KlinkOur favorite Texan, D13 The Colonel, brought up a good question.  So, let’s use his question and expand on it further for the sake of discussion.  Here’s what the good Colonel had to say:

Now….would someone please, prolonged commentary give me a reason why trump would not make a good president? Not hyperbole and not because ” I don’t like him “…a reason. I will start, to give you a good idea. I do not think Cruz would make a good President because of his stance on the international issues. I believe that his personality will signal weakness and indecisiveness to foreign leaders the same as Obama’s. I believe that he lacks the fundamental economic prowess to understand debt to equity and the balanced budget. While in Texas, he did not believe that Texas should have a constitutional requirement to have a forced balanced budget. He was also against the line item veto, which the Texas governor has. On the other hand, he did not walk lock step with the RINOS and the established republicans in Washington….which is why he does not have and support.

Rubio has a stance on immigration of which I could never agree………..

Great question Colonel.  One that deserves an answer form those who dislike him.  But lets take it further, why do you like the candidate that you like?  What don’t you like about the other candidates not named Trump?  This thread will also serve us well for Super Tuesday  🙂  😀  😀  😀



  1. gmanfortruth says:


  2. It would be easier to state what I like about him. Which isn’t much.

    But I’ll start with one negative-whenever anyone says anything negative about his stances- he spouts childish attacks- but when he gets irritated or angry left talking points just pour out of his mouth-because that is his natural go too-because that is what he is-a progressive or at the very least a very progressive rino. That may have been 3

  3. gmanfortruth says:

    In picking a candidate, I like to start with my most important issue. For me, that is the economy. As of this point of the election season, Trump is the ONLY candidate that has talked about the problems with our trade treaties. I think, of all the candidates, he has a clue and is probably the best person for the job of getting some of these trade issues turned around, including bringing jobs BACK to the US. IMHO, we need a businessman to run this country, not a politician. Politicians have had plenty of chances and all they have managed to do is eff things up even further.

    Secondly, I like his brashness and his dislike of political correctness. I don’t really care if has acted “Presidential” to this point or not, there is plenty of time for that later. Other subjects where I like his position….being self funded, Immigration, support for the 2nd Amendment, and just the thought of a Trump/Clinton debate(s). The latter being what could turn out to be an utterly priceless destruction of that old witch.

    I also like Carson and Kasich for a few reasons. I could vote for Carson, not Kasich.

    I don’t like Cruz. I think he is a typical political snake trying to sell everyone some oil. I also don’t think he has a clue about economics or foreign policy. There is a few things about his wife and her dealings that put Cruz right in the same basket as Clinton. Too much access to Wall Street.

    As far as Rubio. I did like him prior to the debate that Christie just destroyed him. That tells me he is weak under pressure. We already have a weakling in office and look how things have turned out. I think he is equal to Cruz on the economy, which isn’t saying anything positive. His immigration position is lame. He’s also establishment and doesn’t seem to grasp that the people are fed up with the establishment.

    In conclusion, I’ll pass on Tea Party Ted and No Show Rubio. One’s a snake and the other can’t handle pressure.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Democrats….While I wouldn’t even consider voting Democrat, if I did have a bad acid trip I would vote for Sanders. At least he has a little honesty about him. Hillary Rodham Clinton is probably the most foul corrupt POS female to walk the planet in my lifetime. And she’s bought and paid for like the rest of the politicians running, sans Trump and Sanders.

  4. Dale A Albrecht says:

    i’ll head to the dems 1st. Hillary, enough said.She says that she will stay the course of Obama’s policies. Bernie, just promises to double down on our socialist trends and will just dig the hole deeper quicker, hastening our economic demise.

    With Obama’s pending State visit to Cuba next month, even though nothing on the Cuban side has met any of the “so called” conditions to justify a presidential visit. He states that he will also meet with oppostion leaders also. I guess it will be in prison, seeing that 1400+ dissidents have been imprisoned this year.

    Seeing that our inhouse military expert says that it IS within presidential authority to close a base. Any bets that while he is in Cuba he will announce the closure of the entire Naval base. My side bet that this base will then revert to Cuban authority, because the US just refused to leave after Battista fell. It’s not like the continued presence of our military in Cuba, is by request of the Castro regime.

    • Actuality I believe we had a 99 year lease which ran out around 1997 or so. We have been on a month to month since but the landlord has not cashed the $ 1.85 checks. he may be contemplating a “holdover” proceeding.

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        holdover tenancy

        . the situation when a tenant of real estate continues to occupy the premises without the owner’s agreement after the original lease or rental agreement between the owner (landlord) and the tenant has expired. The tenant is responsible for payment of the monthly rental at the existing rate and terms, which the landlord may accept without admitting the legality of the occupancy.

        A holdover tenant is subject to a notice to quit (get out) and, if he/she does not leave, to a lawsuit for unlawful detainer.

        Want to bet?……totally plausible

  5. “There arer three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few that learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” Will Rogers

  6. I’m a very simple person. In the simplest explanation, the rest of them got us where we are today. There is no getting around it. As much as I’d like to vote for Cruz, and for all he has TRIED to do, he didn’t get it done. And he hasn’t gotten it done thus far in the campaign. He has fallen behind Rubio in some states. I could live with Carson, I just see him as too nice and would be easily led astray. I have always liked Kasich but he’s tied to government also. Trump and Cruz’s platforms are very similar so I don’t see why the hate for Trump as far as policy. I like Trump for his ability to command attention. Shows leadership to me. What I would like to know is EXACTLY what are you afraid of with Trump? Do you think he’ll get us another 20 trillion in debt? Are you against a wall? or are you FOR continued free passage across the border? Are you afraid of him giving America a bad name? We’re already there. Do you not believe his stance on being a big job creator? Do you think his fair trade ideas are not worthy, and why? I am also tired of being called irrational, delusional, a moron and on and on because of my support for Trump.

    Going out for a nice birthday dinner (from November) and some serious Grandma time.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I’ll just hang out with you and we can be delusional together 😀

    • Adding… Trump may very well be a RINO. I think that’s just a matter of convenience. I don’t think he cares what you call him, he’s blazing his own path. Call him a populist or a pragmatist all you want. I fell he truly wants to make America great again. Can’t hate on that.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        I thought you had fealty to the Constitution! I thought you despised the notion of electing a “King”!

        What kind of SCOTUS appointees will Trump make?

        Which is going to affect the US in the long run, Trump and his trade show or appointing three hard core Constitutionalists to the Supreme Court?

        • gmanfortruth says:

          If the Republicrats running Congress don’t continue with their betrayal of the voters, it may be Chris Christie 🙂

        • JAC, as you say so often, Congress really has the upper hand. The EO option is there, but it’s there for every president. I don’t recall ever using the ‘king’ word so I don’t know where that comes from. I don’t see King Trump, I see American Trump.

          He mentioned Diane Sykes as a possible SC nominee. She was good enough to be appointed by Bush to her Federal seat so without diving into background, I would say I’m comfortable that Trump wouldn’t nominate a communist or a Sharia friendly type.

  7. Just A Citizen says:

    To those who think it critical to have a business man in the POTUS chair.

    Are not Bankers and Finance gurus on wall street also businessmen? Did not the Bush family run an oil business among others?

    If you think some businessman, or any POTUS for that matter, should “fix the economy” then I suggest you read “Fatal Conceit” along with some other works of the Austrian variety.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      It sure looks more appetizing than another damn lawyer. Isn’t that what Tea Party Ted is?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        So when your plumbing is leaking you call an electrician??

        When the laws are broken or abused you call a real estate developer?? Really??????

        • gmanfortruth says:

          You call a businessman to run a country that needs to bring jobs back from other countries. In case you haven’t been paying attention, there’s about 100 million people who could use a good job. Politicians got us in this mess and apparently you want to call a politician to …….keep effing shit up.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            In case you haven’t been paying attention there is absolutely NOTHING that any president can do to “bring jobs back” to the USA.

            Then I suppose you will have no problem if he and Congress start a global trade war because you want jobs and living wages handed to you “from the Govt.”.

            The cry for liberty and freedom is sounding ever so phony these days.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            By the way, you had a businessman and novice politician running the country from 2001 to 2008. He was surrounded by other businessmen who ran Treasury, Commerce and even VP.

            How did that work out for us??

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Almost forgot the “farmer” who ran the country from 76 to 80.

              Although I do have to give the farmer credit for identifying a core problem, people living on debt. But then the “republicans” ridiculed him for that, saying it showed a lack of understanding.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Good Ole Jimmy! 🙂 Believe it or not, I actually supported him when he ran and won. By the end of the third year, I became a Republican. Now, mainly due to local elections, I call myself an Independent. Carter was really bad. Obama has him beat though. I still can’t fathom how anyone with a brain can vote for Hillary. I think there is something in government run water making people irrational.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              For most of W’s 8 years we had a pretty good economy. We hemoraged jobs to other countries thanks to him signing NAFTA, which Clinton negotiated (see, all on the same team). The economy imploded because of idiot Democrats pushing sub-prime mortgages, the housing bubble burst. We haven’t recovered one bit since then, unless you did well in the stock market during the Federal Reserves QE infestation, which is going to come back to haunt us. I would much rather have a successful businessman, who self funded his campaign, to deal with the economic issues ahead. Your snake oil salesman wouldn’t have a clue on how to deal with a crushed economy, all he would do was get on TV and blame Obama. That would be the highlight of a Cruz Presidency, blaming Obama for 4 years.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Well this certainly summarized the disconnect:

                “For most of W’s 8 years we had a pretty good economy.”

                I guess “good economy” is in the eye of the beholder and has nothing to do with reality.

                While many of the accusations from the Dems about Bush’s economy are false, there is no way you can claim it was “good”. Just as Obama’s economy cannot be called “good”.

                Nor any other Presidential reign in my lifetime. Even Reagan’s term is a mixed bag, although better than anyone else’s.

                Clinton’s was largely a fraud and the blessing of good timing (dot com boom).

                A “good” economy is one that grows on investment (savings) not debt, and is resilient enough to rebound from deflations on their own power. Oh, and it involves voluntary trade among people on their own terms.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Not a disconnect at all. We can agree that the state of the economy under any President is subjective, depending on circumstances. Under Carter, I watch the Steel Belt turn into the Rust Belt. Based on that experience, I gauge what I think is good or bad. You do the same. What could have been a time of growth and prosperity in my area could have been horrible in your area. I found Bush’s economy good in my area. Jobs were plentiful and there was growth, unlike the Clinton years. The dot com stuff had little effect on the local economy. Now, living in a rural area, I have a slightly different view of things. However, I’m close enough to the hold stomping grounds to see both areas.

                Under Obozo, things haven’t been very good at all, especially concerning jobs. On the other hand, the only real inflation occurred with food, everything else seemed to stay stagnant or even decrease. I do like the temporary gas prices, but they are temporary. I’m storing gas as best I can for the future. I’ll manage about 125 gallons of storage. So, there are good and bad points. I gauge it primarily on jobs. My guide… there a decent paying job available if I were to need a new job? Right now, flat out NO.

                This should at least ease our disagreement. You may see things differently because of your life experiences, that’s cool. My liking of Trump is based on what he is saying about jobs. His success means a great deal, unlike politicians who haven’t had any business success. Their success is derived from being the best bullshitter. Bullshitters don’t do the things needed for the jobs market to get better, see Obama and what is happening now. Only Trump has talked about lowering taxes, renegotiating trade agreements, so they are fair and equal, unlike the mess we have today.

                If trump can accomplish the fix on jobs, I can deal with any errors he may have, whatever they may be. I’m OK with making our military stronger. I’m OK with a big ass wall down South, even electrified. Frankly, I don’t see Cruz or Rubio as being able to do anything that Trump could possibly do in the most important areas for me. They are politicians. Many of us have had enough of the politicians bullshit, we want a winner who can actually do something for the average American. Cruz and Rubio are more status quo. I’d rather have a bloody revolution than vote for either.

                What I would like to see, if Trump win the nomination, which i’m not convinced of just yet, is for him to pick Ron or Rand Paul for VP. Preferably Ron. That would be icing on the cake. I think Trump may really surprise the naysayers.

                You asked Earlier if I wanted a trade war. YES, we are getting our asses kicked in trade. It needs evened out. I’m willing to pay more for stuff, if that’s what it takes. I’m not calling for us to have big trade advantages, just some equality. If your worried about a war because of a trade war, I don’t see that as an issue. Who’s going to want that war Mexico? China? Neither could win.

                That was fun, I hope it clarifies a few things. PEACE 🙂

              • Dale A Albrecht says:

                I always loved this old movie. “The Devil and Miss Jones” Somehow it reminds me of the current debate. Rich/poor, morality, jobs. you name it.
                The 1st few minutes are so Trump. Worlds richest man, burned in effigy in front of a store he didn’t even know he owned. The board handled it. The last 4 minutes are also telling about what most corporate board thing about morality.

                The SCOTUS in a ruling about free speech basically said corporations are people. That said corporations can move and about for their self interests just like people. My only objection is the how they move about and the why’s.

                Sure Trump might get some jobs back, but I seriously doubt if the PEOPLE would stand for environmental conditions before the EPA and clean air and clean water acts went into effect. Sure the EPA and many other agencies need to be reigned in, but personally I do not want to see another Love Canal, a dead Hudson River, LA smog, Scranton smog, gary Indiana smog. Look at the Blues Brothers and Joliet’s sky. Then watch the Blues Brother’s II and the same panarama. A hairs breath away of a dead Chesapeake Bay. Slowly recovering…The inovation that came out of those restrictions especially the burning of coal. Insteado f everyone burning coal in their houses and going up the stack…nasty pollution, central burning creating electricity not only cheap, but really cleaned up the air. Now Obama want that cheap energy gone.

                Now look at the air and water in China and India. Do we want that again. I doubt it. Of course it’s cheaper to make the products there than here. Labor and work condition rules. Housing conditions. Do we want the inner city of the early 1900’s? Do we want the food quality of days past. Well, maybe the rat parts would be OK they’re organic. Sure might be healthier than all the chemicals and non food in our food.

                I like pickled herring. The commercial process was deemed illegal for environmental reasons. All factories in the US were closed. However, all the product is now imported from Canada who use the same process that our companies used. Their problem not ours. I don’t care…I make my own, no preservative, lye etc. On an old Jaguar I had, the fuel tanks needed work. Replace them new was serious bucks. Might find some old ones, but might still have the problem. The process to repair them was illegal in the US by the EPA standards. WE shipped them to Canada, they did the work, shipped them back all for $400, not $2000

  8. Just A Citizen says:

    Very interesting collection of polling on what if scenarios:

  9. Just A Citizen says:

    Trump, the brilliant business man who understands trade did not even know that China was NOT part of the TPP trade agreement. That this agreement creates incentives for China to start behaving better and if not, for the member countries to increase trade among themselves.

    Will it work? I doubt it. But the point is that Trump was ripping on it and had no clue what it was about.

    Yet nobody seemed to care he was misleading everyone about his knowledge, let alone what the solutions might be.

    So he mentions the devaluation of the Yuan. What can he do about it? I thought we did not want our POTUS unilaterally over turning treaties approved by Congress.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I don’t recall Trump ever saying he would overturn treaties, he said renegotiate. As far as the TPP, the only thing that has been released on it was done by Wikileaks, so nobody really knows whats in it completely. Can you prove that China isn’t part of the TPP today? Has the TPP even been voted on yet? You should thank the Republican led Senate for passing the unconstitutional fast track bill. What a shame, just one more addition to the long list of betrayals.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        There is considerable information on TPP on the internet. Claiming there is none is dishonest or reflects and unwillingness to look.

        Seems to me I posted a link to an explanation of the entire agreement here last month. You may not agree with the explanations but it is on the web.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          I have read a lot…of speculation coming from small leaks here and there. Until it actually comes out for all to read, it’s all speculation. One part about companies suing governments for future loss of profits, which I’m sure you have seen as well, is one that baffles me. Why would any politician agree to such BS? But the TPP, until voted on, doesn’t mean anything just yet. But can you explain why the Republicans passed an unconstitutional law, for the sole purpose of passing this deal, of which Obama has been a big player and wants passed? Please, either explain why you and your fellow voters are being betrayed or simple admit you have been duped 😀

  10. gmanfortruth says:

    Solid evidence that Cruz is nothing but a snake:

    As you can see, the Tweet that Carson was out of the running during Iowa caucus’s was ON PURPOSE! Nothing but a damn snake and a filthy lying one at that.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      So you have ZERO standards for what constitutes “solid evidence”.

      At least your consistent in this regard.

      By the way, nobody ever said the tweet about Carson was not on purpose. They said it was done in response to CNN reporting, which sounded a lot like Carson was dropping out.

      As for Cruz’s “phony” letter set to voters, I do not care for that kind of thing but how can you blame Cruz for using a tactic used hundreds of times by politicians on both sides. All the while claiming that Trump is the guy because he “will do what it takes to win”.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        They knew God Damn well Carson wasn’t quitting the race on the night of the first caucus. He’s a effing snake, plain and simple, but you probably said it best quote” Cruz for using a tactic used hundreds of times by politicians on both sides.” Yes, a typical snake politician, just what this country DON’T need.

  11. First of all I think Trump is a very large gamble.

    Then, what are the alternatives? I was close-by when Hillary ran against Rick Lazio for Senate. The money was on him. Then he confronted her during the debate with a “pledge” to sign about fund raising I think. He, it was immediately reported, “invaded her space” this is something you cannot do to a woman apparently, even one running for the most powerful office in the land. She won, playing Katie Scarlett O’Hara “Who, little ole me?”

    I do not think anyone else can beat her.

    Rubio, a little kid who will be haunted by his inexperience and his non-attendance in the Senate. He also gets very flustered. And… think he could control McConnell and Ryan?

    Cruz, a brilliant man disliked by just about anyone who has dealt with him. Maybe he is the John Adams of this contest. Too easily sidetracked into explaining and defending his positions. The Hillary/Bill braintrust will make mince-meat out of him as they did Bush I. Same on McConnell and Ryan.

    Carson, a nice guy who I’d love to have as VP but will be dogged by inexperience.

    Kasich, Not the guy who went to Congress in ’94 during the Gingrich revolution, Mr bi-partisian which may still work at State House level. . Still thinks he can cross the aisle. he would probably go along with McConnell and Ryan who would be taking their lead from Pelosi and Reid (or Schumer).

    The stakes here are immense. We are so far gone, so fundamentally changed that the gamble is worth it.We are drawing to an inside straight. However, if we don’t play and wait four more years, the game will become three card monte not poker.

    • SK says “Then, what are the alternatives?”

      Exactly! This is the illusion of choice that we have….the illusion of freedom. We are FREE to CHOOSE anyone we like….however, we must choose from the few that have already been chosen for us.

      • I do not feel that way about Trump nor did I about Reagan nor about Goldwater. and the analogy was not to individuals but to the demise of the Republic.

        This place is so friggen far gone yet people do not see that because they can’t simply look backward a few years.

        The Apple I-phone bullshit is a prime example. Privacy my ass. The lemmings are worried about their “internet privacy” yet have no problem with the government having their health information, financial information (deep and getting deeper) and firearm information. All this hoopla to protect their porn proclivities.

  12. Just A Citizen says:

    Just read that Rand Paul is still on the ballot in Idaho. Now I must choose between A or B, knowing A has dropped out.

    But then I hardly ever pick a winner so what the heck.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      There, you finally got something right today 😀

      • Just A Citizen says:

        I get virtually everything right every day.

        That is why I have a dismal record voting for politicians that win.

        I vote for the “right” ones.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Only in your own mind 🙂

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Adding to above comment. I feel that Central banks have a lot to do with the ups and downs of economies. Trump, like Rand and Ron Paul wants to audit the Federal Reserve. No one else is touching that. Trump wants to shut down the EPA and DOE, and maybe other agencies that can be handled by the States or are completely useless and only serve to harm the economy. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m guessing this is a big reason you are against him, YES?

  13. gmanfortruth says:

    Via: Politico:

    Conservative donors have engaged a major GOP consulting firm in Florida to research the feasibility of mounting a late, independent run for president amid growing fears that Donald Trump could win the Republican nomination.

    A memo prepared for the group zeroes in on ballot access as a looming obstacle for any independent candidate, along with actually identifying a viable, widely known contender and coalescing financial support for that person. The two states with the earliest deadlines for independent candidates, Texas and North Carolina, also have some of the highest hurdles for independents to get on the ballot, according to the research.

    “All this research has to happen before March 16, when inevitably Trump is the nominee, so that we have a plan in place,” a source familiar with the discussions said. March 16 is the day after the GOP primary in Florida, a winner-take-all contest that Marco Rubio supporters have identified as a must-win to stop Trump’s early momentum.

    “It’s critical some serious attention is given to this,” the source said.

    The document, stamped “confidential,” was authored by staff at Data Targeting, a Republican firm based in Gainesville, Fla. The memo notes that “it is possible to mount an independent candidacy but [it] will require immediate action on the part of this core of key funding and strategic players.”

    Data Targeting did not respond to a request for comment on the memo.

  14. Ok……I am back….so sorry for the quick disconnect…..

    VH….I voted Cruz not because of his business acumen ( he has none )..and not because of his foreign poicy expertise ( he has none ). I voted for him, as I exlained earlier, because he is the most electable. Cruz cannot balance a check book and totally believes in deficit spending. He has proven that already by his votes in the Senate. I voted for him because he stood up in the Senate and at least filibustered and voted against the very things he said he would when elected. But running the country… He has no managerial experience ( neither did Obama ) He has absolutley no foreign policy experience ( neither does Rubio nor Kasich nor Paul ) nor any one of the remaining Repubs. His demeanor, to me, indicates weakness.

    I do not care much about dirty political tricks….dirty politics is older than dirt and will continue….and, yes, they all lie.

    I have nothing to say about Hillary….she was a shoe in before all the voting. Sanders has no chance,

    As far as Trump…..well, I have no problem with some of his business’ going bankrupt, Bankruptcy is a business tactic that is used over and over and over again. Many successful people have had many bankruptcies. He does understand how to use the different policies of business, good and bad, to his advantage. I think he would do that for the US. Cruz and Rubio have absutey no concept of business tactics. I have no problem whatsoever, with trashing trade policies not to our advantage and I have no problems with trade wars. None. This country needs to hit the reset button. And, yes, I fully understand the economic affect on us. I have no problem with pulling our support for the central banking community. None whatsoever…..the impact to wall street would be a pretty big hit and rightly so. I haveno problem with his brashness and under tones and the reason that I have no problem with it is because he is considered a blow hard maverick and international leaders have no idea what to do with him. I think they will not cross lines and if they do, I think trump would smack the shit out of them and say,…..don’t do it again. I do not believe in compromise just to solve a problem. I only believe in compromise to our advantage and that is what businessmen do….you do not compromise from or to weakness…you will be a loser. I like his straight forward approach as he does not care about political correctness and neither do I. Foriegn leaders would back off, Ibelieve, because he is successful….and JAC, my friend, success comes in many ways. You may not agree with Trump’s definitions or in the way he is a success but he got results. He knows how to win. Cruz and Rubio have no concept of winning much less knowing how to win. I worked in the Cruz campaign to get him elected to the Senate and it was not the Tea Party that got him elected…he rode their coat tails, for sure, but business got him elected and why? Because he is good for business…but only from a legislative stand point. Business acumen is also in knowing how to use assets. Cruz is an asset as a Senator…not a POTUS.

    I am very pragmatic. Very practical in my approach. Trump is not electable….if he were, I would have voted for him. Cruz got my vote because he is more electable than Trump. He will be pushed around by foreign leaders and tromped on because he is a weasel but I would rather have the worst Republican than I would the best Progressive because the best progressive is still worse than the worst Republican. Cruz got my vote because Rubio is a fake,,,,at least Cruz stood up in the Senate…..Rubio caved to the repub leadership.

    • Maybe I’ve misunderstood but I’ve read this twice. Sounds to me like you are saying that it’s okay for someone to be unethical and a weasel as long as they are called a businessman because it’s just the cost of doing business. But Cruz is a weasel because -well I’m not sure why-but I guess because he’s not a businessman.

      • No maam, I am not saying that at all…..Cruz has not proven himsef to be a fighter at all and conducting a filibuster is not a fight. In business, you do what is necessary to win. You trade, you manipulate, you use the assets you have available to win,…I am saying that Cruz has not had that experience. All I read on here is experience matters….and that simply being in Congress counts as experience…but experience in what. You are using terms as unethical. Ok, I will bite…define ethics. Is it unethical to file bankruptcy if that benefits your situation? If it is legal, is it unethical? And if you say yes, then you have to define ethics. I have read your reasons for not liking Trump but everything you posted was personal.

        You have mentioned that you do not like Trump because he is unethical. Where? Bankruptcy filings? Imminent domain issues? I think that I gave you some concrete areas of thw why’s and where fors….You have mentioned two things before… I will ask a direct question. You mentioned that Trump has filed bankruptcies before….where is that unethical? Illegal or immoral? You have mentioned that Trump has used imminent domain before….where is that unethical, immoral, or illegal? Some have mentioned the use of profanity before….where is that unethical, illegal, or immoral? You have mentioned that trupm is a weasel….where has he behaved in such a manner?

        Let me ask you this question….if you had a million dollars right this very minute and you had two choices and only to choices to use to invest your money. Those two choices are Trump and Cruz, who would you pick ( and you have to pick one ). Cruz has no history of investments and he is not a successful business man. I think that you would pick Trump because of his success. Who would you pick to balance a budget? (same rules)….Trump, who has balanced budgets before or Cruz who voted against the line item veto. ( The line item veto is a powerful weapon for a President or a Governor to use to be able to balance the budget). Cruz is totally against that. Cruz believes in, and has voted, to utilize deficit spending…in other words Cruz believes that a government can spend money it does not have.

        Now, there are two specific items….neither of those depict a weasel but they do show experience, which seems to be important to some as a prerequisite to being POTUS.

        Please understand that I am not trying to argue but I really want to know the litmus test that you use. I feel that I am being very pragmatic…perhaps I am not and you will certainly not hurt my feelings if you feel that I am not.

  15. @ JAC….you said the following: “In case you haven’t been paying attention there is absolutely NOTHING that any president can do to “bring jobs back” to the USA.”

    Why do you say this? I think that I could do this over night. You may not like it…..but I think that I could do it pretty damned fast.

    I will tell you how I do it but I have to ask you a question first, concerning ChIna, India, Taiwan, the far east,,,,,,,,do you give a tinker’s damn what happens to them?

    • Just A Citizen says:


      I say this for a few reasons. Most people want the economy back they remember from ten to fifteen years ago, or maybe twenty. It is GONE, never to return. The World has moved on.

      The only way it returns to the US is if we first collapse and destroy ourselves. Then we will have basic industry again to rebuild the cities we destroyed. And we all know Broken Window Fallacy is just that, a Fallacy.

      Another is that POTUS does not have the authority to do much other than issue directives to agencies. I was there the last time that was tried. The Dems and the Courts stopped the efforts to reform Govt. Regulations. The Court even found the President himself, GW Bush, in violation of the administrative procedures act because he tried to issue regulations allowing timber harvest in roadless areas, which was consistent with the Federal plans for those areas. He tried to overturn an arbitrary executive directive of Clinton, and the court slapped him down. He tried to reform Govt. contracting and Pelosi and Reid slapped him down.

      POTUS cannot unilaterally break trade treaties. He can work to renegotiate but the left and elites have the system currently set against his/her ability to act. That is act in a way that benefits the USA.

      I have been quite clear over the years that POTUS can damage an economy by signing onto bad legislation or pushing bad regulations. It is very hard for POTUS to have a positive affect. Largely because Govt. cannot manage an economy. And neither can a single or small group of businessmen. I give you wall street bankers as the latest example of that Fatal Conceit.

      The economy has changed. Govt. need to release the power of the people to figure out how to move forward. Central planning needs to stop. That includes those on the “Right” who think they can do better than the “left”.

      Now for a dose of reality. Our balance of trade is not the issue threatening the US. The single thing creating havoc is something POTUS has virtually no control over. The Federal Reserve Bank.

      The next biggest threat is the next three appointments to the Supreme Court. Given the results of the last two, three more like them will bury what remains of not only the Constitution but the very values upon which it is based.

      I have been clear on why I support Cruz. It is about the Constitution and SCOTUS.

      Next on the list is the DEFICITY and DEBT. This of course relates to the Fed. I don’t give a rip about Cruz’s or any POTUS “economic plan”. What I do care about is their “budget plan”.

      And my final item is our Values and Principles. Sacrificing those to gain a little comfort or to get even will destroy us all in the long run. If we do not start standing on those principles and insisting that our elected officials do the same, all the arranging of economic chairs won’t make a difference.

      As for those countries you listed, I do NOT care what happens to them. I care about what happens to US. Some have mentioned triage. Well that is what I just explained. In my view to many people are focused on the wrong injuries.

      I will address one of your other questions to V.H. with a question to you. Is LYING and ethical violation?

      Bankruptcy is not unethical. By lying to investors about your financial situation knowing your balance sheet has collapsed is unethical in my book. Filing law suits against contractors to avoid paying contract prices is unethical in my book.

      Trump has been caught in several other lies as well. Most recently his claim that he vocally was AGAINST the Iraq invasion. Seems he supported in publicly at least TWICE. How about the use of “illegal workers” on his hotel?? Is that not an ethical issue?

      I was once offered a lot of money to work for a developer who was of the Trump mold. I turned him down because of those kinds of “unethical” behavior. Not illegal but absolutely unethical. That is why I said he has NO Honor.

      Have we really come to that place where we adopt the leftist ethic of “the ends justify the means”?

      People say Trump is a man of action, he will win, he will prevail and get things done. Let me provide a list of those in the last century who were determined men of grate action who “got results”:

      Wilson, Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, FDR. Beware what you ask for.

      • Or we can just stick with the status quo and spin our wheels for another 50 years. This is not your father’s political or economic environment. With much respect JAC, it seems you’re too caught up in how it works than just making it work. More caught up in theory than action. And, I think that we are capable of doing more than one thing at a time. Regarding jobs, I stand there at my job, a screen print shop, and see that we push hundreds of thousands of shirts through. We’re a small shop on the grand scale. The cost to get a shirt printed is minimal, less than a dollar for an average logo on the left crest, to maybe 3/4 dollars for a full front and back print. We print for lots of big players…Volkswagen, State Farm, Pittsburgh Paints, liquor companies galore…literally hundreds of companies. Many orders are repeat orders. The point being…people, even in our economy, pay for these shirts. It’s just a shirt, not food or other important staples. BUT…all the shirts are made in Mexico, China,Taiwan, Viet Nam, Pakistan….anywhere, except the USA. We all know the reasons. Regulations, cost of overhead, etc. And get this,,, we just ran a job that happened to be an Under Armor shirt, made in Guatamala, price tag already afixed. Not even good quality shirt. Three letters printed on the left crest. Price: $22. A hoodie, sleeve print, price tag afixed.. $55. Tell me we can’t compete with that! A shirt shouldn’t cost more than $10!. Trump is the guy throwing the flag, saying he’ll cut through all that and make jobs happen. How? By keeping the heat on. He’ll use his big brash mouth to shame whoever into making it happen. Left, right, the stinking chairman of China, whoever. I think he’ll do whatever is necessary to make it happen. Leverage, negotiation, deals,,done. It can happen. I don’t see where ‘by any means necessary’ translates into anything unethical or unconstitutional. Meanwhile, you’re still shuffling papers to talk about how to go about it.

        • gmanfortruth says:


        • When Farberware pots and pans went to China, When Manhattan Shirts went offshore, the price DID NOT DROP.

          Corporate profits went up, dividends went up and bonuses for CEO’s went up but prices stayed the same. Which leads to that painful question we must ask ourselves. “Is my 401K bottom line more important than the job of the guy down the block?”

          Tripped over this FB site a while back. My wife enjoys it, Anita, G-man and you might enjoy it!

          • Thanks. I have a very small fb footprint, but I ‘liked’ that page. Very happy to report that as I was buying toys for my property, many of the things I bought were made in the USA. Camper, landscape trailer, enclosed trailer, dock posts. I stay outta ChinaMart, Doing my small part to Make America Great Again.

          • Dale A Albrecht says:

            I remember when the CEO of NIKE was bragging at a news conference about how much profit they made on their sport shoes. He also was explaining his huge bonus. These shoes for the most part were in the plus $100 range, at the time. More today. They had moved their manufacturing to Indonesia. We all know how well that turned out. Another example was Kathy Lee Gifford and her line of clothes made in Indonesia. Literal slave labor camps. But the excuse was we just hire a contractor and they set up the factory. Out of our hands. Not our problem. I do not believe we do much business in Indonesia anymore. Look at the deep suspician of the US trying to help by the Indonesians after the tsunami. All legal but unethical as hell as JAC was trying to point out. FYI….this is not confined to American companies.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Wilson, Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, FDR. Beware what you ask for.

        Seriously? Fear monger much?

      • Hiya JAC…..I knew I could smoke you out. Great answer,unfortunately, it will have to wait until later today for an answer. I appeciate your views and I would like to start a discussion on your points….you and I are saying the same things,mostly….but we have a different approach on how to get it….so, I will outline several areas for discussion. However, my retort is going to be along the lines of how to get them done….how to get to the bottom line. So, my friend… to you this afternoon,……..The son and I are in Phoenix getting ready for the National Tour in disc golf. We have a practice round today that starts at 0730.

        By the way….morning temps are in the 60’s with highs in the 80’s. No wind.

        Adios, mi Amigo, hasta la vista.

      • You forgot TR, Eisenhower, Churchill, Gandhi and a few dozen others. Some were blowhards and tireless self-promoters. Others were quiet and incisive.

        And, the broken window theorum is absolutely NOT a fallacy. Take that from a guy who was there. Even the silly/stupid idea of covering the empty window frames of abandoned buildings with decals showing shades, shutters, potted plants and even reclining cats worked. As a resident of East Flatbush told me when we did it. “Thank God, something is happening, for 10 years I have been staring at those four vacant buildings on the intersection (Rockaway Parkway and Lenox Road) with the gaping holes”. A haven for Junkies and hookers the seals finally stayed sealed because the residents of the private homes on the side streets got involved as did the cops.

        Before the seals, these were scheduled to become vacant lots!,-73.9184784,3a,75y,159.71h,86.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sub25osdct2FFF45P0fTNlg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

        • Just A Citizen says:


          You being deliberately argumentative or do you not know what the Broken Window Fallacy is?

      • JAC is trying to depress everyone this am. So our choice will come down to Julius Caesar or Eva Peron.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Seems so. Not sure why he thinks that we can’t bring back better kind and rebuild out industrial base. It’s very possible under the right citcumstances. Optimistic I guess. Maybe it will take a major event, but if rather have someone who understands the business aspects than another clueless some nothing politician.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Better jobs not kind.
            Clueless done nothing politician. Phone autocorrect is weird

          • Just A Citizen says:


            OK, let us take one example. STEEL manufacturing.

            Where do we get the ore?

            Where do we build the new plants? How do we make them competitive under our clean air and clean water acts?

            Who is going to allow them to be build anywhere near their neighborhoods? Ever hear of “environmental justice”?? Well the NAACP is just waiting for you with their army of lawyers.

            Yes, it seem daunting and depressing. But if we do not operate from reality we will just create more cynical idiocy like “we elected the Republicans and they screwed us”.

            Or let us take sawmills and other lumber manufacturing. Where are you going to get the raw materials to replace the Canadian market share? Where are you going to build new mills, many of the old ones have been dismantled. And who is going to work there for $10.00 per hour?

            As a nation we cannot even get our nuclear waste buried in the Salt mines of Nevada, after spending millions preparing them, and everyone thinks Trump can snap his fingers and return us to our hayday!

            We do have great potential and much of that is in new areas, not old ones.

            • JAC I will give you one example of an industry that we were losing but is on the rebound. Ethylene is a precursor to many plastic products. It is made in large industrial furnaces by cracking naphtha at 2000°F. The furnaces are fired by natural gas. Due to our previously high cost of NG we were losing the in industry to the ME and Asia. Once the low cost feedstock is lost, we would eventually lose the ability to make high volume plastics for the auto and other industries. In essence we would be importing plastic pellets to keep the molders going. With fracking and the significantly lower cost of NG compared to the rest of the world, this industry is recovering. We have at least 6-8 large ethylene steam crackers on the drawing boards, under construction and nearing completion. Despite all of the environmental regulations and our high labor costs, we can compete with the rest of world. How much better could we compete if we could eliminate some of the nonsense.

              The frivolous lawsuits brought by the NIMBYs and enviros would be dramatically reduced if we went to a loser pays practice. The Sierra Club sues their buddies in the EPA who put up a nominal fight, then collect money to start the process all over again. These are simple legal fixes if we have the guts for the fight.

              You say you are in the fight for the long term. Frankly, I do not see any positive long term if Clinton or Sanders win. Already only 45% pay income tax and over 47% are collecting from the government. The number will easily climb over 50% as the boomer retire. This country needs an attitude adjustment. We need a 95% attitude adjustment inside the DC beltway.

              • Just A Citizen says:


                Some industries can make a come back. But many more cannot. Not in the current environment, pardon the pun. My point is that far to many people think that by simply putting tariffs on other’s goods we will return to the production of the 60’s, 70,s or even 80’s.

                People are looking for simple answers to complex issues. Sometimes the answer is not simple. Especially when they start cheering for sophomoric rhetoric and behavior as “leadership”.

                Your comment about the greenies is exactly part of what I am trying to get folks to understand. One person, POTUS, cannot reverse many of these problems. But as you note, one POTUS could send us off the cliff for good. In more ways than one.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              You are making assumptions that somehow trade will cease. Really? Where did you make up such nonsense. Trade will continue, we will get iron ore, we will get lumber. We have plenty of lumber right here in the US, we just need to get the access. It seems you mentioned this issue once before…and who was to blame? Oh, the government, that’s right. Of course the enviro-nuts are out there as well, but with the EPA gone, they will be less of a problem, which CAN be dealt with in the courts. I like T-Ray’s proposal, loser pays.

              NAACP? What are they going to sue for, because of the thousands of new jobs that will be available to blacks?

              Steel. China recently laid off 400,000 steel workers. Youngstown Ohio, while still crime ridden, has seen there “rust belt” areas cleaned up. A couple NEW steel mills have moved in and found a niche in the market. They are ready to make a major expansion should the market allow it. They have the property, the environment is a non issue because they have that squared away and people need jobs. All they need is a bigger market share and expansion will occur. Cruz/Rubio don’t present that opportunity.

              I noticed a lot of your examples were from out West, lumber, Nevada salt mines etc. I don’t need to re-explain the problem, but there is much more to this country than the Federally owned Western States.

              • They build the new Bay bridge with Chinese steel. It has been a disaster.

                One of the two closed saw mill in our county had its own timber and won awards for management of forest lands. Lack of access to timber did drive them out of business. It was the ever increasing regulations that did. Workman’s comp was a major piece as was the things like the family leave act, increasing healthcare costs, liability insurance, taxes…. These are all government created disasters.

              • I also might point out that I worked about 1 mile from the mill. Never heard it, never smelled it, there were no houses around it. It was fairly new and modern.

                The timber will come out of those forests one way or the other. Currently we are just letting it burn and getting no value out of it.

  16. gmanfortruth says:
  17. I too have a love/hate feelings for Trump. I love the facts that he is discussing taboo topics and breaking the PC barrier, that he has beat the MSM at their game of destruction, and that he has proposed some good ideas. I detest his bombastic, braggart, blowhard approach and petty school yard attacks on his opponents. He is neither a conservative nor a liberal. He is not ideological but does have a deep love for this country. Financially he has run a brilliant campaign, spending very little money but dominating the press and his opponents. As a result, he is beholden to no one except himself. I suspect he will accept public money or RNC money during the general election.
    Trump is a pragmatist as most business men are. He does know how to negotiate. The ultimate question will be can he negotiate with the Senate Dems to get the necessary legislation through Congress provided the Repubs do not have a 60 vote majority. If the Dems are intransigent, will he be effective at going to the public to make his case and force the issue. Schwarzenegger was not here in CA and it prevented him from implementing the needed reforms.
    I like many of his positions on taxes, repatriation of off shore profits, and reduction in regulations. I have not heard his position on AGW nor on energy. I have heard he wants to eliminate or reduce several current cabinet departments which would be good. He knows how to balance a budget. Balancing the federal budget cannot be done overnight but it can be done by eliminating waste, duplication, failed programs, and unnecessary departments. Entitlements will need to be tackled at some point.
    I am sure at this time he scares the s—t out of friend and foe alike. He is a wild card and therefore unpredictable. Which may be good. I just hope is mouth doesn’t write checks we have to cash.
    I still do not have a good feel for whether he is a long term thinker or a short term opportunist. Our foreign affairs need some good long range planning and strategy.
    To run his successful business empire, he must be relatively good at assembling a team of qualified subordinates unlike the current resident at 1600 who just hires ultra left academics.
    I like his stand on immigration. We need to stop the influx, stop the anchor baby nonsense, and enforce our existing laws. I would hope the public will demand that no new laws are written until there is proof the existing ones are being enforced. Blocking Muslims immigration from problem areas is also good until a proper vetting process is in place. There is more than enough territory in the ME to locate the displaced without bringing them here. If we do anything, we should help the Christians and other persecuted groups.
    There are enough positive issues that I agree with him on to overcome the negative policies that I have heard him state. My biggest problem with The Donald is with his mouth.
    With that all said, we desperately need someone with enough moxie to truly shake up DC. I am predicting that this fall will be the reverse of ’08 an ’12 in which it will be the Dems that stay home. This election is for the Repubs to lose. But like the Cubs, I have confidence they can do it.

  18. D13,

    I’m gonna tell you a story about a successful businessman- not at the level of a Trump but successful none the less- who was a very good friend of my husband and myself for a number of years. He and his wife were very personable, the life of the party. Everyone loved them, of course while his friends thought he was great -he was hitting on their wife’s and girlfriends.

    Another problem with this great businessman is that he had a strange idea of what winning meant-it wasn’t entering into good deals-it was beating everyone else. Or to put it another way-he wanted others to lose so he could win.

    We talked to his cousin, who trusting his cousin went into a deal with him. He lost while the “businessman” won. We asked him why he would intentionally hurt his cousin-His answer – the point of business was to make the best deal you can for yourself and that means doing your best to screw your opponent and if his cousin was stupid enough to take the deal he deserved to be screwed.

    In another instance-we went on a cruise with the same couple-we had traveled with them numerous times-but this time his wife found a deal-the price was good-so we told her to make the arrangements. WE paid the same amount for the trip-but on the last day of the cruise-I went to their room for some reason I don’t remember and realized that they had a suite on the deck with a port hole-we were in the bowels of the boat.

    Obviously, we are not friends anymore.

    Now my point of telling you this-is because I think you give way to much credit to the fact that someone is successful in business. And set very high standards for anyone who is not. I believe there are fighters and there are bullies-in my ex-friends case he was a bully-he was warped in his thinking. From my reading on Trump-he reminds me of my friend. So no, I wouldn’t give my money to Trump to invest.

    As far as Cruz-you claim he isn’t a fighter-based on what-what for goodness sake does it take to impress you-the man is highly intelligent, is a successful lawyer, has taken cases before the supreme court, was on the Fed in Texas, and managed to be elected as a senator. And most important of all-he per you- Kept his word. Do you think a loser could accomplish all that.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Interesting story V 🙂 We should all keep in mind that many things can change before the Conventions and the general election. As my recent article pointed out, the economy may change drastically by then and people may think differently. While your friend isn’t what I would call ethical and moral, his goal was to win the deal and make money. Greed led his life. He was a me, me ,me person who probably thought he was smarter than everyone else. If I were a businessman, needing someone to get my business going in a better direction, I would hire him in a heartbeat. While I may despise him, I want his skills to work for me and make my life better. In the case of Trump, if he can make our lives as Americans better because he screws over those who have been screwing us, great. That’s what I want as a President, someone who will work for US and be ruthless, unlike that squirming little gutless sissy in the Whitehouse now.

      While the package may not be what you want, the end result is what we all need. Sometimes taking a chance works. Hope and Change didn’t, winning just might!

    • VH….ok…you are missing my point…and I blame myself for not being more concise. Do not forget that I voted for Cruz, helped him get elected to Senator and worked his campaign to the Senator level. I have seen him in action. If I was going to court, I would hire Cruz. If I was going to invest money I would hire Trump. Both men are highly intelligent and more so than the average bear….so I do not see advantage to either one on this point.

      If I was going to sit down across the table from Putin, I would want Trump. I pick Trump for this reason and this reason only…..since neither of them have ever been in international high stakes diplomacy before, I want a cursing, stiff backed obnoxious son of a bitch. I want a person that the other side would not know how to take and would be totally afraid of him. I want a person who will get up from the table and walk away without making a deal or compromising a strength position away. The world stage is not a court room…it is root hog and die, no holds barred nasty.

      If it was going to sit down in front of the Queen of England and discuss things, I would want a Cruz. A soft spoken gentleman that is attractive and appealing. Rubio makes me want to go take a shower.

      If I was going to negotiate an arms treaty, I do not want anyone who is soft spoken and quiet. I want a pit bull.

      Cruz is a perfect administrator whereas Trump is not.

      Where I am off on Cruz is his stance that deficits are necessary. He opposes the line item veto and he opposes it because he favors attachements to bills in Congress as opposed to each bill standing on its own merits.

      Cruz has no experience in monetary issues whereas Trump does. Cruz has not demonstrated to me, or anywhere that I can find, that he knows the difference between a liability and an asset. I do not think, given his past performance on budgetary issues, that he supports balancing a budget and his voting record in the Senate show this.

      Cruz has moved up the ladder with success in his word and Trump has moved up the ladder with success in his world. Both are equal here. Being a lawyer with the Fed carries no more weight than does being a President of a successful company.

      Both men have strengths and both men have weakness. I voted Cruz because Trump is not electable. I am looking at the finish line against Clinton.

      Vince Lombardi once said: “Winning is not everything…winning is the only thing. Show me a good loser, and I’ll show you a loser.”

      So, VH, on the world stage I want someone who wants to win and win at all costs. I do not want to be an amicable, likeable second place.

      The hard decision that I made to vote Cruz boiled down to electability. Trump just is not because I think people just do not like an egoist brash ass hole in the Presidency even though that is what it takes in this world today.

      I would rather have a Cruz than a Clinton.

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        Whether something is legal and constitutional more than likely will cross his mind, whereas HRC looks at the law and the constitution as an impediment to the progressive agenda.

  19. gmanfortruth says:

    Off subject, but could be interesting. Note this article:
    Earth emits a burst of carbon monoxide (CO) a few days before an earthquake, according to geophysicist Ramesh Singh. He and co-workers from France and the United States report that this gas could be used as one of the precursor signals for an earthquake early warning system.

    The scientists used data from an American satellite and analysed changes in carbon monoxide at different altitudes. “The carbon monoxide shows enhancement in concentration a few days prior to the earthquake,” Singh said.

    Then this from today: Is this a sign that the big one is coming?

  20. Ok JAC…here goes….and I am going to try to take your post by item.

    19 U.S. Code § 1351 – Foreign trade agreements gives the right to the POTUS to do away with, change, or otherwise void a trade agreement if it reaches a certain threshhold and that threshhold can be in the best interest of the United States.

    The Progressive Movement is all about equality but turns a blind eye towards the slave labor in other countries. The government turns a blind eye towards the issue of labor in other countries by issuing minimum wage standards for American companies and puts impossible trade restrictions and high taxes on our own. This drives companies to an inevitable and correct decision to move off shore and takes its money with it. This is not unethical, it is simply good business. Lower costs equal higher profits. We can do this here. But I bet that people, ethical people, with 401k’s will say they want the higher profits of the companies they are invested in…it all boils down to bottom line….and whatever it takes to get there…..even if it means we use child labor in India or China.

    You say ” Now for a dose of reality. Our balance of trade is not the issue threatening the US. The single thing creating havoc is something POTUS has virtually no control over. The Federal Reserve Bank.” You are partially correct….I never said that the balance of trade was the single issue but it is a main issue. You are entirely correct that the POTUS does not have control over the FED….but the POTUS can control the policies that would affect the FED and force altering of their stance. Now, read me carefully…..I said “affect” the FED.

    You say: The next biggest threat is the next three appointments to the Supreme Court. Given the results of the last two, three more like them will bury what remains of not only the Constitution but the very values upon which it is based.” Ok….so I understand that your only reason for Cruz is because of the SCOTUS appointments. There is obviously a reason that you feel Trump would appoint leftist to the SCOTUS.

    “Next on the list is the DEFICITY and DEBT. This of course relates to the Fed. I don’t give a rip about Cruz’s or any POTUS “economic plan”. What I do care about is their “budget plan”.
    You and I are in agreement on this and neither has a plan.

    “And my final item is our Values and Principles. Sacrificing those to gain a little comfort or to get even will destroy us all in the long run. If we do not start standing on those principles and insisting that our elected officials do the same, all the arranging of economic chairs won’t make a difference.” I do not know how to answer this except one way. My dad once told me that in business, standing on principals makes lawyers rich. His lesson to me was we can stand on principal and that is grand but you can’t eat principal.

    “As for those countries you listed, I do NOT care what happens to them.” Great!!! Will you agree with me to disolve, immediately, all trade agreements and trade deficit agreements with these countries. Let the dollar stand on its own.

    “I will address one of your other questions to V.H. with a question to you. Is LYING and ethical violation? ” To practice any deceit…..not just lying….is unethical. IF anyone “cooks the books” and is found guilty of same…go to jail, do not pass go, and do not collect $200.

    Suing contractors in order to not pay bills….let the courts decide. If the suit is successful, then obviously there was a problem. HOWEVER……any contractor that enters a relationship knowing that said relationship is law suit happy or that relationship has this reputation, then shame on them for not doing homework. Just as ignorance of the law is no excuse, so is “buyer or seller beware”. I certainly would not enter into any agreement with a non reputable person or company and if I chose to do so……my problem.

    “Have we really come to that place where we adopt the leftist ethic of “the ends justify the means”?THAT, sir, is the saddest thing of all. Yes, we have come to this point. When you have to fight the rats in the gutter, you cannot do so from the sidewalk. You have to get in the gutter and face them on their ground. You can stand on principle and feel good that you did…..but I am afraid that you lose and principle, then, means little. Do not misunderstand me. I am in agreement on most things with you…….except in the manner they need to be fought.

    You know, it reminds me of being in Vietnam…..when you are in the jungle and you are facing the enemy in the jungle, the rules of war never come to mind. Politics seems to be the same. We never took prisoners..perhaps its timt to take no prisoners.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      About taking no prisoners…..I have not heard for quite some time of a terrorist being captured. After all the criticism about what constitutes inhumane methods of extracting information….I think we’ve just said…screw it. Battlefield casualty…bag em up….that is if anything is left after a Hellfire ruins their day.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      I am a little to tired to address the full topic. But let me offer a short rejoinder on the issue of principles.

      There is nothing in my principles that prevents me from beating the “enemy”. To kill rats I may have to climb into the sewer but I do not need to become either the sewage or the rat.

      For example, I play in the disgusting world of politics (the Sewer) in order to identify and then slay the rats. To inform others of what is happening and how we might change it. But I do not need to become them, in order to defeat them. To become them is to join them because you cannot have it both ways. You cannot fool yourself by claiming you do not wish to rule over others and then in fact rule over others to enact revenge.

      The saving grace in the battle is one you must never destroy. We never do anything to harm the innocent. The politicians are not innocent. But the millions of our fellow citizens are. If we start swinging Thors Hammer in revenge we will certainly hit some of those innocent people.

      We do not undermine the Constitution to save the Constitution. How did that work out for Bush II?

      The reason Gandhi succeeded was adherence to principles, same for Martin Luther King. Now I personally would be more “aggressive” that these two but the key point remains. They became great leaders because the people realized they were fighting the righteous fight. So the people finally followed their example and change was created.

      My fear is that Trump is just what I think him to be and those of us fighting to restore Liberty will be buried in the avalanche of broken credibility.

      One more thing for you to ponder until tomorrow. I am fighting the long fight. Trump is a short term solution (perceived) to a very long problem. In fact he may harm our efforts to win the longer war.

      Unless of course we are going to simply take up arms against our fellow citizens in the name of Freedom. And if that is the case maybe we should just get on with it. That is aimed at a broader audience in case you were wondering.

      I will address the general idea of economic tinkering and principles. Principle: We DO NOT MEDDLE in the economy. Nothing beyond allowing people to take business to task for fraud, coercion, or harming others. So removing barriers is within Principle. Imposing our own is NOT.

      • Ghandi succeeded because the British were ‘civilized’ and did not kill him. He would not have fared as well with Stalin.

        Ditto MLK. It was time in the US for a change. The troglodytes with the water cannon and police dogs had seen their day come to an end. Had Woodrow Wilson been President things would not have gone as well.

        The modern, post Richard Nixon Republican Party does not understand the war it is in, not at all. Reagan did but I suspect the “establishment” thought him a fool on that. If you want any idea of the world we now live in, rewind tonight’s Academy Awards. The fawning over diversity and race and justice and all the other bukshit was appalling.

        For the past 40 years the Republican Party has been bringing a knife, a penknife at that, to a gunfight. The results have been predictable. As the old guy told me today at the Middletown NY Gun Show, Trump is bringing a flamethrower.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          That is because much of the Republican party are of the same ideological mold. They only differ at the margins. Their core is the same.

          So we spend a bunch of money and effort to get a few “different” people elected and when we see one or two flaws we declare them snakes and rhinos and phony. We attack the very people we wanted to make things change, leaving the establishment untouched. I find this entire election cycle very depressing. And that is due to the behavior of the supposed “right”, not the left.

          Reagan was different. But he also found out he could not get what he wanted and had to get along to go along. Which raises another example of what happened to an attempt at reform. What happened to Reagan’s Secretary of Interior when he started talking about reforming federal land mgt.?? He was crucified and forced to resign.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            So we spend a bunch of money and effort to get a few “different” people elected and when we see one or two flaws we declare them snakes and rhinos and phony.

            Rephrase: So we spend a bunch of money and effort to get a few “different” people elected and when we see them for who they are, we learn that they are snakes and RINO’s and phony’s.

            You have spent too much time in the sewers with the rats. Get out of the sewers and get smarter than what you are dealing with. They have you trained in status quo..

      • Ummmmm….JAC….are we not saying the same things? Don’t the actions that I took say the same thing? I did not vote Trump because he is not electable….the objective is to beat Clinton. But…..I stand by my feelings….none of the candidates we have are Presidential. Look….I helped significantly to put Cruz in office… stand on principles and no compromise. The business tactics of Trump seem to be a problem with you and VH. Well, objection to the line item veto and deficit spending are a pet peeve of mine. Objection to the line item veto is the same as cooking the books….Deficit spending is establishment.

        I do not think you support deficit spending….and I would think you would support the line item veto….but somewhere…..somewhere…. the established power in Washington needs to be upended. Which weapon do we use? I see that as the problem.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          It is not your actions I was responding to. It was your words about willingness to sacrifice principles in order to win.

          • Fair enough…..I do believe that you have to get in the sewer to fight the rats…..then once you win…you must climb out again,…..however….I do not see ANY politician that stands on principles….Cruz included…..Check his voting record….but he is the least of the objectionable.

          • Question for you , though…..on principles. If you are going to be a principled person and stand on your principles….then compromise should be a dirty word. For to compromise….means you have to give up something….you cannot stand firm on principle if you compromise your principles….even a little. As you once said, there is no such thing as being a little bit pregnant.

            I guess I am tired of politicians saying that they will stand firm and then say, “well, in order to get part of it done, I will have to back off a little.” or, “in order to get my bill through committee or Congress, I will allow an attachment to it that I do not like or that I do not want…because that is the only way. Do what is what it takes to win,… other words, do the same thing as Trump… This is done every day in Congress, by the very people that we are trying to get elected. Cruz does it, Rubio does it ( when they voted, which was not very often, their record supports it ) It is there in black and white and I have heard Cruz say before….sometimes you have to bend and accept things you normally would not to get your agenda heard……or even on the docket. In other words, I have to sacrifice my principles in order to get something bigger later. Well, to me, that is no better than winning at all costs.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              Good morning Sir. Forgot myself earlier.

              “Compromise” is an over used and ABUSED word. Most often thrown around by either the ignorant or the devious, when it comes to the “need” for Congress to act.

              My view: Compromise requires BOTH sides to win. Like free trade. If I gain nothing then it is not compromise but capitulation.

              When it comes to core principles I do not capitulate.

              I was overly tired the other day when responding to your questions. I forgot one of the biggest barriers to our economic well being, one that POTUS could do something about, immediately in fact. I can’t believe I forgot to list it.

              Stop the WAR machine. Stop trying to manipulate and control the world. Limit our actions to protection of our sovereignty and maintaining open lines of shipping. Hegemony does not require that we bankrupt ourselves for delusional objectives.

              • “Stop the WAR machine. Stop trying to manipulate and control the world. Limit our actions to protection of our sovereignty and maintaining open lines of shipping. Hegemony does not require that we bankrupt ourselves for delusional objectives.”


  21. Session just endorsed Trump. It is turning into an avalanche.

    • It’s going to be quite a show watching him vs Hillary.

      Mathius’ prediction:
      Trump: 24.99%
      Hillary: 25%
      “None-of-the-above” (write-in): 50.01%

      • Just A Citizen says:

        One can only dream………..

        How are you this morning young pirate? Hope all is well with you and yours.

        • All’s well here.. but I need the S&P to move.. I took at bet that it was going to hit a brick wall today and it’s going to cost me $800 if it doesn’t comply in the next few hours.

          If it hits 1900 by EOD, drinks all around, on me. Otherwise, I’ll be in the basement swigging some of the Dread Pirate’s grog.

          How goes for the JAC clan?

          • I would just like to point out that the S&P did, in fact, comply right at the end of the day. A little too close for my comfort, but I’ll take it.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              My clan is doing fine. Anxiously awaiting real spring time to arrive. Lots of work to do meantime.

              You never did tell me how it came to you day trading. Or is this just a side business?

              • Side business while I’m between things. I left the world’s most batshit insane hedge fund (seriously, NUTS like you wouldn’t believe) in January and at a new shop next Monday.

                When you work at hedge funds, your ability to trade is very restricted – day trading is certainly out. At best you can put on some condors, but you can’t even defend them if they move against you. So, really, it’s just buy-and-hold, which is fine. But I’m not going to pass up the opportunity to supplement my temporary retirement.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Mathius, feel free to expand on the Hedge Fund issue, we would all love to know whats really going on!

              • Gman. I would love – LOVE – to elaborate. But I just can’t do it on a public forum. Seriously, if North Korea were to create a hedge fund, this is what they might create.

                I’ll send you an email..

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Send it, I’ll be looking for it!

  22. After graduation, I got a Post-Doc at the National Bureau of Standards (now NIST) during the Carter years. About the time that I started, they had a reduction in force (RIF). Most of the jobs there despite being professional scientists equivalent to professors, were civil service. In the civil service workers have the right to bump less senior employees and take their jobs. I became acquainted with one individual who did this. I do not remember his specialty but he moved to a job that involved lasers and basic optics. He knew squat about the subject so went looking for an adviser. Unfortunately he found me. I spent hours trying to teach him optics and how to set up his experiments. He was clearly unqualified for the job. Most of the people I worked with at NBS were hard working driven scientists who knew their stuff. A few were political infighters that seemed to cause more trouble than they were worth.

    The government is full of dead wood, leaches and incompetents. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to weed these people out. Look at the VA situation. Minimal firings despite the failures. Same goes for the IRS and other agencies. There is a total lack of accountability. We need someone to come in and shake the system up. Career politicians will not do this.

    Add to all this the clout of the government employee unions. These unions run CA which is one of the main reasons business is leaving the state.

  23. gmanfortruth says:

    The Founders, in adopting the Constitution, instituted a union of sovereign republics and created a general government that was charged with specific, enumerated powers. This government was to be of “a republican form”, which means that, unlike a democracy, its actions are not conducted on the “will of the majority,” but by a “rule of law.” On the other hand, an oligarchy is defined as “a small group of people having control of a country, organization, or institution.” If the Supreme Court, made up of nine politically connected lawyers who are appointed, not elected, with life tenure are the “final say” on what the rule of law is, then it must be admitted that we’ve lapsed from republicanism to an oligarchical form of government.

    This has occurred due to fact that the history of the formation of the union, the proper role of the Supreme Court and the separation of powers between the states and the general government are lost on the overwhelming majority of Americans today. We cannot enforce what we do not understand. Were this not the case, a “balance of power” on the Court would not exist, and every presidential election would not be “the most important in our lifetime” to “preserve our rights”… by a margin of one vote.

  24. gmanfortruth says:

    Another Liberal got too big for her britches, the Dem mother of the Black Pamper party, Melissa Harris-Perry canned at MSNBC. With any luck, she can go back to local news and become even more irrelevant.

  25. I’m not convinced Trump is as far right as he’s been pretending lately (I know I’m not alone on this). I think, he’s probably center-right with a few center-left spots. I think he’s fundamentally a negotiator and would more more inclined to compromise for the “win” than hold a strong stance and “lose.” He’s frequently willing to buck the trend and offer (often reasonable) divergent opinions. These are things I LIKE about him.

    On the flip side, I feel that he lacks a fundamental appreciation of reality. His response to any perceived slight or attack is to go on the offense and I do wonder how he would respond to any foreign aggression? It seems clear to me that he would welcome economic/trade wars at the very least (and I see nothing to suggest he wouldn’t welcome military action, consequences be damned, so long as he doesn’t appear weak). I had eight years of Dubya being a kneejerk reactionary, and I don’t need eight more of Trump. I don’t know where he actually stands on any major issues. He is flippant and smug about major concerns and makes promises without any semblance of a plan how to keep them beyond “I’m The Donald and they’ll do what I want.” His tax plan (such as it is) scares the bejesus out of me. HOW is he going to make Mexico pay for the wall which he flippantly just made 10ft higher? HOW is he going to fix health care in this country (or is his whole plan to get rid of state boundaries)? HOW is he going to make “tremendous cuts” to the federal budget (what is he cutting? And don’t just say “waste and fraud” – to get to his numbers, you’ll have to take out agencies wholesale). It’s irrational bravado and he knows – knows – his supporters won’t call him on it, so why not say whatever he wants?


    But all that pales beside the race bating (yes, I know Muslim isn’t a race, but I don’t have a better term). As a Jew, the idea of a border closed by a religious litmus test is beyond anathema to me. It is antithetical to the very principles of a secular government. Millions of my race were saved by countries willing to accept us when we fled from hostile countries, while millions of us died because of closed borders. I cannot in good conscience support anyone – regardless of any other consideration – who would propose such an un-humanitarian practice. To me, this is evil, and it cannot be tolerated.

    Let’s do try to get this through our thick skulls: MUSLIMS ARE HUMAN BEINGS AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Mathius, Trump proposed a TEMPORARY ban on Muslim’s that can’t be properly vetted, UNTIL(the word he actually used) the Fed’s can get their collective shit together. It’s a completely legitimate and logical solution to a problem, which is a really BIG problem in Europe right now. He did not call for a permanent ban, which is how the Left Wing rags presented it. This isn’t all the new, as Jimmy Carter put a ban on ALL Iranians in the 70’s. I think you are being played like a fool by the Left Wing Media, because apparently you didn’t hear Trump’s entire statement.

      I think Trump is more Center as well, so I can agree with you on that. As far as getting rid of many agencies within the Federal Government, I’m all for it. Very few are constitutional anyway. Most can be hadled by the States and many even closer to home, like education. More later! 🙂

      • I did hear Trump’s statement and I don’t give a flying rat’s ass if it’s “temporary” or “permanent until the sun explodes.”

        It’s immoral and he should be shunned from polite society.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          What is immoral is for Liberal’s like you who will demand the government steal from current and future generations so you can feel good inside. There is NOTHING immoral about controlled immigration. Trump is 100% correct, build the wall, stop all non-vettable Muslim’s from entering the country get the vetting process fixed. That’s called smart, it’s called “if it can save one life, it’s worth it” Which is a quote from the current President and Front running Democrat.

    • So Mathius are you willing to invite a single male refuge into your home and let them sleep in the room next to your daughter? Probability being what it is the odds are that you will get a friendly helpful tenant. However, there is a finite probability that you will get the opposite. Are you willing to take that gamble?

      These are refuges fleeing a conflict. They should be housed temporarily in the region and then sent home when the conflict is over. There are tent cities in Saudi Arabia set up with a/c, TV, etc. to house thousands of pilgrims. They are empty and the Kingdom takes no refuges. If their own kind will not take them why should we?

    • Hi Mathius…..I am like you. Trump is not far right and certainly is not Tea Party right. He is slightly right of center and I do not mind that at all. I have NO PROBLEM with proper vetting of immigrants……I am becoming very calloused to open borders because I see, first hand, what is happening on the border. Innocent will suffer, and that is bad but inevitable. I do not want to go the other way and say come on in and then we will find out….the borders are NOT what they were when Jose’ Jiminez and his family needed work, I invite peope down to see what the border is like. You cannot simply walk across any longer and shop in the touristy shops, drink in the bars, and eat at popular spots like ARTURO’s any longer…they are not there. They are gone. Mexico dumps their criminals on the borders and cleans out their jails and we are letting them. The border crossing is not poor immigrants looking for work…not any longer. They are in the minority.

      I do not know what to think of Trump….I voted Cruz because I want the far left beaten but….what the hell…..your generation likes the freebies and that is hard to beat. I say your generation because of age…not you specifically. YOu are too far left for me and I do not care if you are Jewish or not. It matters not to me what your religion is….I do not have a religion that I follow, so that makes me a pariah, I suppose. I simply do not care.

      Because Trump is a successful businessman and plays hardball makes him un-electable.

      • Because Trump is a successful businessman and plays hardball makes him un-electable.


        Because Trump would mirror some of the most terrible “see no evil” practices that characterized one of the darkest times in human history makes him un-electable.

        I am nominally Jewish. Truth is I’m agnostic bordering on atheist. But the history of persecution my people have suffered is not something I take lightly. I cannot turn a blind eye to such things just because the victims are of a different religion.

        People need help – we help. Goddammit, that’s just being a good human. It’s a fundamental principle of being America that we somehow always seem to forget when convenient. We are a nation of immigrants – yet, for some reason, we forget this every time we get spooked by “others” who want to come here. If some tiny faction are dangerous, you deal with them via routine law enforcement just like you do everyone else who commits a crime, but you don’t punish the vast majority for fear of the few.

        Also because Trump is batshit insane and reactionary, because nobody has any idea where he stands on anything, because he would probably nuke Tehran in his first 100 days, because he’s not just egomaniacal, but has built a entire persona around it, because he responds to every perceived slight and challenge by attacking – these are secondary reasons why he is unelectable.

        Because he is a successful business man and plays hardball makes deals renders him unelectable by the Republican primary voters who will only accept ideological purity.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          I do not see why “helping” requires that we let tens of thousands of people into our country who do not share our values. People who will in fact create a bigger burden if here rather than over there.

          The comparison to the Jewish people is fatally flawed. These people are not running from ethnic or religious persecution. They are simply running from bombs and slaughter by one of the many factions of their “own” ethnic and religious groups.

          I understand your empathy, I just think it is a little misplaced here. Now with that said, if Trump had articulated a cogent argument and plan for “temporarily” halting immigration to the US until we could be confident in our vetting I could have supported the idea. In fact I still support the idea.

          But I do not think that was all he was up to. I think he was playing off the fears of the uninformed flaming his new/old brand of “nationalism”. I don’t think most of us are Islamophobic for recognizing potential conflicts and contradictions. But I do believe Trump was playing the Islamophobia card or perhaps the Terrorphobia card.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            I agree JAC. But, I think trump was just saying what he feels, versus playing a typical politicians game. I don’t consider him anything close to a polished politician. He is running a very different campaign than I can recall, both in tone and in spending. He has been dead and buried because of his comments a dozen or so times by the pundits and media, only to grow in popularity. Think that a lot of people are fed up? I wonder how many TEA party folks are now supporting him, with Rand Paul gone now?

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        I feel that the Republicans are making a huge tactical and strategic mistake with Trump. If one just goes back to the last presidential election and review what the Dems did to Romney as a heartless rich off-shoring 1%’r, and he was a generally nice self effacing guy. Wait until Trump gets the nod. It will be a bloody mess. He makes Romney look like one of the unwashed masses with his wealth. Sure he has a politically incorrect demeanor and it’s refreshing, but personally I have had enough of narcistic ego maniacs, no matter how good of businessman he is. Sure he legally uses bankruptcy to his advantage. That begs the question, if he is so good, why all the bankruptcies? possibly the businesses he gets into. Like casino’s, elite towers and residences all names TRUMP. If we haven’t seen enough of the OWS crowd the other year that was a practice run compared to what we will see against Trump with full endorsement of the Dems. The other republican candidates that can not be used.

        Hillary will be the candidate on the dems side even if she is indicted. But she is paranoid and always claims the attacks are a “right wing conspiracy” for the last 20 years. If you go after a legit target like her record, she runs to her safe space and claims conspiracy, you’re picking on me because I’m a women. But she ademently says, she will stay the course of Obamas policies…..can we afford that….not a chance, but highly likely if Trump is the candidate on the Republicans side..

        • gmanfortruth says:

          At this moment, I have to disagree. Not because of the electablility nonsense, which is propaganda at best and a lie at worst. How the hell could Hillary be electable? She’s should be on trial, not running for President and that day STILL may come. If she is protected, she will get crushed in a general election. Bugs Bunny could beat that soon to be felon.

          But, saying that, what I’m watching is the record number of voters coming out on the RIGHT side. This is what tells the tale for me. Obama is a failure and people vote with their wallets. Whoever ends up getting the nomination will easily defeat Clinton. Can you say landslide? Because that’s what is building up. It’s all about the economy and it sucks for the working class. It’s the working class who will win this election, and with 100 miliion out of work, the rest of this stuff is just drama and show to continue the illusion of choice.

          As far as polls about the general election….useless fodder for the masses. Polls can be easily fixed based on the question asked, I hold none of them as truthful. Part of the big show 🙂

  26. Mathius…really, now……”Because he is a successful business man and plays hardball makes deals renders him unelectable by the Republican primary voters who will only accept ideological purity……you left out the Dems….talk about ideological purity.

    However, I am curious…..You said “mirror some of the most terrible “see no evil” practices that characterized one of the darkest times in human history makes him un-electable.” Can you be more specific?

    • Yes. Turning away refugees based on their religion. I felt I have been clear on this point, but allow me to be slightly more explicit:

      The US, as with many other nations turned away Jewish immigrants fleeing the holocaust. It was feared that, amongst other things, they were too socialist. As a result, MILLIONS of innocent men, women, and children died needless deaths. The US said “not our problem” and, with strict quotas, left millions to fend for themselves, shuggingly suggesting that they should find other countries in Europe where they would be welcome. We could have taken them. We could have saved them. But we didn’t. We were afraid and selfish. And we turned our backs on what it means to be Americans.

      The Donald would turn away Muslim refugees and immigrants because some minority might possibly be dangerous. He would trap them in war-torn countries and shift responsibility to other nations. He would say that other Muslims should take care of the problem while turning his back and chanting La-La-La with fingers in his ears. Because fear mongering is more important than doing what’s right. Screw ’em – they’re “other.”

      If you can’t see the parallels here, then I can’t help you.

      • Thank you.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Unfortunately Mathius, the vast majority of these so called refugee’s are nothing more than economic migrants, who chose to leave the safe refugee camps they were in to go where there are generous welfare policies. 85% of these people are male of fighting age. Refugee’s don’t come with 85% fighting age males, they come primarily as families, women and children and the elderly. The real refugees are getting screwed by the economic migrants, who I might add, are very demanding of their welfare Rights. I have seen refugee’s first hand and in person (Cubans). These are not refugee’s at all. They are invading European countries for the freebies.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Here is where you lose me a little. When and where did your view of this become a truth:

        ………………..what it means to be Americans.

        I think this view of what you think it “means to be Americans” is a very recent thing in our history. One in fact created largely from thin air by people who were rationalizing our efforts to become “the greatest nation on earth”, whether by purchase or force.

        I submit that the refusal of Jewish immigrants in the last century was in fact what it meant to be American at the time. Just as it was “American” for each generation to loath the next generation of immigrants in the 1800’s and early 1900’s.

        Now a pointed question. Are we to believe that being “what it means to be American” should outweigh protection of our culture and values?

        I am also not sure your idea of “law enforcement” after the fact is feasible. Why would we allow people to come here knowing it will increase this burden. Why not do the vetting BEFORE they arrive? Why not provide aid in “their” part of the world instead of moving them half way around the world to a place none of them have ever been, in history.

        Is there a numerical limit in your mind or should we just allow anyone claiming the need for asylum? I guess I am not clear on just how far you think we should to in being American.

        Honest curiosity here, and need for clarity.

        • I submit that the refusal of Jewish immigrants in the last century was in fact what it meant to be American at the time.

          Well then being American is a pointless thing and everyone should go burn their flags.

          Maybe it is a recent thing. Maybe being American is really about being selfish pieces of shit who hate the most recent waves of immigrants (I can’t really argue with that). But then screw being American. We can do better and we SHOULD do better and just because we don’t live up to our ideals (give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses) doesn’t mean we should give up trying to.

          Are we to believe that being “what it means to be American” should outweigh protection of our culture and values?

          A) Our protection is a non-issue. The US can take care of itself with routine law enforcement.

          B) Screw our culture. We are just the latest version of the ever-changing “melting pot.” We will absorb the next wave as we did the last.

          C) What values? The values of hating the most recent immigrants? The value of turning your back on the rest of the world? The value of being selfish and short-sighted? We can afford to lose these.

          Or perhaps you mean the value of showing generosity and kindness, mercy and compassion to those in need?

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Just who is going to pay for your unlimited immigration ideas? Here’s a good question Mathius. If we take all welfare programs from non-citizens, what will happen to immigration?

            • Here’s a different question: why do you feel you have the right to tell another man where he can and cannot go because he had the misfortune of being born on the wrong side of some imaginary line politicians drew on a map?

              (paging: Black Flag)

            • Fine. What happens? Let’s see what happens when we cut off welfare to immigrants/refugees.

              ::gazes into crystal ball::

              A) it puts a (slight) damper on the flow.

              B) Aren’t immigrants already prohibited from claiming benefits?

              C) You’ve forced them into poverty so they get desperate.

              D) Desperate people act desperately.

              E) Some tiny subset does something violent.

              F) The media / politicians respond with demagoguery which indites the public into panic.

              G) Some US citizens get it into their head to do something about those damn immigrants.

              H) Immigrants are rounded up and put into camps, you know, just temporarily, for their own protection.

              I) President Trump, who won on the strength anti-immigrant sentiment begins a quiet effort to find some kind of solution to the immigrant and undesirables problem. Something permanent.. something final.

              J) Special emergency powers are conferred to President Trump as the Capitol burns. Trump blames radical leftists and immigrant supporters.

              K) Prominent liberals in the media and politics are removed from their positions. Over the coming weeks, many of them quietly and suspiciously vanish.

              L) Noting that the people are in danger, the media drums up furious support for President Trump. Trump points out that Mexico has failed to build The Wall, and is therefore an urgent threat that must be dealt with. Within weeks, the annexation of Mexico is complete. All opposing political parties are outlawed, Many prominent Mexicans (including the entire political class) quietly disappear – this is never reported in the media.

              M) Noting that the the need for true border security can never be met as long as we share a giant border with a socialist country like Canada, President Trump vows to liberate the citizens of Canada. President Trump announces “How can anyone say that Canada is not American! Is there anything more American than our old pure North Americanness?” Claiming that our true and pure brothers are trapped by the oppressive and evil socialist regime of the Canadian government, he annexes Canada as well.

              M.2) The Mounties put up a valiant fight, but are quickly defeated.

              N) Some observers note a strange smell near those camps… but it’s never mentioned in the media.

              O) At this point, Trump is often seen screaming, spittle at the corners of his mouth. He is convinced that immigrants are behind every corner. His anger is so great, so constant, and so awe-inspiring, that his followers have now taken to calling him the Fury or Dear Fury (though his accent makes this come out slightly differently).

              ::crystal ball clouds over::

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Funny, but not likely. They will leave. The will stop coming. But don’t worry, they will not lose it. There is the caveat. I don’t want my hard earned money to pay for their existence. It’s really that simple. I don’t care where they were born or what their problems are, I have plenty of my own to be concerned with. I owe no responsibility beyond myself and my family, period. I add some friends to that list, but that is mt free choice to do so. Paying for the existence of people I have no responsibility for is theft and it’s immoral. That is why I despise welfare lifers and those that play the system, they are thieves, period.

                If a person lives in a shithole of a country and they can’t afford to raise a child, they should not screw. If they can’t feed themselves, don’t bring in another life before you get your shit together. Want to leave for a better place, come legally and ready to go to work, no more welfare. We will go bankrupt as a country trying to be bleeding heart liberals. NO THANKS! Do I feel bad for these people ? Sure. It ends there. If you want to bring in people who need help, buy a home for them, feed them and clothe them, then go right ahead, I have no problem with that. Just remember, if they rape or kill, you’re then responsible for damages.

                Responsibility has limitations, I have explained where mine stop. You are free to spend all the money you want helping those you feel are your responsibility, the whole third world for all I care, until you demand that I help pay for it, because that makes you a thief.

              • BAAHAHAHA! That’s the funniest shit I’ve ever read.

                Although, I do agree Mexico should be annexed rather quickly. 🙂

              • Dale A Albrecht says:

                When we moved to California it was very well known as a very liberal welfare State. Basically show up, sign up and little or no vetting and you’re receiving benefits. It really didn’t matter where you were from, ie SOTB. That was under the governorship of Moonbeam’s father, Edmund Brown. There was prety much a huge tax revolt and political change. That was when Reagan became governor. The one most notible thing that happened is that the systems that were put into place, cleaned out a huge amount of fraud. Whether, intentional, which in the medical areas was by doctors and insurance companies or unintentional, usually caused by lazy bureaucrats. In the end of cleaning out the crap, benefits were actually increased to those that truly in need. The dems fought tooth and nail, saying how it hurt the poor and working people. No it didn’t.

                What I mean by unintentional is….many poor and un-employed or seasonal workers moved around a lot. To a new job or possible opportunity for one. They may have been getting assistance. They move, but still need benefits. Their check doesn’t know where to go. They walk into a government office and the bureaucrat says….fill out a form. A new check get cut and goes to the new address and finally the old check starts showing up. 2 checks. Of course 99% of the recipients cashed them. The new systems kicked out duplicate names, even if they were different addresses. A human went and checked. Some obviously were legit and a coincidence, but MOST were not. The government wrote off the losses and stopped the duplicate checks. Reasoning most of the duplication was THEIR fault. It would serve NO purpose to prosecute or try and collect. The prosecutions came clearly with the doctors and insurance. Those people were highly educated and KNEW precisely what they were doing. Today….however, is different….you still have the medical stuff, but now we have generations on welfare and they do know how to manipulate the systems, much less, trying to politically do something is like pissing on the 3rd rail now.

                To Rick….the victors in the Mexican-American War, were smart……they gave it back, that is south of the Rio Grande. One does wonder what it would be like if they kept it…I’d bet a lot less problems, whether real or imaginary (political)

          • Just A Citizen says:


            History has shown there is little value in charity. But that has little to do with the issue on the table.

            You are not talking about people wishing to become Americans to make a better life. You are talking about people running from a WAR, many of whom have absolutely no desire to become anything other than what they were.

            So your howls of charity and compassion carry little water with me. We provide millions, if not billions of charity around the world, for the poor for the victims of disasters and even war. You can play the emotional card all you want, my charity in this regard stops at allowing them into our country just because they need to evacuate their homes for awhile.

            There is a big difference between immigration and mass migration of refugees. I find it hard to believe you don’t understand the difference.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            You prove my point. The conversion of the Statue of Liberty into a message about immigration was deliberate. Then a myth was born that somehow this was the essence of what it means to be American. Well I am sorry but it was not and should not be the case. That does not mean we have to obnoxious to others or exclusionary. But we should not create irrational expectations about what it means to be American. Because your theory of compassion leads to the “greater good” and the destruction of “liberty”.

            From wiki:

            “Paul Auster wrote that “Bartholdi’s gigantic effigy was originally intended as a monument to the principles of international republicanism, but ‘The New Colossus’ reinvented the statue’s purpose, turning Liberty into a welcoming mother, a symbol of hope to the outcasts and downtrodden of the world.”[8]

            John T. Cunningham wrote that “The Statue of Liberty was not conceived and sculpted as a symbol of immigration, but it quickly became so as immigrant ships passed under the torch and the shining face, heading toward Ellis Island. However, it was [Lazarus’s poem] that permanently stamped on Miss Liberty the role of unofficial greeter of incoming immigrants.”[9]”

            And that poem was not stamped on the statue until 1903.

  27. The one thing that I abhor….the name calling and childish crap going on…..the international community has to be laughing.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I agree with you totally. Although other politicians in other countries actually swing at each other from time to time, the International Community has been laughing at us for 7+ years now 🙂

    • Very true. It’s juvenile.

      It’s really astounding. Aside from every other consideration, do you really want to put someone into the most powerful position on the planet when they have this level of maturity?

      I might really love my 3-year-old’s foreign policy stance and tax plan, but I’m not giving her the keys to the nukes, because I know she’ll use them the first time she’s cranky before nap time.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        While I dislike it, these guys are amateurs compared to the Liberal Left and Hillary. They have been slinging names for a solid decade without remorse. It has gotten to the point where being called a racist no longer holds any weight, it’s just another meaningless name being thrown by people with no real idea what a racist really is. We are both white males, which makes us both racist’s in the eyes of Liberals. Go to a Left wing site and pretend to be a conservative, you’ll be called everything BUT a white man withing a few minutes.

      • gmanfortruth says:
      • Just A Citizen says:


        At the core they have all acted like this for quite some time. Some just use bigger words or have others do the name calling on their behalf.

        Yes, it would be nice if we strived for our potential. But as long as the stakes of politics is who controls the Power Stick, I doubt it will ever change.

  28. Just A Citizen says:


    Just thought of an example of political compromise I would consider viable. Given we have Obama Care and law where it currently is at.

    I would be willing to allow provisions for mandatory coverage of pre existing conditions in return for eliminating the mandatory ownership of an insurance policy along with the “tax penalty” tied to the requirement.

    The first part of that is a hit to my principles but I win on two other key principles which are more primary. The net result is a move “closer” to my desired position and closer to my “core” principles.

    In this case, while I deplore the idea of Govt dictating business practice, I deplore the violation of Constitutional overreach much more. The mandatory insurance and associated tax are outright attacks on the Constitution. Under current law, mandatory coverage of pre-existing conditions could be construed as “regulation of interstate commerce”.

    Besides, it would be fun to give the left what they want just to see them whine when the bills came due. My compromise in this case would highlight the actual cost of the required insurance coverage. They could not hide it within a massively confusing program.

    My next step would be to abolish even this as a “Federal” requirement as it should be an issue for the States. But that would require greater work to get the meaning of “interstate commerce” revised by SCOTUS.

    This is why I do not immediately get upset by some politician “compromising” on some previous promise. It truly depends on what they get in the deal. The past twenty years I don’t see our side getting much of anything.

    Another one, which I offered last year, would be to allow a massive increase in the Federal minimum wage. In exchange for eliminating ALL FEDERAL WELFARE PROGRAMS. Now obviously a Federal minimum wage violates my values. But my gains in this case would be far greater than what I give up.

    Obviously the problem with all such “compromises” is the inability to make them last. The left is notorious for coming back to get what they gave up, once they gain any position. They are not honorable when it comes to “negotiating compromise”.

    • But even compromising on a principle is still compromising. Is not principe something to be non negotiable regardless of outcome?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        There are differing layers of principles. CORE principles should not be violated. My example involved a “value”, namely my belief that free markets support freedom, liberty and justice.

        But lets look at my examples. How am I really compromising my principle, or “value”, when I have nothing now but have something after compromising?

        If we have MORE freedom and liberty or justice by compromising and those three values are our core, how have we violated them by getting more of them than we had before compromising?

        Given where we are we have to take back that which is lost. In my example I get something back by granting a Trojan horse. That which I give will likely act against the other side, bringing them back to the table to beg me to take it back.

        For example, what will be the impact of a minimum wage of $20 per hour. If I am unwilling to compromise further on Govt. interference, like unemployment or welfare, how will they get the unemployment reduced? They will have to beg me to allow them to reduce the minimum wage, or eliminate it all together. Because the public will demand it.

        Like I said, operating within our principles while playing the long game.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Just read my comments again. My lack of sleep lately is obviously affecting my ability to properly describe what I am trying to say.

        Based on my comments you are correct, compromising a principle is a violation and should not be done. I guess part of the confusion is over what constitutes a principle.

        Shows why it is so important to pick the right ones.

        So lets start with an absolute CORE principle. In this case the primary moral standard.

        Do not initiate force against innocent people.

        Do you think this is violated in the compromises I have provided as examples?

        Remember, you have to use EXISTING conditions to make the judgment. Hint: who is innocent?

  29. gmanfortruth says:

    After explaining that he isn’t an advocate for open borders, he argued that many of the illegal immigrants living in the U.S. “already got families and kids that are here” — and they wouldn’t allow a Trump administration to break up their families.

    “It ain’t gonna happen,” Gonzales said. “You really want the Mexicans to really, really stir, really get mad? Y’all don’t understand — we aren’t the minority anymore. We own Texas. Texas is Mexican-made. I’m five generations deep right here.”

    This is another issue that could make a good discussion, what to do with the 30 million or so illegal immigrants currently in the US.

  30. gmanfortruth says:

    In a statement released on Sunday, two of the heroes in Benghazi who helped to rescue Americans during the attack on September 11 endorsed the candidate that Hillary is terrified of. Mark “Oz” Geist and John “TIG” Tiegen have officially endorsed Donald Trump for President, check it out…

    Mark “Oz” Geist said, “We, perhaps more than any Americans, know the absolute and imperative reason that we elect Donald J. Trump as President of the United States. First and foremost, under a Trump administration, the request for additional security by an ambassador would have been heeded, and second, there is no question, when the attack came,he would have moved heaven and earth to provide the necessary forces to protect and reinforce our warriors. Mr. Trump is the bold, decisive leader America needs at this time.” Oz added, “Under President Trump, many conflicts will be avoided because our enemies will fear the United States and our military.”

    John Tiegen added, “It is very clear to see the groundswell of support, never seen before in recent politics. Americans want a strong leader, one who cares more about the safety and freedom of the American people than he does winning elections, or what the press might think. In honor of those we have fought with, I am proud to endorse the next President of the United States, Donald J. Trump.”

    Via Breitbart

  31. gmanfortruth says:
  32. gmanfortruth says:
  33. Just A Citizen says:


    Allowing massive migration due to economic collapse and/or civil wars is removing a key negative feedback loop to bad Government.

    What penalty does a dictator suffer if those opposed to him are simply allowed to go somewhere else??

    Then what price does the receiving nation pay? Those living there suffer the negative for doing nothing wrong. Again sending a distorted message about cause and effect.

    Not supporting, just throwing out there based on some other reading I am doing about human evolution and social advancement. Without negative feedback, results of failure, humans stagnate and start making bad decisions. Remove the penalty and those decisions get even worse with time.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I would agree if not for outside interference. See Libya, Syria and a few others. If not for NATO fomenting the Libya issue there would have never been a civil war. If we see the U.S. devolving into a Civil War, without any outside interference, at least it would be legitimate. There isn’t much legitimacy about the Arab Spring and beyond, It’s mostly hegemony interference.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Well then change the penalty to those at fault. The US should have to suffer millions of refugees due to our meddling.

        The question is not who but whether mass migration is a negative feedback that is being overridden by modern transportation and international “compassion”.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      I think this is along your path of thought. In WWI the Jews fought for Austria and Germany just as patriotically and the next guy. However, Hitler decided that that the Jews were poison to the German people and the cause of all thir problem. (simplistic magicians trick) Just think of the brain drain of some extremely smart people that went to the opposing forces of the fascist, Italy included. Would the outcome of WWII been the same?

      I do know people who fled Vienna just before the anschluss. They were being (very encouraged) to leave Austria for years by the government. They were allowed one small box of belongings and that had to be sent via the post. NON of their goods were received in France. So basically they LEFT with nothing. Started making a life in France, the again had to get out and left with nothing. 1st to Canada, because Britain was in the war and were opening up the provinces to refugees. But it was close. They then came into the US during the war. Now the Father was a University of Vienna professor of languages. He also used to translate famous german authors book into other languages for publication. In my friends diary, she says that the anti-semitism in the US was rampant, and the other double whammy was being Germanic. They survived, but marginally….they did lose many relatives to the concentration camps, because those that stayed didn’t believe anyone, ie Hitler could be so evil. Dora on the other hand was an opera singer and traveled all over Europe and could see the writing on the wall.

      Even parts of my family came to the US in the 1890’s due to religious persecution and prosecution in Austria, and that was for being a Protestant and not Catholic. The persecution stopped or slowed after 1906….FYI that story is not from family lore. They refused to talk about anything from the old country. The legacy of prosecution of protestants was in the city’s website that they came from….sort of a soul cleansing

      • Nice. parallels many stories I heard from Austrian and German Jews in Washington Heights.

        • Dale A Albrecht says:

          Dora, whose diary i have a copy of wove quite a tale. Our family gets introduced in the 50’s Her daughter edited and self published a limited amount for close friends, but then also gave copies to the Holocaust museum in DC. Dora’s sister was a very good artist and illustrator. She did not make it out and died in the camps. Several years ago in Vienna a great deal of her art was discovered in a garret hidden away. The art was sent to Dora. Much of it was done during the Nazi era. You can look at all the photos you want and are horrifying but are just a photo. The art incorporated raw human emotion and was deeply impacting. It was all donated to the museum. Dora said, that it was to painful to have around in the house.

          The University of Vienna built a bridge last year and named it in honor of one of their great professors. 77 years after they drove him out for being Jewish. He used to translate authors like Thomas Mann and Stefan Zweig for publication in languages other than German. The diary listed many other famous authors, so he was good and well known. One brother ws never allowed into the USA. He fought against the Nazi’s in Spain. SK, you have to remember that even when we were in the service applying for a security clearance being asked if you had anything to do with the “Abraham Lincoln Brigade” The fact that the communists backed the loyalist and were anti-fascist could still keep you out of the US. Interesting how the fascists were more desired than the communists in the 30’s. Carried on well into the 70’s. Another of her brothers went eastward and wound up never being able to leave the USSR until it collapsed.

          • Worked with a black guy for a few years, Tony Rogers who fought in Spain with the ALB. Sharp dude, Red all the way through though . Then again if I had been an intelligent, educated black man in the US during the first 60 years of the 20th Century doubt I would have been a Conservative.

            • Dale A Albrecht says:

              I don’t believe you never commented on Christie….I know just about all republican guv, that had a chance at the presidency somehow all ended up with some nasty charge. Perry in TX, charges that were dropped ultimately for doing his job. Bridgegate for Christie. I knew something was coming down on Jindal, but he quit running very early. The former Gov of VA had an interesting fed trial. By VA laws did nothing in any way illegal. Never acted on the supposed, potential “bribery” etc. This was brought totally by the feds and Holder on the “possibility” that there could have been some corruption someday. Wasn’t even an actual crime commited. Just the potential. Why should the feds care, He was a prime contender for a run at the WH.

              Back to the ALB. I guess if you were a US citizen you could return, but I’m sure the FBI’s had you down in their books as a subversive. A foreigner trying to get here who fought the fascists couldn’t get in. In fact at the time “Ole Joe” was an ally and we were ourselves fighting the Nazi’s. Funny how the screw turns.

              • Actually there is some fascinating stuff out there if you dig for it. A number of folks were turned down for service in WW 2 because they were in Spain with the ALB. They then wound up working for Wild Bill Donovan in the OSS.

  34. Just A Citizen says:

    This is provides further commentary on my argument the other day that trade deficits are no big deal if your use a proper time line.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      NAFTA = 100 million out of work. I think we have crossed the proper timeline nonsense. However, maybe Black Flag can give some of his economic expertise on the subject. That would be welcome. 🙂

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Take the article with my explanation of where dollars are going from China back to the US. What you see is that our living on debt has interrupted the normal forces that would level trade over time.

        Otherwise, what would the Chinese do with all those dollars??? They could buy oil with dollars but then what would the Oil Seller do with them???

        I also think your 100 million out of work is a little inflated. You are claiming that 33% of the US population is out of work and is in fact looking for work.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Labor participation rate, plus the skewed unemployment rate, is actually more like 110 million, but I rounded down. The problem is that no one can trust government numbers anymore. Many articles confirm all of this, but it’s really just a number. What’s the number of companies that have left and gone to other countries since NAFTA was signed by Bush…..well over 40,000 the last time I have read an article on the matter, and that was probably a year ago.

          One thing you may be right about, they (business defectors) aren’t coming back. Which means the fix is new business’s. Right now, taxes and regulations are in the way. Those are two subjects I agree with Trump on, the third is trade. If the first two issues get fixed, then the latter could be just the jump start for new companies to begin and grow quickly. Funny, one part is to get government out of our business and the latter is the opposite. Maybe we can delay the latter to see if it’s actually needed, should the first two change for the better.

  35. gmanfortruth says:


    What can really suck about how the Primaries are run is that by the time 1/3rd of the States have voted, the Primary could be decided. This leaves many States voters without a voice (see how that illusion works). In short, by the time the Primary comes to Pennsylvania, it may be completely useless to vote because the winner has been declared. So States that vote later than Mid March, chance not being a factor during Primary season. I will be surprised if this over by the end of the day.

    So, who quits at the end of the day? Any predictions on who will be declared the winner of the day?

  36. activehealthy says:

    Well, depending on what happens today, it has occurred to me that I might not actually vote this time around. I know that is exactly what has been recommended previously on SUFA, just never thought I’d find myself in that position.

    VH – agree on many of your thoughts on Trump.

    And Mathius is suddenly a great (religious!) American Patriot? LMAO! That alone was worth checking in today!

  37. Just A Citizen says:

    A good example of major changes in an industry that had nothing to do with NAFTA or free trade, but was driven by other Govt. interference in the market place. In this case it was interference to help “certain businesses” that caused unforeseen outcomes.

    The net result is mills have less logs as the timber investment companies sold theirs to China.

    Many of these major land trades had requirements that a certain volume of logs would be sold to the sawmills which had the land, for a certain period of time. I believe most of those agreements have or are coming to an end.

    In my region the investment companies are now selling the land because they took the timber and it now costs to much to hold the real estate.

  38. Just A Citizen says:

    A fantastic example of the media trying to drive the bus instead of report on the bus.

    Also why so many of us simply despise them. Sadder yet is the number of people who will fall for this STRAWMAN argument.

    I wonder how many people running for state office will now be chastised for not criticizing the guy who did not criticize the guy who did not criticize the guy who did not criticize Trump enough to satisfy some media hack?

  39. gmanfortruth says:

    Daily Mail.:

    Three University at Albany students who claimed they were victims of a racial attack on a bus last month have been charged with assault as prosecutors said they were actually the aggressors.

    Alexis Briggs, Ariel Agudio and Asha Burwell, all 20 years old, appeared at Albany City Criminal Court today for their arraignment.

    All three have pleaded non-guilty to charges of assault in the third degree, CNN reported. Burwell and Agudio have also pleaded not guilty to falsely reporting the incident.

    They claimed they were attacked on a Capital District Transportation Authority bus on January 30, but prosecutors say they actually assaulted a 19-year-old woman early that Saturday.

    ‘The evidence indicates they were actually the aggressors in the physical altercation, and that they continued to assault the victim despite the efforts of several passengers to stop them,’ police said in a statement.

    The women’s initial report of the incident led to national outrage, a massive campus rally and even Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton tweeted about it, hitting out against violence on a college campus.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      It seems that Clinton had tweeted support for these three young thugs. That could cost her down the road.

  40. gmanfortruth says:

    What is the first thing I hear on internet radio when I come in? In Texas, people bitching because they voted for Trump and the computer gave the vote to Rubio. Computer voting is one of the biggest frauds EVER perpetrated on the American people. The vast majority just don’t know it yet.

  41. gmanfortruth says:
  42. TO: JAC……get some sleep, my friend. The only place that you and I really differ is that you see shades of gray…..I see black and white. The main thing that you said above still boils down to one issue…….what does it take to win. Like Vince Lombardi said: Winning isn’t everything…it is the only thing.

    What I am finding very interesting and funny….In the least couple of years, most everybody has indicated that the rpoblem with our system is the entrenched establishment. Most everyone was crying….NO MORE POLITICIANS…….we need new blood…and outsider. Now you have one and everybody is trying to change horses in a dead run……Wait….this outsider is too brash, too unrefined, too cruel, too boisterous, too whatever….we can’t have him…we need Rubio, an insider, we need Cruz, another insider……so what the hell do the non establishment people want? An outsider that speaks Washington-ese? They do not exist.

    They are all politicians of sorts and when they are not kissing babies, they are stealing their lollipops. to quote from the Hunt for Red October.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      How funny! You claiming I see gray, the guy criticized here for making everything black and white all the time.

      Seriously, I don’t see where you think I am seeing shades of gray, unless it is my assessment of the candidates. In that regard I just don’t see them the same way.

      Not gray, just not all the way in the tank yet.

      I think you are misrepresenting or misunderstanding the desire for “not” politicians. Nobody said they would rather have a phony non politician over an honest politician who had not been corrupted. We simply agreed that there were few of the latter. That is why Trump is being attacked by some of the Tea Party folks. It is not necessarily his brashness, but his lack of bona fides on the Constitution and other “conservative” or “libertarian” ideas.

      I can make the same argument for Cruz and Rubio. Both elected by the Tea Party revolt, even though both had been in politics. Then when they run for POTUS, which we all hoped they would, I see people trashing them as “snakes”, establishment, etc. etc.. You see those two as establishment, I do not. I see them as having political experience, but not establishment in their thinking or behavior. I do not see them as pure either but not with the elite. They voted to often against the elite. Cruz to the point nobody can stand him in D.C.. He is so much an insider they all hate him. Sarcasm alert!!

      I will give you one here though. I think this race has pushed Rubio towards the establishment faster than would have happened without the Trump phenomena. Remember, the establishment was behind the Bush/Christie attacks on Rubio. Now they are being forced to look to him and it looks like he is looking to their support to beat Trump.

      Remember that in our prior discussions on this rebellion topic we also said it would probably be necessary to replace our newly elected folks before they fell to the Potomac fever. But at the same time, we expect them to work for us to “gain ground”. I am more than a little frustrated by those who chastise them for compromising to move the ball in our direction. How the hell else they think a “minority” is going to get their way??

      The establishment’s attacks on Trump are understandable and expected, and the majority of the opposition. If Trump was not ahead Cruz would be getting the full load of that garbage. And if not him then Rubio. If Jeb had not fallen flat, along with Kasich and Chrisite, the establishment would not be supporting Rubio. They would be waiting for him “next time”, because he has not been turned completely.

      As for me, I want rebels and they can be politicians or not politicians. As long as they share those pesky principles I have. The key ones. Cruz and Rubio have displayed they share them. At least for the most part. Nobody is going to be 100% except maybe me or you. 🙂

      I do not see that in Trump. I think V.H. and Kathy are saying the same thing. I think we all see a democrat running as a Republican, a progressive running as a conservative. Doesn’t matter that he is an outsider, although I question just how outside he is really.

      Now all that applies to me and those of us who have been pushing for new blood, but honorable people who understand what the proper role of the Fed. Govt. is supposed to be.

      I think your own question provides the answer as well. It now appears there was a large number of people calling for reform who simply wanted an “outsider”. Those people are supporting Trump and Sanders. We purist rebels did not see that coming and have been fighting back. So the criticism you see is not really the “we want an outsider” crowd. We were more than happy to have some new “outsiders” but that was not the ONLY criteria. I am thinking that those supporting Trump to now do in fact have only one criteria. And that is being an “outsider”. That and someone strong willed enough to turn the Democrats tactics against them.

      But then we need to ask why Carly Fiorina did not get the traction Trump did. She was an “outsider” just the same, successful, smart and the only one to take Mrs. Clinton on directly, calling her a Liar even. So if “outsider” was so important, and strength, and the ability to beat Hillary, then why not Carly?? The female double standard perhaps??

      One other reminder of past discussions. Remember when we were all whining about the lack of “statesmanship” in D.C. these days? Well we elect a Tea Party Senator who goes and acts statesman like, Rubio, and we trash him because he tried to resolve one of the biggest issues that had been hurting Republicans.

      Come to think of it, I believe I am as confused about all the reactions and results as you are. So far I cannot adequately determine what is happening and why. One explanation may be the “new voters” turning out due to Trump. It may be that nobody knew what these folks were thinking or wanted because they were not part of the Tea Party revolt. Or they may have faded away quickly when the establishment tried to hijack the movement.

      My current rankings:


      Fourth place discussions are still ongoing in my house. Will we vote for Trump if he is running against Clinton?? Today we are leaning yes, but then again voting no would allow us to stick to principles without cost. Not really a test of one’s principles is it.

      • Very good, JAC….a nice retort and we are still saying basically the same thing, however, I will have to answer late this afternoon. I have a 745 tee off and must get going. First day of the tournament. Talk to you later this evening.

      • Ok…back from first round of tournament….

        “Seriously, I don’t see where you think I am seeing shades of gray, unless it is my assessment of the candidates.”…no sir….perhaps a shade of gray is not the proper terminology. When you said or I thought that you said, that you can have differing sets of principles and that it is ok to “fudge” for the sake of progress….I call that gray. You are saying that it is ok to have varying sets of principles and within that varying set of principles itis ok to manipulate them to gain…..or in other words, to win.

        ” It is not necessarily his brashness, but his lack of bona fides on the Constitution and other “conservative” or “libertarian” ideas.”…..I can understand reasoning on not following “other conservative” or ” libertarian “.ideas. But….where are you getting “lack of bona fides on the Constitution?” I do not want a candidate to walk lock step with the current Republican Party. The current party does not represent conservative nor libertarian viewpoints, in my opinion. But I also do not want a candidate to not want to further or recognize that the Constitution is a main stay. Please show me an area where Trump does not want to follow or abide by the Constitution.

        ” You see those two as establishment, I do not. I see them as having political experience, but not establishment in their thinking or behavior.”. Yes, I see them as establishment. Rubio more so than Cruz. Rubio will succumb to the Republican leadership in order to beat Trump. He is their pick. THAT makes him walking in lockstep to win. Selling his soul. Cruz will not get the leadership backing…they hate his guts because he is not walking lock step with the established Republican leadership. But, even though I voted for him, he is not what I want in a candidate because I see him as a weak POTUS. But he is far better than Clinton. I do not like compromising on bills to get his through. I do not like him voting to fund government when he should shut it down. I do not like him voting for the last funding bill that also funded Planned Parenthood and then run against it. I do not like him voting for the funding bill with all its attachments to it and increasing spending and unemployment benefits. THAT, in my opinion, is establishment,….he voted to get along.

        “I am more than a little frustrated by those who chastise them for compromising to move the ball in our direction. How the hell else they think a “minority” is going to get their way??” AND I am frustrated that they compromise their principles. They are not going for the win, they are trying not to lose. That is not a fighter.

        ” I do not see that in Trump. I think V.H. and Kathy are saying the same thing. I think we all see a democrat running as a Republican, a progressive running as a conservative. Doesn’t matter that he is an outsider, although I question just how outside he is really.” I can accept this fact…that you do not like him. OK. I like him but I did not vote for him. But I did not vote for him because he cannot beat Clinton so I voted for the one that has a chance to beat Clinton….He has not shown me anything that says he is running as a Progressive Left. I see that he has changed his position of some things….like me, I used to be totally pro choice….now I am not. Does that make me fake?

        “Now all that applies to me and those of us who have been pushing for new blood, but honorable people who understand what the proper role of the Fed. Govt. is supposed to be.” So, you find Rubio and Cruz to be honorable even though they play the political game. They engage in name calling and romper room antics….not one iota of class….they, including Trump are about the most embarassing things that I have seen. However, one thing Trump has done is lure them into an ambush…Trump starts the name calling and Rubo and Cruz follow suit…Trump has pulled Rubio and Cruz to his level of vitriol..not the hallmarks of individualism….(and, no VH, the fact that they are engaging him is not showing a fighting spirit….it shows that Trump was able to manipulate them). Rubio and Cruz are playing Trump’s game. Now to take it further… used the term “honorable” and you used the term ” understand the Federal Government “… will have to explain honorable to me….but to understand the federal Government and how it operates says to me….establishment. But I am sure, or at least you indicate, that in order to change something, you must be an insider to do it. I do not agree with this theorum.

        ” I am thinking that those supporting Trump to now do in fact have only one criteria. And that is being an “outsider”. That and someone strong willed enough to turn the Democrats tactics against them.” EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is exactly what is driving the Trump train. People are so pissed….they just want something new and Trump is filing that void….Now, what can Cruz and Rubio do to counter this? Do you expect people to be an informed voter? NO…people want a leader and trump is talking big and taking on specific things…FOR EXAMPLE: Building a wall and having Mexico pay for it……that is a hot button issue that he has attacked directly. He has said what he is going to do and how to do it. The only thing that has happened is ridicule and no one has offered an alternative. Cruz or Rubio has not said anything about how they are going to stop it. People want it stopped…and Trump is still standing up there saying….I am GONNA DO IT. AND he says…I am gonna take on China and I am gonna take on Russia….and I am gonna make AMERICA great once again…I am gonna bring back the jobs…He is the only one saying this and he is saying it forcefully and aggressively and no one else is. Think of the bump Cruz could get if he finally stands up and says….Trump is right !! It is time we plug the gaps….and stop the bleeding and this is how I am gonna do it. He does not even need a plan right now….but show some balls and get up and say it….and do not worry about political correctness. The main public is uninformed….but they want leadership….Trump is giving it to them. Hell, he even has the ex President of Mexico coming after him and cursing and people are responding to that because Trump got under his skin. He is getting results.

        I don’t know either JAC…..but Trump is resonating and he is beginning to gain support from within…but here is a bigger problem…I think the Republican party is going to be set back by decades if not be made ineffective. If Trump wins the nomination, many Republicans and many establishment are either not going to vote or will vote Clinton…..just for spite. The same thing is going to happen if Rubio or Cruz wins the nomination…..the Trump supporters will stay home. And one last thing….remember all the hoopla when Trump was dragged across the coals about supporting someone else if he loses and the Republicans making him sign a pledge not to run third party…..and now the establishment is reneging. trump is free to do what he wants.

        And if this goes to the convention, and the Republs pull a brokered convention….they will lose the house and the senate because Trump Republicans….beginning to show in the 40% range now….will not vote.

  43. And the winners are….. Trump and Clinton to no ones surprise.

    Trump gave a nice press conference. If he would stick to that tone of voice and presentation style, he would run the table.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Here’s what I liked about Trumps strategy last night. The other politicians gave stump speeches to their supporters (or at least those folks they hired to appear) and The Trumpster called a press conference and talked to all people. I have to say, another brilliant campaign strategy. Whoever is running his campaign is going to make a lot of money in the future, he or she is very good.

      Like you T-Ray, I also liked his tone. Congratulating Cruz several times and commending him for his hard work was classy and should tone down the name calling between the two of them, which will help both going forward. If Rubio don’t lose the name calling, he is done, although I think he is done anyway.

      I’m hearing some pundit’s saying that if Clinton and Trump get the nominations, Clinton should NOT debate Trump. I don’t think that will work too well, but It may not work to well if she does debate Trump. Those debates will be priceless if they occur.

  44. Just A Citizen says:

    Thought for you morning coffee.

    To those who think the newly elected republicans did not do enough, or did not keep their promise, let me ask you:

    What do you think they should have done? And how do you think they could have done it?

    • gmanfortruth says:

      JAC, it’s not just the newly elected Republican, it’s all of them and for the most part, they all ran on the same pretense. Newbies have little power in Congress outside of their vote and what they get to say on the floor. We all know that these folks have got to play the game to get on those special committees. This is the claim we all hear, getting on the committees gives them more of a voice. To get on committees, then many, especially TEA partiers, had to dump their principles to make some votes to support the leadership to get on the committees somewhere down the road.

      Sorry about the rant, back to your answer. Answer…At least pretend to make a fight about funding before you hand the Democrats everything including the kitchen sink. They simply did what many of us believed they would do, show their true colors…and the did, in style, and it’s undeniable. That my friend is why Trump is having such success.

      Three elections since the Democrats had a super majority, the Congress is now under Republican majority and what do the Republicans do? Betray their voters and whether you believe that or not doesn’t matter, because the reality is happening at the polls. Betrayal has a price. I’m wondering if the Republicans can even hold the two majorities now. If they can’t, you will know why.

    • The thing that upset me the most was simply not doing their job. For example, not sending legislation to the POS errr, POTUS because he will veto. Well, do YOUR job….if he veto’s then it’s on HIM.

  45. gmanfortruth says:

    Off subject. Question: By what authority does the President change laws? Hint: If your answer isn’t written IN the CONSTITUTION, then there is a problem.

  46. gmanfortruth says:

    (TRUNEWS) The Republican establishment is talking behind closed doors about ways to deal with the rise of Donald Trump, even threatening to bring Mitt Romney into the race for the White House, if Marco Rubio does poorly during Tuesday’s primaries.

    “The leaders of the GOP establishment plan to steal the nomination from Trump and to thwart the popular will, and they don’t care if they lose. Trump threatens all the establishment GOP leaders’ cozy deals. He’s a threat to the lobbying class. He’s a threat to the consultant class. He’s a threat to the globalists,” said GOP strategist Roger Stone in a WND interview.

    He said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan believe they have a better chance of keeping their jobs with a Democrat in office. Some Republican leaders have threatened to vote for Hillary Clinton over Trump because her plans line up with the GOP agenda in Congress.

    “The Democrats and the GOP in Congress both want to continue open borders, to introduce amnesty for the illegal immigrants already in the United States, to give the green light to the Trans-Pacific Partnership and ship more millions of jobs overseas, and to expand the welfare state and retain Obamacare, and to allow Goldman Sachs and their friends on Wall Street to make all the money they want to make,” said Stone.

    David Gergen agreed with Stone in a CNN interview. He is a former White House advisor who served under several presidential administrations, both Democratic and Republican and is now a political commentator.

    “There’s going to be an effort to unravel this,” he said.

    Gergen also pointed out that in recent days Romney has not endorsed Rubio, as expected, but has criticized Trump.


    • gmanfortruth says:

      Romney will be speaking tomorrow, I wonder what the establishment has in mind?

  47. gmanfortruth says:
    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      I wonder how the Olympics will handle this self identification gender bending? I guess when a guy stops winning in the men’s division, they can switch gender and win the gold for a few more Olympics. This all is getting so out of control, it isn’t even laughable anymore.

  48. gmanfortruth says:

    “They thought they’d be warmly welcomed in Germany,” he said. “Some thought they’d get a lot of money, that the state would give them big houses to live in.

  49. gmanfortruth says:

    The biggest mistake most voters make is still believing that there is a political difference between Democrats and Republicans. Nothing could be farther from the truth as the political landscape in Washington today consists of neither party, but government officials having a socialist agenda, and the few politicians who are American Patriots believing in the constitution as the basis of all law.

    The only way to break the stronghold of socialism in the US is for the American people to demand a return to paper ballots which have to be individually counted and verified and get rid of electronic ballots which have essentially ended fair elections.

    We must also demand that all states require ID from everyone before casting a vote, as well as ending any state’s right to allow people who are not citizens of the US to vote, period.

    The prosecution of politicians who openly cheat their way to wins must also be demanded. We simply cannot afford to allow any questionable wins from anyone running for office, from the President down.

    Until these and other election issues are resolved, voting in the US is meaningless and we will continue to have appointed rulers rather than elected representatives.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Oh…and get your finger dipped in indelible ink that can not be washed off, but has to wear off.

      Gman…you’re forgetting Common Core math. Any answer is the correct one. Computer voting, like touch screens can be manipulated and so can the scanners. They all run into computers. Even hand counting can get weird. Just remember Florida not to long ago, recounting erasures, hanging chaff, 2 selections. The recounter chose instead of discarding the ballot. Your statements in voter and vote fraud counting always brings to mind two old movies. One by WC Fields “You can not cheat an honest man” when he’s handing out change. The other is a Bud Abbott and Low Costello routine…”One for you, one for me”

  50. gmanfortruth says:

    Gotta love the strawman BS being tossed around by the pundits. If So and So wasn’t in the race we would have won. What nonsense. There is no way of knowing how those voters would have voted. This is just another reason why the MSM is becoming irrelevant.

  51. gmanfortruth says:
  52. gmanfortruth says:

    There is a new thread posted. See you there.

%d bloggers like this: