So once again the divisive forces of the left have been repulsed and change will happen. Boris Johnson will now lead the UK out of Europe and the democratic process has been upheld. The wishes of the majority will be implemented

Paraclete: This is remarkable news! It seems that the Right is on the march around the globe......The forces on the left, here in the U.S. and all their allies around the world, are taking their orders from their puppet masters in Red China. Trump has bloodied China's nose with tariffs and the bastards have wilted under the pressure and submitted to his will. Meanwhile, Jair Bolsonaro, who will probably go down at the greatest leader in the history of Brazil, has the communists/socialists on the run and has told the media to stop giving the "little brat, Greta Thunberg, so much air time, while telling France's socialist poster boy Macron to grow a pair and worry about his own screwed-up country!

So happy that Great Britain has voted to retain its heritage and the ownership of its own destiny and told the German conspiracy, know as the E.U., to go burn in hell, if they so chose to keep going that way as they have been going.

Paraclete: This is remarkable news! It seems that the Right is on the march around the globe......The forces on the left, here in the U.S. and all their allies around the world, are taking their orders from their puppet masters in Red China. Trump has bloodied China's nose with tariffs and the bastards have wilted under the pressure and submitted to his will. Meanwhile, Jair Bolsonaro, who will probably go down at the greatest leader in the history of Brazil, has the communists/socialists on the run and has told the media to stop giving the "little brat, Greta Thunberg, so much air time, while telling France's socialist poster boy Macron to grow a pair and worry about his own screwed-up country!

So happy that Great Britain has voted to retain its heritage and the ownership of its own destiny and told the German conspiracy, know as the E.U., to go burn in hell, if they so chose to keep going that way as they have been going.

Yes the Fourth Reich is on the run and the master race have been polluted from the ME, that is what socialism does for you. Once again the Battle for Britain has been won and Ecosse can run to France, but they won't protect them

It's a global right wing loony epidemic all right. The zombie apocalypse has begun.

Hide from really Tal, but if it is a zombie apocalypse, it is an apocalypse for leftist zombies, those flesh eating monsters are getting their just desserts

So once again the divisive forces of the left have been repulsed and change will happen. Boris Johnson will now lead the UK out of Europe and the democratic process has been upheld. The wishes of the majority will be implemented

Very well said.

You're both old enough to celebrate while you can, and enjoy yourself while it lasts.

You're both old enough to celebrate while you can, and enjoy yourself while it lasts.

Tal, in both my country and the UK the forces of revisionism and socialism have been wiped out, the public are no longer interested in government control of their lives, they have learned what a crock it is, they are no longer yielding to bureaucrats. Such politicians are doing much navel gazing because they don't understand that the old class struggles have gone and that you oppose progress at your peril

So yes I will celebrate for years to come

Paraclete: The Brazilian President is really interesting.....he is unapologetic as he can be....a man's man....he is bent on eliminating the left in Brazil, too.

After the true Marxist President in Mexico has buggered up that nation really badly, AND YOU KNOW HE WILL OVERREACH, they always do, Mexico will turn Right, too!

Glorious days ahead! I would love to take a vacation one day where I could hop from one Right nation to another Right nation, just to get a flavor of the NEW EXAMPLE OF NATURAL LAW IN ACTION! The Laws Of Nature cannot be denied: Man will always come back to them, eventually! The left can never make that claim.

There is no doubt rabid leftist policies have ruined some countries ; Venezuela is a case in point and look what going too far did for Greece. You cannot cure all social needs with government intervention because there are always those with their hand out so balance must ensue

you see the way the Antifa goons took to the streets of London ? What the left won't tell you is that he defeated an anti-sematic goon .

Tal, in both my country and the UK the forces of revisionism and socialism have been wiped out, the public are no longer interested in government control of their lives, they have learned what a crock it is, they are no longer yielding to bureaucrats. Such politicians are doing much navel gazing because they don't understand that the old class struggles have gone and that you oppose progress at your peril

So yes I will celebrate for years to come

You know how that goes Clete, once you finally throw the bums out, you better produce or you get YOUR bums thrown out. Don't forget those lefties will still be around and have nothing better to do than throw rocks at YOU, and it's very easy to throw rocks when you're on the sidelines. You righties better get busy and deliver, or the worm can turn really fast if you don't.


There is no doubt rabid leftist policies have ruined some countries ; Venezuela is a case in point and look what going too far did for Greece. You cannot cure all social needs with government intervention because there are always those with their hand out so balance must ensue

You got the stick, talk is over, use it or lose it.

you see the way the Antifa goons took to the streets of London ? What the left won't tell you is that he defeated an anti-sematic goon .

For whatever reason Corbin was seen as a lousy candidate whose support within his own party had been sliding for years.

You know how that goes Clete, once you finally throw the bums out, you better produce or you get YOUR bums thrown out. Don't forget those lefties will still be around and have nothing better to do than throw rocks at YOU, and it's very easy to throw rocks when you're on the sidelines. You righties better get busy and deliver, or the worm can turn really fast if you don't.

You got the stick, talk is over, use it or lose it.

you see Tal we are capable of delivering while the namby pamby left vacillates. On border policy, the conservatives acted and hey presto, the problem abated. In this country, the left has shown itself to be incapable of acting rationally on any form of climate policy but we have moved on, the take up of renewables is huge despite the backing off of government subsidies, no new power stations have been built and old ones decommissioned. this is called direct action where worthwhile projects are supported

https://reneweconomy.com.au/australias-main-grid-reaches-50-per-cent-renewables-for-first-time-17935/

You want to rock my roof, remember I can throw rocks too

No Clete I meant you have the stick of power in your government so you can rock those lefties as much as you want. You misunderstood. No rocks from me today my Aussie friend but maybe after the fires are out. 8)

No Clete I meant you have the stick of power in your government so you can rock those lefties as much as you want. You misunderstood. No rocks from me today my Aussie friend but maybe after the fires are out. 8)

Yes we all hope for that, and yes, now and again, we do succeed in rocking those lefties. Ah, if it weren't for their fellow travellers. I fear the smoke is becoming too much, I have developed a cough [[8:(>

Taliman: Corbin was a lousy candidate who was losing popularity in his own party JUST LIKE HILLARY CLINTON was a lousy candidate and was losing popularity within her own party.....but she ran and lost anyway!

Yes History repeating itsself

HILLARY CLINTON was a lousy candidate
Just about right. The election gave us the poorest choice between two mediocre candidates that I have seen in my lifetime. As it turned out, Trump has done well in some ways so good for that, but the addictive over-spending by the feds is still running out of control with no will being exhibited by either party to do anything about it. With the current crop of candidates for the dem nomination, HC will have some cause to feel a little better about herself once the next absolute loser gets the nomination.

I think the UK was finally sick and tired of the political wrangling over Brexit and decided to throw the bums iin power out and give conservatives a true shot at resolving it. Don't really blame them for that.

Yes some divisive forces have been vanquished

They didn't get the job done so away with them and we'll see what the new crop brings

They didn't get the job done so away with them and we'll see what the new crop brings

Just, shame you don't think the same about your own crop of miscreates

Start at the top and get rid of his miscreants! See I do feel the same. 8D

Start at the top and get rid of his miscreants! See I do feel the same. 8D

No get rid of all miscreates

Shame we have only miscreates to replace the miscreates with. What a daunting dilemna.

yes it is

No biggie Clete, not much has changed over the last few centuries. Same people different names.

Tal, I think people are different now, much more focus on self

Probably so. We haven't come very far up the evolutionary ladder just more stuff to play with when we get bored of self.

Tal, I think people are different now, much more focus on self

I would agree completely with that.

Tal, I think people are different now, much more focus on self


I would agree completely with that.

I have to agree with you both, but look around. The competition for resources is steep, and getting steeper, while the OPPORTUNITIES and options for those resources are scarce and getting scarcer. They just don't make as many bootstraps anymore. The line is long for where they do.

while the OPPORTUNITIES and options for those resources are scarce and getting scarcer. They just don't make as many bootstraps anymore. The line is long for where they do.

As much as I agreed with Clete's statement, I disagree with yours. This is the most amazing time of life to be alive in American history. There are jobs on practically every street corner. There is money to be made nearly everywhere you look. If a young person can't make it now, then they would have had no hope at all a hundred years ago. You might have to start off working two jobs. It won't be easy, but with a 3.5% unemployment rate, it's a workers market out there.

Comparable with working two jobs are the working couples because they need to. I don't know if it's just a temporary situation or not, but clearly people need mo'money to survive. I also remember Reagan touting all those jobs and if you looked they were low wage jobs or those requiring exceptional skills. I know many school teachers working 2nd jobs to raise their kids which isn't an easy thing either since advancement in most areas are few and limited for the vast majority of workers.

which isn't an easy thingKind of reminds me of the old parable about the man who complained about having no shoes until he met a man who had no feet. I've been that teacher working two jobs so I can speak of that, but I was raised to do what you had to do to support your family. It's not easy, but it's much better than no job at all. And I eventually worked my way into a principal's position. If you're looking for easy, then I can't help you.


advancement in most areas are few and limited for the vast majority of workers. I don't think that's true. I've seen it happen over and over again.

Kind of reminds me of the old parable about the man who complained about having no shoes until he met a man who had no feet. I've been that teacher working two jobs so I can speak of that, but I was raised to do what you had to do to support your family. It's not easy, but it's much better than no job at all. And I eventually worked my way into a principal's position. If you're looking for easy, then I can't help you.

Been there done that myself, and I had ONE good job but stuff happens all the time like losing a furnace in the winter, or blowing an engine coming home from work, just to name a few things. I wouldn't know easy if it bit me in the face. Still don't! Just makes me grateful to find a good path, and the things along the way, and have a lot of empathy for those not as blessed as I obviously have been.


I don't think that's true. I've seen it happen over and over again.

So have I JL, and seen some really bad stuff that can happen by accident or mistake and through no fault of some. Sometimes you can't help but empathize to some extent. Sometimes it's okay to take a hardcore stance, but not all the time with everybody.

I'm all for being empathetic with your own money. I have done it on many occasions and I'm sure you have as well. It's when you want to be empathetic with someone else's money, and then want to feel like the very soul of charity for doing it, that I blow the whistle and call a foul.

I have suggested many times you take that up with your state since they control the money, not the feds in Mississippi. You don't think you're going to tell Texas, or any other state what to do, do you? I respectfully submit JL, I don't think you can tell your fellow statesmen what to do.

I have suggested many times you take that up with your state since they control the money, not the feds in Mississippi. You don't think you're going to tell Texas, or any other state what to do, do you? I respectfully submit JL, I don't think you can tell your fellow statesmen what to do. Now that's funny. You think the feds don't control it? What do you think we're doing, going up to D.C. with a gun and doing an armed robbery? Of course they control it. They control all federal spending, so if you don't like us getting so much, ask them to change it. I'll be with you on that one.

I don't care what you get JL, but why whine about it, just don't take it if it's so bad. What, do the feds hold a gun to your head and make you take the money? LOL, it's crazy hollering about people taking YOUR money while you take theirs.

I don't care what you get JL, but why whine about it, just don't take it if it's so bad. What, do the feds hold a gun to your head and make you take the money? LOL, it's crazy hollering about people taking YOUR money while you take theirs.

Yeah. I can tell you don't care by all of the complaining you do about it. Do you people in Texas turn down fed money? When you do, then you can come over here and tell us how you liked it.

It's our money, we pay more into the system than we take out so it's not like we are taking YOUR money.

It's our money, we pay more into the system than we take out so it's not like we are taking YOUR money.

Then vote for people who will help you keep it. I'm with you on that. I'd love to see a smaller fed govt that doesn't pass out welfare benefits like candy on Halloween.

Hey Tal, a little change of subject. Saw this ad on Facebook. Why would anyone want to pay 13 bucks for a receptacle? What's the advantage with this one?

https://www.emisupply.com/catalog/leviton-52622pw-extra-heavy-duty-controlled-duplex-receptacle-volt-p-21599.html?ftm_source=facebookcatalog&utm_medium=product_search&utm_campaign=facebook-catalog-us-en&utm_term=LEV-5262-2PW&fbclid=IwAR2T2FxzKIQLfmiG8VeWDpgl2ZbqsVNQDDLOtqp-3DCABtEz82nojK11A3U#.XfuaIuhKjIU

Why would someone buy that as opposed to this?

https://www.homelectrical.com/15-amp-duplex-receptacle-outlet-white.gp-sere01asw.1.html

The economic realities of a growing aging population has certainly changed the traditional thinking and conditions of all of us. Especially younsters just getting their feet wet, but still prices rising faster than wages is going to be the primary challenge even with some states stepping in and raising their MW's it's just passed on to consumers and 3% wage growth just ain't going to cut it.

Found this at my FAVORITE (https://www.homedepot.com/s/heavy%2520duty%2520industrial%2520receptecles?NCNI-5) store to compare product prices.

3% wage growth works fine when inflation is at its current 2.5%.

I know they have different prices. I just wonder why anyone would pay 13 dollars, or even 6 dollars, for a receptacle when you can buy them all day long for a buck and a half. It must have some glaring advantage or feature that I'm not seeing.

I have to disagree when inflation tends to wipe out the agregate buying power of any wage growth and while it's better than 0, .50 doesn't get your household budget very far.

You know, what a contractor and a DYI'er buy are vastly different because of who can pay for it and the overall view of the project, and the budget, or PROFITS. Me, I'm cheap when I do the work for ME. 8D

I have to disagree when inflation tends to wipe out the agregate buying power of any wage growth

Well, that was kind of the whole point. When wages grow faster than inflation, then your buying power actually is increasing, not decreasing.

Unfortunately 50cents extra don't help me pay my winter heating bill as a practical matter, but better than NOTHING? Just trying to keep a positive attitude.

Roger that.

Just an honest question does the UK losing the EU as a trading partner cost them money?

Just an honest question does the UK losing the EU as a trading partner cost them money?

They haven't lost them as a trading partner, the customs union stays in place for at least a year while a trade pact is negotiated, what they have gained is new or old trading partners they abandoned in the rush to join the Europen utopia

And greater freedom.

Seems they have lost the economic benefits that trading with EU members afforded them, or will lose them soon.

And greater freedom.

yes that is what it is about, trade will happen anyway

Social issues rile us up here too!

Social issues rile us up here too!

You are not as riled about immigration as they are

Desperate and hopeful brown men women and children are no threat to me, and some of my peeps have been through a lot of and even more cruel crap from those who are riled by the thought of sharing the lands with others different than them. They are but the latest targets of fear and hate, not that they now like the past objects of their fear and hate. That struggle still rages.

You must be up to your ears in them and my son just told me he wants to move to Texas, seems he thinks you are free over there, free to do what?

Not really Clete that's just the anti immigrant hype. The brown people have been going back and forth for centuries and so have we here in America. Shame spending OPM on a stupid wall. I said the same thing about the fence way back in the day, just to make a few white people feel better about themselves.

Tell your son if he isn't a racist hater the he will enjoy as much freedom if not more than anywhere on the planet. Free to do what you ask? Freedom to pursue his own happiness.

He is free to do that here, he just isn't allowed to shout hate in someoneelse's face

You know Clete, as a parent of 40 tear olds', long gone from the nest kids with there own lives in different cities, there isn't a day that goes by I don't worry my a$$ off, especially with the times we live in and the sensational headlines and happenings in the news. I do have sympathy. I get it.

Tal, we have a saying; no worries. I know my kids have to make their own way, I help them out now and again. The times are difficult and will be worse for our grandchildren but people are resilient. I have faith and that means I'm not in charge and so cannot change anything. You know as well as I do that all things come to an end

Your right except I take it as things change and you must adapt. Let me tell you that it's not easy as I make it look, not even close!

with you there

Who listens to me any more? I'm just the old guy who drools in his sleep, and they are busy doing their own thing.

Who listens to me any more? I'm just the old guy who drools in his sleep, and they are busy doing their own thing.
That may be true but you can be sure they remember you

Well I am a lovable crazy old man, and I'm sure you are too!

I'll take that under advisement Tal, although you have leftist leanings you are alright, we can agree on some things

Hows that cough doing? Did you find some safe clean air?

Hows that cough doing? Did you find some safe clean air?

The cough is gone but the smoke remains, the place I went didn't turn out any better and on the morning I left I found my car covered in ash. I would say we had a pyrocumulus event over night. We are now back to high temperatures and more fires in various places and the air quality hasn't improved so brer fox he lay low. In my travels, I observed that the smoke is hundreds of kilometers from the source. There are three big fires in this state and others in other states as well many low level threats.

https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/homes-and-lives-threatened-in-victoria-as-bushfires-claim-volunteer-nsw-firefighter/live-coverage/eccdbf36e90795da92052636148934be (https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/homes-and-lives-threatened-in-victoria-as-bushfires-claim-volunteer-nsw-firefighter/live-coverage/eccdbf36e90795da92052636148934be)

Well the chickens have come home to roost, just been told the place where I was staying two days ago has been evacuated, so it becomes personal as my son and his family are directly threatened
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-31/nsw-south-coast-fires-rfs-emergency-warnings/11833712

I just saw the latest picture and they look BAD!

I just saw the latest picture and they look BAD!

It is bad, a town south of where my son lives is wiped out, also a town to the west, there is no communication so I don't know how he has faired, I saw a map and it showed the fire front had crossed his property but it is hours old. One of the towns that was wiped out overnight I used to live in when a teen. It is a nightmare people camped on beaches. It is a major holiday resort all along the coast and there is no way out

Boris has finally got the dastardly deed done, the british parliament has passed the Brexit Bill

Finally the crap can hit the fan. No not immediately, but inevitably.

Freedom, that's what it means, freedom from socialism

Good morning to all of you.


Freedom, that's what it means, freedom from socialism
You hit the nail on the head.

I am sitting here interested with the talk about the "difficult times" we live in. Please don't misunderstand me. It's not that I don't have sympathy for your troubles. Still, we live in the greatest age of prosperity in the history of the earth. It literally has never been this good for all of history. Certainly there are scarcely any areas of life now that are not better, and generally MUCH better, than 100 years ago.

Suggested reading: The Worst Hard Time. Read that and you will never again speak of how hard things are now. We are living, relatively speaking, in luxury.

Yes, to be sure it is very tough in parts of Australia now. Some people, without question, are enduing terrible hardship all around the world, but in terms of averages, a person would be completely deceived to want to live in a time other than the one we are in now. I often think that is a huge part of our problem in America. We are so busy complaining that we don't appreciate what we have. We have become a nation of whiners. And yes, more frequently than I would care to admit, that includes me.

https://www.amazon.com/Worst-Hard-Time-Survived-American/dp/0618773479/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=books+about+the+dust+bowl&qid=1578661481&sr=8-2

Talaniman: How do you figure Britain has screwed up with Brexit? To be so sure that they have fouled-up would mean that you think the E.U. must be the greatest organization ever...but what proof do you have that the E.U. is so GREAT? The E.U. is a German inspired idea design whose ultimate purpose is the GERMAN domination of Europe...plain and simple....Britain saw this and told them to go to hell....EVERY NATION has a right to self-determination, don't you think?

Talaniman: How do you figure Britain has screwed up with Brexit? To be so sure that they have fouled-up would mean that you think the E.U. must be the greatest organization ever...but what proof do you have that the E.U. is so GREAT? The E.U. is a German inspired idea design whose ultimate purpose is the GERMAN domination of Europe...plain and simple....Britain saw this and told them to go to hell....EVERY NATION has a right to self-determination, don't you think?

Not saying the Brits have screwed up at all, but breaking one agreement and replacing it is a very daunting task, and in regard to trade agreements even more complex. What, you think the NAFTA agreement was a simple thing? Read it again, very small changes were made for all the hubaloo.

Be it countries or businesses every side has a right to negotiate, or renegotiate in it's own interest.

Talaniman: O.K....The Brits might know something we don't know: They may be working behind the scenes on trade deals with nations we know nothing about, in direct competition with the E.U.....I suspect, with nothing to support this other than a hunch, that Trump may offer Boris a trade deal with the U.S.: That would be something!

The british want an end to european migration, to european restrictions on every aspect of life. Already the EU is saying no trade deal unless these things are left in place. This is a german plan conceived by the NAZI and executed after the war, a united Europe was the NAZI plan for after the war

Economics and social issues seldom mix well, and fear of Nazis is never a good strategy with trade and PRICES. Yes this whole Brexit stuff was about imigration policy I think, but I doubt if the EU is going to get anything close to open borders, and the UK will not get good prices on an open market. You can blame Germany all you want and hide behind migrants but Vlad is already counting his money. Merkel is on her way out so which way will Germany go next?

Economics and social issues seldom mix well, and fear of Nazis is never a good strategy with trade and PRICES. Yes this whole Brexit stuff was about imigration policy I think, but I doubt if the EU is going to get anything close to open borders, and the UK will not get good prices on an open market. You can blame Germany all you want and hide behind migrants but Vlad is already counting his money. Merkel is on her way out so which way will Germany go next?

Germany will continue its march to European domination as was laid out in the master plan and implemented by the very nazi who conceived it and got himself elected to be the first common market president

Vlad is already counting his money.Don't kid yourself. Russia's economy is just limping along.

Vlad seems to limp along rather well and can expand to other countries despite those crippling sanctions. So do other countries we have sanctioned. Who's kidding who here? Iran has been sanction since the 80's and boy has that made a difference in their behavior! Can you explain that?

Iran has been sanction since the 80's and boy has that made a difference in their behavior! Can you explain that?That's a pretty good point. I'd respond in two ways. 1. We don't know what Iran would be doing if we had NOT imposed sanctions. It could very easily be much, much worse than it is now if they had been given billions of dollars in oil money in addition to the 1.5 billion gift from Obama. 2. The Iranian economy is in desperately bad condition and there is, say some people, considerable unrest in the country. That has to be a major concern of the fanatics running the show.

Those sanctioned countries seem to survive rather well and reek havoc on society, as well as survive social upheaval within the country. Just suggesting that there has to be something else we don't know about and these dictators do.

That could be the case, but again, we don't know but that issues would be far worse without sanctions.

I suspect you are dead on, but I sure would like to know what the trick is. Maybe it's like many places where there is a poor economy and people depend on the underground economy to keep them going. I have heard that there is a global black market and many ways to skirt around laws and sanction like Saddam did in Iraq years ago and as Erdogan was suspected of doing during the rise of ISIS a few years ago. No secret the rich Koreans have a global hustle going to get what they need despite those sanctions from decades ago.

I suspect you are dead on, but I sure would like to know what the trick is. Maybe it's like many places where there is a poor economy and people depend on the underground economy to keep them going. I have heard that there is a global black market and many ways to skirt around laws and sanction like Saddam did in Iraq years ago and as Erdogan was suspected of doing during the rise of ISIS a few years ago. No secret the rich Koreans have a global hustle going to get what they need despite those sanctions from decades ago.

People are resilient and able to do much with little. They don't suffer from the bloated economy of the west, you spend a lot of money because the big ripoff is in effect and you don't get value for money. Vlad can keep decades old aircraft flying while he develops a new range of weapons and once again you are playing catchup. Kim has a nuclear program on a shoe string because he isn't spending money on welfare

Why is anyone surprised Russia keeps clicking along despite sanctions? RUSSIA SURVIVED A NAZI ONSLAUGHT AND LOST 21 MILLION PEOPLE IN THE PROCESS! Let's face it: Russia IS A BEAR!

Sanction on other countries DON'T WORK AS EFFECTIVELY AS THEY COULD BECAUSE OTHER COUNTRIES IGNORE THE SANCTIONS AND KEEP TRADING WITH THEM! The Europeans are some of the worst offenders of desiring to trade with sanctioned nations: Why were they so upset with Trump about telling the Iranians to shove Obama's deal up their arses? They were worried about getting Iranian petroleum, not making the Iranians do right. The E.U. will always work against U.S. interests! The E.U. is run by the Germans and they have large designs.

The E.U. is run by the Germans and they have large designs.

Haven't I just been saying the same thing

Paraclete: Yes...yes, you have! I don't trust the Germans: The never really gave up....they have simply changed tactics....the wolves are now wearing sheep's clothing. When you look at how much of the U.S. is German ethnicity, its the largest: Few people know about the German-American Bund Society: It was large and had dangerous potential....many convicted of espionage were members.

The never really gave up....they have simply changed tactics

They can't be too keen on military aggression. If they are, then how could someone explain their relatively small army and air force? Their approach now is not even close to what Hitler was doing. Now are they after some sort of economic domination? That's possible, and perhaps that was your point.

I will just note that the EU has a basic flaw that most trade unions have in that the have the richer states making policy for poorer states with less resources and economic options. The CENTRAL authority is to weak to be independent of the more powerful members so they can be virtually useless to develop policy that benefits all equally. Very easy to make the most powerful the bogey man and never address the inequality, that tends to be a norm among haves and have nots. We have the same dynamic here among our own states with the same economic disparity between those who could survive the GFC and those that couldn't and the slow trickle down of those that have not shared in the recovery.

The biggest clue was on the solution that is popular with capitalist orthodoxy, loan the poor a few bucks at a high interest and when they cannot pay, clamp down and take whatever assets they do have. If that were done here as opposed to grants and other vehicles to bring economic balance to poorer states then Mississippi and others would be in hock until perpetuity. A poor way to assist a poor state and bring them from poverty, and exploitive to a great degree.

Now is it a coincidence that this policy in Europe coincide with the social unrest and the rise of nationalistic right wing political power? Not so sure I can connect those dots but bears watching as a universal event. I can see it happening here also, as the governments ability to get anything done has left it weak and incompetent so probably deserves all the blame it gets, and the fallout is people turning away from it as an institution of trust, and filling the gaps with all sorts of social crap. That's not good for a growing nation anywhere, to paper over the needs of the many for what a few want.

jlisenbe: Yes, to some extent, that was my point....and it will remain that way for a while...but, at some point, the Germans will raise the issue of the need for an "E.U." military force to protect E.U. interests, to counter perceived Russian threats, and to become "independent" of the need for U.S. military protection and presence: When that point arrives, WATCH OUT, it will come with speed!

Talaniman is spot-on with the idea that the more affluent nations in these "Unions" will ride the weaker poor ones like rented mules: straight-up exploitation! Nothing ever really changes, does it?

The biggest clue was on the solution that is popular with capitalist orthodoxy, loan the poor a few bucks at a high interest and when they cannot pay, clamp down and take whatever assets they do have.


Talaniman is spot-on with the idea that the more affluent nations in these "Unions" will ride the weaker poor ones like rented mules: straight-up exploitation! Nothing ever really changes, does it?

Can you be specific with an example of this?

jlisenbe: The most obvious ones are Greece and the Balkan states: The more affluent E.U. countries have used these nation as a "catchall" repository for illegal immigrants so they don't have handle so many themselves.

Greece won't work. The Greeks tried to have the ideal Socialist country where everyone had 40 days (or whatever) of paid vacation, no one had to really work hard, free meds, free everything, and when the economy turned down, they were borrowed to the hilt and couldn't pay the many stupid loans they had made. There is no one to blame for Greece but Greece.

jlisenbe: The most obvious ones are Greece and the Balkan states: The more affluent E.U. countries have used these nation as a "catchall" repository for illegal immigrants so they don't have handle so many themselves.

The immigrant situation and loading those already cash strapped resource poor countries with debts they cannot possibly repay within the given parameters has made for a volatile hot bed of social unrests and their governments have little choices but to go along somewhat with what amounts to payday loans for poor people. It would seem they do have a model for those states they could use to better effect with commercial and civic investments since they are a very lucrative financial force that creates jobs and eases an overburdened social system.

Not that our system of sustaining our poorer states is that much better, plenty of corruption and abuses to address, but still much better than adding debt and straining an in debt country even further, unless the goal is to push them out all together and seek the help of say Russia as a relief to the capitalistic exploitation of their fellow Europeans. Then where would the EU be? Losing the Brits was but the first sign of the inner turmoil the Europeans are experiencing that I suspect started when they left Iran and we marched right into Iraq on a pretense.

No the Euros had their fingers in that pie as well with our help, that in hindsight begins to look like more exploitation of conquered nations. Or kicking a poor country when it's down Take your pick because both could apply while those exploiters extract wealth and make profits hand over fist in the same time frame.



Greece won't work. The Greeks tried to have the ideal Socialist country where everyone had 40 days (or whatever) of paid vacation, no one had to really work hard, free meds, free everything, and when the economy turned down, they were borrowed to the hilt and couldn't pay the many stupid loans they had made. There is no one to blame for Greece but Greece.

Obviously I disagree very strongly since debt was the only thing offered by their fellow EU partners that knew full well they could never repay the debts. Like say that was a pay day loan mentality not meant to help but exploit.

Countries need to learn to avoid debt like the plague. No one is to blame for Greece but Greece. No one forced them to go into debt. They really should look at Germany or Sweden and decide to become like them. I never cease to be amazed at how many problems could be solved by people adopting the idea of working 60 hours a week or how many hours it would take to pay the bills.

Not adding debt? We're foolishly adding a tril of debt a year. We are no example for anyone to follow.


Obviously I disagree very strongly since debt was the only thing offered by their fellow EU partners that knew full well they could never repay the debts.If they had not loaned them money, and postponed existing debt payments, the Greeks would have been bankrupt. Last time I checked, it takes the agreement of TWO parties for a loan to take place. Why didn't Greece just pay their own way as they went?

We'll figure it out one of these days that corrupt pols love debt. It allows them to look caring and compassionate while not piling on an excessive load of taxes. We are completely stupid for falling for that tactic. It's dems and repubs alike doing it, Obama and Trump alike.

To work there must be the jobs that support those 60 hours a week and let's face it the reality is Greece doesn't have those kinds of job opportunities. Never have the way other countries did or were helped to structure that way. Germany benefited immensely from the Marshall Plan so you think they would pass that to countries that could use them like Greece rather than act like greedy exploitive mobsters.

jlisenbe & Talaniman: May sound like I'm crying over spilled milk but I don't think many of these European nations PAID back their Marshall Plan debts and Greece had one heck of a time recovering after WWII because they had a communist insurgency for about five years post War that set them back when others were nations economies were growing and beginning to thrive. I agree that its bad business to go into debt and the U.S. is not a good example in this category AND Obama and Trump are almost brothers of different mothers in this arena in driving debt sky high.

However, Germany looms large in a lot of these European economy dramas....I think German fingerprints are all about Europe, cloaked in the E.U., and they truly are the shadowy puppet masters of Europe....what is a not known right now is the Merkel replacement and what path that German will take. In E.U. gatherings, those nations that don't fall-in lock-step with the E.U. plans are attacked with great gusto and vigor (remember Nigel Farage and Matteo Salvini were pounced upon by E.U. leaders).

Yes Germany certainly won the peace, no doubt due to soviet aggression

jlisenbe & Talaniman: May sound like I'm crying over spilled milk but I don't think many of these European nations PAID back their Marshall Plan debts and Greece had one heck of a time recovering after WWII because they had a communist insurgency for about five years post War that set them back when others were nations economies were growing and beginning to thrive. I agree that its bad business to go into debt and the U.S. is not a good example in this category AND Obama and Trump are almost brothers of different mothers in this arena in driving debt sky high.

However, Germany looms large in a lot of these European economy dramas....I think German fingerprints are all about Europe, cloaked in the E.U., and they truly are the shadowy puppet masters of Europe....what is a not known right now is the Merkel replacement and what path that German will take. In E.U. gatherings, those nations that don't fall-in lock-step with the E.U. plans are attacked with great gusto and vigor (remember Nigel Farage and Matteo Salvini were pounced upon by E.U. leaders).

As well they should be, but can such extreme right wing loonism take over Germany? Seems to be the trend in the EU countries, and many other places even here. Fear driven and hate based neo nationalism of which the dufus and Vlad are the poster boys for, is certainly something even conservatives oppose as extremism.

Talaniman: Right Wing Loonism is a REACTION to left wing loonism….almost always has been through history......Hitler would have never gotten traction in Germany if the ALLIES hadn't decided to rape Germany as part of the "Peace Agreement" (a Peace Agreement that fostered hatred) and the communist hadn't been trying to exploit the situation.....Salvini wouldn't have gotten popular in Italy if the left hadn't been trying to do and end-around run on the will of the people. Germany is primed to turn Right and, potentially, hard Right because of Merkel's cutesy moves with flooding the country with M.E. and African refugees will have an effect on helping propel the native German population to look for "alternatives" to their traditional left-leaning views.

Talaniman: One thing is for sure: The left doesn't have all the CRAZIES....the Right has plenty of them, too.....and the rest of us are in the middle but what we cannot be is "timid" or the extremes on either side of us will run rough-shod over us!

I tend not to vote for extremist right or left, but you are very correct that the middle or moderates have to watch them loonies all the time because they never quit, or go away, and you just can't out holler them!

No coincidence that issues on sovereignty and immigration are what they rally around. Them people is but a cover for racism, and an excuse to blame others for their misery.

No coincidence that issues on sovereignty and immigration are what they rally around. Them people is but a cover for racism, and an excuse to blame others for their misery.

so sovereignty and immigration are about racism, not nationalism, not start your charity at home and look after your own. Twisted leftist views Tal

No coincidence that issues on sovereignty and immigration are what they rally around. Them people is but a cover for racism, and an excuse to blame others for their misery.So we can't be a sovereign nation, and we can't control immigration? I guess that means you let anyone and everyone into your house at night, or at least it does if you practice what you preach.

That always amazes me about liberals. They have such a wonderful moral standard that they want other people to live by.

That always amazes me about liberals. They have such a wonderful moral standard

Hmmmm! moral standard? is that what you call it? free range abortion on demand? drugs for all? helping the poor of other nations before helping your own?

So we can't be a sovereign nation, and we can't control immigration? I guess that means you let anyone and everyone into your house at night, or at least it does if you practice what you preach.

That always amazes me about liberals. They have such a wonderful moral standard that they want other people to live by.

Now that would be funny if not down right tragic if the way you exercise and control your borders is by being cruel to scared men, women, and children running from the lawless dangers in their own countries. I'm not surprised you cannot find a moral way to go about it and prefer to accuse liberals of being against sovereignty and border control. Humane process is beyond you righties or something?

Hmmmm! moral standard? is that what you call it? free range abortion on demand? drugs for all? helping the poor of other nations before helping your own?That wasn't my point at all.



Now that would be funny if not down right tragic if the way you exercise and control your borders is by being cruel to scared men, women, and children running from the lawless dangers in their own countries. I'm not surprised you cannot find a moral way to go about it and prefer to accuse liberals of being against sovereignty and border control. Humane process is beyond you righties or something?If you are so kind yourself, are you opening the door of your own house to those people, or do you just expect others to shoulder the burden? We cannot hold everyone who has a problem in their own country, just like you don't ask 8 of your local homeless crowd to come live in your house. You don't do that, do you? Do You?

Just because I don't house the homeless, or immigrant, or those people and don't ask you to do it either, we do as a collective try to help a fellow human don't we? They takes as much from me as you in that regard so what the heck are you talking about expect others to do it? Jesus tells you to do it and you cry and whine and refuse? You really think telling me to follow Jesus and you don't works for me?

You claim to be super-moral because you want the feds to basically allow anyone and everyone to come into our country and expect to be housed and fed when they get here, but you don't engage in any of that yourself? Hmmm.

I claim no such thing. We are both a part of the collective effort, but you cry about it. Now dry your eyes and do what Jesus tell you to do and I'm sure you know that scripture by heart.

I claim no such thing. We are both a part of the collective effort, but you cry about it. Now dry your eyes and do what Jesus tell you to do and I'm sure you know that scripture by heart.

Last time I looked Jesus said go into the world, not invite the world to your doorstep so please don't attempt to quote scripture and induce a guilt trip. You liberals are too good at that. Don't tell us what to do, go and do it yourself. When Jesus said feed my lambs, feed my sheep he was speaking about preaching the Gospel, not putting food on the table

I hate it to have to preach the gospel to true believers, BUT...


Leviticus 25:35-38 (http://www.biblica.com/en-us/bible/online-bible/niv/leviticus/25/) 35"'If any of your fellow Israelites become poor and are unable to support themselves among you, help them as you would a foreigner and stranger, so they can continue to live among you. 36Do not take interest or any profit from them, but fear your God, so that they may continue to live among you. 37You must not lend them money at interest or sell them food at a profit. 38I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt to give you the land of Canaan and to be your God.Matthew 25:35 (http://www.biblica.com/en-us/bible/online-bible/niv/matthew/25/) 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in,Hebrews 13:1-2 (http://www.biblica.com/en-us/bible/online-bible/niv/hebrews/13/) 1Keep on loving one another as brothers and sisters. 2Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it.Leviticus 19:33-34 (http://www.biblica.com/en-us/bible/online-bible/niv/leviticus/19/) 33"'When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. 34The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

OK. First of all, of the four passages you quoted, Jesus only spoke one of them. The Bible does command us to be hospitable and ready to help those who need shelter, but you should note that there is no command for one person to force another to give money (taxes) to a program that is largely politically motivated. In fact, the verses you quoted lend credence to the idea that YOU are supposed to be helping the poor and homeless, and not forcing others to do so by political means.

I hate it to have to preach the gospel to true believers, BUT...


Leviticus 25:35-38 (http://www.biblica.com/en-us/bible/online-bible/niv/leviticus/25/) 35"'If any of your fellow Israelites become poor and are unable to support themselves among you, help them as you would a foreigner and stranger, so they can continue to live among you. 36Do not take interest or any profit from them, but fear your God, so that they may continue to live among you. 37You must not lend them money at interest or sell them food at a profit. 38I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt to give you the land of Canaan and to be your God.Matthew 25:35 (http://www.biblica.com/en-us/bible/online-bible/niv/matthew/25/) 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in,Hebrews 13:1-2 (http://www.biblica.com/en-us/bible/online-bible/niv/hebrews/13/) 1Keep on loving one another as brothers and sisters. 2Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it.Leviticus 19:33-34 (http://www.biblica.com/en-us/bible/online-bible/niv/leviticus/19/) 33"'When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. 34The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.


1. I wonder if the jews in your country are following Leviticus. However, the Old Testament never contemplated being overrun with foreigners. Hospitality was not offered to the Midianites when they overran the land
2. Put these texts in context, in these societies there were no motels where a traveller might stay, maybe an Inn could offer accommodation to a few so hospitality was offered in private homes, by this means news was communicated.
3. I very much doubt the millions who have moved from south and central america, from the ME and Africa include many angels and these are not residents
4. as we said before, go you and do likewise

4. as we said before, go you and do likewiseWell said. Those scriptures were to govern personal behavior, not government behavior. Liberals love to quote those texts, but only to try and score political points.

Well I though the bible was the word of God. My bad for thinking that, and not seeing it's just scoring political points for a government to make policies and laws that reflect that notion. You could have told me that the only parts of the bible is the ones that quote Jesus. Or are you trying to make excuses for your own religious and political hypocrisy?

I take your point that ancient man made stuff up according to what was happening during his time and as man evolves those words are irrelevant to modern man.

That's nonsense and you know it. You were trying to support this statement: "Now dry your eyes and do what Jesus tell you to do." You then listed four passages, but only one of them was what Jesus said. But even at that, none of them (all of which did indeed come from God's Word) instructed you to go out and force your fellow citizens to engage in charity. All four of them were instructing YOU to engage in charity. It's just like I have said a million times here, this is all just the typical liberal dem philosophy of wanting to claim the moral high ground because you force other people to contribute to your favorite charity.

How am I forcing you to do anything? Liberals aren't making you do anything either, at least not in the repub dominated state you live in. Most states are repub lead, so why are liberals your problem, and not repubs? Bet even you don't know what you're talking about, you just want to blame your ills and pet peeves on liberals. It's no wonder you figured out a way to let yourself off the hook and not obey the rules of your own bible. So go do what your bible tells you to do and quit crying and making excuses why you can't and blaming it on liberals.

Cut out the guilt trips Tal

The U.S. gives more to charity worldwide than any other nation. On top of that, every illegal alien we take into the U.S. is "A CHARITY CASE"....I think the U.S. does enough and, it can be argued, too much in terms of charity.

Cut out the guilt trips Tal

No guilt trip Clete, just calling out the excuses and hypocrisy of gospel spouting self righteous people who don't practice what they preach and blaming it on someone else like you're trying to do accusing me of guilt tripping JL.

The U.S. gives more to charity worldwide than any other nation. On top of that, every illegal alien we take into the U.S. is "A CHARITY CASE"....I think the U.S. does enough and, it can be argued, too much in terms of charity.

Okay let's argue if it's too much and while we're at it why even use the term illegal alien when there is NOTHING illegal about asylum seekers. I guess we don't have to argue about those folks do we? How can we ignore that those charity cases take any job they can get and pay taxes which they cannot benefit from. That's the myth name calling tries to hide from the narrative. That way it's okay to exploit the brown people from the south and treat them like criminals, and animals.

Talaniman: No, I don't support treating anyone like a criminal unless they are criminal and certainly don't like the idea of treating humanity like animals: We've seen enough of that in the last 100 years to last the next 1000 years. I have been round and round with my own feeling about the "brown people" as you call them: I don't like it that they just walk across our border uninvited....but, I generally like them as a people, or at least the ones I know and have worked with....and it would make it easier for me to make a stronger opinion if I didn't like them....so I come back around to this: In the most general terms, these "brown people" are fine, upstanding people of mostly high moral character.....most of them are strong Catholics and I am Catholic: You see where that puts me? I can't deny that I would prefer to help them more than "other" immigrants, I am biased through faith and I know what Jesus said and my wife reminds me often. I JUST WISH THAT THEY WOULD GO THROUGH PROPER CHANNELS AND PROCEDURES! Why does this have to be so hard? It took my wife 10 years to become a U.S. Citizen...her girlfriends the same...I would prefer that the RULES be applied EQUALLY TO ALL AND IN ALL CASES....Its not fair to tug at our heartstrings because it interferes with good business sense.....my problem is that, in this case, I have trouble separating my religious beliefs/right and wrong and business...secular decision taking is not possible in the case of what is happening on the Southern Border, at least I am not capable of it.

I appreciate your honesty Vac, and all I have ever advocated was a fair humane process, for everybody. True some have been migrating north from the south for many decades and not just from Mexico, but many countries and in many cases have family here already, and despite the hype obey the laws and report as directed and basically keep within the law. Many get deported after going through that lawful process, and doing as directed. I have a problem though with the present administration making this a disgusting spectacle however with the exaggerated rhetoric and antics that I don't consider good behavior at all and that's what I am really against.

I just don't think that's necessary or appropriate from this country, and I believe we are better than that. Separating kids from parents and packing people together like sardines? Naw man just cannot abide by that kind of behavior. I mean in a supposed Christian country can't we at least do things in a Christian way and not act like Nazis? Am I asking to much?

Talaniman: The nerve for me is the incidences I have seen lately where U.S. Military Veterans have be put up for deportation: That is utterly intolerable to me and I can not find any position where I leverage my own conscious to support that kind of B.S.: Veterans have EARNED more rights than the rest of us than those of us that are not veterans (my personal opinion) and, as such, are not to be fooled with: Its a disgusting proposition to take a man who has served this country and then relegate him to so much garbage as to "send him packing" when his service is completed.

Its a dynamic problem and I wish it were an entirely "legal question" but to pawn something like this off and make it a sterile/clinical type decision is, to me, near impossible: I find myself too emotionally invested to make sound, reasonable decisions.

It is much easier to identify truly evil enemies, demonize those evil enemies, and convince yourself of what you must do to protect yourself and others.....it is harder to get psyched-up that way against the "brown people" at the border, at least for me anyway, especially when I know that they are, for the greatest majority, simply seeking a better life.

why is this reduced to a question of race, it is also a question of culture yet you continually refer to race, it comes down to sovereignty, people cannot just wander across a national border at will

people cannot just wander across a national border at willExactly correct.

why is this reduced to a question of race, it is also a question of culture yet you continually refer to race, it comes down to sovereignty, people cannot just wander across a national border at will

Said the migrant who is surrounded by water. With all due respect it's rather an insult that you think you can define our sovereignty which in due course has changed over the decades and at one time was a common thing until someone decide it wasn't. Some boat people were allowed and some were not and has resulted into a death penalty of others. We even rounded up and incarcerated some races for nothing else other than where they came from, and while culture is a factor race has always been the biggest factor. I don't remember Germans being hauled off to concentration camps during the war but the Japanese were.

As Vac has said and I agree it's disgusting to deport those that swear their lives to defend the country, and that goes for the families they leave behind, many subject to the same deportation order, and cruel as all get out to deport a kid or young adult who didn't have any choice as they were growing up and only know ONE home in their lives. If that's not just plain cruel then I don't know what is. Such unchristian behavior makes me sick, and represents a step back from humanity, not forward. So spare me please the sermon on it's about culture not race! It's always about race in this country.

It's always about race in this country.


Yes that would seem to be so, you are not colour blind. You want to say I am a migrant, but we are all migrants. I have not been a migrant for six, or maybe more generations, so my perspective might be different to some.

It is not cruel to deny entry to those who would flout your laws, you accept those who patiently wait in line and follow the laws, so do we. We temper acceptance with the ability to absorb the numbers, you apparently do not. Do not bring Christianity into this since yours is a secular nation and the laws that force such action are secular

It's always about race in this country.It is for liberal dems. For the rest of the country, race is mentioned rarely. It is not an issue.

You forgot the ultra conservative good old boys and the white supremists that make up the dufus/repub base. Race always matters to them.

Yes that would seem to be so, you are not colour blind. You want to say I am a migrant, but we are all migrants. I have not been a migrant for six, or maybe more generations, so my perspective might be different to some.

Most migrants think of themselves as natives after a few generations of blood, sweat, tears, and struggle, and lets not leave out the perks of conquest. If this is the only home you know about then you would also feel that way especially if your culture and heritage were brutally beaten out of you for a few generations.


It is not cruel to deny entry to those who would flout your laws, you accept those who patiently wait in line and follow the laws, so do we. We temper acceptance with the ability to absorb the numbers, you apparently do not. Do not bring Christianity into this since yours is a secular nation and the laws that force such action are secular

There are plenty of laws that call for a humane process, and none of them includes separation of kids from parents or family, or incarceration in unhealthy conditions. Those are policies to deter that has nothing to do with the law, and more to do with this administration. They all claim to be Christians so it very well should be included in the conversation. What, you don't think Christians can be cruel?

You forgot the ultra conservative good old boys and the white supremists that make up the dufus/repub base.Those are the very kind of mindless, hateful comments that are the reason we have become so divided. It's on the same level as saying that the dem base is all welfare moms who want a bigger govt check. Pathetic. I'm not a repub, but I know a lot of repubs. They don't obsess about race nearly as much as you do.

The WWII Japanese were a special case and that case had a lot to do with what happened immediately after the Pearl Harbor attack: It was called the Niihau Incident where a downed Japanese Zero pilot and a resident man and wife of the island of Niihau conspired and went about killing off everyone on the island....the compelling part of this was that the man and wife of Japanese ancestry HAD NEVER BEEN TO JAPAN and chose to assist the Japanese pilot in the systematic murdering of their fellow citizens just because the pilot was of the same race (Japanese). The facts of this case were kept hush, hush because of the potential for wholesale bloodshed that may arise if the general stateside population found out about and went about killing the hell out of Japanese citizens. There were other incidents, too, of Japanese Americans supplying fuel to Japanese submarines....So, there was some "basis" for the incarceration of Japanese during WWII, it was not ALL just a xenophobic reaction perpetuated by evil Caucasians. All of this is part of the history record....but let's also state the other fact: The most highly decorated Army Unit of WWII was a unit entirely comprised of Japanese Americans that fought in Europe killing Nazis: in a weird twist, these Japanese had to "prove" their patriotism and they did in bunches.

Those are the very kind of mindless, hateful comments that are the reason we have become so divided. It's on the same level as saying that the dem base is all welfare moms who want a bigger govt check. Pathetic. I'm not a repub, but I know a lot of repubs. They don't obsess about race nearly as much as you do.

I don't know if obssessed is an accurate description for the reality I live in, but being aware that these aforemention people exist and mean you no good, is crucial to the survival for many minorities. I don't know if denying their existence or minimizing their threat is a very healthy approach though. Sorry you took my comments so personally, and perhaps it's just because you don't feel as threatened by them as I do, but it does explain part of my attitude toward the dufus.

Perhaps you should talk to your minority neighbors to get a better perspective of what you think is just an obsession. Actually I'm glad your experience with such people seems very limited.

Talaniman: Not putting words in jlisenbe's mouth but I can assure you, as a fellow Southerner, we have an extraordinary amount of interaction with minorities and have had those interaction from very tender ages: Blacks were not people we read about or saw on TV or in televised sporting events: We went to school with them in great number, played with them, fought with them, ate with them, worked with them, and have prayed with them: Blacks are in no way strangers to us. And I can tell you that, generally speaking, almost always, the interactions between races in the South, at least in my time, have been good. Where a Southern man tends to get riled is when we are told that we are responsible for the any plight that exist in with the Black race or that we owe them anything or that the Black race may deserve certain "unalienable" privileges: Our generation of Southerners never owned Slaves (my ancestors weren't even here, honestly, at the time) and the idea we owe anything is not palatable.....I think most people, Southern or Northern, or where ever they may hail, would support the idea of removing all senses of "race" from all government documents and such.

Race designation is, in and of itself, a very divisive descriptor...especially when you lead with it.....if we want real harmony amongst ethnicities, we should abandon it.

I can certainly understand your position JL and Vac as southerners, and maybe someday we can get to that point, but MY point is that even if you and JL haven't a racist bone in your body, you cannot say that about others and I was specific in that regard. Good old boys and white supremist were the specific people I referenced. Of course there are others, all over the country, who do have racist intents and prejudices and to not be able to acknowledge that fact is baffling to any one who experiences it in todays age. We can never have harmony as long as the racists exist, and maybe they always will, and act on those feelings even if you could wipe out racial designations.

What say you to that fellows?

being aware that these aforemention people exist and mean you no good, is crucial to the survival for many minorities.But that was not what you said. You said that the core of Trump's support was white nationalists. That is completely untrue and smacks of bitterness.


I don't know if denying their existence or minimizing their threat is a very healthy approach though. Sorry you took my comments so personally, and perhaps it's just because you don't feel as threatened by them as I do, but it does explain part of my attitude toward the dufus.I haven't denied their existence. I did not take your comment personally. I did call you out on the outrageous assertion that Trump's base is a bunch of racists. It's those kind of reckless comments that need to be thought through more carefully.


Perhaps you should talk to your minority neighbors to get a better perspective of what you think is just an obsession. Actually I'm glad your experience with such people seems very limited.And that's another foolish comment. I worked in two schools for ten years with many black teachers on staff. I have interacted closely with many black parents. I worked for five years at a Choctaw Indian school. I attended a racially integrated church for over twenty years. To say my experience is "very limited" is ridiculous.

As you can see, I don't have much patience with this kind of thinking since it, on the surface at least, closely resembles racial prejudice. If someone had suggested that Obama's core support came from black nationalists, or that people only voted for him because he was black, it would rightly have condemned as outrageous statements. Hopefully your statements were inaccurate, or perhaps I misread your intent somehow.

Talaniman: I tend to get overly defensive on this subject....and I acknowledge that racists exists and they exists everywhere in the country, no part of it is exempt: Like the saying "You can't fix stupid" it is true beyond doubt...I just hate the stereotyping that the South gets on this subject: it is not constructive. I think I may have misread what you wrote and misunderstood your intent, also.

I really want this race thing to go away: I can think of no other subject with such potential to divide, weaken, and disrupt these United States Of America than racial divisions.

We have to be careful how we interpret and how we judge those individuals of the past: It is dangerous to view history through the prism of what we deem conventional wisdom of today.

You forgot the ultra conservative good old boys and the white supremists that make up the dufus/repub base. Race always matters to them.

You have stated many times you don't know any racists or supremist, and that's fine, and I'm glad you don't. But lets not pretend they are not part of the dufus/repub base. No not all, and probably a small number, but energized and emboldened in the dufus era, and let's examine why they gravitate to him. For one he has done some racist stuff in the past, things that use to disqualify someone for high office, like not wanting black people in his buildings, or around his racists clients. Fact check me yourself by just googling "Trump the racist". In addition, the ease in which it's dismissed and look the other way at such antics, not just you, is rather disturbing to anyone who has experienced such racist antics. and that's just real, and not imagined or mistaken. Makes me wonder W T F!

You obviously misunderstood my intent, and got carried away by your own outrage. Racism is a big freakin', life changing, traumatic deal to those subjected to it, and it's been going on a long darn time. Unlike you, I don't have the luxury of ignoring it or downplaying it. If you were confused by my words or intent, you could have just asked for clarity instead of jumping to conclusions.

You have stated many times you don't know any racists or supremist, and that's fine, and I'm glad you don't. I don't think I've said that. I have said that I rarely hear a racist remark from people I know, and I know a lot of people.
But lets not pretend they are not part of the dufus/repub base. No not all, and probably a small number, but energized and emboldened in the dufus era, and let's examine why they gravitate to him. For one he has done some racist stuff in the past, things that use to disqualify someone for high office, like not wanting black people in his buildings, or around his racists clients. Fact check me yourself by just googling "Trump the racist". In addition, the ease in which it's dismissed and look the other way at such antics, not just you, is rather disturbing to anyone who has experienced such racist antics. and that's just real, and not imagined or mistaken. Makes me wonder W T F!But again, that's not what you said. You said that Trump's base was composed of white supremacists. That is a flatly false statement. And as to Trump being a racist, the big gun aimed at him is the housing discrimination that did clearly seem to have happened BY HIS FATHER.


You obviously misunderstood my intent, and got carried away by your own outrage. Racism is a big freakin', life changing, traumatic deal to those subjected to it, and it's been going on a long darn time. Unlike you, I don't have the luxury of ignoring it or downplaying it. If you were confused by my words or intent, you could have just asked for clarity instead of jumping to conclusions.I see. You made an outrageously false statement, but it's my "outrage" that is the problem. Hmmm. I have been subjected to racism. I think your assumption that Trump's base is composed of white nationalists smacks of racism itself. It is plainly untrue, and I can't imagine any good reason for you to say it. You didn't say Trump was racist. You said his supporters were racists. But if you want to clarify your statement, then go ahead. Why did you say that Trump's base was composed of "white nationalists"?

I don't think you are a racist. I think you made a poorly worded statement.

But again, that's not what you said. You said that Trump's base was composed of white supremacists. That is a flatly false statement. And as to Trump being a racist, the big gun aimed at him is the housing discrimination that did clearly seem to have happened BY HIS FATHER.


Why don't I just supply a LINK. (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-racist-examples_n_56d47177e4b03260bf777e83?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmluZy5jb20vc2VhcmNo P3E9dHJ1bXAlMjB0aGUlMjByYWNpc3QmRk9STT1FREdTSDMmUE M9TENUUyZyZWZpZz1lNmVlN2JmNGIwMjQ0OWE3YjZiMTE2N2Nl MzExOTJhYSZodHRwc21zbj0xJm1zbmV3cz0x&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAAQAijZc1FarUcON8Q9Fiz48ymjA DrPlzpDpYygn1T4ULYNlrZ6usyXFwIC7odw6HunMeNKO8pLkd0 JYObFIWiYghUSD1fiH--8yrJboCh6tKLoJJEP_JvKmtNzKVtXfOe2wPh3FPiMPAOTJo2z8 5Knt-A9LPG_QljD319CpoQ2I) Poorly worded could be the culprit, but white supremist ARE a part of his base. They love him, and I have called him a racist many times before because I have always believed he was.



I see. You made an outrageously false statement, but it's my "outrage" that is the problem. Hmmm. I have been subjected to racism. I think your assumption that Trump's base is composed of white nationalists smacks of racism itself. It is plainly untrue, and I can't imagine any good reason for you to say it. You didn't say Trump was racist. You said his supporters were racists. But if you want to clarify your statement, then go ahead. Why did you say that Trump's base was composed of "white nationalists"?


Maybe this can explain it better than I can, (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/08/trumps-bigoted-base-by-the-numbers.html)They put the white supremist support at about 7% of his coalition, a lot, but not ALL by any means just to clarify and specify my position. In no way did I mean ALL or a large part of his base was racists.

so what does it matter if white supremacists support him they are not going to support namby pamby liberals and communist fellow travellers. What you are really saying is you don't like the idea the more militant members of society might support Trump, I think I'll just go over in the corner and eat worms

It matters because you must appease your base, be it with red meat, or stuff they like and feeding white supremists and racists means minorities get sacrificed and screwed. Enjoy your worms.

It matters because you must appease your base, be it with red meat, or stuff they like and feeding white supremists and racists means minorities get sacrificed and screwed. Enjoy your worms.

You see, this is the problem, you are not inclusive of all views, I like to eat red meat, doesn't make me a racist or a white supremacist.

I can tell you that I expect everyone to have equal opportunity and none to be excluded because of their political views no matter how much I disagree with them. Seems to me that such views are not easily tolerated there

They put the white supremist support at about 7% of his coalition, a lot, but not ALL by any meansWhen did 7% become a "lot"? I would think it would be "relatively few". So would you say that a "lot" of Obama's support came from the BLM loonies?

You see, this is the problem, you are not inclusive of all views, I like to eat red meat, doesn't make me a racist or a white supremacist.

I can tell you that I expect everyone to have equal opportunity and none to be excluded because of their political views no matter how much I disagree with them. Seems to me that such views are not easily tolerated there

No Clete you are a bit off if you are elevating white terrorists to the level of legitimacy. That is the problem.


When did 7% become a "lot"? I would think it would be "relatively few". So would you say that a "lot" of Obama's support came from the BLM loonies?

Same answer I just gave Clete. Are you righties comparing White Supremists to other social activist groups and defending them?

Hold on for a minute: White supremacist supporting Trump...these are extremist who really don't have "THEIR OWN PARTY"...why do they support Trump? Probably because the choices they have to support: they certainly cannot support leftists of the Democrat Party because socialist are in 180 degrees out of phase with the extremist ideals of supremist. I mean, why don't we point out the outright communist Marxist that support the Democrats? Because they are also extremist. As a candidate or party, you can't dictate WHO is going to come under your umbrella, uninvited. Trump didn't tell the supremist to come support him any more than the Democrats asked the communist to come and support them. Why does anyone want to pick out examples of extremist and hold them up as legitimate? This is just a play to the emotions and is disingenuous.

Same answer I just gave Clete. Are you righties comparing White Supremists to other social activist groups and defending them?I'm saying the white supremacists, the BLM loonies, most of the NAACP crowd, and other race-oriented groups are all negatives for our country. The loonie groups come in all kinds of colors.

You never did explain how 7% equates to "a lot" in your world.

Hold on for a minute: White supremacist supporting Trump...these are extremist who really don't have "THEIR OWN PARTY"...why do they support Trump? Probably because the choices they have to support: they certainly cannot support leftists of the Democrat Party because socialist are in 180 degrees out of phase with the extremist ideals of supremist. I mean, why don't we point out the outright communist Marxist that support the Democrats? Because they are also extremist. As a candidate or party, you can't dictate WHO is going to come under your umbrella, uninvited. Trump didn't tell the supremist to come support him any more than the Democrats asked the communist to come and support them. Why does anyone want to pick out examples of extremist and hold them up as legitimate? This is just a play to the emotions and is disingenuous.

I can almost see your point, except for lumping White Supremists in with Marxist and the Communists, may be a stretch for me, because only one of those groups represents injury and death in my mind.


I'm saying the white supremacists, the BLM loonies, most of the NAACP crowd, and other race-oriented groups are all negatives for our country. The loonie groups come in all kinds of colors.

You never did explain how 7% equates to "a lot" in your world.

Like I wrote above, I have a hard time believing civil rights groups pose the same physical threat as White Supremists. and doing the math, 4 million extremists that may be violent to others is a lot in my mind, so I guess a persons politics and views are tolerable, and they have a right to express them, but I kind of draw a line with potential violence.

Like I wrote above, I have a hard time believing civil rights groups pose the same physical threat as White Supremists.When was the last time a white supremacist group caused, as BLM did, the kind of rioting and destruction as occurred in Ferguson, Missouri, and then only to find out that their core complaint of police violence wasn't even valid?


and doing the math, 4 million extremists that may be violent to others is a lot in my mind, so I guess a persons politics and views are tolerable, and they have a right to express them, If I accept your figure of 4 million (I don't), then your own estimate of 7% would mean that about 60 million are NOT white supremacists. So in what universe could 4 mil be the "core support" of a group of 60 mil? Besides, if there are really 4 mil of them, then why is it that WS demonstrations nearly always only attract a few dozen people? Where are the other 3,999,950 of them?


but I kind of draw a line with potential violence.So you draw the line with BLM, or with the Nation of Islam?

It just seems to me you have a standard you live by. If it's liberal, then it's good. If it's conservative, then it's bad.

Talaniman: The track record of KILLINGS BY WHITE SUPREMIST Vs. KILLING BY MARXIST/COMMUNIST weighs heavily in favor of the communist/Marxist: Stalin-communist + Mao-communist = 80 million dead: White Supremist, even if you throw Hitler in the midst, pales by comparison. Even recently, the hidden face Marxist of Antifa are attacking and causing injuries to people. Not defending the POS supremist, they are pure scum, but they are nothing of a threat compared to communist/Marxist.

When was the last time a white supremacist group caused, as BLM did, the kind of rioting and destruction as occurred in Ferguson, Missouri, and then only to find out that their core complaint of police violence wasn't even valid?

Violence like the loony shooters of synagogues? Actually Ferguson was a catalyst for many police community changes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferguson_unrest) but how was BLM connected to that?


If I accept your figure of 4 million (I don't), then your own estimate of 7% would mean that about 60 million are NOT white supremacists. So in what universe could 4 mil be the "core support" of a group of 60 mil? Besides, if there are really 4 mil of them, then why is it that WS demonstrations nearly always only attract a few dozen people? Where are the other 3,999,950 of them?


For one, I have never used the phrase core support, and obviously my estimate was a national estimate of WS voters. What you think they run around in a big gang? No guy there are many small local groups that fall under the Supremist label.


So you draw the line with BLM, or with the Nation of Islam?

It just seems to me you have a standard you live by. If it's liberal, then it's good. If it's conservative, then it's bad.

Neither of which is connected to violence and TNI is a religious group like Christianity. It's never been about liberals or conservatives. That's just your spin. I think in previous posts I specified extremes on both sides. For the record BLM and TNI are nowhere near the threat that WS is.


Talaniman: The track record of KILLINGS BY WHITE SUPREMIST Vs. KILLING BY MARXIST/COMMUNIST weighs heavily in favor of the communist/Marxist: Stalin-communist + Mao-communist = 80 million dead: White Supremist, even if you throw Hitler in the midst, pales by comparison. Even recently, the hidden face Marxist of Antifa are attacking and causing injuries to people. Not defending the POS supremist, they are pure scum, but they are nothing of a threat compared to communist/Marxist.

Vac I don't even count those old world political parties as part of the discussion of modern day American groups. It just ain't the same.

For one, I have never used the phrase core support, and obviously my estimate was a national estimate of WS voters. This was your quote. You said "base" which means the same as "core". "You forgot the ultra conservative good old boys and the white supremists that make up the dufus/repub base. Race always matters to them."


Violence like the loony shooters of synagogues? Actually Ferguson was a catalyst for many police community changes but how was BLM connected to that?BLM was up to its elbows at Ferguson. The WS has never inititated anything even close to being that destructive. From Wikipedia: "The movement became nationally recognized for street demonstrations following the 2014 deaths of two African Americans: Michael Brown—resulting in protests and unrest in Ferguson, a city near St. Louis—and Eric Garner in New York City."


Neither of which is connected to violenceBLM most definitely is.
and TNI is a religious group like Christianity. It's never been about liberals or conservatives. That's just your spin.I never said they were liberal. They are very much a race based movement and promote black superiority and black nationalism. If the WS/WN people are wrong, and they are, then why aren't the BS/BN people wrong?


For the record BLM and TNI are nowhere near the threat that WS is.Go tell that to the people in Ferguson and see how far you get.

This was your quote. You said "base" which means the same as "core". "You forgot the ultra conservative good old boys and the white supremists that make up the dufus/repub base. Race always matters to them."

Maybe I should have stipulated I meant WS and good old boys were a PART of conservative base. Would that have made a difference in your understanding?


BLM was up to its elbows at Ferguson. The WS has never inititated anything even close to being that destructive. From Wikipedia: "The movement became nationally recognized for street demonstrations following the 2014 deaths of two African Americans: Michael Brown—resulting in protests and unrest in Ferguson, a city near St. Louis—and Eric Garner in New York City."

I have seen no violent activity initiated or engaged by them and peaceful protests seem to be all they have ever done. You got something different than peaceful protests, march's and demonstrations, please share that.


BLM most definitely is. I never said they were liberal. They are very much a race based movement and promote black superiority and black nationalism. If the WS/WN people are wrong, and they are, then why aren't the BS/BN people wrong?

Race based maybe, but you will have to show where they promote black superiority and black nationalism to even start equating them with the WS movement with a history of violence death and hate.


Go tell that to the people in Ferguson and see how far you get.

Go ahead, Ferguson has changed quite a bit since the riots, for the better.

Talaniman: What about the Black Panther Party? They have a history of violence. I believe the Black Panthers have murdered cops before, have they not? They preach racially based hatred, as well as the White Supremist do. We can even go over to Louis Farrakan: He calls Caucasians "White Devils"...yet there are pictures of Obama and Farrakan together. Can you find a picture of Trump with the Imperial Wizard Of The KKK or Nazi Party? I know you can't. And, then there is the darling of the left: Antifa! Yes, Antifa who claims themselves to be against Fascist but who themselves act like Fascists and run up and down the streets with masks on while being fully supported by the left: And they are violent, as well.

Nothing precludes anyone from saying that they "support" one candidate over another or one party over another. And, sometimes, these supporters are mere plants from the opposition who are attempting to draw inferences between some despicable group and whomever they oppose. After all the intrigue we have seen with the falsities that have been exposed through the accusers in the Russia Investigation and the Ukraine accusation fiasco, I don't doubt anything any more.

Maybe I should have stipulated I meant WS and good old boys were a PART of conservative base. Would that have made a difference in your understanding?It would have changed your meaning, and so would have changed my understanding.


I have seen no violent activity initiated or engaged by them and peaceful protests seem to be all they have ever done. You got something different than peaceful protests, march's and demonstrations, please share that.If the quote from Wiki I posted above is not enough for you, then you have a mind that cannot be changed by any amount of truth. That BLM stokes violence is plainly true. Here's your link. https://www.nationalreview.com/2016/07/black-lives-matter-hypocrisy-cheering-violence/



Race based maybe, but you will have to show where they promote black superiority and black nationalism to even start equating them with the WS movement with a history of violence death and hate.OK. Let's see. They call themselves "The NATION of Islam", and their stated goals are to improve the spiritual, mental, social, and economic condition of African Americans in the United States. So you really don't think that's a nationalist movement and race based? Additionally, the NAACP exists for the "Advancement of Colored People", so do you think they are race based?

I'm not saying these organizations are entirely bad or that they are filled with violent people, but they are all race-based and much, much larger than the WS groups of which you are critical.

Let me ask a question. Would you be opposed to the WS or WN groups if they were completely non-violent?

Oh No! Say it ain't true! You actually, or at least the writer of the article, conflates the actions of a sick loony opportunist with the BLM march in Dallas? We watched it on TV and it went without any violence until the loon showed up and even the opposition protesters with guns ran to get out of the way of cops doing their job, least they be mistaken for a shooter. Fact of the matter is from me and the local reporting the Dallas police did an EXCELLENT job of not just performing in a crisis, but handling the aftermath by going directly to the communities as they have been known to do and with good results.

So for those reasons I must reject the narrative of your article as non fact based, and a deceptive piece of crap to tie BLM to events which they have nothing to do with and in this particular case there are enough pictures of friendly interactions with the cops and marchers to debunk any animosity associated with the events of that day. Further JL, I have no doubt police are afraid now a days and it should be noted that the root cause of that fear is the backlash associated with cops shooting a black unarmed citizen, which happens all to often today, so if cops are scared imagine if you will, how scared a black citizen would be with any interactions of the cops. It should surprise no. one that race based movements have risen and grown at a time when many oppressed people are still oppressed. Should they suffer in silence and turn the other cheek?

WS has every right to express their views and we all have a right to oppose them, but I think we all should oppose the violence that some prefer. I have to thank you at this point for being willing to discuss this rather than dismiss it and sweep the facts under a rug, and we may not agree, but it's always a good sign that we can talk about it. My very sincere thanks my friend.

Tal, if you honestly believe that BLM had nothing to do with the violence in Ferguson, and if you can convince one other person of that, then two people on the earth will have that belief.

Yes, I'm glad we can have these discussions. I think we would be much better off in this country without both the WS and WN groups, and also without groups like BLM, NAACP, and SCLC. They are all, in the end, divisive and engender bitterness which leads to violence.

Given the size and rate of growth of BLM then I won't be that lonely at all, and the movement has expanded to a few other cultures and races to acheive a consideration of international status. Wonder if the groups you oppose would be so venerable and popular if minorities and others didn't think they were needed. I fail to see how a fight for equality, and civil rights is divisive in the first place. Or engender bitterness, or lead to violence.

What and who could be against equality and civil rights?

What and who could be against equality and civil rights?

Now that is a good question, tell me have you stopped beating your wife yet or flogging your donkey?

What and who could be against equality and civil rights?
That was true of civil rights groups fifty years ago. It is no longer the case. The battle has been won, so these groups have changed to trying to convince minorities that they are victims and should search for those who will feel sorry for them. As I've said before, I generally don't feel sorry for any person, sound in mind and body, who has been blessed of God to live in this land of enormous opportunity. The message should be, "Get a good education, get married and raise children (in that order), and learn how to handle money." But I don't expect to hear that since it would entail the listeners learning how to exercise self-discipline, and that is a much less popular message than the victim message. It's always easier and more fun to blame someone else. That's why so many people despise Dr. Ben Carson. He puts the lie to this victim approach.

Effectively, the "Civil Rights" bunch, today, has become and industry. Their main goal is to see who they can set up and who they can sue....remember the charlatan the Rev. Al Sharpton? Ooh! What a POS! A bunch of them are mere thugs. Its not only Caucasians that are spiked with slime balls...all races have them.

LOL, the dufus won barely by convincing the right that someone else was taking your stuff, and how it was the liberal left. You bought it and now we are all screwed, because he held the door open for him and his buddies to take the money and run, leaving you sitting there waiting for the crumbs to trickle down. All we will have to show from this administration is the bill for the party they had. That's why the civil rights movement is still growing and expanding, despite the right wing noise machines disinformation and conspiracy theories. In blocking the liberal cause you block your own protection against oppression and the exploitation of the oligarchs, who manipulate the money and strangle the circulation of wealth.

As the trend toward conservative power increases and bring the nationalistic protectionism with it, the chances for real solutions that work for everybody shrinks too. What do you conservatives care as long as you THINK it's working for you!

As the trend toward conservative power increases and bring the nationalistic protectionism with it, the chances for real solutions that work for everybody shrinks too. What do you conservatives care as long as you THINK it's working for you!Yeah. You are so right. I mean, this record setting low unemployment, constant economic growth, growth in manufacturing jobs that makes Obama look silly, energy independence, growth in wages, and profitable trade deals with China is all so bad that I don't see how we will survive. Oh for the wonderful days of tepid, timid economic growth with Obama, and all of those wonderful "real solutions" that made us so much more...ordinary.

Your comment was so strange that I can only assume you were joking.

Yup low unemployment with slow wage growth certainly helps consumers the real driver of the economy, a barely break even China deal, and the farmer bailout that rivals the bank bailout except without the ROI, has you pretty giddy doesn't it? Fascinating you have to exaggerate the dufus accomplishments and ignore his wrong doings, even while you admit to his big mouth. Consistent though with elevating anything the minorities do to further there struggle for equality, as a race based menace equal to WS and WN.

You aren't joking either are you?

Only someone deeply infected with TDS would view this economy as a negative. The really hilarious thing is that you brag about Obama's economy despite the fact that it did not measure up in any way to what we have now, and yet you refuse to give Trump credit for what we have now. TDS pure and simple. You should get some help for that. Maybe there's a pill you can take.

Only someone deeply infected with TDS would view this economy as a negative. The really hilarious thing is that you brag about Obama's economy despite the fact that it did not measure up in any way to what we have now, and yet you refuse to give Trump credit for what we have now. TDS pure and simple. You should get some help for that. Maybe there's a pill you can take.

How long have you suffered from liberal derangement disorder? It may be to late for a cure sad to say. You may have to live forever with holding your nose. At least we liberals have a remedy for our disorder, get rid of the dufus and his sycophants. Works better than a pill and easier to swallow.

If you don't like this economy, you must have been in terrible depression with Obama. His economy, by any measure, was weaker than what we have now. To have a dynamic, booming economy like we have now coupled with low inflation is amazing. Only a TDS infected person would complain. If Obama was still pres, you would be singing his praises.

Let's face it: Trump is the PRESIDENT OF ECONOMY! He is the boldest President and the President with the deepest understanding of economy that we have ever had in these United States.

Let's face it: Trump is the PRESIDENT OF ECONOMY! He is the boldest President and the President with the deepest understanding of economy that we have ever had in these United States.
Get real! Obama started in a deep hole (thanks to the great recession caused under the George W. Bush presidency) while tRump had a booming economy to start with (thanks Obama).

Obama left a "booming economy"? I think you don't understand what a booming economy is. Obama had the least robust economic recovery from a recession in a hundred years. Reagan faced more difficult economic circumstances than Obama, but he really did end up with a booming economy. Obama doubled the national debt and still only had moderate economic growth at best.

https://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/170105184946-03-obama-economy-gdp-780x439.jpg

LOL, your source doesn't support your booming economy because it stops in 2016. Got anything more recent by which we can compare and verify what your premise is? Like this? (https://www.bea.gov/news/glance)

Soaring rhetoric and spin mean nothing when you crunch the actual data, which reflects the dufus juicing the economy with tax cuts which have already made their way through this BOOMING economy, but stepped all over it with sanctions and trade wars which Americans bore the brunt of and that's with the bailouts to farmers which were as much as the banks got at a decent interest no less, which returned as a profit. The dufus bailouts are but a temporary bailout with no hope of an ROI even approaching the ones the banks had, and even the Phase I agreement with China is but a start to regaining already LOST revenue. If you're counting on future agreements making up for those revenues lost and losing now, nice idea but isn't that like counting your chickens before they hatch, in the face of SLOW wage growth, and rising prices?

Even record unemployment figures don't make up for real spending by consumers which are juiced by the Nov/Dec holiday seasons, peak earning time for retailers and manufacturers traditionally, but as consumer pay those holiday debts we always see a slowdown and adjustments to those great numbers. Obama's economy was slow, steady, and very healthy for business and consumers as states raised their wage minimums over a period of 3 or so years which would normally bode well for consumer spending if indeed every state had followed suit forcing businesses to follow nation wide, but even that won't address the challenges of those states and regions hit hardest by the recession and who have not had the benefit of the BOOMING economy and well may not in the future.

The dufus economy BOOMS for some and not others and he and the congress cannot escape that fact no matter how much spin the put on it and no matter how much the denigrate the previous presidents efforts. The congress still must act in real time and it's ticking away as we speak. You want a REAL boom? Circulate more money that has a return on interest. Private sector/Government investment is the best long term investment that theirs is and a nickel on every dollar over a million is just the vehicle for starting that investment.

Sound like an infrastructure bill to you?

LOL, your source doesn't support your booming economy because it stops in 2016. Got anything more recent by which we can compare and verify what your premise is? Like this?OK. Let's see. Trump has had four quarters of GDP growth above 3%. How many did your hero have?

As to rest of your rant, I will just repeat the obvious. Record low unemployment, energy independence, economic growth much better than under Obama, growth in manufacturing jobs which puts Obama's numbers to shame, and an outstanding trade deal with China. Yeah. Sure makes a fella long for the good ole days of the "limping along" Obama economy.

This is to easy (https://checkyourfact.com/2017/08/31/fact-check-trump-claims-gdp-never-hit-3-under-obama/)!



Verdict: True


Gross domestic product (GDP), the total value of goods and services produced in the U.S., never rose 3 percent annually under Obama, although there were eight separate quarters where GDP grew by more than 3 percent.


Record low unemployment, One point better than Obama's

energy independence, Policies started before the dufus. (https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/factchecking-trumps-energy-boasts/)

economic growth much better than under Obama, those pesky facts again.
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/08/20/trump-v-obama-economy-charts/)
growth in manufacturing jobs which puts Obama's numbers to shame, Your best case so far and not by much as another good trend the dufus inherited.

and an outstanding trade deal with China The ink is still wet but already it's NOT close to where we started.

Record low unemployment, One point better than Obama's
What part of the word "record" do you not understand?


energy independence, Policies started before the dufus.
Do you remember the Keystone pipeline that Obama REFUSED to build that have gotten us here much faster?


economic growth much better than under Obama, those pesky facts again.
So you link to the Wash Post which requires a sub to view. Really?


growth in manufacturing jobs which puts Obama's numbers to shame, Your best case so far and not by much as another good trend the dufus inherited.
You are stubborn to facts. Remember? The first 21 months of the Trump admin was TEN TIMES better than last 21 months of Obama. Remember? And that's what you call a good trend???


and an outstanding trade deal with China The ink is still wet but already it's NOT close to where we started.Correct. It is ahead of where we started. Obama chose to sit on his arse rather than try and confront the Chinese. Coward.

Correct. It is ahead
of where we started. Obama chose to sit on his arse rather than try and confront the Chinese. Coward.

No, one communist to another, business as usual

What part of the word "record" do you not understand?

What part of inheriting a good economy is it you don't understand. Try starting at 10 and bring it down over years and you may be in line to celebrate an accomplishment. Of course anyone following Obama would have had the record too, even HC!


Do you remember the Keystone pipeline that Obama REFUSED to build that have gotten us here much faster?

Now how did that happen since it hasn't been completed yet? Maybe in the future but NOW (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline#Keystone_XL)? I don't think so!


So you link to the Wash Post which requires a sub to view. Really?

Sorry 'bout that but here is the GDP chart

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/JGE2VMLMVJHGHO6MAIYS6RJOVY.jpg&w=1440


You are stubborn to facts. Remember? The first 21 months of the Trump admin was TEN TIMES better than last 21 months of Obama. Remember? And that's what you call a good trend???

YUP, a good trend, and here's the proof

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/UI4CFDI3FVCHRB3STCQWCVHVBU.png&w=1440



Correct. It is ahead of where we started. Obama chose to sit on his arse rather than try and confront the Chinese. Coward.

Prove it, your turn!

Prove it, your turn!Started at 104. Now at 108. Hello? Obama had 4 years out of 8 with growth under 2%. So far, Trump has ZERO years under 2%. In addition to 10 TIMES faster growth in manufacturing jobs, what else do you want to know? Unemployment at record low levels? Energy independent? What else would you need?

Started at 104. Now at 108. Hello? Obama had 4 years out of 8 with growth under 2%. So far, Trump has ZERO years under 2%. In addition to 10 TIMES faster growth in manufacturing jobs, what else do you want to know? Unemployment at record low levels? Energy independent? What else would you need?

While interesting, this has nothing to do with the OP, so did a conservative win in the UK precipitate the break up of the royal family who had younger members opt for the socialist safe haven of Canada?

Started at 104. Now at 108. Hello? Obama had 4 years out of 8 with growth under 2%. So far, Trump has ZERO years under 2%. In addition to 10 TIMES faster growth in manufacturing jobs, what else do you want to know? Unemployment at record low levels? Energy independent? What else would you need?

I need everybody to get some of that good economy and not just the ones who were already getting it.


While interesting, this has nothing to do with the OP, so did a conservative win in the UK precipitate the break up of the royal family who had younger members opt for the socialist safe haven of Canada?

I think the pomp and ceremony is much different than the actual governing Clete, and the Parliament has work to do while the royal kids are doing their own thing.

I need everybody to get some of that good economy and not just the ones who were already getting it.Are you one of these, "The glass is 1/10 empty" kind of guys?

Equal justice and equal opportunity for ALL! That's the kind of guy I am. You can ignore and dismiss those who have neither, but I will not. We are talking people not glasses of water.

Equal justice and equal opportunity for ALL! That's the kind of guy I am. You can ignore and dismiss those who have neither, but I will not. We are talking people not glasses of water.If you really believed that, then you would be raising your voice against abortion. It is the ultimate equal justice cause for which you care not one ounce. You would also be raising your voice loudly against the epidemic of sexual promiscuity which results in out of wedlock births, one of the great robbers of equal opportunity. I guess it's just a lot easier to call names and blame it on someone else. It's what seems to me to be the typical liberal mentality of "I want to sit in the comfort of my living room and think of myself as a SJW." Well, it doesn't work that way.

If you really believed that, then you would be raising your voice against abortion.
No. All males upon reaching puberty must have a vasectomy. That will take care of the problem.

Have no clue what an SJW is.

I need everybody to get some of that good economy and not just the ones who were already getting it.

I think the pomp and ceremony is much different than the actual governing Clete, and the Parliament has work to do while the royal kids are doing their own thing.

Yes there could be nothing more boring than being nice to people all the time

No. All males upon reaching puberty must have a vasectomy. That will take care of the problem.True. Then we could all sit around for several more decades enjoying the rotting fruit of the sexual revolution while we wait on our species to become extinct. A much easier solution is for women to keep their pants on until they have a ring on. Worked for thousands of years. Only the recent feminist liberal philosophy, which you seem to have embraced with enthusiasm, has brought about that change. It has not been for the good at all.

True. Then we could all sit around for several more decades enjoying the rotting fruit of the sexual revolution while we wait on our species to become extinct. A much easier solution is for women to keep their pants on until they have a ring on. Worked for thousands of years. Only the recent feminist liberal philosophy, which you seem to have embraced with enthusiasm, has brought about that change. It has not been for the good at all.
A man can have sex over 100 days with 100 women and produce 100 babies. A woman can have sex with 100 men over 100 days and produce one baby. Who needs to keep pants on???

A man can have sex over 100 days with 100 women and produce 100 babies. A woman can have sex with 100 men over 100 days and produce one baby. Who needs to keep pants on???A man could not have sex at all if all of those 100 women insisted on the ring going on first, but you have a fair enough statement. So do we agree that men and women alike need to postpone sex until marriage?

Well here we go with this abortion debate again, but I suppose it's inevitable since some love to blame a woman for being a women and the men are just to stupid to count on. That's the whole illogic part of this is the blame is always one sided if it's a bad thing. Would you be happy if marriage was mandatory or something JL? Or should we return to the secret days of sending pregnant women to boarding schools however it was dealt with before we started keeping track of such things. Yes I suppose your way has worked for a few thousand years but wonder what they did for thousands of years before that. That could be said to have worked also. What was that again?

Lets go back to letting the village raise the children and stop making faults and laying blame. Does it really matter why they are here when they are a blessing either way regardless? When are we going to ACT like it instead of this useless babble into what's good for YOU!

A man could not have sex at all if all of those 100 women insisted on the ring going on first
None of those women want a ring -- or anything else -- from him.

A man could not have sex at all if all of those 100 women insisted on the ring going on first, but you have a fair enough statement. So do we agree that men and women alike need to postpone sex until marriage?

People have been breeding many thousands of years before somebody came up with the idea of a ring and I predict they will keep doing it for a thousand more years to come, with or without a ring so good luck stopping them.

None of those women want a ring -- or anything else -- from him.And again, do we agree that men and women alike need to postpone sex until marriage? If not, then what, as a confessing Christian, do you suggest?


People have been breeding many thousands of years before somebody came up with the idea of a ring and I predict they will keep doing it for a thousand more years to come, with or without a ring so good luck stopping them.Oh please. Are you really going to try and suggest that our present ideas of sexual promiscuity are not primarily limited to the 20th century? If you do, then you don't know squat about history. And the "ring", of course, symbolizes marriage which has been the primary arena for sex for millennia.


some love to blame a woman for being a womenYou do that? I didn't know. You really should stop.

And again, do we agree that men and women alike need to postpone sex until marriage? If not, then what, as a confessing Christian, do you suggest?
I was allowed to date only Christian young men. My parents made sure they were. Their Christianity didn't interfere with their lust. I had to be my own gatekeeper.

So, how do you propose to prevent men and women from enjoying sex before marriage? And if no pregnancy results, why can't they indulge? Or is that your only concern, an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy?

Plainly you don't wish to answer my question which is, "Do we agree that men and women alike need to postpone sex until marriage?" At any rate, I will answer yours.


So, how do you propose to prevent men and women from enjoying sex before marriage? And if no pregnancy results, why can't they indulge? Or is that your only concern, an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy?First of all, it's an astonishing question coming from a professing Christian. Still, this issue relates back to the question of out of wedlock pregnancies. It is true that women can take the pill and be largely assured that they will not become pregnant. It is also true that, to the tune of several million a year, single women become pregnant and either have an abortion or give birth to a child which is born, in the great majority of cases, into a disadvantaged situation. My concern is primarily for those children and for the 900,000 a year killed in abortion. They are certainly free, as you so casually describe, to "indulge". As to how to prevent that, perhaps we could start by preaching about it on Sunday mornings, or even start with you and me agreeing together that sex should be reserved for marriage. Sadly, you won't even answer the question. It is a huge task since it is an enormous problem. We have dug ourselves a huge hole.

Lets go back to letting the village raise the children and stop making faults and laying blame. Does it really matter why they are here when they are a blessing either way regardless? When are we going to ACT like it instead of this useless babble into what's good for YOU!Why do I bring up abortion? Because I'm sick of people who profess to believe in equal justice but who then dodge the question of 900,000 deaths a year by babbling on about villages raising children, or my supposed attitudes about women, or laying blame and finding fault. The truth would be better served if you would simply say that you really don't give a rat's rear end about those 900,000 unborn children and couldn't care less if the number was ten times that high. They're dead, gone, and out of your way, so you don't have to worry about it. Have that attitude if you want to, but don't try to impress anyone with your platitudes about "equal justice" and "equal opportunity", or at least not until you can tell us about where the justice and opportunity for life for the unborn went to.

Old saying is that "God looks after fools and children": I was both....had more than my fair share of promiscuity with promiscuous women.....never had an impregnation because the women I was having these romps with were not trying to "trip" me or trap me, they only wanted to have pleasures of the flesh.....this is a big difference: When pregnancy occurs, many times it was with intent from the female....but it was also a lot of people who got the cart before the horse: There is a right way and a wrong way.....I got lucky because I was a "fool"...it could have gone either way.

Geez JL, I thought a bunch of you have been preaching about out of wedlock sex for a few thousand years and it worked? Or did it not work and was kept a big secret from all you preachers?

never had an impregnationYou can never be 100% certain of that.

Why do I bring up abortion? Because I'm sick of people who profess to believe in equal justice but who then dodge the question of 900,000 deaths a year by babbling on about villages raising children, or my supposed attitudes about women, or laying blame and finding fault. The truth would be better served if you would simply say that you really don't give a rat's rear end about those 900,000 unborn children and couldn't care less if the number was ten times that high. They're dead, gone, and out of your way, so you don't have to worry about it. Have that attitude if you want to, but don't try to impress anyone with your platitudes about "equal justice" and "equal opportunity", or at least not until you can tell us about where the justice and opportunity for life for the unborn went to.

My caring and your caring don't stop NUTIN"! A sad but true fact! Don't blame ME for your misery!

Plainly you don't wish to answer my question which is, "Do we agree that men and women alike need to postpone sex until marriage?"
I don't know how. I suggested reversible vasectomies at puberty. Do you know how to make everyone postpone sex until they're married?

I don't know how. I suggested reversible vasectomies at puberty. Do you know how to make everyone postpone sex until they're married?

Zieg Heil Mine Further. The nanny state at work, forced sterilisation, your solution? Perhaps the girls could have their tubes tied also?

Zieg Heil Mine Further. The nanny state at work, forced sterilisation, your solution? Perhaps the girls could have their tubes tied also?
The girls don't need their tubes tied if the boys get their reversible vasectomies. So you don't have a solution either apart from forced (temporary) sterilization?

Zieg Heil Mine Further. The nanny state at work, forced sterilisation, your solution? Perhaps the girls could have their tubes tied also?Now Clete, you might be on to something! I'm sure WG will agree that forced sterilization for both sexes would solve the whole problem, or at least until she threw in that pesky little "reversible" clause. If all of this is reversible, then why bother?

I'm really disappointed, WG, that you won't answer a simple question. Would you agree to join me and others in encouraging young people to postpone sex until after marriage, or do you insist on maintaining your forced sterilization solution?


My caring and your caring don't stop NUTIN"! A sad but true fact! Sounds like you're suggesting we simply shouldn't bother ourselves to care. That might work for a liberal dem, but the world depends on people who care. I want to be one of those.

COOL, you keep preaching.

Now Clete, you might be on to something! I'm sure WG will agree that forced sterilization for both sexes would solve the whole problem, or at least until she threw in that pesky little "reversible" clause. If all of this is reversible, then why bother?
Why bother? So the woman doesn't get pregnant before marriage. That was your concern -- and even your demand. It would be really silly for both men AND women to be sterilized. And the "reversible" part was part of the deal, since the married couple would possibly want to have children, but I decided to add that, figuring you would hold that omission over my head.

I'm really disappointed, WG, that you won't answer a simple question. Would you agree to join me and others in encouraging young people to postpone sex until after marriage, or do you insist on maintaining your forced sterilization solution?
You can't "encourage young people to postpone sex until after marriage." That's not how it works. Encourage??? Um, try again.

Why bother? So the woman doesn't get pregnant before marriage. That was your concern -- and even your demand. It would be really silly for both men AND women to be sterilized. And the "reversible" part was part of the deal, since the married couple would possibly want to have children, but I decided to add that, figuring you would hold that omission over my head.

You can't "encourage young people to postpone sex until after marriage." That's not how it works. Encourage??? Um, try again.well if sterilisation isn't the go how about segregation?

well if sterilisation isn't the go how about segregation?
The Shakers preached celibacy for both men and women. We know where that ended up....

The Shakers preached celibacy for both men and women. We know where that ended up....

well it would be useless preaching celibracy for only one sex

You can't "encourage young people to postpone sex until after marriage." That's not how it works. Encourage??? Um, try again.What a strange world you live in. We encourage young people not to smoke, not to have unprotected sex, not to drop out of high school, not to break the law and end up in prison, not to take drugs, not to discriminate on the basis of x, y, or z, and not to eat unhealthy foods. I'm sure the powers that be will be surprised to find out about your theory of "That's not how it works."

It's sad to see you so caught up in your liberal orthodoxy that you are too fearful to simply say that the world would be a better place if young people reserved sex for marriage. The benefits would be enormous. You're not being asked to join the republican party, but rather just to agree with a common sense proposition. It's a no brainer for any confessing Christian to agree to. Instead you seriously promote a governmental program to force teen age boys to be sterilized. Unbelievable.

What a strange world you live in. We encourage young people not to smoke, not to have unprotected sex, not to drop out of high school, not to break the law and end up in prison, not to take drugs, not to discriminate on the basis of x, y, or z, and not to eat unhealthy foods. I'm sure the powers that be will be surprised to find out about your theory of "That's not how it works."

It's sad to see you so caught up in your liberal orthodoxy that you are too fearful to simply say that the world would be a better place if young people reserved sex for marriage. The benefits would be enormous. You're not being asked to join the republican party, but rather just to agree with a common sense proposition. It's a no brainer for any confessing Christian to agree to. Instead you seriously promote a governmental program to force teen age boys to be sterilized. Unbelievable.

Says the guy who condones the lying cheating ways of the dufus because he thinks it's worth it to have conservative judges who will change the law to favor conservative causes and pet peeves and an economy that serves some that can afford it and others not at all.

Talk about living in a strange world.

What a strange world you live in. We encourage young people not to smoke, not to have unprotected sex, not to drop out of high school, not to break the law and end up in prison, not to take drugs, not to discriminate on the basis of x, y, or z, and not to eat unhealthy foods. I'm sure the powers that be will be surprised to find out about your theory of "That's not how it works."

It's sad to see you so caught up in your liberal orthodoxy that you are too fearful to simply say that the world would be a better place if young people reserved sex for marriage. The benefits would be enormous. You're not being asked to join the republican party, but rather just to agree with a common sense proposition. It's a no brainer for any confessing Christian to agree to. Instead you seriously promote a governmental program to force teen age boys to be sterilized. Unbelievable.
How well is all that "encouraging" of your Christian young people working? I was more than just "encouraged"!!!

(P.S. I'm a Republican.)

Says the guy who condones the lying cheating ways of the dufus because he thinks it's worth it to have conservative judges who will change the law to favor conservative causes and pet peeves and an economy that serves some that can afford it and others not at all.Says the guy who condoned the lying, cheating ways of Obama since he considered it worth it to have liberal judges who disregard the Constitution to allow for abortion and gay marriage, a doubling of the national debt, and a tepid economy which served no one particularly well.

Yearning for those good old days of yester year again? YO, it's 2020, what year would you like it to be?

Yearning for those good old days of yester year again? YO, it's 2020, what year would you like it to be?Yes, the good ole days of Obama lying, a tepid economy, doubling the national debt, and a president who was cheerleader in chief for abortion. I know you miss them terribly.

How well is all that "encouraging" of your Christian young people working? I was more than just "encouraged"!!!It's hard to know how to answer someone whose solution is the forced sterilization of (of course) young boys, but then seems to find the idea of encouraging young people to make quality decisions to be bizarre. I think you have it seriously backwards.

You're a republican? Remember the old saying? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck..?

It's hard to know how to answer someone whose solution is the forced sterilization of (of course) young boys, but then seems to find the idea of encouraging young people to make quality decisions to be bizarre. I think you have it seriously backwards.

You're a republican? Remember the old saying? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck..?
Young people on dates don't make quality decisions. I am guessing you were pure as the driven snow when parked and alone with a young woman in a dark car? I could keep you up all night, telling you stories about fighting off the CHRISTIAN young men I dated.

Young people on dates don't make quality decisions. I am guessing you were pure as the driven snow when parked and alone with a young woman in a dark car? I could keep you up all night, telling you stories about fighting off the CHRISTIAN young men I dated.

What we know is self control is uncommon, however, the problem is cultural, with the worst manifestations of the problem occurring in secular cultures such as the US

It's only a problem to those that don't approve of such a thing as sex without marriage. Religious laws can vary from place to place, church to church. I thought Australia was a land of secular laws like the US.

It's only a problem to those that don't approve of such a thing as sex without marriage. Religious laws can vary from place to place, church to church. I thought Australia was a land of secular laws like the US.

Yes it is, but the problem isn't as endemic here as it is there, although the decline in religion appears to be greater than there, but then we have a different ethos

The divorce rate here is between 40 and 50 percent for first marriages and goes up with each subsequent marriage. It's no wonder that as an institution marriage has declined as a viable option for many. Is that the difference in ethos you mean?

LOL, I think every one of our 50 states here has a different ethos.

In 1960 there was no bc pill and far fewer abortions, and yet the out of wedlock birth rate was but a small fraction of what it is now. Now for those of us who actually care about such things, it plainly tells us that the problem is, as Clete said, cultural and linked to changed human behavior. For those who plainly couldn't possibly care less about 900,000 abortions a year and fatherless, disadvantaged children, it's enough to offer up platitudes about villages, government imposed sterilization of teenage boys, and who you used to date in your youth. Well, you don't care, so fine. It's so typical of liberals whose caring is strictly limited to making calls for higher taxes to be imposed on others. For those of us who actually rolled up our sleeves and spent a lifetime working with people, it's a little different story.

Sadly, abortion is also a fact of life in Australia, registering about 50,000 a year. Might add that the out of wedlock birth rate is only marginally lower in Australia than it is here, 34% versus our 40%. As you can see below, the increase world-wide over the past fifty years is breath taking. It's nearly non-existent in Japan and South Korea so yeah, behavior matters.

https://yournotthefather.com/out-of-wedlock-births-by-country/

Not a lot of record keeping on abortions back in those days and most were never reported, and the only ones NOW are those reported by Planned Parenthood, which has shown a decline however slow or small. So really hard to draw conclusions except that science has made it safer for women which ain't a bad thing health wise, but does make PP an easy target. Women with resources don't report it nor use PP, but a lot more than 900,000 woman have had at least one. (http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/uslifetimeab.html) We could be talking tens of millions here JL, and even you are powerless to change such a situation. It's not a matter of caring, but obviously some care far more than others.

I just don't think blasting and bad mouthing others who aren't as caring as you are is a good solution regardless, but do your own thing.

Not a lot of record keeping on abortions back in those days and most were never reported,How do you know that?
and the only ones NOW are those reported by Planned Parenthood,Completely, totally, 100% untrue.


science has made it safer for women which ain't a bad thing health wise, but does make PP an easy target.For the unborn baby, fully a living human being, it is always fatal. Sadly, you don't seem to care one whit about that. Hopefully I am wrong about that.
Women with resources don't report it nor use PP,You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Individuals don't "report" to someone that they have had an abortion.
We could be talking tens of millions here JL, and even you are powerless to change such a situation. It's not a matter of caring, but obviously some care far more than others.Sadly, that's what it all comes down to. We don't want to have to take care of millions of children, so let's just kill them. "Having a baby is inconvenient, so I'll just have my baby killed, and then I can go back to doing what I want." What a sick world we live in.

How do you know that?Completely, totally, 100% untrue.

Did my homework and recognize those numbers as ones reported by PP


For the unborn baby, fully a living human being, it is always fatal.

Correct. Depending on when you believe life begins.


Sadly, you don't seem to care one whit about that. Hopefully I am wrong about that.

I care but as helpless as you are, so a lot less emotional about a simple fact of life and human history of behavior.


You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Individuals don't "report" to someone that they have had an abortion.

That was my point, we really don't know who has an abortion.


Sadly, that's what it all comes down to. We don't want to have to take care of millions of children, so let's just kill them. "Having a baby is inconvenient, so I'll just have my baby killed, and then I can go back to doing what I want." What a sick world we live in.

Women often make choices for their own situation, so don't include me in the don't want to take care of the kids. We should all want the kids taken care of no matter what the circumstance or the costs, or the state of the world. You seem to have your own limits as to what that entails and that's fine with me. I will just submit though if you get a tax refund then taking care of those kids costs you nothing tangible. Even if you don't it's a small price to pay for caring for that precious child.

The way you holler and complain though JL, one would think YOU didn't care.

Did my homework and recognize those numbers as ones reported by PP
The figure of 900,000 comes from the Alan Gutmacher Institute. They get their figure by surveying many abortion clinics and not just the PP ones.


Correct. Depending on when you believe life begins.
The only answer to that which makes any sense at all is that life begins at conception. It is plainly true, and the only reason to believe otherwise is in an effort to justify abortion.

I care but as helpless as you are, so a lot less emotional about a simple fact of life and human history of behavior.But I'm not helpless, and neither are you. I don't vote for those who support abortion. I bring up abortion when I can (like here) and try to affect people's views on the subject. I go to an abortion clinic regularly and register my opposition. I pray frequently. Because there have been those who believe they are not helpless, we have seen a significant drop in abortions in the past twenty years. There is only one such clinic left in our state and we are working to get rid of it. I am not helpless. Neither are you.


The way you holler and complain though JL, one would think YOU didn't care.
I think your silence speaks volumes. If you really want children taken care of, then wouldn't you oppose this sexual revolution which has resulted in so many kids born fatherless? That would require you to question your liberal credentials and beliefs.

In 1960 there was no bc pill and far fewer abortions
If only you men had known about the abortions that were being done secretly. Toilets and bathtubs had to be thoroughly scrubbed so there was no evidence. How many teen girls moved in with out-of-state relatives (until the baby was born and given away)?

If only you men had known about the abortions that were being done secretly. Toilets and bathtubs had to be thoroughly scrubbed so there was no evidence. How many teen girls moved in with out-of-state relatives (until the baby was born and given away)?First of all, everyone is aware that women had illegal abortions. That is not a great secret. They were not nearly as common as abortions are now and that is also not a great secret. As to women who gave birth and then gave them up for adoption, that is what is known as an out of wedlock birth which is what was being measured.

First of all, everyone is aware that women had illegal abortions. That is not a great secret. They were not nearly as common as abortions are now and that is also not a great secret. As to women who gave birth and then gave them up for adoption, that is what is known as an out of wedlock birth which is what was being measured.
How many fathers stepped up and put a ring on their finger before an abortion was needed? And btw, those secret births at Grandma's or Auntie Jane's weren't measured.

How many fathers stepped up and put a ring on their finger before an abortion was needed? And btw, those secret births at Grandma's or Auntie Jane's weren't measured.Even if both of those arguments are valid, and I'm sure to some degree they are, they cannot come even close to explaining the absolute explosion of out of wedlock births we have seen the past fifty years. The occasional "secret birth" or the forced marriages just can't do it. You have to have an explanation that has the power to explain going from about 8% in 1960 to the current rate of over 40%.

But aside from all of that, what is your point? Are you really trying to suggest that moral values have not changed, or that the sexual revolution has had no impact, or that the constant, widespread depictions of casual sex in movies and on television has made no difference, or that the broad dissemination of the idea that women are "mighty" and thus need no husband has provoked no change? Sometimes I think you are so eager to defend your liberal orthodoxy that you trip over the truth which is standing in broad daylight right before you.

Even if both of those arguments are valid, and I'm sure to some degree they are, they cannot come even close to explaining the absolute explosion of out of wedlock births we have seen the past fifty years. The occasional "secret birth", or the forced marriages just can't do it. You have to have an explanation that has the power to explain going from about 8% in 1960 to the current rate of a little over 40%.

But aside from all of that, what is your point? Are you really trying to suggest that moral values have not changed, or that the sexual revolution has had no impact, or that the constant, widespread depictions of casual sex in movies and on television has made no difference? Sometimes I think you are so eager to defend your liberal orthodoxy that you trip over the truth which is standing in broad daylight right before you.
We haven't even touched on why. You've been arguing the what and who.

My liberal orthodoxy??? That if the males kept their pants zipped up, there wouldn't be a problem! That's liberal orthodoxy???

Of course we have. You did it when you posted, "How many fathers stepped up and put a ring on their finger before an abortion was needed? And btw, those secret births at Grandma's or Auntie Jane's weren't measured." You were trying to explain why the rate has risen so dramatically. If you weren't, then what on earth were you trying to explain?


My liberal orthodoxy??? That if the males kept their pants zipped up, there wouldn't be a problem! That's liberal orthodoxy???
Men exercising self control is not being argued. I agreed with that months ago. No, I mean your liberal orthodoxy of holding doggedly to the idea that women have no responsibility in this issue. That's a shame since women stand to lose far more than men do. You seem to care nothing at all about that.

Of course we have. You did it when you posted, "How many fathers stepped up and put a ring on their finger before an abortion was needed? And btw, those secret births at Grandma's or Auntie Jane's weren't measured." You were trying to explain why the rate has risen so dramatically. If you weren't, then what on earth were you trying to explain?
I was responding to you.

Men exercising self control is not being argued. I agreed with that months ago. No, I mean your liberal orthodoxy of holding doggedly to the idea that women have no responsibility in this issue. That's a shame since women stand to lose far more than men do. You seem to care nothing at all about that.
If men kept their pants zipped, problem solved! After all, the men are the strong ones, right? The ones who demand order and abhor chaos. Men are the ones in charge. Women are submissive and busy in the kitchen making them nourishing meals.

Typical woman wanting to blame all ills on men, man is not to blame for the nature of women which is to lust after men and try to dominate them with the lure of sex.

Typical woman wanting to blame all ills on men, man is not to blame for the nature of women which is to lust after men and try to dominate them with the lure of sex.
Typical man wanting to blame all ills on women, woman is not to blame for the nature of men which is to lust after women and try to dominate them with the lure of true love.

If you are too weak to resist the lure of sex then that's YOUR problem but you better have diapers and bon bons when you go a visiting. JL, you should scroll down and seek the sources for your stats before you start an argument on such trivia. I ony used PP because that's the one you know of the 3 or 4 that account for abortions. You just keep preaching and get those clinics closed then there will be no more reporting like it was before. Just can't believe there are literally many millions of abortions nation wide that you know nothing about. If that's your peeve then have at it and good luck. Ironic that out of wedlock babies are your peeve too, and since the price of milk and diapers is rising sturdily you better cough up more loot.

If you are too weak to resist the lure of sex then that's YOUR problem but you better have diapers and bon bons when you go a visiting. JL, you should scroll down and seek the sources for your stats before you start an argument on such trivia. I ony used PP because that's the one you know of the 3 or 4 that account for abortions. You just keep preaching and get those clinics closed then there will be no more reporting like it was before. Just can't believe there are literally many millions of abortions nation wide that you know nothing about. If that's your peeve then have at it and good luck. Ironic that out of wedlock babies are your peeve too, and since the price of milk and diapers is rising sturdily you better cough up more loot.

so let me get this straight, you are ok with the murder of millions of american babies while whining about how Trump will not let in millions of hispanic (babies), I think your priorities are in that place where the sun don't shine

JL, you should scroll down and seek the sources for your stats before you start an argument on such trivia. I ony used PP because that's the one you know of the 3 or 4 that account for abortions.How would you know what abortion clinics I know about? Besides, that's not what you said. You said, "and the only ones NOW are those reported by Planned Parenthood.." You simply misstated the truth.


You just keep preaching and get those clinics closed then there will be no more reporting like it was before.And again, you just don't get it. AG Institute does not rely on PP only. They get data from a variety of places.


Just can't believe there are literally many millions of abortions nation wide that you know nothing about.So you are aware of millions of abortions that neither the AG Institute or CDC know nothing about? How remarkable. But if it makes you feel better that there are actually several million abortions nationally rather than 900, 000, then I don't know what to tell you. You are celebrating death. How bizarre.


Ironic that out of wedlock babies are your peeve too, and since the price of milk and diapers is rising sturdily you better cough up more loot.Funny how, for liberals, it's always someone else who needs to pay.

My link was from the AG Inst, have quoted them often over the years on this subject. (https://www.guttmacher.org/united-states/abortion)

I don't celebrate abortions but accept the right of a female to choose and be safe about it. I even accept your view of it as murder and many do, so change the law and no doubt you are going to try and that's why we have the dufus as president because it's your priority, and anybody that can deliver that you are for. My point to you is you balk at taking care of those babies and whine about somebody else paying for it when last I checked everybody pays an equal share. It ain't just you. I do my part gladly you cheap crybaby.

but accept the right of a female to choose and be safe about it. I even accept your view of it as murderSo you support the right of a woman to have a doctor murder her unborn child? Doesn't that sound a bit strange?


that's why we have the dufus as president because it's your priority, and anybody that can deliver that you are for.Didn't you vote for Obama because you supported issues he could "deliver" on and tolerated his lying for that very reason?


My point to you is you balk at taking care of those babies and whine about somebody else paying for it when last I checked everybody pays an equal share. It ain't just you. I do my part gladly you cheap crybaby.My life was spent helping children and I'd gladly do it again. Everybody pays an equal share? Why do you keep dragging up that old story that has been thoroughly disproven over and over again? For "everybody" to pay an equal share, we'd first have to get "everybody" to pay something. At the present, half of income earners pay NOTHING. The top 20% pay nearly all of it. What is your proposal for everyone to pay an "equal share"?

People just ain't perfect and most of us just do the best we can with what we have, so lighten up with the soaring rehtoric of your own pet peeves because despite your position, people do have their own lives to manage. I think its rather small of you to denigrate those that are limited in there ability to share YOUR peeve and toe the line of what YOU want them to do.

So if I sound strange to you, just imagine how bonkers you sound to me sometimes. Okay...a LOT. It's all good because sooner or later we will find common ground on something. Obviously abortion isn't it, or taxes, or shared responsibility.

People just ain't perfect and most of us just do the best we can with what we have, so lighten up with the soaring rehtoric of your own pet peeves because despite your position, people do have their own lives to manage. I think its rather small of you to denigrate those that are limited in there ability to share YOUR peeve and toe the line of what YOU want them to do..I'll remind you of this the next time you spend several hundred letters denigrating and trampling on the performance of Trump since he isn't perfect and doesn't share your peeve or toe the line of what YOU want him to do.

Might add that I have not denigrated those women who seek abortions so you need to be a little more thoughtful in your remarks. Now the doctors should be sent to jail for the rest of their lives. They know better.

Repubs should know better too! The more they allow the dufus to break the law, the more laws he will break. The more they defend him, the more they will have to defend him. Back to business as the House wraps up it's case, and the Prez gets his turn, lets get those witness lists together and get to the end of this thing with the FACTS!

Anything less would be a successful cover up.

So you support the right of a woman to have a doctor murder her unborn child? Doesn't that sound a bit strange?
That baby gets born to a single mom. Then what happens to it? What about feeding it, housing it, caring for it especially IF mom finds a very likely low-paying job?

Repubs should know better too! The more they allow the dufus to break the law, the more laws he will break. The more they defend him, the more they will have to defend him.You should know seeing that you did exactly that with Obama. That's my biggest contention with you. Your criticisms of Trump ring hollow since you let Obama do the same kind of things without so much as a peep of protest. For that matter, the whole deal with HC's toy email server was probably the greatest lapse of judgement I have heard of in many years. Now you will contend (of course) that she did nothing illegal. I didn't say it was illegal. I will say it was either titanically stupid and foolish, or there was some sort of devious purpose behind it that remains uncovered.



That baby gets born to a single mom. Then what happens to it? What about feeding it, housing it, caring for it especially IF mom finds a very likely low-paying job?I would not suggest that isn't a concern, but just killing the unborn baby is not the solution. That's why I contend (alone) that we need to press upon young women that getting pregnant out of wedlock is one evermore terrible idea. You seem too busy with your quest to have a government mandated program to sterilize all boys to get too excited over the most basic, common-sense idea on the table.