What if it was not the Russians?

[Mr. Deez]

Ron Paul's position on the US expressing it's power globally is not that it's none of our business, it's that we cannot afford it. RP is all about the spending.

Link.

It's ideological and about his worldview at least as much as it's about money. Perhaps even more. If we were running trillion dollar surpluses, his position would be the same.

 

[Garmel]

Why do you think that is? Culturally and politically I'm far to his Right across the board and not just on fiscal matters but on matters where he's furthest from conservatism. I'm pro-life, hostile to social liberalism across the board, and I'm an evangelical Christian. Yet somehow I can have a civil discussion with him. Yes, the dick-slapping culture is the difference-maker..



Glad you can acknowledge that.





Glad you can acknowledge that.



Prodigal routinely has civil discussions with him. And mchammer? He loves dick-slapping almost as much as he loves taint.

The probable reason is that you rarely push him on anything even if he says anything ridiculous but you will us. Btw, Prodigal has had civil discussions with him as I have. However, Prodigal has him blocked because he's tired of the nonsense. However, I have to admit Husker has been a lot better of late.

 

[Mr. Deez]

The probable reason is that you rarely push him on anything even if he says anything ridiculous but you will us.

I like how you admit that you say ridiculous things. Lol.

On policy, I routinely push him. I even defend Trump to him when I can. When there's a dick-slapping session going on, you're right. I don't usually jump in. Why not? First, I don't enjoy it. Second, it's unnecessary. You and others go all-in. What's the point of me piling on?

 

[Joe Fan]

 

[Garmel]

I like how you admit that you say ridiculous things. Lol.

Of course. Everybody says dumb stuff at times on here. I have and you have. None of us are 100% correct.

 

[Joe Fan]

Finally addressing the actual original posted question

Pretty funny if true

 

[Joe Fan]

FWIW -- while Obama was President and John Brennan was CIA director, China also --

-- murdered the entire CIA network in their country
-- annexed the South China Sea
-- hacked the US government, repeatedly​

 

[4th_floor]

Oh our wonderful European allies? Let's review these allies:

1. We gave them favorable trade deals during the cold war to boost their economies. Now, 28 years later after the cold war ends and they have a peaceful EU at our expense, they refuse to renegotiate a fair deal.

2. WE provide their military. Because we provide their military with our tax dollars, they do not have to spend significant amounts on defense. Countries like Portugal, for example, have militaries with only 32,000 people in them. You know what you can do when you do not have spend $ on a military? You can afford free healthcare and education. So we provide their military and foot the bills, and they have to be PUSHED into adequate spending (which still is far too low) and refuse to negotiate fair trade deals.

3. https://www. bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44842723 (I had to put a space in because I cannot get this to link to the article. It keeps posting a video). If we have any type of embargo with a country, and our European "allies" can make $ with that country, they do not care how we feel. Europe trades with Cuba. France traded with Iraq and Saddam. The EU starts a mess in the Ukraine and got us involved. Then they turn around and makes deals with Russia for oil, but tell us we should not be talking to Russia at all. Now, the EU is planning to go behind our backs on Iran (see the above link). Again, we foot their defense bills, and they do not hesitate to stab us in the back economically. Personally, I hope Trump does get a trade deal with Russia going. A. You do not go to war with your trading partners. B. It would undercut the EU.

4. So we provide their military and waste tax dollars putting troops in Poland because of the Russian threat, but when we needed help in Iraq, many of our "allies" (France and Germany) condemned the war. Spain pulled out in 04. Many other European countries pulled out of Iraq early.... but they still cry for Americans to defend them from the Russian "threat".

5. Europe gets us involved in stupid cluster****s. The Libyan disaster was a British and French scheme for oil. The EU's push into the Ukraine has only achieved destabilizing European relations and almost dragged us into another cold war with Russia.

Sorry, but other than the UK, our European allies are WORTHLESS. I'd rather just stay allied with the UK and be at peace, without alliances, with the EU and Russia. No Americans need to die and nuclear war should not be threatened over the Ukraine, Latvia, Macedonia (who now wants to join NATO even though they cant get along with Greece) or any other Eastern European countries that all have their own separate agendas.

We would save a lot of tax dollars and Europeans would actually be forced to pay for their own defense. Let's see how well socialism works when you actually have to have a defense budget for a real military.

In short Seattle, our "allies" are already treating us poorly. They have been treating us poorly since the Cold War ended and the threat of a real invasion ceased. All there is now is a phony "threat" from Russia that is used as a political tool.

Now if Russians posted things on facebook because they wanted Americans to support a regime that would be more favorable to peace with them, guess what, we disseminate information all over the world (and the CIA probably does more), true or not, in favor of candidates and parties and groups less hostile to us. Big deal. We have been disseminating far more information to Cuba and North Korea for years without it making a difference. Nothing Russia posted on facebook made a difference. It was about as successful as our propaganda is in North Korea or Cuba.

Excellent post. Bears reposting.

 

[Garmel]

Finally addressing the actual original posted question

Pretty funny if true

Rep. Gohmert has also said it's not Russia. We don't have enough info yet to say he's right(or this article) but to take the IC's word as law is just stupid.

 

[4th_floor]

Finally addressing the actual original posted question

Pretty funny if true

Lisa Page seems to be cooperating with the investigation a lot more than her idiot ex-lover. Don't know if it is just fear, or if she has a conscience.

 

[4th_floor]

Next recession in 2022 as people become more extended on credit. At some point it snaps (just requires a trigger for a certain set of people living on the edge, then it spreads as people tighten their spending). For now, you can probably trade up for a better job, just like you could flip the house in 2005-2006. At some point that is no longer possible. Buckle up for a wild ride for the next 4 years.

There will definitely be another correction in the housing / mortgage sector. I doubt it will be as bad as 2007-2008. I see some real estate investors on the sidelines now, waiting for said correction. I think there will be money coming off the sidelines when prices fall, which will cushion the correction and recession. JMNSHO.

 

[Joe Fan]

Rep. Gohmert has also said it's not Russia. We don't have enough info yet to say he's right(or this article) but to take the IC's word as law is just stupid.

I was thinking about that question that was put to Trump -- he could have laid into them but it really was not the proper time and place to do that.

But he could have said something like, "Their conclusion is certainly worth due consideration but it could also be seen as conveniently self-serving by taking all focus off their own behavior. The facts are also that the IC collectively spied on my campaign while I was running for President and even continued to do so after I had won. So I am somewhat reticent to jump 100% on board with any conclusions they make on attempts to intervene in the 2016 election"

 

[Joe Fan]

Lisa Page seems to be cooperating with the investigation a lot more than her idiot ex-lover. Don't know if it is just fear, or if she has a conscience.

The problem for the rest of us with both she and Strzok being retained as employees is that it means the FBI provides their attorneys (and they both a team of Govt-provided lawyers) which allows the FBI to control what questions Page & Strzok may and may not answer. So the FBI gets to control her level of cooperation.

 

[4th_floor]

The problem with both she and Strzok being retained as employees is that the FBI provides their attorneys (and they both a team of Govt-provided lawyers) which allows the FBI to control what questions Page & Strzok may and may not answer.

True dat. But Strzok is an arrogant *** who is using his attorney to only answer what he wants to answer. It appears that Page is answering more questions. Of course, she hasn't testified publicly to my knowledge. So I'm just going off news reports, which could be totally fake.

 

[ProdigalHorn]

However, Prodigal has him blocked because he's tired of the nonsense.

OK since my name is being dropped and my ears were burning, I'll chime in.

I did block him, but not because he disagreed or that he was getting on my nerves (well, ok that was part of it), or that his tone was getting more and more obnoxious (and to be fair, he had some help in that regard, and he wasn't alone in that fact), but that he posted a meme that I felt was deeply, deeply offensive to me as someone who loves God and loves Jesus and finds it despicable when people degrade them by inserting crude language and divisive, political statements into their mouths. (I never blocked Barry, and he's a hundred times worse than SH in terms of his complete inability to have a rational debate about basically anything.)

I've since unblocked him, and am general trying to not engage where I don't think engagement will make any difference. Trying to rebuild some of my "tolerance and civility" muscles which have been atrophying in the last few months based on reading too much political stuff.

Agree with Deez that we all need to be better about trying to have discussions rather than slap fights. Nothing wrong with venting about the crazy people, but there's no reason to equate their craziness onto people on this board unless/until they embrace the crazy. And even then, best to treat them like they're actual human beings.

 

[Garmel]

OK since my name is being dropped and my ears were burning, I'll chime in.

I did block him, but not because he disagreed or that he was getting on my nerves (well, ok that was part of it), or that his tone was getting more and more obnoxious (and to be fair, he had some help in that regard, and he wasn't alone in that fact), but that he posted a meme that I felt was deeply, deeply offensive to me as someone who loves God and loves Jesus and finds it despicable when people degrade them by inserting crude language and divisive, political statements into their mouths. (I never blocked Barry, and he's a hundred times worse than SH in terms of his complete inability to have a rational debate about basically anything.)

I've since unblocked him, and am general trying to not engage where I don't think engagement will make any difference. Trying to rebuild some of my "tolerance and civility" muscles which have been atrophying in the last few months based on reading too much political stuff.

Agree with Deez that we all need to be better about trying to have discussions rather than slap fights. Nothing wrong with venting about the crazy people, but there's no reason to equate their craziness onto people on this board unless/until they embrace the crazy. And even then, best to treat them like they're actual human beings.

Like I said he's knocked off his more obnoxious nonsense lately(well, the stuff he does that gets on my nerves).

 

[Joe Fan]

True dat. But Strzok is an arrogant *** who is using his attorney to only answer what he wants to answer. It appears that Page is answering more questions. Of course, she hasn't testified publicly to my knowledge. So I'm just going off news reports, which could be totally fake.

 

[Garmel]

I was thinking about that question that was put to Trump -- he could have laid into them but it really was not the proper time and place to do that.

But he could have said something like, "Their conclusion is certainly worth due consideration but it could also be seen as conveniently self-serving by taking all focus off their own behavior. The facts are also that the IC collectively spied on my campaign while I was running for President and even continued to do so after I had won. So I am somewhat reticent to jump 100% on board with any conclusions they make on attempts to intervene in the 2016 election"

Nobody will accuse Trump of being articulate or PC enough to put out a statement like that.

 

[Joe Fan]

Nobody will accuse Trump of being articulate or PC enough to put out a statement like that.

IMO, he can do it whenever he wants
I will always remember his pressers during the campaign. Every public appearance he made, he stood and took all their questions. Every single one. Most of these Q&As were longer than an hour, and I recall one lasting 3 hours. He did this at every stop (Hillary, by contrast, rarely made appearances and never took questions). The press pounded him, time after time. He gave right back to them without a single note or teleprompter, winning most of the time.
I think he can still do this whenever he wants to use his time on them, but a joint presser with a foreign leader is usually not the place for it.

 

[Joe Fan]

 

[Horn6721]

I just watched a Dem Rep (from Md I think) rant for minutes on how Trump needs to tell us what was said during meet with Putin
How he, Congress and the American people have a RIGHT to know and by god we need to know now. That it might mean forcing Trump to appear before Congress because congress has to RIGHT to know.

I missed his or any Dems's outcry when Obama told Medvedev, "“This is my last election ... After my election I have more flexibility,”


Pure BS Dem politics.

 

[mchammer]

A lot wrong with this. For starters, the US was not one of the key players in the encouragement of the Axis. In fact, the US had passed several neutrality acts in the 1930s to stay out of any possible war, and the Axis didn't expect to fight them. The key players were Britain and France in the West and the Soviet Union in the East. Furthermore, at the time the Axis began provoking war (the militarization of the Rheinland and the build-up of the Wehrmacht in violation of the post-WWI agreements), Britain and France were much stronger from a military standpoint. Both of their armies were bigger and better armed. The Royal Air Force was strong, and the Royal Navy had been the envy of the world for centuries.

The big thing Germany had going for it was resolve. They were willing to go to war. Britain and France wanted to avoid it at all costs, and everybody knew it. (Of course, Germany had an advantage in that it was a dictatorship, so Hitler didn't have to care what its people thought.) Accordingly, Britain and France appeased Hitler - let him rebuild his military, let him annex Austria, and seize Czechoslovakia. In other words, they were willing to Make Germany Great Again to have less confrontation (or so they thought).

My point wasn't to draw a Nazi reference. It was to point out the irony of your post. Conservatives usually don't buy into the idea of appeasing a bad guy in hopes that he won't act so badly. We criticized appeasers of communist regimes during the Cold War as well as of terrorist organizations and Islamic states like Iran. But on Putin, you're basically saying the same thing that Obama and his ilk said about Iran.

If you can’t see the difference between Obama and Trump, then I can’t help you.

 

[Mr. Deez]

If you can’t see the difference between Obama and Trump, then I can’t help you.

I can see the difference between Obama and Trump, but their rhetoric has a disturbing similarity - to assign blame to the US where it is not warranted or deserved and disregards context. If Trump hadn't made that one dumbass comment, I wouldn't be anywhere near as hostile to how he handled the visit.

 

[mchammer]

And mchammer? He loves dick-slapping almost as much as he loves taint.

I have a dick-slapping certificate from Trump University that I earned for predicting a Trump victory when few else dared. I checked the fine print - I can’t find an expiration date for the dick-slapping. If I dick-slap, it’s to knock people from their confirmation bias bubbles.

 

[mchammer]

I can see the difference between Obama and Trump, but their rhetoric has a disturbing similarity - to assign blame to the US where it is not warranted or deserved and disregards context. If Trump hadn't made that one dumbass comment, I wouldn't be anywhere near as hostile to how he handled the visit.

On that issue, I believe Trump was specifically referring to the witch hunt and blaming all things on Russia. Seriously, there is a hysteria going on in America regarding Russia. Was that the right venue to raise it? I am more open to that criticism. But no way can you blame Trump for not harboring resentment.

 

[Joe Fan]

I can see the difference between Obama and Trump, but their rhetoric has a disturbing similarity - ....

One easy distinction is that Obama's rhetoric was displayed on a teleprompter most-often written by someone not Obama. If you want to champion him with being an excellent teleprompter-reader of another's composed rhetoric , I concede.

Trump most often speaks without a teleprompter or notes of any kind. IMO, this makes both the form and content of Trump's rhetoric refreshingly unique in modern American politics.

 

[Phil Elliott]

to assign blame to the US where it is not warranted or deserved and disregards context.

After all the HS that has gone on with the "intelligence" community directed at DT, I think it is completely justified. Why should he lionize the people who have tried from the get-go to undermine his presidency?

 

[Mr. Deez]

I didn't like what Trump said off the cuff in the conference, but it's not what really pissed me off. And the media only hated that stuff because it attacked their narrative. What bugged me was the America-bashing he dished out on Twitter.

Nevertheless, the "don't worry, he says stupid **** sometimes" dismissal does get old.

 

[Joe Fan]

After all the HS that has gone on with the "intelligence" community directed at DT, I think it is completely justified. Why should he lionize the people who have tried from the get-go to undermine his presidency?

Were Clapper, Brennan and/or Comey contributors to the "IC consensus"?
If so, this alone would make that report suspect.

 

[mchammer]

WTF?