241
3DHS / Re: Obama Legacy
« on: December 09, 2016, 05:55:00 PM »
That might explain the hyperbolic outrage the left is currently in.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
242
3DHS / Re: If social security gets cancelled
« on: December 03, 2016, 02:09:09 AM »actually quite alot of of conservatives has been favorable to it and the quote is welfare to the middle class. so far no party has been harmed by this statements.
I have to echo Cu4's question......who are these "alot of conservatives" who simply want to cancel SS??
243
3DHS / Re: If social security gets cancelled
« on: December 01, 2016, 11:04:24 PM »
People can say...pretty much anything. It won't be cancelled, however. As I said, political suicide....not just the President, but party as well
244
3DHS / Re: If social security gets cancelled
« on: December 01, 2016, 02:30:55 PM »
Why preface a scenario that isn't going to happen? That's political suicide to "cancel" SS. Modifications are definitely in order. Some privatization would be an extremely wise approach, but it'll never be cancelled
245
3DHS / Re: Tim Kaine Blasts "Gun Violence" After Ohio Attack, but no gun used!
« on: November 29, 2016, 10:28:05 AM »
ooooops......but hey, there's an agenda that must be pushed forward
246
3DHS / Re: So...what do we all think of the present "flip flopping" of our President-elect?
« on: November 27, 2016, 02:57:10 PM »
He definitely is now
247
3DHS / So...what do we all think of the present "flip flopping" of our President-elect?
« on: November 26, 2016, 10:25:27 AM »
Not counting the ridicuolus reporting by the media of how so much "disarray" his transition team has supposedly been in....but actual words by him
- global warming
- Obamacare
- no longer going to push to fully investigate Clinton & her Foundation
- global warming
- Obamacare
- no longer going to push to fully investigate Clinton & her Foundation
248
3DHS / Re: Happy thanksgiving
« on: November 24, 2016, 07:21:19 PM »
I've simply pre-ripped the pants 
Happy T-Day to u2, Kimba....and to the rest of the Saloon, both current and previous patrons
Happy T-Day to u2, Kimba....and to the rest of the Saloon, both current and previous patrons
249
3DHS / Re: I hope xo is doing OK
« on: November 23, 2016, 10:29:09 AM »
ahhhh. He was so absolutely convinced Trump was going to go down in flames,.... of landslide proportions, no less. Just couldn't come to accept just how fatally flawed his horse was
250
3DHS / I hope xo is doing OK
« on: November 22, 2016, 07:00:21 PM »
I'm sure Clinton's defeat, or more likely, Trump's win, had to come to a huge blow, given how dead set sure he was, that he'd lose big time. Here's hoping all is ok, that he's not one of the rioters, and that when he's recovered, he may again venture into the saloon
251
3DHS / Re: Quite the Democratic hutzpah
« on: November 21, 2016, 01:11:28 PM »
Of course not, since the Constitution clearly stipulates its achieving the necessary electoral votes to become President, currently that being 270. The left would proclaim the people have spoken, thru the Constitution, and we should have a peaceful transition of power
While many Trump supporters would feel horrible, there'd be precious little rioting, if any. And there'd be no movement in trying to overturn the Electoral vote. There'd just be half a country, PO'd at the imminent disaster a Mrs Clinton would provide us, in her administration
And on a tangential note, notice how the left, and being enabled by the media, keeps trying to paint the present Trump cabinet as not just radical, but beyond the ideological fringe. And yet the same media didn't bat an eye at all the hard core leftists that were placed in high level cabinet positions, under Obama
While many Trump supporters would feel horrible, there'd be precious little rioting, if any. And there'd be no movement in trying to overturn the Electoral vote. There'd just be half a country, PO'd at the imminent disaster a Mrs Clinton would provide us, in her administration
And on a tangential note, notice how the left, and being enabled by the media, keeps trying to paint the present Trump cabinet as not just radical, but beyond the ideological fringe. And yet the same media didn't bat an eye at all the hard core leftists that were placed in high level cabinet positions, under Obama
252
3DHS / Re: Quite the Democratic hutzpah
« on: November 20, 2016, 04:35:50 PM »
I've figured it out......the hypocritical rage of the left, as presently exemplified in all these protesters, riots, and #notmypresident ilk.....
For decades, Democrats have largely been in the driver's seat of policy making, in this country. We see it in the ever expanding role of Government and the welfare state. Either a Democrat was in the WH, or they controlled one, if not both houses of congress. And they had enough votes, when it mattered in Judicial decisions at the Supreme Court to enact wide sweeping actions, such as Abortion & Obamacare. Not enough to really screw the country, but enough to get their foot in the door, at the judicial level
There was those 1st 2 years of Bush II, that provided a cleaning out of the Clinton stench, and did allow across the board tax relief, that stemmed the fiscal impact of 911, but with 911, and the subsequent drumbeat of how bad Bush was in conducting the war, Democrats regained control of Congress, and Democrat-lite policies ensued once again
With the election of Trump, the GOP control of both branches of Congress, and the pending picks that will solidify a hopefully conservative leaning Supreme Court, the left is having an absolute conniption (downright fear) of so many of those beloved policies being reversed, if not abolished. Not just Obama's legacy of executive orders on immigration, environment, "treaties", and guns, but policies way back to Clinton. That's why you already have the asinine claims of how racist his cabinet is supposed to be looking like, how Hitleresque his actions are. That's why all the unconscious fear in the form of riots and ridiculous rhetoric
IMHO
For decades, Democrats have largely been in the driver's seat of policy making, in this country. We see it in the ever expanding role of Government and the welfare state. Either a Democrat was in the WH, or they controlled one, if not both houses of congress. And they had enough votes, when it mattered in Judicial decisions at the Supreme Court to enact wide sweeping actions, such as Abortion & Obamacare. Not enough to really screw the country, but enough to get their foot in the door, at the judicial level
There was those 1st 2 years of Bush II, that provided a cleaning out of the Clinton stench, and did allow across the board tax relief, that stemmed the fiscal impact of 911, but with 911, and the subsequent drumbeat of how bad Bush was in conducting the war, Democrats regained control of Congress, and Democrat-lite policies ensued once again
With the election of Trump, the GOP control of both branches of Congress, and the pending picks that will solidify a hopefully conservative leaning Supreme Court, the left is having an absolute conniption (downright fear) of so many of those beloved policies being reversed, if not abolished. Not just Obama's legacy of executive orders on immigration, environment, "treaties", and guns, but policies way back to Clinton. That's why you already have the asinine claims of how racist his cabinet is supposed to be looking like, how Hitleresque his actions are. That's why all the unconscious fear in the form of riots and ridiculous rhetoric
IMHO
253
3DHS / Quite the Democratic hutzpah
« on: November 19, 2016, 05:49:37 PM »
It's bad enough the lectures we got about peacefully accepting the election outcome (unless of course your horse doesn't win, then its ok for riots & mass protesting), but apparently a NY Democrat congress critter, by the name of Murphy, believes that President-elect Trump should nominate Clinton for UN Secretary.
Seriously, that's what she is advocating.
Clinton operated an unauthorized and unsecure server while serving as secretary of state. She said it was approved by the State Department, she lied. She said no classified information was sent through the server, which was also a lie. She continued to email classified information after leaving the State Department. She was the subject of an FBI investigation while running for president. It was an unprecedented email system that ignored federal regulations concerning preserving communications of government officials, with an active effort to destroy said comunications, in the face of a Congresional subpoena. And we want this person back in government? I don't think so
Seriously, that's what she is advocating.
Clinton operated an unauthorized and unsecure server while serving as secretary of state. She said it was approved by the State Department, she lied. She said no classified information was sent through the server, which was also a lie. She continued to email classified information after leaving the State Department. She was the subject of an FBI investigation while running for president. It was an unprecedented email system that ignored federal regulations concerning preserving communications of government officials, with an active effort to destroy said comunications, in the face of a Congresional subpoena. And we want this person back in government? I don't think so
254
3DHS / Re: Who should be the top 3 choices to replace AG Loretta Lynch?
« on: November 18, 2016, 03:00:29 PM »
Well, looks like its Jeff Sessions. Wasn't on my list of 3, but its a credible option. And it reinforces Trump's focus...not so much on the DC corruption as on the ridiculous lack of enforcing our immigration laws. Expect some massive political capital expended on dealing with ILLEGAL immigration (need to keep adding that qualifyer, since so many on the left try to portray the issue as being anti immigration, in general)
Also need to add a pair of other of qualifyers.....as in regarding a "Muslim registry". The left and media are going to try and paint any such registry as simply rounding up any and all Muslims in the country, when its very specific to any Muslims coming FROM a terrorist sponsoring/supporting region. NOT ANY Muslims already established here in this country, especially those who are already American
And that the emphasis in deporting illegals, is specific to targering those illegal immigrants who have added to their resume, criminal conduct. The left, as noted by these sancuary city mayors, are trying to scare their population about how they're going to defend some non-existent attempt to storm homes in the middle of the night to mass deport families. And the media will play that line of garbage up. Watch and see
Also need to add a pair of other of qualifyers.....as in regarding a "Muslim registry". The left and media are going to try and paint any such registry as simply rounding up any and all Muslims in the country, when its very specific to any Muslims coming FROM a terrorist sponsoring/supporting region. NOT ANY Muslims already established here in this country, especially those who are already American
And that the emphasis in deporting illegals, is specific to targering those illegal immigrants who have added to their resume, criminal conduct. The left, as noted by these sancuary city mayors, are trying to scare their population about how they're going to defend some non-existent attempt to storm homes in the middle of the night to mass deport families. And the media will play that line of garbage up. Watch and see
255
3DHS / Re: Trump....how and why
« on: November 14, 2016, 06:39:24 PM »
It's pandering in the most transparent of ways, but worse, it's very condescending