Trump’s War With the Liberal Media

trump-steam-roller-500x358It has become quite entertaining watching President Trump’s continued attacks on the biased Liberal media.  It looks as though the days ahead will be filled with a back and forth that should provide some great moments.  We have a Free Press, but they are not immune to ridicule, despite their whining.  They will claim that ridiculing them undermines the 1st Amendment, without realizing that it’s also the 1st Amendment that supports such ridicule.  That seems to be lost to many journalists and media pundits.  My answer to them….TOUGH!  Let the discussions continue  🙂



  1. gmanfortruth says:


  2. gmanfortruth says:
  3. The MSM are theoretically in competition with each other. Why then do they not severely criticize one member when the publish fake news or improperly vetted news? This process of self criticism would improve the product. Instead they defend each other.

    Many years ago, I did an experiment with our local metropolitan newspaper. I would read a front page above the fold article to get the gist of the story. I then would cross out every adjective and adverb and reread the article. The slant left was obvious. The bias is daily and constant. It is testament to the ordinary people in this country that they can see through it.

    But as Mika says, it is our job to tell you what to think.

  4. gmanfortruth says:

    CNN media reporter Brian Stelter said Friday that outlets like CNN and the New York Times never show favor for any president during a segment about the Trump administration’s decision to block some news organizations from an off-camera press briefing.

    CNN, the New York Times, BuzzFeed, and Politico were among the outlets not allowed into Friday’s gaggle, while admission was granted to NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox News, and conservative news outlets like One America News, Breitbart, and the Washington Times. The Associated Press and Time reportedly boycotted the gaggle in protest.

    Stelter said the Trump administration has been “stacking the deck” with friendly news outlets, referring to Press Secretary Sean Spicer’s habit of calling on right-leaning groups at briefings.

    “We don’t see CNN or the New York Times rooting for any president, whether a Democrat or a Republican,” Stelter said. “But the Breitbarts of the world, they do root for candidates and root for presidents. There’s not anything necessarily wrong with that. It’s a point-of-view form of journalism.”

    This guy is a partisan dolt.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Breitbart is ABSOLUTELY PARTISAN.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        While I don’t read at Breitbart, I would have to agree from what I have read in the past. I would guess those on the left would put FOX on the partisan right.

        Frankly, it has gotten near impossible to find any news that doesn’t have a partisan slant. All and any facts, graphs, polls etc can’t be trusted much these days. It’s actually frustrating trying to have a decent debate these days.

        I will say, I don’t think the Liberal media’s constant attacks on Trump will work, at least not for election reasons. People are tired of the MSM and a great deal of folks can see through the crap.

  5. gmanfortruth says:

    About a year later, Melanie changed her name, began taking hormones, and started identifying as a man.

    She said her gender transition “was one of the driving elements for why I reported” the incident to the school, “because I felt uncomfortable using the men’s restrooms in my residential college, for fear that I would encounter him.”

    Just unbelievable. 🙂

  6. The press does not know how to interpret Trump. He is a typical blue collar NYC exaggerator. If he sees a hundred people cheering on a roof tip in NJ, it becomes thousands. Mix that background with a strong dose of Madison Ave. to sell the Trump brand and you have THE DONALD. The only greater exaggerators are Texans.

    • Harumph………..why is it truth has to be exaggeration…..with Texas, that is.

      1) Is it not true that Texas is the best state?

      2) Is it not true that Texas harvested Alaska for ice for its Lone Star Beer?

      3) Is it not true that St Peter has to stake out Texans like horses to keep them in heaven and returning to Texas. It is better to be in Texas than heaven. God did not want the competition.

      4) Is it not true that “hotter than Hell” originated in Texas after the Devil visited and decided not to stay, and instead, went to New York?

      5) Is it not true that Texas has four seasons: drought, flood, blizzard, and twister. Because of its sheer size, Texas experiences all kinds of weather—sometimes all at once. Out in West Texas, the weather can be drier than the heart of a haystack and windier than a fifty-pound bag of whistling lips. A duststorm is dubbed “Panhandle rain.” Thunderclouds might bring some real rain—say, a real gully-washer toad-strangler. And, all over the state, it’s hot—darned hot. How hot, you ask? Hotter than a stolen tamale. Do you think that sayings as, it is so foggy the birds are walking, or so dusty the rabbits are digging holes six feet in the air, or the wind’s blowing like perfume through a prom or it is so windy we’re using a log chain instead of a wind sock? Do you really think that these are just metaphors?

      How can you not recognize the contributions of Texan Speak to the English Language. Such as: Skittish horses have inspired many an equine expression. Consider “He won’t stand hitched” or “She’s chewing her bit.” Other apt examples: “She’s so nervous she has to thread her sewing machine while it’s running” and “He’s as nervous as a long-tailed cat in a roomful of rockers.” But one saying in this category reigns as the undisputed classic: “Nervous as a whore in church.” He’s grinning like a mule eating cockleburs. Jumpy as spit on a hot skillet.
      Calm as a june bug. He makes a pressure cooker look calm. Hotter than a burning stump. He’d worry the warts off a frog.

      Besides, Texans brag when they would rather remain quiet but Californians and Easterners demand it. For instance, you might start off by saying that Texas is as big as five ordinary states. They would be impressed but not visibly moved. You could say that the state is so big it takes three days to drive across, and that might set them to thinking. But if you said the swimming pool on your ranch is as big as the Gulf of Mexico and the three-day drive to cross the state doesn’t include the day it takes to get from your front door to the end of the driveway, well, then they would smile and shake your hand and say they were glad to know you.

      So, how can you deny the truth… NOT……DO NOT….put the Donald in the same class as Texas…..he has to look up to see the bottom of Texas…….

      So, remember this,,,,we do not brag…we tell truth…Texas now is more civilized. We don’t kill large animals with our hands or grab comets by the tail. For heaven’s sake! Today we build tall, modern buildings so that the stars can find their way across the sky at night. And in the evenings, after a hard day’s work in our bustling, prosperous cities, we take what remains of the sunrise out of our pockets and use it for coals in our portable backyard barbecues.

      That said, I remain humbly yours, D13 The Colonel.

  7. gmanfortruth says:

    Leaked audio from an anti-Trump protest group meeting reveals activists with anti-Trump group Indivisible plotting how to best manufacture a hostile environment at a town hall with Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy in Breaux Bridge, Louisiana on Friday.

    Read more:

    The more this happens and the more the truth comes out, the more disingenuous Democrats become.

    • It sounds like these people are not from the area that the town hall is supposed to serve. If that is true, they should start making people prove residency before they allow them in. It is unfair to the local people that their voices are being drowned out by outsiders. They can talk to their own representatives.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        This was a State Senator. However, I do agree that these meetings should be limited to constituents, including those Town Hall’s by House Representatives.

        I can justify this because of the actions of the protesters. Their Rights end where my Rights begin. The protesters attempt to stifle the free speech of others they disagree with. This begs a question. Who’s Rights take priority? The Rights of the protesters or the Rights of the constituents? I would think BOTH, until one interferes with the other. The interfering group should be removed. Let them re-enter for a separate Q & A. This way, both sides get heard.

  8. gmanfortruth says:
  9. gmanfortruth says:

    Rumors are swirling that anti-Trump Democrats will prompt Muslim and immigrant guests to boo and hiss during the President’s speech to Congress tomorrow.

    Lawmakers usually get one guest ticket each for presidential addresses and numerous Democrats are reportedly planning to pack the crowd with immigrants (both legal and illegal) as well as Muslims angered by Trump’s travel ban.

    However, the question of whether the guests will merely represent a symbolic rebuff to Trump’s policies, or if they will engage in actual heckling is being hotly debated.

    According to DC Whispers, “It is rumored some of these guests will boo and hiss the president and that the media is already preparing to highlight those examples in its coverage of the prime-time address.”

    Given the mainstream media’s obsession with hyping Republican Congressman being interrupted by protesters at town halls across the country, the anti-Trump press must be licking their lips at the prospect of immigrants becoming vocal during Trump’s prime time speech.

    Any attempt to interrupt Trump during his presidential address will be abnormal but not totally unprecedented.

    Back in September 2009, South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson shouted “you lie!” during President Obama’s health care speech to Congress. Wilson was subsequently forced to apologize after members of both parties condemned the heckling.

  10. gmanfortruth says:

    Has anyone noticed that the term “State of the Union” has been absent this year? Is Trump’s speech to Congress just that, but not being referred to as the State of the Union?

    • I read that in a new president’s first year, there really isn’t an official SOTU speech. But they normally make a speech to the full congress. That’s tomorrow night.

      • They have always called it the SOTU before and it is a Constitutional requirement.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          The speech is not required. Only a full assessment by POTUS on the State of the Union. He could put it in writing and send it to them.

          • I know that but do not recall them calling a Jan/Feb POTUS speech to Congress anything but the SOTU no matter the length of time in office. Seems line an insult to me.

  11. Just A Citizen says:

    Trump wants over 50 Billion increase in defense spending. Because an annual increase equal to almost the entire annual Russian budget is just what the Doctor ordered. I thought this guy was supposed to be a good businessman?

    • Several ways to look at it. He’s renegotiated with Lockheed to the tune of 100s of billions.
      Has a pledge from Boeing for major cut on the price of Air Force One. Just heard Krauthammer explain that in ’09 defense spending was at 4.something of GDP, now we’re at 3.something of GDP. He ran his campaign saying he was going to beef up the military. I’d say we’re still ahead

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Typical lousy argument by the pro militarization people. That is using GDP.

        Does it cost MORE to defend the country just because the economy grows?

        • gmanfortruth says:

          It would seem that increasing the size and capabilities of our military, using American companies in the U.S. and American workers would be a boon for the economy, at least one that could last a decade or more, if done right. There is plenty of government spending that could be curtailed to pay for it.

      • Depends on where we spend the money… this very moment, the US does not have the physical assets to fight a major war greater than 22 days.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          Then I would say some people should be put in prison for misspending the taxpayer’s money. We should have enough to fight Russia and China by now, until they scream Uncle.

          I noticed the F35 budget estimate of three years ago is almost equal to just the increase requested by Trump.

          P.S. How long does it take to launch a couple of nukes? Less than 22 days I hope. Which of course begs a question which I think you can anticipate.

          • I should have emphasized conventional war. We have a moth balled navy….we should have 9 carrier groups out there and we have one and one on the way. All the fighters are out dated and operating on spare parts. We are still using 60 year old b 52 bombers. The F35 squadron is now reduced to one. We have less than one million in uniform when we should have 2 million and a reserve of 500,000. The B2’s are now mothballed with the exception of 2 squadrons.

            Other than Special Forces units, we no longer have the logistics of moving thousands overseas except by COMMERCIAL shipping. The MAC troop cargo planes are reduced to 6 operating. You get the idea.

            We should have the armed forces to fight two major conventional wars for 180 days until we ramp up.

            • Just saw a piece in “Defense news Weekly,” the hard copy version, where by next summer maybe, female pilots will be able to fly the F-35. Right now smaller framed people cannot fly the plane because if they have to eject there is a strong liklihood the force will break their necks. One of the fixes considered is having TWO styles of ejection seats. Maintainers will LOVE that fix.

              By the way, if you have an interest in the hardware out there that is coming on line and problems with it as well as who is buying from who (get this Viet-nam is buying from Israel!) then it is worth it to bookmark their E-edition link. It’s free and fascinating. The previous was an unsolicited, unpaid endorsement.


            • Sounds like we are in worse shape than at the end of the Clinton era.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              The idea is that if they know we have nukes and will use them, we do not need an army to fight two wars for 180 days.

              Time has proven that when the military is at capacity we use it for things we should not be using it for.

              Eisenhower’s strategy. Use Nukes to deter war………MAD…. allowing us to keep the military expenditures low.

              • JAC…..” The idea is that if they know we have nukes and will use them, we do not need an army to fight two wars for 180 days. ” This is out of the question because no one will use them. In my opinion…..I said, MY opinion… one hs the balls to push the button… one. Not China, not Russia, not the US…….What are you going to do if China suddenly decides they want the Phillipines? Use a nuke? Nope… will not do that.

                “Time has proven that when the military is at capacity we use it for things we should not be using it for.”….This is very , very true. But hardly an epitaph.

                “Eisenhower’s strategy. Use Nukes to deter war………MAD…. allowing us to keep the military expenditures low.”…Ike’s strategy was good………back then.

                1 carrier group…..can carry enough fire power to respond immediately to any spot where our interests are threatened without ground troops. You have five carrier groups on patrol in the Mideast, the Med, the South Pacific, the North Atlantic, and the Panama Canal. Two Carrier groups in refit, and two carrier groups on leave. Each Carrier group is supported by 9 ships each. Three air defense, 2 offensive cruise missile, and 4 anti sub-patrol and routine use…fast moving destroyer types.

                Fourteen ballistic nuclear submarines…9 on station at all times. I supporting each carrier group….the rest stationed off China, Russia, and the US.

                Twelve Armored Divisions. Four on station at all times, four in training, and 4 reserve. Each Armored division is, of course, supported by artillery and air assets.

                US Air Force…….mainland defense only. NOt necessary to have stationed airbases anywhere in the world. Close ’em down. Get rid of B2 bombers and F 35 attack aircraft. Let the Navy handle it with 9 carrier groups……bombers, other than conventional warfare, are obsolete….and so are the generals that like them.

                Finish it off with a land based nuclear UP TO DATE program that can reach Mars.

                Total cost of operation to GDP…….5%….and leave it there…..I do not give a rat’s ass whether we out spend the rest of the world…….

                D13 has spoken.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Colonel, AF at home, hell yes!!!!! The Army should be reduced, as long as we have a strong Navy on the high seas and a strong AF to protect the States, the Army could be reduced to Reserves. The Marines can handle the small stuff. What’s the point of having nukes if they are not a deterent?

              • I would remind you that there were a whole lot of people in Germany during the Cold War. Also in Korea also in Japan. In ’57 you reached the high point with 440,000 in Europe mostly Germany and 240,000 in Korea and Japan. That was Ike’s plan.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              Why carrier groups? And why the heck do we need 9 of them?

              Why not Submarines armed with conventional and nuclear missiles?

              Why not build some islands in strategic locations in the open ocean and then declare it US territory? Loaded with more missiles of course.

              • I don’t think 9 is out of the question. One here, one there, maybe a couple for training, rotations for maintenance and swapping out for fresh troops and supplies.

                How many do you think are necessary?

              • “Why not build some islands in strategic locations in the open ocean and then declare it US territory? Loaded with more missiles of course.”

                So, in deference to military spending, you are ok with the US doing what China is doing? Extending US hegemony…I thought you were against all of this.

          • Problem is you probably want to stop short of launching a couple of nukes.

            I also think it is probably not a good idea to compare other’s budgets to ours. They have “command” budgets and poor pay and benefits for their troops. I used to argue with my lefty friends about going back to the $ 89.00 per month army. They thought that unfair.

  12. gmanfortruth says:

    I just watched some Democrat Representative talk about how great these illegal immigrants are for the economy and that we need them to do jobs that Americans won’t do. So, to this Democrat, the low skilled immigrants are good and wanted by Liberals. OK, but that isn’t what was being handed to the people by Liberals just a little over a decade ago, as stated in this example:

    Let’s look at what the current batch of Republicans dogmatically support:

    Unrestrained legal immigration (increases the supply of low wage labor, decreasing wages for the poor, also costs the populace money for health care, education, police, population increase, etc.). Check.

    Illegal immigration (increases the supply of low wage labor, decreasing wages for the poor, also costs the populace money for health care, education, police, population increase, etc.). Check.

    Foreign Outsourcing (sends middle class knowledge-based jobs and manufacturing jobs abroad, destroying ladders of upward mobility). Check.

    H-1B and L-1 Foreign Work Visas (allows foreigners to enter the country where they work for low wages in knowledge-based jobs, displacing Americans from those jobs and destorying ladders of upward mobility). Check.

    A Large and Growing Trade Deficit. Check.

    Increasing the National Debt and Budget Deficit. Check.

    Tax “cuts” for the very fortunate wealthy that are actualy tax shifts into the future since they appear as increased national debt. Check.

    Opposition to Legal Abortion (encouraging population growth, increasing the cost of land and decreasing the nation’s quality of life). Check.

    So, just why do the Republicans want America to look like an impoverished third world South American country?

    We have been fed the nonsense that Republicans want low wage workers for a longtime, including the last campaign cycle. That example was from 2004. The narrative is beginning to change.

  13. gmanfortruth says:
  14. How can anyone defend Trump now? This is beyond the pale.

    • OMG…….ketchup? What do you expect….it is New York. SIgh…..I mean, damn, this is the city that thinks Mexican Food is Taco Bell…………where is the media when you REALLY need them? Nobody….and I mean NOBODY puts ketchup on ANYTHING? Ok, I can bend a little if some misbegotten soul wants to put ketchup on a sandwich…or fries….but a STEAK?????????????????????????????????

      Not only is that blasphemous……………it is more criminal than Hillary Clinton with a room full of personal computers and a check book from her now defunct trust. Ketchup………geez……..and then a well done steak? That is as bad as a rare bleeding steak. Medium rare, mediu, or medium well, if you must…..Ever seen a steak act like Washington DC? Rare and Bleeding ( extreme left )…..well done or burnt ( extreme right )…..and then Ketchup……I am sure that the Heinz family loves to hear that……

      SHit…..I need a DR Pepper.

      • I have a wife who……..

        Anyway my ketchup story is on fried and scrambled eggs. Got that from Dad who got into it in Europe during the war when his eggs were mostly powdered. Condiments, with the exception of Mustard,which is the greatest anti-oxidant known to man, are to be used sparingly to enhance flavor. Mustard can be eaten alone as a snack or with white bread.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        A properly cooked steak needs nothing but a hungry mouth 🙂

        Ketchup has it’s place on the table, depending on the food. French Fries for example.

        The best thing ever invented for military food is Tobasco sauce.

      • Settle down Col., it is not the end of the world. You will work yourself into a heart attack. For the record, I eat my stake naked.

    • Penalty points for ketchup on steak. Yuk. Ketchup is for fries, meatloaf and sloppy joes…
      1 lb burger, 1/2 can Manwich, make up the difference with ketchup mustard and Open Pit….mmmm sounds like lunch today.

    • Relax. That’s not what it means.


  15. Take that sister!

    • gmanfortruth says:

      CNN and others are grasping for straws. It’s pathetic to watch them grovel like this and embarrasses the whole media profession.

  16. Just A Citizen says:


    1. When have I ever said I was against hegemony? What I am against is accomplishing that via coercion backed by threat of military force or economic black mail. Lead by example. If freedom truly is a universal human desire the rest will follow.

    2. Islands. Just trying to think outside the box relative to the Chinese and N. Korean threat. Submarines are islands. But maybe if we started building an island in response the China they would think twice about more.

    3. China invades Philippines. We once again come around to the key question. WHAT is our role in the world? A strictly defensive position would dictate we do nothing. So are we back to the position that we need to not only be the biggest gorilla but we are going to police the world?

    By the way, if we are going to keep up this global superiority I expect 9 carrier groups is not enough and we need MORE air bases around the world, not less. These bases need to be located and used as the forward outposts, much like the forts along the old immigrant trails.

    And if we are going to be the world’s policeman then we need to start charging the world to keep up force effectiveness.

    Another thing on China’s invasion. They have already invaded parts of SE Asia, Africa, parts of S. America and will soon be in Mexico. So far what have we done? Nothing. Because they were “invited” into those places to replace the US. Why would people want the Chinese over the US?

    4. 5% of GDP. If 2% of GDP is what we ask of others to maintain an adequate NATO fighting force then 2% should work for the US as well. AND, once again WHAT does GDP have to do with the cost of military readiness??

    Summary. Maybe some broader thinking along diplomatic lines and cooperation with others would be more cost effective at containing potential problems like N. Korea, China and Russia.

    We cannot afford a 5% of GDP budget just for the military. Even if that were our true goal. Not with the size of our debt plus unpaid obligations (liabilities) over the next 30 years. So we need to start coming up with ways to maintain our own defense, then to deal with these external issues that does not rely on the costly military buildup which has become the typical response.

    I also said someone should be jailed for misappropriation of funds. It appears that is true. Our military budget has been running at close to 5% for some time. Yet we are depleted and worn out. That means that either the money is misused or the military is being misused. Or both.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      A complete audit of the Pentagon is a good start!

    • JAC……everything depends on what your perspective is…..if we are to be defensive only, then we do not need what I described. If we do not have a commitment to NATO or the UN, then we do not need what I described. If we have no reason to patrol the seas for any reason, then we do not need what I described. I do not see a middle ground anywhere.

      I do not agree with you that diplomacy works. Diplomacy without strength is useless. That is what we have now……diplomacy with China is not working and never will….not without a big stick that is hanging over their head. Now, to your point, it does not have to be mlitary. But you have to be willing to use it and back it up…..what good is diplomacy with out back up? It is like your nuclear weapon theory….unless we have the balls…cast iron ones….to punch one off when everything else fails…..then there is no use.

      My position is going to be different than yours from one major perspective…..if we, the United States, is to be defensive only, then there is no need to be part of NATO nor the United Nations. We should not care who gets invaded for whatever reason. If we are to be defensive only, then we do not have a reason to protect United States business nor individuals abroad….it is a risk they take for being outside our borders. If we are to be defensive only, then we do not care if China closes the shipping routes….we simply protect our own ships as they pass through. If we are to be defensive only, then we do not enter into mutual defense treaties.

      If we are to be defensive only, and someone kicks sandin our face, then we cannot sit back…you send a nuke. BOOM……leave me alone is the message. You cannot threaten unless you are prepared to act.

      If we do this, then you do not need an offensive military force….just a reactive one on our own shores. I personally feel, that there is no in between. The last 8 years has shown us what to expect. Personally, I am tired of having sand kicked in my face but my view of the world is different than most. I would have already sent China’s islands to the bottom knowing that they cannot strike us back. I would have already sent Iran’s NAvy to the bottom again, saying that any retaliatory terrorist attack results in a glass factory of the ME,,,,and then do it.

      Do you, sir, have the reslove to launch a nuke for any reason?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        YES, I do. But it is easy to say without the actual weight on my shoulders. However, I also do not think we have given ourselves good options to using nukes or to using limited nuclear strikes. I am thinking smaller devise set off over some “man made island” or a fleet of ships sent to attack somebody. Or, North Korean Capital and military installations. OK, I am getting carried away.

        You and I agree on one major thing. First you decide what the overall strategy is. Then you gear up for that strategy. Fully and completely. I see three options, not just your two.

        1. Purely defensive. Does include the ability to strike as needed to defend our shipping. And as you said, this may not go well for some countries as they will have to defend themselves.
        2. Offensive: Ability to wage war on many fronts with the goal of destroying whoever we attack. Our military is truly used as an extension of our hegemonic goals, creation of a true Empire. We tell Iran to stop and they don’t stop. We INVADE and TAKE IRAN.
        3. Status Quo: Included protecting the US, US shipping as well as our Allies and friends as we deem them to be such. NATO, UN, etc. etc. continue on and on.

        Frankly, the way we have been executing the Status Quo is to much like the Offensive strategy lately. Which is where I think we agree as well. You cannot be half pregnant. Fish or Cut Bait. S__t or get off the pot. The Jihad movement is beating us by getting us to spend ourselves into a dark hole. We need to reduce the COST of this War on Terrorism.

        This might mean gearing up and ENDING it once and for all. It will get ugly. And most Americans won’t be willing to handle it. So they will destroy our kids futures making themselves fell safer today. You think finding someone with the brass to push the nuke button is hard. Try finding someone willing to push the Total War in the Middle East button.

        Now I want to address what I meant by diplomacy. I do not expect to get much from China using diplomacy. There has and will continue to be some coercive element in diplomacy with other powers. They have to have a reason to negotiate. But coercion does not mean military, it can be economic as we have also agreed to in the past.

        What I was getting at was to stop using threats on the rest of the world. Stop interfering in their local politics. China has expanded its presence by holding out economic incentives. They are abusing those and getting some blow back. But the fact is they displaced the US in some cases because many in the world no longer trust us. It is these countries where we need to really change our approach. Deal with them firmly but FAIRLY. Not to their advantage but to theirs AND ours.

        The more the world is on our side the more isolated and weakened China and Russia become. Eventually it could come to war as they will either have to join the rest of the world or strike out. I am betting they join the rest.

        Thought of the Day, on this subject.

        Our real adversaries are not countries but the leaders of those countries who seek Empire, hegemony or some other “power” status. So in reality nations should wage war against the leadership of other nations. That is the actual people making the decisions.

        But isn’t it funny how those who hold the POWER. Those who RULE have all agreed that direct attack on another nation’s leadership is forbidden. Assassination of your adversary is immoral. But bombing the hell out of the citizens of that despot is “just war”.

  17. gmanfortruth says:

    There is a story beginning to go around about a lawsuit against Obama and the HHS. It seems when Congress said it wouldn’t fund the money for Obamacare to give to the insurance companies, Obama simply took the profits from Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, telling investor who bought stock in those two agencies had their money confiscated by the Treasury Dept.

  18. Just A Citizen says:

    “If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress….Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.” — James Madison (1751-1836), Father of the Constitution for the USA, 4th US President Source: referring to a bill to subsidize cod fisherman introduced in the first year of the new Congress.

    For those who think the attacks on our Constitutional Republic didn’t start until the 1800’s or later. “In the first year of the new Congress”.

  19. Well, well, well, I think we saw PRESIDENT Trump tonight!

  20. Just A Citizen says:

    Ladies of SUFA, care to comment? How about Mathius and Buck?

    “We wear white to unite against any attempts by the Trump Administration to roll back the incredible progress women have made in the last century, and we will continue to support the advancement of all women. We will not go back,” said Rep. Lois Frankel (D-Fla.), who chairs the Democratic Women’s Working Group and is spearheading the move to wear white on Tuesday.

    • gmanfortruth says:
    • Mathius says:


      A) “Wearing white” is exactly as effective as “liking” in Facebook. That is to say, it’s entirely pointless and, quite literally, the least you can do. Ooh.. I want to protest but I can’t be bothered to, you know, go somewhere, spend money, or even pick up a phone, so I’ll wear pick a readily available clothing option to wear that day. That’ll show ’em!

      A.2) That’s like, in college, we had a “wear jeans on day x if you support gay rights.” What an asinine methodology for compelling change. Half the campus wore jeans without any idea what they were “supporting.” And, at the end of the day, no one gave a singly flying f**k – not one – that people wore jeans, even if they did so deliberately in support of gay rights. Who could possibly believe that would bring about change? Oh, your pant-choice has convinced me of the error of my ways!

      B) I’m not entirely sure what “roll back” Frankel is talking about here. She couldn’t be bothered to name a specific policy? Just, you know, generally rolling back of progress. From the last century, no less. So maybe they just want to make sure he doesn’t back a full century and they can keep their right to vote? What, exactly, is the objection here? Lilly Ledbetter? Roe? Oh wait, no, I’ve got it! The objection is deliberately vague to allow people to fill in the blank with their own worst fears.

      C) B, above, is not to say that there aren’t real issues with the Trump Presidency, nor that women, specifically, shouldn’t be concerned. Maybe they should, maybe not, I don’t know. I’ve been paying attention and I have no idea where he stands on practically anything. But if you’re going to try to cobble together a national protest, I would appreciate some clarify as to what – exactly – it is your protesting as well as some general idea of what your protest goal is and how your protest aims to achieve it.

      C.2) It is entirely possible she did clarify and it just wasn’t captured in your quote above. I’m not going to research it, however, because, as the great Morgan Freeman said in Shawshank Redemption: “to tell you the truth, I don’t give a shit.”

      D) I’m wearing white right now. But it’s Wednesday. That must mean I’m super committed to this amorphous cause, right?


      What a lazy bullshit “protest.”

      I wonder why MLK didn’t tell everyone to wear white instead of marching on Washington. I mean, the two are essentially equivalent, apparently.

    • You mean the choir ladies who were missing from the inauguration because they were busy knitting their pink hats for the day after march? You mean Nancy, who’s guest was an illegal alien? Woulda been great if Trump would have had him arrested on the spot on live TV. Or DWS who was sitting next to her deputy replacement? They could have made their point with more class by just staying home.

      They won’t go back? Did I miss where there is an attack on women? Hasn’t Trump appointed enough women in the last 5 weeks for them? Hasn’t he proposed legislation aimed right at women? I don’t even know exactly what they’re whining about.

      • Not the “right” kind of women Anita, not the right kind!

      • My spousal unit wonders where everybody has been. When we did the “hitchin” thing, she knew immediately that I wanted her to independent, make decisions……anytime that I am away doing simple things like fighting wars and patrolling borders and little crap like that, I told her to use her best judgement and make decisions accordingly…nothing should wait. I do not open her mail, read her emails or look at her phone. It is none of my business unless she asks me to look at something. She does likewise with me. She has her own money to spend and I do not look at her bank book. If she wants to work outside the home, she can. If she chooses not to, she can. She is part of every investment decision and is an officer in everything that I participate in and has equal input should she so desire. She is my best friend and my significant other. She tells me when I am wrong and she laughs at my jokes….even the bad ones….and then says, “that was a lousy joke”. She knows exactly how far she can push me….and also knows how to snap me back into reality if a get a little too Pattonish…..She is not happy with the women who are wearing whiteand thinks they hurt the women’s movement and, to quote, ” Makes us look stupid and demnading”.

        She can shoot the wart of a gnat’s ass at three hundred meters although she lacks a little in the knife throwing area….still working with her on that. She carries concealed…and hopes to never have to use it although she is prepared and would have no problem.

        She wants to meet as many of SUFA, if we can. Even the DPM, whom she laughs at when he is on the blog…..she is kinda pissed a Mathius for keeping him locked up but did help me park the sub and sail the Hammer to Laguna Madre….( on the US side ). She thinks there is hope for Buck and is really wanting to go to New York despite the possibility of being contaminated in liberal land. She is quite sure that a trip the gun range, a little hunting, and being outdoors is a sure fire cure for liberal-apathy.

        She often wonders how JAC can survive being so close to Oregon and California but I assured her that he gets out and about in the fresh air and open skies. But she is really worried about those Sufa-ites that live in California….

        So, I wonder where the women are so set back?

        • She thinks there is hope for Buck

          Then she is deeply mistaken. 🙂

          She is quite sure that a trip the gun range, […] is a sure fire cure for liberal-apathy.

          Off topic, but I feel it’s worth mentioning – and I think you’ll appreciate this – I feel that riflery should be a mandated course in elementary school. It doesn’t have to be a year long – a week or two should do – but it should be required of every school-age child.

          I took it at camp (without my parents’ knowledge until afterward!) and even got a sharpshooter award. 🙂

          But the important part isn’t knowing how to hit a target, or how to take a gun apart and put it back together, or any of that. You and I know the single most important thing is teaching respect for the weapon. Never point it at another person unless you plan on using it. Don’t ever “trust” that a weapon is unloaded. Etc. Every kid in America should know exactly how dangerous a gun is and how to be safe in the presence of one. The fact that this isn’t taught is terrifying.

          How do you think my friends in the liberal echo chambers would react to a federal mandate to teach gun safety in schools?

          Even the DPM, whom she laughs at when he is on the blog…..she is kinda pissed a Mathius for keeping him locked up

          My tracker suggests that he’s sailing around near you… You could probably flag him down via semaphore.

          [Mrs. Colonel] did help me park the sub and sail the Hammer to Laguna Madre

          Interesting… very interesting..

          Now I know who else to blame.

          ::adds name to a list::

          • I must ask……your sharpshooter award….round silver medal with crossed rifles from either the NRA or Junior NRA?

            Back in the 50’s ( yes, I said 50’s)……Dad taught us how to use weapons. First a shotgun (Ivers Johnson double barrel.410 guage, for you gun gurus to look up) at age 5, then a Marlin .22 lever action.

            At age 6 through age 10, I attended a boys summer camp at Camp Stewart in Kerville, Texas. We were taught riflery, archery, all the sports, camping and fire training ( how to bank fires and build proper camping fires ) tracking, leather working ( making belts, holsters, wallets, etc), horseback riding, swimming, learning about snakes, insects, fish …..everything that a Texas kid would like.

            But in riflery, I distinctly remember shooting single shot .22’s and the medals that were given out were NRA and junior NRA all the way from Marksman, Pro Marksman, Sharpshooter, and Expert. But all long guns….no pistolas.

            My sister went to a girls camp, Camp Waldemar ( sp). She learned the same things there plus some different girly type things…. but was also taught how to shoot.

            I was great in riflery and not so great in archery….I could hit the target but that was about it…you know, one of those big round hay bale type targets. I never made it past novice archer. Even in Special Forces training, I never could get the hang of the fancy dancy compound bows…but there were guys that did….Over in Vietnam, I did learn the crossbow from the Montgnards….it always amazed me how those scrawny little guys could charge those teak crossbows so quickly….but they were accurate. I managed to get one back in my duffel.

            • Mathius says:

              I don’t remember the medal too well. I was young (10? 11?) and my parents confiscated and threw it out as soon as they found out about it. I remember there were a bunch of different levels.. mine was a gold wreath with two crossed riffles underneath. I worked hard for it, shooting this giant bolt-action (22?). For some reason, I seem to recall a 25 in the middle – but what that was about, I don’t know.

              Looking at Google Images, I can confirm it was not an NRA medal. There was a whole chart, and I couldn’t hope to get them all – there were different ones for prone, sitting, standing, and various distances.

              I seems to recall doing 300m and getting tight clusters. I remember, I couldn’t figure out why people thought it was so hard. Maybe I missed my true calling?

              Archery was the same (sans medals). It was pretty straightforward, and I enjoyed it. Always found it easier to pull the arrow through the hay bail than back out the way it came. I never had a great deal of difficulty hitting my target, but that could just be that I never pushed myself to try a hard enough distance. The thing about archery is that the ammo is reusable. In riflery, when you ran out, you were done. In archery, you went until you were bored or you couldn’t lift your arms. They had a crossbow, but I wasn’t allowed to try it – and that struck me as odd that they’d let me fire a rifle, but not a crossbow. ::shrug::

  21. gmanfortruth says:

    Thoughts on the speech.

    Trump’s message was great. A few surprises came out that I hadn’t heard before, like the Canadians and US working together to help women in business. I like the idea of a merit based immigration system, from what I have read in other countries, it works well. Overall a good speech with some typical responses by the opposing party, which brings me to….

    The announcement of VOICE for victims of illegal criminal violence and the reaction by the Democrats. Apparently their bleeding hearts aren’t what they claim them to be.

    Trumps guests in the gallery. Theater to promote his ideas, but I think much of it was a dig at Democrats, their policies and ideology. Very effective.

    The Democrats couldn’t have made it any more obvious they wanted to scurry out of the joint as quickly as possible. Swamp Rats have a new meaning.

  22. Jim Duncan says:
    • What is your damn point asshole? Here we go again. Someone shut the door on this guy.

      • Nice redirect on the link too. GTFOH

      • Jim Duncan says:

        My point;

        A man is taught from birth to value the state over life, thus not knowing the difference between good and evil.

        The state responds by honors to him and his family for it, but does not include recognition of the other victims(yes he is a victim too, a victim of misdirection of society). The message being projected is more reinforcement of the state over the value of life.

        This is why the USA is sick.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        The pictures are not from Yemen. It’s propaganda for the naive. For example, the boy at the bottom right was also in a picture being used as a victim of Israeli aggression in Palestine. The one with the boy in bandages and all bloody was from Syria. The house with the bullet holes could have easily been taken in Panama years ago. The girl on the Left, which he posted before, also rang a bell as a picture I had seen before. I’ll figure that one out in time, because they will all be used again down the road.

        • Jim Duncan says:

          Nawar al-Awlaki is not the only victim of US violence. Hence the others.

          How hard do you statists need to be smacked before you get it through your thick skulls that the ultimate result of your support for military is unnecessary deaths of women and children, destruction of whole civilizations, and the perpetual enslavement of your own children?

          I know I have a thick skull. I know what a complete wreck I am. So I am not trying to judge you. But I can at least see the difference and wonder why you all can’t or won’t.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Unfortunately you haven’t been around here regularly to even know WTF your talking about when it comes to what people actually think. Maybe you should spend some of your time researching past comments when you weren’t around and maybe you can stop making a fool of yourself.

            • Jim Duncan says:

              I am here now. And it doesn’t seem much has changed since the last time I was here. And it is still happening. Innocent people are still being slaughtered for your bankers and voters.

              And what is foolish about speaking up for what is right? How am I a fool for knowing it is wrong to harm innocent women and children?

              This isn’t about ego. It is about the basic difference of right and wrong. I am calling the USA out for being a sick society that doesn’t value life.

              I think I made my point. I am done.

  23. Mathius says:

    Unblock me! Arrgh!

    • gmanfortruth says:

      You aren’t blocked. I’ll check the spam folder.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      It did go to spam, have no idea why because I don’t have access to that part of the administration office.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I will keep that page open today if you are going to comment, just in case.

      What did you think of the speech? Do tell 🙂

      • I will keep that page open today if you are going to comment, just in case.

        If you’re comfortable with it, I’d be happy to accept unblocking authorization as well. I don’t plan to be active, but I can unblock myself and any alter-egos as needed without bothering you.

        What did you think of the speech? Do tell

        I think I’d rather piss glass than watch it.

        That said, it is my considered opinion that the words coming out of his mouth have no meaning. As with all pathological liars, the only thing that matters is what he does.

        Is there some aspect, specifically, I you would like my opinion on, or were you fishing for just general thoughts?

        • gmanfortruth says:

          General thoughts mainly.

          I’m not sure what is causing the issues with you and spam, nobody else seems to have issues. That’s not on any of us, but on WordPress.

          • Ok, then I repeat my general thoughts. He says whatever he feels like, but it doesn’t necessarily correlate to reality. Ergo, why listen to him?

            He promises miracles, with no cognition behind how to get there. We’re going to have fantastic health care for everyone that’s going to be the very best and also cheaper. What?! That’s great! How.

            We’re going to spend 1T on infrastructure? Great… but, um, how are you planning on getting that through the “Freedom Caucus”? What are you going to spend it on? How does that square with your other statements about shrinking the deficit?

            Then he quotes massively misleading numbers. There are 94mm Americans out of the labor force.. sure. But that includes retirees, stay at home parents, students, and off-the-books employees. That number is meaningless except as a scare tactic.

            And he constantly talks about what a “mess” he inherited from Obama – sure – but then pans Obama for it while neglecting any acknowledgement of the clusterf**k that Obama inherited.

            It’s all just nonsense.

            And in the midst of all this, where is a serious, nuanced, plausible policy that I am supposed to believe he actually supports?

            It’s like Rorschach test where he wants everyone to see what they want to see, but where there is no actual meaning.

            So why bother?

            • gmanfortruth says:

              We’re going to have fantastic health care for everyone that’s going to be the very best and also cheaper. What?! That’s great! How.

              After the Democrats, all by themselves failed miserably, Just about anything , other than the ACA’ will likely work, maybe even “get government out of the way”.

              That’s a lot for someone who didn’t watch. 🙂

              • I honestly think he believed Ryan and Turkey neck that they had something to “roll out”.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                The ACA isn’t anything more than a wealth redistribution scheme. The young and healthy didn’t play, scheme has failed.. The Liberal’s will never learn that taking money from X to provide for Y will never work in this country. Even the Millenial’s have rejected it.

    • Hmmmm….me thinks that DPM is behind this blocking thing.

      By the way, sorry that I coud not get on that blog for your amusement….everything went somewhere and never got posted. I even change the moniker but all my posts never made it…..I wonder if it was something that I said……I was very cordial and even nice. I even managed to tyoe in complete sentences and used punctuation in a correct and precise manner.

      • Ha!

        I noticed that, for a day or two, I was in the dog house over there. I don’t particularly care about “likes” or “upvotes,” but my comments usually garner a few. However, nothing I said or a few days seemed to garner any. I guess they were mad at me for trying to puncture their bubble?

  24. gmanfortruth says:
  25. I would not be a true TEXAN if I did not post the following:

    ” Nations, as well as individuals, are amenable for their acts to the public opinion of mankind. A statement of a part of our grievances is therefore submitted to an impartial world, in justification of the hazardous but unavoidable step now taken, of severing our political connection with the Mexican people, and assuming an independent attitude among the nations of the earth.

    The Mexican government, by its colonization laws, invited and induced the Anglo-American population of Texas to colonize its wilderness under the pledged faith of a written constitution, that they should continue to enjoy that constitutional liberty and republican government to which they had been habituated in the land of their birth, the United States of America.

    In this expectation they have been cruelly disappointed, inasmuch as the Mexican nation has acquiesced in the late changes made in the government by General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, who having overturned the constitution of his country, now offers us the cruel alternative, either to abandon our homes, acquired by so many privations, or submit to the most intolerable of all tyranny, the combined despotism of the sword and the priesthood.

    It has sacrificed our welfare to the state of Coahuila, by which our interests have been continually depressed through a jealous and partial course of legislation, carried on at a far distant seat of government, by a hostile majority, in an unknown tongue, and this too, notwithstanding we have petitioned in the humblest terms for the establishment of a separate state government, and have, in accordance with the provisions of the national constitution, presented to the general Congress a republican constitution, which was, without just cause, contemptuously rejected.

    It incarcerated in a dungeon, for a long time, one of our citizens, for no other cause but a zealous endeavor to procure the acceptance of our constitution, and the establishment of a state government.

    It has failed and refused to secure, on a firm basis, the right of trial by jury, that palladium of civil liberty, and only safe guarantee for the life, liberty, and property of the citizen.

    It has failed to establish any public system of education, although possessed of almost boundless resources, (the public domain,) and although it is an axiom in political science, that unless a people are educated and enlightened, it is idle to expect the continuance of civil liberty, or the capacity for self government.

    It has suffered the military commandants, stationed among us, to exercise arbitrary acts of oppression and tyrrany, thus trampling upon the most sacred rights of the citizens, and rendering the military superior to the civil power.

    It has dissolved, by force of arms, the state Congress of Coahuila and Texas, and obliged our representatives to fly for their lives from the seat of government, thus depriving us of the fundamental political right of representation.

    It has demanded the surrender of a number of our citizens, and ordered military detachments to seize and carry them into the Interior for trial, in contempt of the civil authorities, and in defiance of the laws and the constitution.

    It has made piratical attacks upon our commerce, by commissioning foreign desperadoes, and authorizing them to seize our vessels, and convey the property of our citizens to far distant ports for confiscation.

    It denies us the right of worshipping the Almighty according to the dictates of our own conscience, by the support of a national religion, calculated to promote the temporal interest of its human functionaries, rather than the glory of the true and living God.

    It has demanded us to deliver up our arms, which are essential to our defence, the rightful property of freemen, and formidable only to tyrannical governments.

    It has invaded our country both by sea and by land, with intent to lay waste our territory, and drive us from our homes; and has now a large mercenary army advancing, to carry on against us a war of extermination.

    It has, through its emissaries, incited the merciless savage, with the tomahawk and scalping knife, to massacre the inhabitants of our defenseless frontiers.

    It hath been, during the whole time of our connection with it, the contemptible sport and victim of successive military revolutions, and hath continually exhibited every characteristic of a weak, corrupt, and tyrranical government.

    These, and other grievances, were patiently borne by the people of Texas, untill they reached that point at which forbearance ceases to be a virtue. We then took up arms in defence of the national constitution. We appealed to our Mexican brethren for assistance. Our appeal has been made in vain. Though months have elapsed, no sympathetic response has yet been heard from the Interior. We are, therefore, forced to the melancholy conclusion, that the Mexican people have acquiesced in the destruction of their liberty, and the substitution therfor of a military government; that they are unfit to be free, and incapable of self government.

    The necessity of self-preservation, therefore, now decrees our eternal political separation.

    We, therefore, the delegates with plenary powers of the people of Texas, in solemn convention assembled, appealing to a candid world for the necessities of our condition, do hereby resolve and declare, that our political connection with the Mexican nation has forever ended, and that the people of Texas do now constitute a free, Sovereign, and independent republic, and are fully invested with all the rights and attributes which properly belong to independent nations; and, conscious of the rectitude of our intentions, we fearlessly and confidently commit the issue to the decision of the Supreme arbiter of the destinies of nations.”


  26. Just A Citizen says:

    Ever wonder why when a Progressive politician talks it sounds like they are promising everything to everyone, even when those things contradict? I tried to point this out to “Progressives” and “Liberals” when Mr. Obama spoke. Especially during his first campaign.

    Well the answer is because that is their supposed political belief system. It is a massive contradiction and includes everything plus the kitchen sink.

    The funniest part of this is they had to get a bunch of academics together to figure out what it was they stood for. Despite having claimed themselves as Progressives for many years before that.

    • Ever wonder why when a Progressive politician talks it sounds like they are promising everything to everyone, even when those things contradict?

      I have noticed this.

      Have you noticed it about Trump at all?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Check your memory banks please. What did I say about Trump when Anita first asked my opinion of the man?

        • Mathius says:

          No idea. The only thing keeping me vertical right now is a Red Bull IV drip.

          Can you point me in the right direction, or recap it for me? I’d be much obliged.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            I said that Trump was “just another Progressive Republican”.

            I recall Anita and SK didn’t appreciate it then, and I am sure will not now.

            • Mathius says:

              I’m not sure I agree.

              I think he’s a nihilist.

              But, please, elaborate on your view of him as a “progressive Republican.” What makes him “progressive”? What makes him a “Republican”?*

              * Other than that he ran as one. Similarly, Bernie ran as a Democrat, but he’s not really a Democrat. He, like Trump, is an Independent who simply hijacked an established national party to utilize its voter base and resources.

              • Just A Citizen says:


                His party affiliation makes him a Republican.

                The Progressive part comes from his willingness to Use Govt. to accomplish his goals. Forcing changes in trade agreements, federal agencies, immigration policy, etc.
                But especially his views on Social Security, the Safety Net, and now possibly Daycare for working mom’s. And then there is his promise to cover everyone with insurance. He stated several times that proving Medicaid or Medicare for all the poor people sounded good to him.

                Progressives do not have any real ideology other than the notion of pragmatism and accepted use of Govt. to get what they want. As one Liberal said, Liberals give out money to get what they want, Progressives use the Govt. to get what they want.

                Republicans from the NE USA tend to be Progressive or more “Liberal”. They are especially not Conservatives as described by Conservatives like Goldwater or this modern bunch.

                Trump is a mix of many things. Just as many Progressives are a mix of many things. As the mixed up and contradictory ideology I listed earlier today shows.

                SK probably has it right. Trump is a close comparison to Teddy R., the first Progressive President.

            • Progressive in the sense of TR?

              If so, I will live with it.

      • I did not watch the speech because I was on the road and I did not isten to it while driving. I actually wanted to get my information today from SUFA, the pundits, and other forms of media and now go back and listen to it to see how everyone’s opinion stacks up. So, I have Anita’s, JAC’s, G man’s, Dale’s, Mathius…….do not have Buck nor DPM as yet. I have read articles from Daily KOS, Huffpo, Breibart, Fox, CNN, MSNBC,,,,,,,,Now, will see how they interpret it.

        Interesting how the numbers are stacking up……everyone has their own numbers and facts and no two are alike. What I love the most is listening to the different economists…..they are all over the place as well…..and no one knows what will happen and what the deficits and debt is going to do until it is done. You cannot, under any circumstance, predict what is going to happen because cause and effect are not even in place yet…….listening to these “book learned” idiots is enough for me to know that they do not know shit from shinola.

        • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

          He’s just another statist. He is simply trying to change the big government state which controls every aspect of your life to a slightly different big government state which controls every aspect of your life.

          Meet the new boss.
          Same as the old boss.

        • Just a thought, as in those old cavalry movies of my youth when talking about the “hostiles”,

          “Things are waaaay too quiet out there, Lieutenant!”

          • Mathius says:

            In the “old cavalry” shows of my youth, hilarity would usually ensue because the only show I watched like that was F*Troop.

        • Dale A Albrecht says:

          There’d been no comment from me…..I crashed and all I got later was second hand and heresay, so inadmissable in court of SUFA.

    • In the very first sentence it says Trump “APPEARS”. That is the key word it sets the entire tone and yes, they planned it.

      Now, being an old fart, the Bay of Pigs invasion was done on Kennedy’s watch but planned on Eisenhowers. This happened while I was a High School freshman.To this day Kennedy apologists blame Eisenhower and Eisenhower supporters say Kennedy did not provide promised air cover.

      So, let’s agree they both own part of it and neither is willing to accept that responsibility.

      Having said all that, in the scheme of things, putting boots on the ground in hostile country is always a dangerous venture (remember Black Hawk Down?) In my humble opinion, it was just PDL (pure dumb luck) that they knocked off Osama without casualties. Historically, the failed Son-tay raid in Viet-nam was a huge planning op with hundreds involved yet a thorough a failure, we walked away with no casualties. Again good planning but mostly PDL.

      • Mathius says:

        I agree PDL (I like that acronym) is (probably) largely to blame.

        And I will also stipulate the attack (may have been) was planned on Obama’s watch.

        BUT at the end of the day, he – TRUMP – gave the go ahead.

        PDL or not, the buck should stop at his desk. Did he blame his generals and Obama? Maybe. But it sure does look like he’s trying to weasel out of responsibility. I’ll reserve judgement, but would like this example noted for future reference.

        There will be more failures because, of course there will be. He’s the President and the world doesn’t give anyone an unbroken string of unmitigated successes. So we’ll see if he owns the next one or passes the buck.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          The issue has been overblown by the Liberal media, as is the norm. Now they are attacking both Trump and the widow. It was a military mission, period. It would not have occurred if not for all the previous Radical Islamist actions that have killed thousands. Let’s put the blame where it belongs…….on a very violent cult like offshoot of a religious Theocracy.

          • Let’s not go there…….that might be a cause….but it is not the reason.

          • Mathius says:

            The issue has been overblown by the Liberal media, as is the norm

            Because conservatives never blow anything out of proportion *cough* Benghazi, Solyndra, IRS “scandal,” F&F, birth certificates, emails *cough*

    • Tough to say, Mathius…..this would not have been a mission that Trump would have ordered….meaning from the beginning. I have been on two of these type of raids before and the planning takes months….not to mention the rehearsals.

      So, my initial thought, knowing the time involved, was that this was an operation already planned and rehearsals already run. They would be just waiting on the moon phase. Trump, as the new POTUS, would have to make a decision. If he trusted the generals, then all he would do is authorize the mission…IF the mission took Presidential authorization. Most missions, once authorized do not need the micro management of the POTUS……however, if they came to him and told him of the mission and he trusted the prior planning of the generals, he would have said “go”. I can guarantee you that this is not a Trump planned mission. Not enough time.

      What bothers me more…..the intel got out, according to this article. That leaves only two choices….very faulty security or it was intentionally leaked. Seeing as how this raid was apparently to be POTUS authorized when ready….my guess it was intentionally leaked. So, let me profer that it is not above politics to have a mission leaked to make someone look bad and I actually feel that it could have been that. The only other answer is a mole in the organization. If they were ambushed…that is the only way it could happen.

      A mission goes bad for only two reasons……lack of security and bad luck. However, if they were ambushed, it would not be bad luck.

      So, as a POTUS, IF….and that is a big IF…..the mission go ahead rested upon his shoulders to say yes or no…..then he should have waited. BUT……If the mission had been previously authorized and the generals said it was good……now is the time…..then he pulls the trigger.

      The other thing that I do not understand is micro management of combat missions….that is NOT a POTUS responsiblity.

      • So Colonel. Do you think the Son Tay raid “got out” to the NVA which was why there was nobody home when they got to those camps?

        Full disclosure, I do think there were honest to God traitors out there at State and in the Pentagon at the time. Certainly anything shared with the House or Senate got out.

        • Ahhhhhh….Operation Ivory Coast……..I did not get to make the raid…I did volunteer for it but because I was already involved in Project Omega, I was denied..As to Son Tay….I actually think that the Son Tay raid went off as expected. I have read all of the AAR’s and there is nothing in there to suspect that it was a tip off….the NVA were well known for moving prisoners around and never leaving them in the same place except up in Hanoi.

          The other reason that I think the raid went well was the number of dead at the prison including the Russian soldiers. There was no ambush…..just empty cells. There were an inordinate number of enemy soldiers killed. The Russians were killed at short distance away when one of the choppers mistook it. They actually landed in an old school yard that was actually a barracks for Russian and Chinese soldiers. Over 100 hundred of the Russians and Chinese were killed. No American casualties.

          • Thank you. When you say something like that, it brings me back to reality. The “source” makes a difference. If it were a set-up I always had a problem with us getting away without casualties. That was what made me question my own instincts.

            For years I had this lingering “itch” over the JFK assassination until I finally made it to Dallas a few years back. Looking out that window, I realized what an easy shot it was with the caveat you had to be a stone cold killer.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Mathius, D13, SK, Gman and those interested in the Yemen raid.

      I saw this weeks ago and am surprised the information contained in the interview seems to be lacking on both sides of the media. Now, I am not sure she is telling the truth and I wouldn’t trust her farther than I could throw her, and my back is aching right now. But that does not mean she is lying either.

      But more importantly, she reveals a broader strategy being pushed for US involvement in Yemen, and Mr. O did not crush the idea, he simply delayed the first steps until he was certain of less risk. This is consistent with his aversion to risk, relative to use of troops.

  27. Just A Citizen says:

    Sometimes they expose just how stupid they are. Chuck Schumer telling the media that the Democrats are done with Trump. How he gave Mr. Trump a chance but now Trump has moved to far to the “right”. In this he makes the following statement, in HPo article:

    “Schumer said it reminded him not so much of the tea party surge in 2010, or the Democratic wave of 2006, but the anti-war movement when Eugene McCarthy knocked President Lyndon Baines Johnson from office.

    “I cut my eyeteeth in the Eugene McCarthy campaign of 1968,” Schumer said. “A ragtag group of grassroots activists, students and other assorted misfits toppled the most powerful man in the world, Lyndon Baines Johnson.””

    He seems to have forgotten that this led to NIXON winning…. TWICE.

    • I wonder if after the dirty work was done by Gene McCarthy, if he then abandoned him for Bobby Kennedy. Inquiring minds want to know. I always considered Kennedy to be about as “establishment” as one could get yet chameleon like in picking his issues. An architect of our involvement in Viet-Nam who never acknowledged that there was even a “change of heart” when he changed sides.

  28. Just A Citizen says:

    Thought of the morning.

    I remember back to about a year ago when I was somewhat shocked by some SUFA members attack on Marco Rubio’s immigration positions. The accusations of him being an Establishment hack, his “Amnesty” view points, etc. etc. The contrast between him and the more desirable Mr. Trump were stark, as Mr. Trump would expel them all, no amnesty.

    Now that Mr. Trump seems to have adopted the Rubio position I am wondering how all those people who expected deportation of illegals feel!

    • Mathius says:

      As before, I have no idea what position he has or has not adopted.

      He opens his mouth and words come out, but they are often contradicted in the next breath. And action follows with no correlation.

      Has he signed up for “amnesty” or is that just what he felt like saying in that moment? And, if he has signed up, will he change his mind in the face of opposition? And how does he plan to get it through a congress which is belligerently hostile to the idea?

      So, in conclusion: “meh.”

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I’m not totally convinced Trump has adopted the Rubio stance just yet. He is taking things by steps, which is necessary. First priority would be those who have been convicted of crimes. They go, all of them, no exceptions.

      I don’t think amnesty is a good idea, at the same time, I don’t think that deporting all illegals is necessary, but that don’t mean amnesty. The kid issue is all together another boondoggle. How do we deal with unaccompanied kids now here living with legal residents? There are some moral issues here that require a lot of thought.

      The anchor baby issue needs to be challenged in court and resolved once and for all. For example, if a pregnant American is visiting Canada and gives birth to a preemy, that child should not be Canadian citizen, the child is the citizen of it’s birth mother. The whole Birther issue was wrong on it’s face, but was using the “anchor baby” mantra to support it. Even if Obama was born in Kenya, his mother was a US citizen, end of discussion. I think the issue is used to fit the narrative, devoid of common sense.

    • I think this is very “up in the air’. If I were a betting man, I’d bet after we get rid of the criminals and build the wall, there will be some type of normalization of regular illegals WITH NO CITIZENSHIP. Then, the dreamers, depending on age on arrival will probably be offered a path to citizenship.

      • I can tell you what is happening right now…..enforcement. We are almost getting bored here now…the crossing have dropped off so far that it is almost not on the radar. There is no more catch and release. They are finger printed and taken to the border. If caught again, they simply go to tent city. All the crossings have been re-directed to Arizona and California.

    • Jim Duncan says:

      Get rid of national borders.

      Open it wide up.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        After all, it’s working so well in Sweden, Germany France etc. 🙄

        • Jim Duncan says:

          I am not talking about the injection of radicals for political leverage.

          I am talking about no forced borders anywhere so regular people can travel freely and associate with whomever they choose. Sure, there will be adjustments, but the overall end result will be better balanced, …and, of course, free.

          There are SO many examples of positive effects of integration and free travel.

          • Yes, and unfortunately it all ended on 9/11/01. And, dammit, that’s exactly what they wanted.

            • Jim Duncan says:

              People still immigrate and integrate without issue. It is happening all over the place. Your USA has recently taken in a lot of Muslims from elsewhere.

              As best as I can tell, they seem to be doing well. I understand there are some issues with bigotry though.

      • Mathius says:

        Get rid of national borders.

        Open it wide up.

        That the first sensible thing you’ve said!

        • I will make a deal ith you Mathius……I will agree to open borders if it works BOTH ways…I DO NOT agree that the United States set the example. If all the countries of the world will agree to open borders with no restrictions, all at the same time…I will get on board.

        • Jim Duncan says:

          I have been saying that a lot in the last few years. Here and elsewhere.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          About as sensible as eating glass.

          • Jim Duncan says:

            What did the USA do when the border wasn’t enforced?

            • Just A Citizen says:

              The border has always been enforced. But back in the day, migrations across the border was pretty minimal.

              The Comanche, Apache, Kiowa, Navaho and Shoshone would kill those that crossed north. And some who tried to cross south.

              Are you trying to compare a nation of less than 100 million to one of over 300 million people? A nation with wide open spaces and free running rivers with one inundated with overpopulated cities? A nation where the poor could simply put down roots and grow their own food, if they could defend their home to the one now where everyone is dependent upon Govt. services and all the land is now owned, by somebody?

              • Jim Duncan says:

                It has been very relaxed until recent decades. I don’t see why it’s such a bad idea to open it up. It may turn out to be a great thing.

  29. Mathius says:
    • gmanfortruth says:

      There is a lot of hatred towards Jews out there, I have read and heard plenty of it. I reject their position, but this kind of stuff shouldn’t be a surprise in the US. I have read that the calls may be coming from overseas, using technology discussed in the Buzzfeed article. I expect things to get worse. I also reject any violence towards any group of people, race, religious or otherwise.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Just a thought on the bomb threats. Is someone testing response times? Or making false threats to slow them down for the future?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      “We need the people at the highest level to stand up and denounce this,” Mazo said. “I think people really believe that they are doing what some of our leaders want them to do because there is so much hateful rhetoric out there that people feel like that this is simply just following up on the message that they heard through the campaign … (Leaders) need to stand up and let people know that we don’t tolerate this.”

      Really? OK Mr. Mazo. Please provide definitive evidence of anyone in the campaigns that alluded to or called for attacks on Jewish people. Or on Muslims or anyone else. Please. Give it a whole hearted try.

  30. Just A Citizen says:
  31. Jim Duncan says:

    1, not 5


  32. Jim Duncan says:

  33. Just A Citizen says:

    OK, I have about had it with our Govt. and the left wing media. Add the DNC to that list.

    Someone please explain to me how 10 “Govt. Officials” are telling the Press that the raid in Yemen produced “No actionable” nor “any valuable” information?

    Who the hell are these 10 people and why are they saying anything. Why are they not in jail tonight, since they leaked this information earlier today?

    The stupidity of the Press to even print the stuff is not causing me heartburn. Although some never consider that the intelligence and military could be using them in a disinformation campaign.

    I do have heartburn over the LEFT WING MEDIA who seem to want to denigrate Trump so badly they will cast aspersions on the Military and the poor guy who died. They would just love to get the kids parents both ranting against Trump. Because of course destroying Trump is far more important than supporting our operations against ISIS and/or Al Qaeda.

  34. Just A Citizen says:

    More anger from me. Who the hell do these generals think they are? And how come we have over 100 retired generals?

    Lets sum up their claims. All the money we poured into those places hasn’t stopped the Militant Muslims from recruiting or expanding. The very people charged with ending the Jihadi movement have FAILED. And now they want us to believe that we MUST spend more to keep them happy or they will join ISIS or some other militant radical group.

    Well generals, that is tantamount to Blackmail. Is that your real view? That the US should allow itself to be blackmailed into giving billions of our hard earned money to people so they want get mad at us? Oh, maybe you generals can explain why all the leadership in these groups come from upper middle class and upper class families. Why the recruits are not all from impoverished areas.

    • You have to understand the mentality of Washington Generals. The generals right now are mostly Obama appointees……he fired the smart generals.

  35. Just A Citizen says:

    What do you suppose the response would look like to a similar call up in the USA?? How many of our Anarchist friends would volunteer for training?

    • Jim Duncan says:

      Americans have already formed militias all over the country. Many of them function as to protect the state, thus, as an anarchist, I will not ally with them unless absolutely necessary.

      If the US was invaded, if there were no regular army to protect, the invaders would have hell to pay, probably slaughtered. Americanism is a militant gun-nut culture.

      I sometimes laugh to myself about the fear mongering idea of a terrorist force invading. It would be a bloodbath.

  36. I love photoshop.


    • Perfect musical accompaniment:

    • Trump has signaled twice now that he is open to compromise on immigration. He said in the press conf. that he was uncomfortable about deporting children. Again in the SOTU he mentioned a merit based immigration system and with some room to compromise. He does emphasize that he will enforce the law. Congress has the ability to change the law as long as Trump agrees to it. Now we know the Repubs are in total disarray as is normal. The Dems are united but out of power. If I were a Dem, I would do the following:

      I would immediately write a reformed immigration bill that is both pragmatic and fair. It would tighten the borders, put teeth in visa overstays, and kick out the crooks and gang bangers. Visa overstays would have to go. Illegals here for more than 2 years could stay if they have clean records have not tapped welfare but they have to stay clean, stay off welfare, and learn English. They would be given a temporary green card. After 5-7 years, it would be converted to a permanent green card but citizenship would not happen. The Dreamers could stay if they also have clean records, complete high school, or serve a hitch in the service. A HS diploma or honorable discharge would give them a 2 year path to citizenship. Otherwise it would be 5-7 years with a green card before they could apply for citizenship. The ability to speak English is a given. I would then look to set a workable guest worker program for farm and other labor with quotas that would fill the needs but leave room for American workers. I would create a mix of merit based and economic/refugee based immigration for the future.

      I would take this proposal and beat the Repubs to Trump with it and try to win his approval. Trump will negotiate for some better terms. He may push to end anchor babies and severely curtail the H1B program. He will also insist on securing the border and whatever else is required to stop the illegal inflow. He will want future immigration based on merit which is fine. Quotas would be set such that there would not be an over abundance of labor that would impact American workers. Some of the required funds could come from the welfare rolls as Americans go back to work.

      It would be a political coup for the Dems. Instead of fighting with Trump, they would become an ally and make the Congressional Repubs look like disorganized buffoons. However, I am absolutely certain the Dems will not cease the opportunity as this would make Trump successful.

  37. Hmmmmmm….ok, media, I have a suggestion………..Trump and 7 of his cabinet are working free… salary, no medical benefits……nothing. If you work free….no salary, no benefits,,,,,,nothing….you might become credible.

  38. The untold story of the Obama Administration’s widely reported, $335 million discrimination settlement with Countrywide Financial Corporation is that, under a secret Justice Department program, a chunk of the money won’t go to the “victims” but rather leftist groups not connected to the lawsuit.

    The Department of Justice (DOJ) will determine which “qualified organizations” get leftover settlement cash and Democrat-tied groups like the scandal-plagued Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) and the open-borders National Council of La Raza (NCLR) stand to get large sums based on the hastily arranged deal which got court approval in just a few days.

    Judicial Watch has investigated this controversial arrangement and in 2010 sued the DOJ to obtain information about the policy directing big portions of cash settlements from its civil rights lawsuits to organizations not officially connected to the cases. In response to JW’s lawsuit, the DOJ was forced to acknowledge that it has no official guidelines regarding “qualified organizations” that get leftover settlement funds and that it doesn’t monitor how the money is used.

    The NCLR also stands to get money under the Countrywide settlement because the influential Mexican La Raza group is tight with the president and offers Latinos “housing counseling” that’s previously been funded by Uncle Sam. A JW probe uncovered documents in June that reveal federal funding for the group has skyrocketed since one of its top officials— Cecilia Muñoz—got a job in the Obama White House. Keeping with the mutual praise, the NCLR quickly issued a press release commending the administration for holding Countrywide “accountable for targeting communities of color.”

    Did anyone know this? I just found out…….perhaps these are the things that will come out in a Trump administration. Someone needs to go to jail…..perhaps Holder?

    • This has been par for the course for Obama. They threatened to sue many of the banks and other entities in the financial meltdown as well as BP for the Gulf spill. Then settled for a large cash award which did not go to the general fund. Thus it could be used w/o Congressional approval. The many mortgage relief programs advertised a some of these funds. It was all used to buy votes and influence as in look see how Uncle Sam helped you. I think this practice needs to stop. The funds need to go to the general fund where Congress can direct the expenditures.

  39. Mathius, I went back and did some investigation on the raid in Yemen. Some of it is still classified but I can tell you that the planning for this raid started approximately 9 months ago….I was not allowed to see or access the information that was obtained as I have no need to know. Hope this answers some questions.

  40. Mathius……are you hedge fund guys falling for the snap chat IPO?

    • I can’t talk about what my fund itself is doing – though Snap Chat would generally be considered outside of our investment strategy.

      That said, I, personally, wouldn’t touch it with a pole (except maybe to take the IPO bounce and immediately dump).

      Personally, I’m holding some long-dated deep-ootm spy puts. I’m betting and Trump wrecking something and I, for one, plan to clean up when he does. If he doesn’t, well, that’s cool too because my firm will do well and I’ll benefit from that instead. Win-win.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        That sounds like what the Big Banks did with housing derivatives. Your betting against the house while the house sells everyone else their products.

        Good strategy, but I had to note the similarity. And yes, I know it is not exactly the same.

        The market is going to have a real come upance some day soon. GDP came in awfully low this month. It won’t have anything to do with Trump.

      • I knew you could not talk about your fund but the generalities was what I was looking for…..everyone is hyper about snap chat and I am staying as far away as I can……since I am not a day trading person………..anyone going up against Facebook is insane right now.

      • I think you will lose your Trump bet…..but, as you said, win-win. However, I do not dwell in the hedge fund market… matters not to me what the stock market does….I am in it for yields. When the market went down 50%, I did not lose a single dime in investment income….just a paper loss that was back within 6 months. I am pretty conservative because I do not need to take chances.

        If I want to take chances, I go to the dice tables in vegas….where I am headed this saturday for a few days…..Bowling in the National Amateur tournament with a few side trips to the tables accordingly.

        But will check infrom time to time to make sure do not need to send raptors anywhere.

        By the way, sir…..tried semaphor but DPM had some rather interesting responses with pennants never before seen…..but not the problem…he knows that the Hammer is outfitted with the new GPS/scramble communication device.

        You are toast. He really likes Mrs Colonel.

  41. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Just in case anyone is interested…..the tornados last night that came through SC and NC went west and north of us here on the coast by 150 miles. Basically west of Raleigh angling northeast…..its a fairly common path. We just had a windy day and evening with heavy rain after midnight.

  42. gmanfortruth says:

    The Liberal media are tripping over their tongues trying to make something out of nothing concerning Sessions and the Russian Ambassador.

    The media has lost all credibility. It’s impossible to know what to believe.

    The Swamp Donkeys in DC have shot their credibility to hell as well. Wearing white in surrender at the Trump speech was their smartest moment in years.

    Leaked intelligence. Problem? Yes. But it can be used against those who are leaking it and those who are getting it. Expect it.

    The Russian election nonsense is made up of whole cloth and it is also being used in a similar fashion in France and Germany, to name a few. With that said, it will continue to be brought up.

  43. gmanfortruth says:

    Racist graffiti featuring a swastika alongside the words “hail the KKK” that was blamed on Trump and his supporters by Sarah Silverman and ‘Black Lives Matter’ leader Shaun King turned out to be the work of a non-white special needs student.

    King, who works for the New York Daily News as their “senior justice writer,” tweeted out the images on Monday, commenting, “Lakeville South High School in Lakeville, Minnesota. I see these every day all day now.”

    The images showed a backwards swastika (perhaps King should have seen this as a red flag), alongside the words “fuck niggers” and “hail the Klu Klux Klan (another mistake given that the name of the group is the Ku Klux Klan).

    Just hours later, comedian Sarah Silverman amplified the issue to her 10 million followers, tweeting, “Make no mistake this is what they mean by make America great again,” highlighting the images shared by King’s tweet in her post.

    The obvious implication was that the environment Trump has created and his supporters were responsible for the vulgar graffiti.

    However, the very next day it emerged that the culprit behind the graffiti was not a racist white Trump supporter, but a non-white special needs student.

    “Officials with Lakeville South High School, with the permission from the student’s parent, identified the student responsible as non-Caucasian and having significant special education needs,” reports CBS Minnesota.

    “While this does not excuse the student’s actions, the district believes it will help the community and others put this incident into perspective,” school officials said in a statement.

    Neither Silverman or King have deleted their original bogus tweets about the incident.

    This is just the latest of a number of hate crimes that the left has blamed on Trump supporters but which have turned out to be completely fake. In some cases, such incidents were staged by leftists in an attempt to frame Trump supporters.

    Meanwhile, Trump supporters continue to be the victims of actual hate crimes which the media has barely reported on.

    THe images and Tweets can be seen here:

  44. gmanfortruth says:


    n. the Federal crime of advocacy of insurrection against the government or support for an enemy of the nation during time of war, by speeches, publications and organization. Sedition usually involves actually conspiring to disrupt the legal operation of the government and beyond expression of an opinion or protesting government policy. Sedition is a lesser crime than “treason,” which requires actual betrayal of the government or “espionage.” Espionage involves spying on the government, trading state secrets (particularly military) to another country (even a friendly nation), or sabotaging governmental facilities, equipment, or suppliers of the government like an aircraft factory. During U. S. participation in World War II (1941-1945) several leaders of the German-American Bund, a pro-Nazi organization, were tried and convicted of sedition for actively interfering with the war effort. Since freedom of speech, press and assembly are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, sedition charges are rare, because treason and espionage charges can be made for overt acts against the nation’s security.

    I expect this word to become used more frequently in the coming months.

  45. Just A Citizen says:

    Question of the morning.

    Will the Democrats call for sanctions against France for what is obviously and attempt to manipulate elections and impair freedom of speech?

    Not holding my breath!

  46. Just A Citizen says:

    (Some say that statistics are a precise and logical method for stating a half truth, inaccurately).

  47. gmanfortruth says:

    Going to put together a new article and post it today. 🙂

  48. Just A Citizen says:

    “While Gramsci stresses the significance of ideology in power structures, Marxist-feminist writers such as Michele Barrett stress the role of ideologies in extolling the virtues of family life. The classic argument to illustrate this point of view is the use of women as a ‘reserve army of labour’. In wartime it is accepted that women perform masculine tasks, while after the war the roles are easily reversed. Therefore, according to Barrett, the destruction of capitalist economic relations is necessary but not sufficient for the liberation of women.”

    SUFA………read that last sentence one more time. Things make more sense now?

    • Jim Duncan says:

      Economics should not be based on girl power. It needs to be a free market that accommodates everyone, including women.

      Trying to control economic systems produces nothing but problems, hence the state of the US and global economy.

    • I don’t even know what that means, but sounds like bs. 😉

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Barrett is saying that not only must Capitalism be destroyed to truly liberate women, but our Culture must also be destroyed. Because it is the “power” of culture that keeps them oppressed. Not just the Capitalist economic system.

        Now put that statement in context of what NOW has done over the years and how the “Women’s Liberation” has been integrally tied to the Democratic Parties desire to undermine so many cultural norms. Women will only be free when the culture of family first is destroyed.

        • Jim Duncan says:

          Family is very important. It is of the UTMOST importance to raise children properly, to exhibit lots of patience and TLC.

          Please don’t get me started on a rant about family values and how they have been eroded by feminism and law.

        • JAC. Im ready for a chewing for this but…. I read an article by Sundance about the Big Club as he calls it…its basically the lobbyists….but the Big Club is the guys writing legislation…they cross the palms of the politicians to ‘sell’ that legislation to the public.

          The article went on about how that process affects the repeal of ObamaCare. Supposedly the Rs have had a plan to repeal for years, and they have just been stringing us along with no real plan, just words, becaussssse…the lobbyists see OCare as a bought and paid for deal and they’re not about to lose millions over it. Specially seein’ as how they’ve already lost TPP, Common Core, and something with immigration. (so much to keep straight and I’m going from memory.)

          So, politicians are just the puppets. I get that. Here’s where I’m gonna get it. This ties in with your ideology thing above…I’m starting to think we all need to lose the whole ideology thing. What good does it do to be stuck to an ideology when its really just a bunch of gobbooldygook because its not the politicians running things anyway? What control do we, or our ideology, have over lobbyists?

          The lady in your article brings her ideology into it and comes up with some backdoor slam against the family structure. What good is ideology in that scene? To me, there is no ideology related to the fact that when men are at war, women take up the slack. It’s a no brainer. Its not a philosophical thing, its a common sense survival thing.

          Now lets look at Trump. He runs as a conservative republican. I have never seen him to be either. I don’t think the guy has an ideology, he wings it by straight up common sense. He may very well be a conservative, or he may be a liberal. who knows, but he doesn’t wear it on his sleeve. He doesn’t like the media, he goes around them. He doesn’t like the politicians, he goes around them, straight to the people, or straight to the CEOs, or straight to the world leaders. He just keeps his head down and keeps working. He could run the whole show on his own really. If anything he’s just a nationalist. Looking back, they’ve been globalists…44 globalist….43 globalist…42 pervert globalist…41 globalist… 40 conservative so the story goes.

          Stopping here even though it feels like a dead end. I’m anticipating a dissertation on principles guiding us. I see principles as a private thing, like your conscience. Your conscience can guide your decisions but where does ideology come in?

          • Just A Citizen says:


            Let me try to be brief. And put it in more useful terms.

            A culture defines a people. Which should in turn define how we operate. This includes politics.

            Ideology, if there is one, is a key part of culture. But think of ideology as the values or principles of the people. For a culture and thus a people to form and maintain itself, there must be COMMON principles or values. Thus there must be a coherent ideology.

            Principles can also be private, as can values. But for a Nation to thrive, or I should say a People, to thrive, they must have some set of defined or “understood” values, ie., principles on which to stand. If nothing more than Individual Freedom, Liberty and Justice.

            The communist woman above has hers. It is not personal it is a general ideology that spread around the world. But, it is but one of many choices. WHICH ideology is the question. Not whether one is useful.

            Progressivism is NOT an ideology. Note my other post showing how they are trying to develop one. Why? Because they know it is easier to move a nation if they have one.

            Conservatism is NOT a true ideology although modern conservatives have modified it to make it look like one. Mainly by relying on the original one used to found the nation.

            One point of clarification on the communist authors comments about women working in war. It was not the idea that women worked. But her claim that the reason they returned to the home was our CULTURE. You say common sense. Yes, but only because that was our culture. She is saying that OUR Culture needs to be destroyed.

            So the real question relative to her claim is whether it was just common sense in that it was a rational and normal response (your assertion). Or was it only driven by cultural norms (her assertion). Personally I think you are closer to being correct. As a Communist she was searching for ways to motivate women to her cause based on the desire for “liberation”.

            I posted it to show the linkage between the Communist’s thinking and the Women’s Lib movement, as represented by NOW. We often wonder why they oppose the things they do. We think they are just misguided or crack pots. But what I showed you was their thinking is tied to the Communist view of “women’s liberation”. So the vitriol and hatred of other women who do not fit their idea of what “liberated women” should be is largely due to the Communist roots or ideology which infiltrated the movement. I suspect most of them don’t even realize the connections.

            Hope I didn’t lecture to much. Regardless of what Trump is or does or doesn’t do, DO NOT give up on the idea that we need some kind of ideological revival. How else will we shed the Socialism from our system?

            • Ok. I thought our principles were freedom, liberty, and justice. We went off track somewhere because we are for sure not united. Why? Ideology. Of the people. Who get their ideas from politicians. Who get their ideas and pay from lobbyists. Who don’t have any principles. Talk about a snafu.

              Read something a lonnnng time ago. How do you get rid of lobbyists? Strip the government so there is nothing to lobby about.

              • Just A Citizen says:


                That is absolutely correct. Just the opposite of the common view.

                By the way, lobbyists don’t really own the politicians. The politicians that take that kind of money see it out. They use the lobbyists to get what they want. So that sword can cut both ways.

                And lobbyists do serve a valuable purpose. They are often the experts on any given topic.

  49. Just A Citizen says:

    Thought of the day:

    I see Wyden, of Oregon, is now claiming that Trump’s tax returns represent the intersection of financial interests and national security. Wyden used to have some sense. It seems he is now just another partisan hack. But here is the thought.

    Apparently all those politicians squealing about Trump’s possible business connections are only upset over business dealings. Contribution, govt. paid junkets, cushy lobbyist jobs after leaving office and other benefits to Congress and Govt. employees are not a big deal. Neither is the interference of a political party leadership in a presidential primary, or the intersection of DNC and MEDIA in controlling the political narrative.

    One can only conclude that what they are really bitching about is that in their mind ONLY POLITICIANS are allowed to hold public office.

    And if you think this is just due to Trump, I remind you of how they treated Carly Fiorina in her California race and again when she ran for President. Immediately going after her “cold hearted” business decisions.

%d bloggers like this: