Getting closer to a mafia state

[Spaten]

When you come to full realization that the party’s main tenet is killing children, your mind just doesn’t accept euphemisms anymore.

I wish we could have a conversation about the topic itself, but with such a “bizarre” nonsense it is not likely. “Killing children as the main tenet!!!” - my left foot!

 

[drcube]

Well, nothing Trump said was illegal. Nor is there any reason to think he intended to extort Zelensky. Nor did Zelensky think so.

Yes, and when the funeral home owner was asking the Godfather to be his friend, he didn’t know that would cause the guy who raped his daughter to get beat up.

Anyhow, can you provide the Zelensky quote? I can’t find it.

But yes, I do understand the mafia quite well; likely a lot better than you do. The Dem Deep State people are a lot closer to it than Trump ever even imagined.

Ah, the exaggeration. Man, how did you get out then? I heard the only way people can leave the mafia is through prison or death.

 

[JimG]

The Democrat pro-abortion position gets more radically pro-abortion with every clection cycle. If Nancy Pelose ever announced that the party should allow for pro-life positions by Democrats, the ensuing Dem civil war would tear the party apart. But that will never happen.

 

[Theo520]

That is a gross misunderstanding of the role of an Ambassador. Ambassadors are needed more than ever.

I see you too have little experience with the US Foreign Service and how it operates. The below assessment came from the Obama era, but it still applies, it was from Foreign Policy Magazine.

If we didn’t have ambassadors where would we send all the campaign donors and political hangers-on for whom we couldn’t find plum jobs in Washington?”

If a job is meaningless enough to be entrusted to someone who is unqualified to do it, do we really need to fill that post? This point is made especially forcefully when even the most important such jobs (like Japan) are being filled by political bag men. Further of course, anyone with much exposure to foreign policy knows that to our closest allies and most important enemies, dealing with ambassadors is often viewed as being at the bottom of the food chain. It is too easy today to pick up the phone or send ministers to speak to cabinet secretaries or sub-cabinet officials to meet with sub-cabinet officials or even to arrange exchanges among leaders than to entrust really important communications to intermediaries who need to pass it up through multiple layers in the State Department and/or the White House before they reach the eyes of anyone who is actually a policymaker.

We do need competent career Foreign Service Officers on the ground, but the Ambassador role is mostly ceremonial.

 

[Guinness]

Those were the good old days when journalism was respected - a respect it richly deserved.

You just long for the days when your side controlled everything.

 

[phil3]

I only hear about causing a Civil War from the right. Why is that?

The moment Trump won the election the leftist/progressives/liberals/authoritarian/Clintonesta/obamaite started up with the impeach him. Yet the day before they were all worried that Trump wasnt going to accept the outcome once Hillary won in a landslide.

These people want to silence the opposition. The dont care that Trump was legally elected. They have spent the last three-plus years calling Trump supporters names daily. They didn’t win the election so they are too willing to overturn it no matter the cost. Now when I say a civil war I don’t mean with guns and blood. But with their states putting an end to the authoritarian federal overreach.

Trump supports are going to fight back.

Here are many amendments we need to see passed:

Term Limits: Reps to two terms senators to two terms and the President stays the same. Justices to 10 years,

Repealing the 17th Amendment

Grant both Congress and the state legislatures the authority to overturn court decisions with the vote of three-fifths of both houses of Congress or state legislative bodies.

a balanced budget amendment, limiting spending to 20% of GDP with 3% going to pay off the national debt. Once paid off the Fed can only spend 18% of GDP this can only be suspended with a 3/5 roll call vote of both houses and only for two years out of a ten year period. restrict the use of federal funds to only issues that affect the entire country or cross state lines, allowing aid for disaster relief with disaster relief being clearly spelled out.

modify the 1st amendment so that free speech can not be limited by “Hate speech”

Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States.
sunset federal regulations and subject the existence of all federal departments to stand-alone reauthorization bills every three years.

To define the legal effect of international treaties do not impose limits on a citizen constitutional right

an amendment stating that the federal government can not make laws that infringe upon duties that are reserved for the states.

to make omnibus types bills unconstitutional.

To define personhood is created at the time of conception. To declare that life begins at conception and that the 5th and 14th amendment apply to the unborn

The amendment would make it clear that the commerce clause grants the congress only the power to prevent states from impeding commerce among other states.

To clarify eminent domain, specifically that no takings can be transferred to a private person except for transportation projects

Repeal the income tax and replace it with the fair tax or a variation of it. If you really want to keep it, no income below $500,000 can be taxed

.
allow states to override federal statutes by majority vote in two-thirds of state legislatures.

 

[drcube]

Well, at least you don’t mean a Civil War with guns and blood. The only person calling anyone names around here is @Ridgerunner and he is calling people he doesn’t like “Never Trumpers” and claiming they despise Trump. I don’t see anyone here calling Trump supporters names.

 

[phil3]

Youre moving the target.

 

[phil3]

No one said that a female become pregnant to get an abortion. But they do get pregnant due to lack of self control. Rubbers just dont cost that much.

 

[drcube]

Youre moving the target.

How am I moving the target?

 

[Theo520]

O ONE, and I mean no one is pro abortion. No woman ever wanted to get pregnant JUST SO that she can have an abortion. Abortion is not a “welcome” event to long for, or to look forward to. It is the worst case outcome when one does not wish to become or stay pregnant.

ROFL, using your logic I can say nobody is pro-antibiotics or pro-vaccine since nobody wants to get sick. Nor are they pro-cancer treatment.

Stop playing word games.

 

[phil3]

Because you wrote “the right” and then you changed it to “The only person calling anyone names around here is @Ridgerunner and he is calling people he doesn’t like “Never Trumpers” and claiming they despise Trump. I don’t see anyone here calling Trump supporters names.”

The anti-trump people can not debate his successes. Well, they claim the great economy is all Obama’s doing. I didn’t hate Obama as a person. I hated his policies and his political views. Where as the anti trump people hate the man. I do believe here I read someone call Trump a “monster”. Was it allowed for Obama to be called a monster?

I am a libertarian that leans very much to the conservative side both as I vote and my faith. but in today’s church to be conservative (traditionalist) is view by the Pope as sinful. Just as today is a conservative you’re a racist hate monger.

 

[drcube]

Because you wrote “the right” and then you changed it to “The only person calling anyone names around here is @Ridgerunner and he is calling people he doesn’t like “Never Trumpers” and claiming they despise Trump. I don’t see anyone here calling Trump supporters names.”

I’m pretty sure I didn’t edit that post, so I don’t really know what you are talking about.

The anti-trump people can not debate his successes. Well, they claim the great economy is all Obama’s doing. I didn’t hate Obama as a person. I hated his policies and his political views. Where as the anti trump people hate the man. I do believe here I read someone call Trump a “monster”. Was it allowed for Obama to be called a monster?

I think a lot of people here do debate whether or not Trump has had success and it has nothing to do with hating him. If you want to call out someone who called Trump a monster, then you are welcome to it, but I think you are painting with too broad of a brush.

I am a libertarian that leans very much to the conservative side both as I vote and my faith. but in today’s church to be conservative (traditionalist) is view by the Pope as sinful. Just as today is a conservative you’re a racist hate monger.

So, now you are attacking the Pope for not agreeing with your religious views. This is a Catholic website. Attacking the Pope is not okay.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The Democrat pro-abortion position gets more radically pro-abortion with every clection cycle. If Nancy Pelose ever announced that the party should allow for pro-life positions by Democrats, the ensuing Dem civil war would tear the party apart. But that will never happen.

It’s true. When my wife and I were still active in the Dem party, she gave a speech to the State Committee in which she advocated for encouraging prolife candidates. Afterward she was told never to say anything like that again because it’s “divisive”. And, in truth, I guess it was.

 

[drcube]

It’s true. When my wife and I were still active in the Dem party, she gave a speech to the State Committee in which she advocated for encouraging prolife candidates. Afterward she was told never to say anything like that again because it’s “divisive”. And, in truth, I guess it was.

What year was this?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

I see you too have little experience with the US Foreign Service and how it operates. The below assessment came from the Obama era, but it still applies, it was from Foreign Policy Magazine.

I see you have too little experience distinguishing between opinion and facts.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

I think it’s one of those “call a spade a spade” things. When you come to full realization that the party’s main tenet is killing children, your mind just doesn’t accept euphemisms anymore.

That doesn’t answer the question, which was, what do they hope to accomplish by demonizing Democrats? (I can suggest an answer, if you don’t have one.)

You have to realize the Dem party has changed. I didn’t.

Well, you did say you would be a Democrat to this day, if not for abortion. So I guess you didn’t really mean it. What you probably meant was “I would be a Bill Clinton Democrat or an LBJ Democrat today, if the party were the same as it was in Bill’s or Lyndon’s day.” Still, there were policies that the “old” Democratic party favored that you do not favor now, don’t you think? (Not that it matters for this discussion, of course.)

 

[LeafByNiggle]

In any case, the fact is that the US forces beat back the 1968 Tet Offensive and had the North on the ropes that year. The NVA and the Viet Cong lost 40k soldiers in that one conflict and they were reeling badly.

You can debate a single offensive and it’s reporting, but the war in total was unwinnable for several reasons. Maintaining otherwise today in an effort the discredit all mainstream media is really jumping the shark.

 

[phil3]

So, now you are attacking the Pope for not agreeing with your religious views. This is a Catholic website. Attacking the Pope is not okay.

I didnt attack the Pope, I disagree with him. I am a traditionalist

I dont like the fact and it is a fact, the pope attacks people like me. He is openly critical of traditionalist.

The faith is splitting and sticking your head in the sand isnt going to stop it. This synod is an example of the splitting. 10 years from now there will be two different catholic faiths that will have split from this one.

 

[drcube]

I didnt attack the Pope, I disagree with him. I am a traditionalist

I dont like the fact and it is a fact, the pope attacks people like me. He is openly critical of traditionalist.

He might be critical, but you said he said it was sinful. Show me where he did that. If you cannot, you are lying about the Pope on a Catholic website.

The faith is splitting and sticking your head in the sand isnt going to stop it. This synod is an example of the splitting. 10 years from now there will be two different catholic faiths that will have split from this one.

I am very disturbed by your attack on the Pope. Please back it up with actual statements that the Pope said being a traditionalist is sinful.