's smart enough to do what is right for the people. Yours and others attempts at undermining the good things being done won't work. This is just morons trying to convince other morons why they need to stick with the failed country destroying policies of the democrat party. Good luck with that. You had your chance and failed miserably.
What do you call this replacement government? What type woud it be? The government was founded with a separatione of powers, so if that is demolished, what do you call the replacement. It's not a republic, and not a democracy.
 
Yeah, like outlawing liquor didn't cause a problem. Pornography is in the eye of the beholder. Who would you trust with that particular judgment? The first Amendment protects speech we hate. What about that is so hard to understand that you think it should have exceptions?

Swear that you'll be 100% honest in your reply to me on this one: What do you think the Founders would have thoughts, let's take George Washington, about Brazzers magazine or Playboy? Do you really think free speech encompassed things that were dangerous and actually harmful?
If your speech causes actual, measurable harm to society , it can be regulated. And it should be.

They could easily come up with definitions for porn
 

But not infinite freedom. Not, for example, the freedom to smoke crack cocaine or let a child gamble at a casino, or a 10 year old buy vape products.

I'm not against all regulation. I'm just against a lot of it.
 
On the abortion issue, first let me say that my wife and I agreed that IF she got pregnant, we would not abort. It would not have been our choice. I don't have the Tay-Sachs gene (though my genetic heritage would suggest the possibility) so we would not have been faced with that kind of dilemma. But for various reasons we were childless. She had kids from her first marriage so I became a grandpa anyway and couldn't love those grand-stinkers more, even now that they are mostly grown up.

Having said that, you DO realize that abortion has been around for millennia, don't you? It was a well-known thing even in ancient Egypt, with a reference from about 1550 BCE, or 3500 years ago. You can make it illegal. You can force it into a back alley. You can leave it to a guy with a non-sterilized coat hanger (yecch!). But it is going to happen, women will die or become sterile to lose the unwanted fetus, and the world will still turn tomorrow as it has turned countless times before.

Birth control methods fail every day. Accidents happen. My #2 grandson was, in fact, an accident - but he is a beloved accident. Women should have some choice in the matter after the fact, at least early during the pregnancy, but too many folks have swigged down the radical soft-drink of telling women that their opinions and their problems don't count. To me the particularly hateful aspect of current anti-abortion laws is that you can't even grant the woman the option to terminate a pregnancy caused by the RA-word (which gets blanked out by forum filters). The psychological harm to the victim of that RA-word in such rulings is astounding to me - but many states ban ALL abortions for any reason.

OK, you can say "Adoption" - but agencies are already filled to overflowing with kids who DON'T get adopted. It is hard to find a study that clearly shows the effects on a child's upbringing when that child was the result of RA-word actions. But the woman who keeps such a child will surely keep many negative feelings as well, which will affect that child. I grieve for the child who must grow up within such an environment, for it surely was not the child's fault. But I could not blame the mother who would harbor resentment for the child. After all, the mother is human and has emotions just like the rest of us.
 
I have no idea who you are talking to. But you have sure bought into the progressives' position.

But you CAN always get rid of the fetus. Does the woman know she was raped? Yes. Is there any part of her being that says she wants the child? No. If she reported the incident and sought medical help, chances are that unless she went to a Catholic hospital (and possibly even then) she was offered a morning after pill at that time. OR she could have gone to her doctor and requested it. WHY WAIT until it is too late to terminate the pregnancy before taking action? I don't know the laws in all 50 states. I know that some are very restrictive. If you were ra*** and your state prevents you from getting a morning after pill, get in the car and cross into a neighboring state and get a damn pill!!!!!!!!!!! If you take the pill the morning after, the success rate is very high and it is painless. Then work to change the law. The pills do work later to cause an actual miscarriage but I'm not sure how far into gestation they work and of course the longer you wait the more like an abortion the effects are.

Even I would almost certainly take immediate action for exactly the reasons you mentioned.

Sorry, Pat... my response was to Mike Krallo's #11 post that included a statement about abortion being in contention. Should have made it a formal reply instead of an informal one.

Pat, I hope you don't suddenly think I've bought into a progressive position. In this subject I have been consistent for many years. I happen to think I've bought into the idea that we have too many laws that restrict women's options, too many laws that sound too much like Sharia (Islamic) mandates... which I oppose most strenuously. And name-calling (by saying I've bought into a progressive's position) doesn't become you.

There was a recent attempt to block "morning after" pills, but SCOTUS stopped it - this time. I don't know what will happen when the religious right mounts another attempt to keep women barefoot and pregnant. I'm not a true Republican, though I favor Trump (slightly) over Biden. I'm more of a Libertarian, but not a chaotic one. That Libertarian stance, unfortunately, becomes hard to strictly define since a lot of the things I think should be legal are also considered a matter of conscience for many people. Too many regulations don't help this country.
 
Sorry, Pat... my response was to Mike Krallo's #11 post that included a statement about abortion being in contention. Should have made it a formal reply instead of an informal one.

Pat, I hope you don't suddenly think I've bought into a progressive position. In this subject I have been consistent for many years. I happen to think I've bought into the idea that we have too many laws that restrict women's options, too many laws that sound too much like Sharia (Islamic) mandates... which I oppose most strenuously. And name-calling (by saying I've bought into a progressive's position) doesn't become you.

There was a recent attempt to block "morning after" pills, but SCOTUS stopped it - this time. I don't know what will happen when the religious right mounts another attempt to keep women barefoot and pregnant. I'm not a true Republican, though I favor Trump (slightly) over Biden. I'm more of a Libertarian, but not a chaotic one. That Libertarian stance, unfortunately, becomes hard to strictly define since a lot of the things I think should be legal are also considered a matter of conscience for many people. Too many regulations don't help this country.
You considerably more moderate than what Pat post. She has a relentless attack and continuous denial of anything except the ultra far right.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom