Knucklehead Republicans and those who vote for them

[Silver]

Never said I trusted our government, never said they were not all crooked. Just tired of listening to all the Trump bashing. Everything is Trumps fault. Everything is the Republican party's fault. Liberal media will not cover one good thing he has done for this country since he was sworn in. But they will pick apart every "racist, "hateful" "bigoted" comment he makes.

When Trump sent missiles into Syria and killed innocent people that same liberal media praised him.

I never said that everything is the Republican Party's fault. Of course, the Democrats are to blame as well. The real issue is that Americans got lazy and stopped caring who they sent to Washington. Something like 95% of all incumbents are re-elected each time so the same scoundrels just stay in DC and make things worse. The solution can only be to stop voting for the traitors in both parties. You should read the thread called Ether's Avenue.

Is it bashing if it's true? If you are tired of reading the news I share about Trump's lies and betrayals, you can put me on ignore.

[Silver]

Thank you. Me too.

...and that helped how exactly?

Meanwhile Trump accomplished the fillowimg in less than a year:
http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/11/4621979/

Have you truly investigated that list on your own? It took me less than 10 seconds to find errors.

So when you say there are errors on this list, are you saying that in your opinion they are not accomplishments or that the items listed by an unaffiliated organization did not ocurr (ie they lied about them)?

Let’s say you are correct; that there are errors on this list. What percent are errors? 5, 10, 50%? Ok, bc you obviously have an unreasonable disdain toward Trump, let’s say 50% of the list is in errorr. Fine. Trump ONLY made 85 significant accomplishments in less than a year essentially with both parties against him—Not too shabby.

I guarentee that Darell Castle couldnt have done better.

Joseph Smith (and the subsequent prophets) taught that we should vote for good people. He didn't say vote for a partially bad person so a really bad person won't get elected.

[capctr]

...and that helped how exactly?

Meanwhile Trump accomplished the fillowimg in less than a year:
http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/11/4621979/

Have you truly investigated that list on your own? It took me less than 10 seconds to find errors.

So when you say there are errors on this list, are you saying that in your opinion they are not accomplishments or that the items listed by an unaffiliated organization did not ocurr (ie they lied about them)?

Let’s say you are correct; that there are errors on this list. What percent are errors? 5, 10, 50%? Ok, bc you obviously have an unreasonable disdain toward Trump, let’s say 50% of the list is in errorr. Fine. Trump ONLY made 85 significant accomplishments in less than a year essentially with both parties against him—Not too shabby.

I guarentee that Darell Castle couldnt have done better.

Joseph Smith (and the subsequent prophets) taught that we should vote for good people. He didn't say vote for a partially bad person so a really bad person won't get elected.

Just so I’m clear, who did you vote for silver? Hillary?

[simpleton]

Your post is very misleading. You are complaining about government surveillance and your freedom? The government "spies" on international calls, texts and emails to folks in foreign nations that want to come here and blow innocent civilians to pieces. So unless you are emailing a guy in Syria or Yemen, I dont think your privacy will be compromised. Now back to posting what you ate for breakfast on Facebook.

I am curios if you really believe the above statement/paragraph or are you being sarcastic.....

I believe some of it. A court order is still needed to spy on Americans, again, the law was intended to keep Americans safe and foreigners who want to harm Americans exposed. I have no problem with the NSA spying on foreigners in and out of the US.

I have no problem at all with spying on our enemy's either but it seems that is the excuse to in turn spy on Americans in spite of needing a warrant..

[Silver]

Have you truly investigated that list on your own? It took me less than 10 seconds to find errors.

So when you say there are errors on this list, are you saying that in your opinion they are not accomplishments or that the items listed by an unaffiliated organization did not ocurr (ie they lied about them)?

Let’s say you are correct; that there are errors on this list. What percent are errors? 5, 10, 50%? Ok, bc you obviously have an unreasonable disdain toward Trump, let’s say 50% of the list is in errorr. Fine. Trump ONLY made 85 significant accomplishments in less than a year essentially with both parties against him—Not too shabby.

I guarentee that Darell Castle couldnt have done better.

Joseph Smith (and the subsequent prophets) taught that we should vote for good people. He didn't say vote for a partially bad person so a really bad person won't get elected.

Just so I’m clear, who did you vote for silver? Hillary?

No, as I wrote in the 3rd post of this thread, Darrell Castle.

[Gage]

Never said I trusted our government, never said they were not all crooked. Just tired of listening to all the Trump bashing. Everything is Trumps fault. Everything is the Republican party's fault. Liberal media will not cover one good thing he has done for this country since he was sworn in. But they will pick apart every "racist, "hateful" "bigoted" comment he makes.

When Trump sent missiles into Syria and killed innocent people that same liberal media praised him.

I never said that everything is the Republican Party's fault. Of course, the Democrats are to blame as well. The real issue is that Americans got lazy and stopped caring who they sent to Washington. Something like 95% of all incumbents are re-elected each time so the same scoundrels just stay in DC and make things worse. The solution can only be to stop voting for the traitors in both parties. You should read the thread called Ether's Avenue.

Is it bashing if it's true? If you are tired of reading the news I share about Trump's lies and betrayals, you can put me on ignore.

I didnt say "your" bashing, maybe that wasnt the correct word to use. My problem is with the media and their agenda to destroy this nation.

[eddie]

Don't blame me I voted Darrell Castle.

Thank you. Me too.

...and that helped how exactly? It gave the janitor something to do by taking out the many, many ballots in the trash.

Meanwhile Trump accomplished the fillowimg in less than a year:
http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/11/4621979/

[eddie]

So when you say there are errors on this list, are you saying that in your opinion they are not accomplishments or that the items listed by an unaffiliated organization did not ocurr (ie they lied about them)?

Let’s say you are correct; that there are errors on this list. What percent are errors? 5, 10, 50%? Ok, bc you obviously have an unreasonable disdain toward Trump, let’s say 50% of the list is in errorr. Fine. Trump ONLY made 85 significant accomplishments in less than a year essentially with both parties against him—Not too shabby.

I guarentee that Darell Castle couldnt have done better.

Joseph Smith (and the subsequent prophets) taught that we should vote for good people. He didn't say vote for a partially bad person so a really bad person won't get elected.

Just so I’m clear, who did you vote for silver? Hillary?

No, as I wrote in the 3rd post of this thread, Darrell Castle.

Oh Yeah, ME TOO!! hahaha Never ever say Hillary, even if you did!

[eddie]

I wonder how Trump would label Silver? Lamen, Lemuel, King Noah, korihor or the little chicken who says, " The sky is falling!" I suppose he wouldn't use B of M names, maybe something like " Lying Ted, or "Crooked Hillary". Silver has called Trump a murdered etc., so let's not get sensitive Silver!

[TheSnail]

I know you're sincere, but you are mistaken. On taxes, if there is no accompanying reduction in spending (and there's not) the country only goes deeper in debt. Why doesn't $20+ trillion in admitted national debt bother everyone? You are a debt slave and you think a minor tax cut is going to make things better?

Even with corporate tax cuts, the wealthy will reap the greatest gains. Why? Because the wealthy now own most of the shares of the large corporations. (The top 10% of American households, as defined by total wealth, now own 84% of all stocks in 2016, according to a recent paper by NYU economist Edward N. Wolff. http://time.com/money/5054009/stock-own ... t-richest/ ) The lower and middle classes have been squeezed so tightly that their homes are the asset class with the most value -- if they still own one.

You also need to reconsider your support of Gorsuch. His first act as a Supreme was to sentence a man to death in Arkansas who was clearly undeserving of the execution. Gorsuch grew up in Washington, DC, with a mother who was a US congresswoman and an EPA (EPA!) director. Gorsuch has been eating on your dime for a long time. Just because that has become the norm, doesn't mean it's right. To call Gorsuch a conservative is to redefine the very meaning of that word.

So did you change your mind, or is that too painful for you?

It's true we need to reduce spending, however, there is a real reduction in taxes that is offset by higher revenues from increased growth and productivity incentives. The main cause of our debt was boondoggle spending by Barack Obama. Now that republicans are in office, the democrats are acting like they care a lot about the debt, which does enormous good in reducing spending.

So, even though there aren't budget cuts, spending has gone down dramatically, because Trump is a better and more caring president than Obama. And republicans get held accountable on the debt by thier base and by democrats.

I'm not familiar with that particular decision, however, I know that Gorsuch is a defender of the constitution, and Hillary would have appointed someone to destroy it. I don't care who he was raised by, but what he does. Let me remind you that Abraham was raised by a wicked father.

I'm not saying that republicans are great. I'm saying that turning the gov over to democrats would have been terrible.

Let me know when my choice is republicans vs awesome candidates, and I'll gladly vote against republicans.

Meanwhile those who do not care if democrats are in office will stand idly by while our constitution is destroyed.

[Silver]

I know you're sincere, but you are mistaken. On taxes, if there is no accompanying reduction in spending (and there's not) the country only goes deeper in debt. Why doesn't $20+ trillion in admitted national debt bother everyone? You are a debt slave and you think a minor tax cut is going to make things better?

Even with corporate tax cuts, the wealthy will reap the greatest gains. Why? Because the wealthy now own most of the shares of the large corporations. (The top 10% of American households, as defined by total wealth, now own 84% of all stocks in 2016, according to a recent paper by NYU economist Edward N. Wolff. http://time.com/money/5054009/stock-own ... t-richest/ ) The lower and middle classes have been squeezed so tightly that their homes are the asset class with the most value -- if they still own one.

You also need to reconsider your support of Gorsuch. His first act as a Supreme was to sentence a man to death in Arkansas who was clearly undeserving of the execution. Gorsuch grew up in Washington, DC, with a mother who was a US congresswoman and an EPA (EPA!) director. Gorsuch has been eating on your dime for a long time. Just because that has become the norm, doesn't mean it's right. To call Gorsuch a conservative is to redefine the very meaning of that word.

So did you change your mind, or is that too painful for you?

It's true we need to reduce spending, however, there is a real reduction in taxes that is offset by higher revenues from increased growth and productivity incentives. The main cause of our debt was boondoggle spending by Barack Obama. Now that republicans are in office, the democrats are acting like they care a lot about the debt, which does enormous good in reducing spending.

So, even though there aren't budget cuts, spending has gone down dramatically, because Trump is a better and more caring president than Obama. And republicans get held accountable on the debt by thier base and by democrats.

I'm not familiar with that particular decision, however, I know that Gorsuch is a defender of the constitution, and Hillary would have appointed someone to destroy it. I don't care who he was raised by, but what he does. Let me remind you that Abraham was raised by a wicked father.

I'm not saying that republicans are great. I'm saying that turning the gov over to democrats would have been terrible.

Let me know when my choice is republicans vs awesome candidates, and I'll gladly vote against republicans.

Meanwhile those who do not care if democrats are in office will stand idly by while our constitution is destroyed.

Oh, I see. You're just another Republican voter who doesn't care about people dying unjustly at the hands of government. The casual way you dismissed the death of the resident of Arkansas is duly noted.

Your use of the worn out old false dichotomy about Dems gaining in office is also noted. Joseph Smith didn't teach us to vote for the louse who could beat a Democrat. He and subsequent modern prophets have told us to vote for good people. I'll follow the prophets before I vote for a lying pervert like Trump.

[Silver]

Well, this thread proves once again that politics is overly burdened with the idea of us vs. them. Presented with undeniable data that the Republicans are perverting the government and robbing them of their rights, there are still members here who refuse to abandon the party for whom they always vote. Intellectually they may understand that the Republicans (the make-believe heroes) are doing bad things, but emotionally they fool themselves into thinking they can't vote for any other party because then the Democrats (their fantasy bad guys) might win. The problem is, of course, that the Republicans are no better than the Democrats. By every measure, the country is less free than it was 10 or 20 or 100 years ago. It doesn't matter who is in office, Democrats or Republicans. This is the work of the secret combination of which we were warned. This is what will destroy us.

It is extremely sad that a people led by a prophet can't break free of their chains. I can understand why Ether hid in a cave and silently recorded the demise of his civilization.

[TheSnail]

I know you're sincere, but you are mistaken. On taxes, if there is no accompanying reduction in spending (and there's not) the country only goes deeper in debt. Why doesn't $20+ trillion in admitted national debt bother everyone? You are a debt slave and you think a minor tax cut is going to make things better?

Even with corporate tax cuts, the wealthy will reap the greatest gains. Why? Because the wealthy now own most of the shares of the large corporations. (The top 10% of American households, as defined by total wealth, now own 84% of all stocks in 2016, according to a recent paper by NYU economist Edward N. Wolff. http://time.com/money/5054009/stock-own ... t-richest/ ) The lower and middle classes have been squeezed so tightly that their homes are the asset class with the most value -- if they still own one.

You also need to reconsider your support of Gorsuch. His first act as a Supreme was to sentence a man to death in Arkansas who was clearly undeserving of the execution. Gorsuch grew up in Washington, DC, with a mother who was a US congresswoman and an EPA (EPA!) director. Gorsuch has been eating on your dime for a long time. Just because that has become the norm, doesn't mean it's right. To call Gorsuch a conservative is to redefine the very meaning of that word.

So did you change your mind, or is that too painful for you?

It's true we need to reduce spending, however, there is a real reduction in taxes that is offset by higher revenues from increased growth and productivity incentives. The main cause of our debt was boondoggle spending by Barack Obama. Now that republicans are in office, the democrats are acting like they care a lot about the debt, which does enormous good in reducing spending.

So, even though there aren't budget cuts, spending has gone down dramatically, because Trump is a better and more caring president than Obama. And republicans get held accountable on the debt by thier base and by democrats.

I'm not familiar with that particular decision, however, I know that Gorsuch is a defender of the constitution, and Hillary would have appointed someone to destroy it. I don't care who he was raised by, but what he does. Let me remind you that Abraham was raised by a wicked father.

I'm not saying that republicans are great. I'm saying that turning the gov over to democrats would have been terrible.

Let me know when my choice is republicans vs awesome candidates, and I'll gladly vote against republicans.

Meanwhile those who do not care if democrats are in office will stand idly by while our constitution is destroyed.

Oh, I see. You're just another Republican voter who doesn't care about people dying unjustly at the hands of government. The casual way you dismissed the death of the resident of Arkansas is duly noted.

Your use of the worn out old false dichotomy about Dems gaining in office is also noted. Joseph Smith didn't teach us to vote for the louse who could beat a Democrat. He and subsequent modern prophets have told us to vote for good people. I'll follow the prophets before I vote for a lying pervert like Trump.

I don't know the details of that case. I know the federal gov hurts a lot of people, and they will hurt even more if we lose the supreme court. That's the second time you've attacked me personally, and I still think it's because your argument losses on the facts.

It's not a false dichotomy. Your choice for president truly was trump or Hillary, and you abstained. Your candidate wasn't even a remote possibility.

I did vote for a good man in the primary, and I voted for the best available man in the election.

[Silver]

I know you're sincere, but you are mistaken. On taxes, if there is no accompanying reduction in spending (and there's not) the country only goes deeper in debt. Why doesn't $20+ trillion in admitted national debt bother everyone? You are a debt slave and you think a minor tax cut is going to make things better?

Even with corporate tax cuts, the wealthy will reap the greatest gains. Why? Because the wealthy now own most of the shares of the large corporations. (The top 10% of American households, as defined by total wealth, now own 84% of all stocks in 2016, according to a recent paper by NYU economist Edward N. Wolff. http://time.com/money/5054009/stock-own ... t-richest/ ) The lower and middle classes have been squeezed so tightly that their homes are the asset class with the most value -- if they still own one.

You also need to reconsider your support of Gorsuch. His first act as a Supreme was to sentence a man to death in Arkansas who was clearly undeserving of the execution. Gorsuch grew up in Washington, DC, with a mother who was a US congresswoman and an EPA (EPA!) director. Gorsuch has been eating on your dime for a long time. Just because that has become the norm, doesn't mean it's right. To call Gorsuch a conservative is to redefine the very meaning of that word.

So did you change your mind, or is that too painful for you?

It's true we need to reduce spending, however, there is a real reduction in taxes that is offset by higher revenues from increased growth and productivity incentives. The main cause of our debt was boondoggle spending by Barack Obama. Now that republicans are in office, the democrats are acting like they care a lot about the debt, which does enormous good in reducing spending.

So, even though there aren't budget cuts, spending has gone down dramatically, because Trump is a better and more caring president than Obama. And republicans get held accountable on the debt by thier base and by democrats.

I'm not familiar with that particular decision, however, I know that Gorsuch is a defender of the constitution, and Hillary would have appointed someone to destroy it. I don't care who he was raised by, but what he does. Let me remind you that Abraham was raised by a wicked father.

I'm not saying that republicans are great. I'm saying that turning the gov over to democrats would have been terrible.

Let me know when my choice is republicans vs awesome candidates, and I'll gladly vote against republicans.

Meanwhile those who do not care if democrats are in office will stand idly by while our constitution is destroyed.

Oh, I see. You're just another Republican voter who doesn't care about people dying unjustly at the hands of government. The casual way you dismissed the death of the resident of Arkansas is duly noted.

Your use of the worn out old false dichotomy about Dems gaining in office is also noted. Joseph Smith didn't teach us to vote for the louse who could beat a Democrat. He and subsequent modern prophets have told us to vote for good people. I'll follow the prophets before I vote for a lying pervert like Trump.

I don't know the details of that case. I know the federal gov hurts a lot of people, and they will hurt even more if we lose the supreme court. That's the second time you've attacked me personally, and I still think it's because your argument losses on the facts.

It's not a false dichotomy. Your choice for president truly was trump or Hillary, and you abstained. Your candidate wasn't even a remote possibility.

I did vote for a good man in the primary, and I voted for the best available man in the election.

No, the Republicans are almost entirely bereft of goodwill and love of country. If you voted for a Republican in the last presidential you vote for evil.

[Craig Johnson]

So many issues here, I'd just like to deal with one. Ford signed the privacy act in 1974 and now everybody thinks their privacy is really important because Nixon's hand picked man made sure he got off and remember not one American voted Ford into office. As a retired military person who first enlisted in 1974, I want you to know, you don't have any privacy and you never will. The only reason people want privacy is because they are embarrassed or guilty or they might be abused, not because they are righteously indignant. The only persons who actually have privacy are the powerful elite who can invoke protections for themselves that you will never have or even understand. Why do you think no one is going after Hillary? Because she is innocent? Her husband is a former president, she was a senator and the secretary of state, those people get to make their own rules and no one can do a thing about it until the public forces them to, those elite are shielded because we allow it. The public is not doing anything about it, they are not angry enough. The privacy of individuals is foolishness and it cannot be allowed, there is too much at stake. But, the abuse of that power is even more wicked since it destroys all trust. This situation can never be rectified, because no one can be trusted to that extent. All we can really do is try to get the nicest person into office and that is really only a delay. Any person who is willing to lay down their life for America is not worried about privacy and that is a fact. And jumping a little sideways, if you think Hillary was a better choice than Donald you are very sadly mistaken. Putting her back into an active position of power is woefully wrong. She is old-money politics with types of connections that you completely miscomprehend or have not even thought about. The longer they are in politics the more corrupt they are, except in very rare cases.

[Craig Johnson]

Silver you replied to me as follows: "I never said that Hillary was a better choice than Trump. However, we are taught to not vote for the lesser of two evils. Trump is evil as evidenced by both his life before becoming president and his actions since taking office. I voted for the Constitution Party candidate, Darrell Castle."
I could not figure out to reply to you but herein.
Trump has done things that are evil, so has Castle and so have you and so have I. So, you actually did choose what you thought was the lesser of at least three evils. That was not the method I used to choose. I took them at their word (yes, even Hillary) and I examined their past. Trump had a somewhat unknown quality of having never been a politician which was difficult to compute in my weak logic but, we do know a lot about him. Castle had no chance whatsoever, so voting for him was throwing away a vote, that is clear. I am not going to throw away my vote, I'll take whatever blame I deserve, but I consider my vote sacred and important and not to be wasted. I'm not sure if you ever went to either of their websites and did the homework, but it sounds like you did some research. To me Trump's word and past indicated he was the best choice of the two actual, potential candidates. I feel very vindicated about this now, but initially, until he pulled out I was in support of Scott Walker. I now feel Trump was an even better choice than Governor Walker and if you examine Mr. Walker you will find that he would have been a very good president.
I would like to nicely tell you that you have what we used to call "thinking errors" in the field in which I used to work. It is likely that you are somewhat emotional instead of cold and calculating about the truth. There is the possibility that you are devious, but I am not certain that is what you are being. Dealing with issues like this I strongly recommend discarding all emotion. Your emotions are important, but in politics emotions generally ruin the day.

[larsenb]

. . . . I would like to nicely tell you that you have what we used to call "thinking errors" in the field in which I used to work. It is likely that you are somewhat emotional instead of cold and calculating about the truth. There is the possibility that you are devious, but I am not certain that is what you are being. Dealing with issues like this I strongly recommend discarding all emotion. Your emotions are important, but in politics emotions generally ruin the day.

Some people on this forum are virtually addicted to black-and-white thinking (bifurcation logical error) and sweeping generalizations (another logical error), and yes, their errors seems to be highly charged w/emotion and accusatory cathect. You will see this approach again, and again, and then again.

[Craig Johnson]

I'm kind of losing my interest in this website, but I do see some value here. Trying to rescue people, that sort of thing.

[nightlight]

Left/Right none of this will matter when SHTF. We are all guilty... sackcloth and ashes is our future. Stop pointing blame and get ready to cowboy up.

[BeNotDeceived]

. . . . I would like to nicely tell you that you have what we used to call "thinking errors" in the field in which I used to work. It is likely that you are somewhat emotional instead of cold and calculating about the truth. There is the possibility that you are devious, but I am not certain that is what you are being. Dealing with issues like this I strongly recommend discarding all emotion. Your emotions are important, but in politics emotions generally ruin the day.

Some people on this forum are virtually addicted to black-and-white thinking (bifurcation logical error) and sweeping generalizations (another logical error), and yes, their errors seems to be highly charged w/emotion and accusatory cathect. You will see this approach again, and again, and then again.

The title of this thread, is indeed only one prime example, of how politics brings animosity to the fore. Or 4 as in 2024 when the moon shadow doth again cross our beloved homeland. Fulfillment of the Hancock Prophecy, likely begins at this time of heightened tensions, best described as a subsequent selection.

Said subsequent selection being 7 years future, from the recent effection of our winning candidate, even the Honorable, President Donald J. Trump.

[Crackers]

I'm kind of losing my interest in this website, but I do see some value here. Trying to rescue people, that sort of thing.

I've enjoyed reading some of your posts. Certain posters, on certain topics here, can be quite (...please insert a not too unkind word here for me), and I think you've found that. Sometimes you just have to disengage or ignore.

[Craig Johnson]

Yeah, kind of makes me sad.

[TheSnail]

It's true we need to reduce spending, however, there is a real reduction in taxes that is offset by higher revenues from increased growth and productivity incentives. The main cause of our debt was boondoggle spending by Barack Obama. Now that republicans are in office, the democrats are acting like they care a lot about the debt, which does enormous good in reducing spending.

So, even though there aren't budget cuts, spending has gone down dramatically, because Trump is a better and more caring president than Obama. And republicans get held accountable on the debt by thier base and by democrats.

I'm not familiar with that particular decision, however, I know that Gorsuch is a defender of the constitution, and Hillary would have appointed someone to destroy it. I don't care who he was raised by, but what he does. Let me remind you that Abraham was raised by a wicked father.

I'm not saying that republicans are great. I'm saying that turning the gov over to democrats would have been terrible.

Let me know when my choice is republicans vs awesome candidates, and I'll gladly vote against republicans.

Meanwhile those who do not care if democrats are in office will stand idly by while our constitution is destroyed.

Oh, I see. You're just another Republican voter who doesn't care about people dying unjustly at the hands of government. The casual way you dismissed the death of the resident of Arkansas is duly noted.

Your use of the worn out old false dichotomy about Dems gaining in office is also noted. Joseph Smith didn't teach us to vote for the louse who could beat a Democrat. He and subsequent modern prophets have told us to vote for good people. I'll follow the prophets before I vote for a lying pervert like Trump.

I don't know the details of that case. I know the federal gov hurts a lot of people, and they will hurt even more if we lose the supreme court. That's the second time you've attacked me personally, and I still think it's because your argument losses on the facts.

It's not a false dichotomy. Your choice for president truly was trump or Hillary, and you abstained. Your candidate wasn't even a remote possibility.

I did vote for a good man in the primary, and I voted for the best available man in the election.

No, the Republicans are almost entirely bereft of goodwill and love of country. If you voted for a Republican in the last presidential you vote for evil.

Rand Paul is evil? I don't think so.

Some Republics do evil, and others do good.

In the primary, you vote for the good candidate. In the election, you vote for the lesser of evils. Welcome to American politics.