| Author | Message | ||
     Fb1 |
Yesterday, Mika Goebbels said that controlling what people think is MSNBC's job (I imagine CNN has a thing or two to say about that...): Later in the day, apparently facing significant blowback from us ABCD's (American Bitter Clinger Deplorables ©), Ms. Goebbels made a valiant attempt to defend herself via Twitter:
^ Source: https://twitter.com/morningmika Dear Ms. Brz...Goebbels: Yesterday, upon first blush, I gave you the benefit of the doubt - certainly your comment was taken out of context, I reasoned. Then, I discovered the video segment of you saying exactly what you later said you didn't say. Very fake news, except...some of what you said yesterday, remarkably, is actually the truth. We live in interesting times. | ||
| Fb1 |
Source: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/02/23/pr esident-trump-meets-with-manufacturing-ceos-to-dis cuss-economic-policy-objectives/ ^ Get 'er done.  | ||
| Fb1 |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3KT5o09OIw | ||
| Fb1 |
CNN's Chris Cuomo recently told us ABCD's we're not allowed to view information from WikiLeaks; he said it's CNN's job to examine the "news" and decide what we're allowed, or not allowed, to see; I posted a YouTube clip of this breathtakingly-stunning Mika-esque statement during the presidential campaign. The bathroom issue seems to be a big deal right now with many in the left, particularly those in the Mainly Swamp Media; one can only wonder why. Cuomo was asked a question about an aspect of this topic on Twitter today, and his reply is as vile and repulsive as his "All the news are belong to US!":  Image source: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/02/23/cn ns-chris-cuomo-demands-12-year-old-girls-be-tolera nt-of-male-genitalia/ Link to tweet: https://twitter.com/ChrisCuomo/status/834745679394 246658 Cuomo, I can't think of words heinous enough to describe what I think of you. Seriously cold anger... | ||
| Fb1 |
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/02/ho w_to_tell_if_news_is_really_news.html | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/02/we _call_them_palestinians_because.html A little history to help understand the words the haters use. And why. | ||
| Ratbuell |
So watching the Today Show talking heads over coffee just now, they had a piece on how "the people" are supporting Trump...."but". Aside from the obviously slanted questions and exposure, one thing stood out to me. There was a farmer who - while he voted for Trump - thinks the immigration policy is a problem "because my farm can't operate without immigrant workers". THEY STILL DON'T GET IT. Somebody - P45, PLEASE hammer this home in a press conference!! - needs to graphically explain the difference between "immigrant" (and the fact that they're OK)...and "ILLEGAL immigrant" (which is NOT OK). Unless the farmer completely understands the difference and should have spoken more accurately: "my farm can't operate without the cheap labor that comes from my hiring illegals to do the work that legal Americans could be doing instead". Methinks we need to not only drain the swamp...we need a major re-education, nationwide. PC needs to go out the window. Call it like it is, eliminate the confusion on all levels. | ||
| Sifo |
There's also a difference between immigrant and migrant. What those farmers need is legal migrant workers. | ||
| H0gwash |
I'm pretty sure that out of work Americans don't want to pick fruit at those wages. Not that migrant workers legal or illegal really *want* to do that either. I would not be offended if 'welfare to work' programs had the able bodied pick fruit. If I was on welfare, boy that would be incentive to get a *real* job. Is that fundamentally offensive? | ||
| Aesquire |
What good farmers need is legal migrants. That farmer may be a slavery enabler. Farmers aren't dumb. That "ignorance" may well be propaganda or the real complaints of an evil exploiter. He may belong in prison. | ||
| Airbozo |
HOgwash; The unions would never allow such a welfare to work program. They oppose such programs because it would put their regular union workers out of jobs and reduce their paychecks and money they spend on political campaigns. Several decades ago Denver wanted to institute a program to clean up the city while helping folks get off the welfare gravy train. Even though at the time, there were very few Street Cleaners and basic janitor staff that cleaned the city, the service unions went on strike, stopped collecting trash and cleaning anything in the city until any mention of that program was eliminated. Years later the city was still a mess and they could not hire enough people to do the jobs while welfare recipients sat at home or went fishing all day happily collecting their free money. Hell my Mom and Aunt were part of a community group learning how to fill out the forms and answer questions to maximize their benefits. Disgusted me to no end. As far as farm labor goes, when it is more lucrative to pick strawberries than collect welfare, you _might_ see some American citizens roll up their sleeves. As it stands now, most parents don't even want their high schools students or college students working part time for minimum wage to support themselves because it is beneath them. Attitudes must change for anything like this to work. | ||
| Sifo |
I'm pretty sure that out of work Americans don't want to pick fruit at those wages. Not that migrant workers legal or illegal really *want* to do that either. I would not be offended if 'welfare to work' programs had the able bodied pick fruit. If I was on welfare, boy that would be incentive to get a *real* job. Is that fundamentally offensive? Nobody wants to work for low wages. Absent other pressures, most will look to advance their positions when possible. It's normal. It's good. Take the illegal workers out of the picture and farmers will be forced to pay more for legal workers. Migrant or otherwise. No doubt this sends ripples down the whole trail of the produce. Eventually consumers have to pay a bit more. All segments will find their natural place in the economic conditions. Not all that different than the economic adjustments that had to happen when slavery was banned. That would be the legal kind of slavery, not this "undocumented" class of workers living in the shadows of our society that has been created by ignoring our borders. Welfare for the working poor? It's a noble proposition. You have to be careful that you don't pay people to be poor though. That's one of the most evil things that you can do to kill the incentive to better yourself. It's nice to think that welfare recipients will lift themselves into productive upper-middle class citizens, but that is done in very small steps. If the first steps on that path involve a reduction in cash in their pockets, they are likely to never take those steps. That's another insidious creation of current liberal thought. Suddenly you have people who are more comfortable not working than working. They can also make extra cash doing things off the books. Of course, if you are going to break the law working off the books, and you are looking to advance your position (see my first paragraph), it's seems far more profitable doing any variety of things than picking crops in a field. Far more accessible to city dwellers too. This is the reality of our current welfare system. So you have to choose your balance of good and bad. Enforced borders, and encourage people to better their positions, and have the added drat on the people of higher prices for goods; Or, set up a system that encourages a virtual slave class who are undocumented, and paying the poor to be poor, which is also paid for by the working class. Both ways have their problems. Only one really encourages the poor to take the first steps toward changing their lives for the better though. Both systems will show what they encourage as you get to the second and third generations. | ||
| Fb1 |
President Trump speaks at CPAC, 02/24/2017: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw0G2BymVvE | ||
| Fb1 |
Mr. Nigel Farage speaks at CPAC, 02/24/2017: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqntMoZPPak | ||
| Fb1 |
Source, more: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/02/24/pr esident-trump-begins-dismantling-the-regulatory-an d-administrative-state/ | ||
| Fb1 |
^ Source: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/02/24/it -begins-trump-administration-dhs-posts-bid-contrac t-for-southern-border-security-wall/
^ Source: https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form& id=b8e1b2a6876519ca0aedd748e1e491cf&tab=core&_cvie w=0 | ||
| Torquehd |
My proposal for location of the wall:  | ||
| Fb1 |
^ Nearly every single member of mine and my wife's family would end up on the west side of that wall, in spite of the fact they're all staunchly conservative. It's the mega-populated blue areas in WA (Seattle is the worst), OR (Portland is the worst) and CA (tied between SF and LA?) that paint the entire state blue, when, in fact, most of each state actually bleeds red. This dynamic is true nationwide, actually - take a look at a county-by-county map of the presidential election, for example - get out of the city (ANY city), and our country is largely deeply red. So, while I understand the sentiment, the location of the wall as illustrated above (at least as it pertains to our most-western states) is not the solution. Just an opinion.  | ||
| Torquehd |
My home is on the left side of that line as well. But i still think it's funny. I'm currently stationed way right of that line but in a couple years I'll be moving back to western washington. It's home and I agree, outside of the population hubs, Wa, Or, and Ca are filled with good patriotic Americans. Who would probably also think it's funny. After I moved to my new hometown just south of Olympia, Wa, I walked into the local supermarket and they were playing Merle Haggard and Randy Travis on the PA. I knew I had chosen a good town. | ||
| Sifo |
If we are willing to cut WA & OR in half, do the same with CA. It certainly makes sense based on my travels in CA. | ||
| Fb1 |
After I moved to my new hometown just south of Olympia, Wa... I was born and raised in that part of the world. Centralia? Chehalis? If we are willing to cut WA & OR in half, do the same with CA. It certainly makes sense based on my travels in CA. Cali is a diverse state, of course. Get out of the city (Sacto, as one example) and you quickly run into normal people...like you and me. Honestly, the solution - whether we're talking about Cali, NY, or wherever - is get rid of the corruption, and suddenly the problems begin to dry up. P45 is already doing a mahvelous job - in just one month! - of draining the proverbial swamp. The left is panting like dogs - "Please, Mr. President (gasp! gasp! gasp!), slow down!" The only wall we need right now, IMO, is the one between us and Mexico. And.......we're taking bids. | ||
| Sifo |
Maybe we should consider walling in our major cities?  | ||
| Torquehd |
Centralia? Chehalis? Yep, Centralia is the next exit down I-5. I love that area and can't wait to move back home in a couple years. A wall is the answer for the southern border but obviously won't do much for the internal problems (it will do a little to slow the internal demographic shift). The internal problem is not just "The swamp", it's an ideology that resides in parts of the mass base of the populace. We'll never be able to eradicate ideologies like socialism, or living off the system, or silencing opposition, or violence against diversity. Just like we'll never be able to eradicate true Islam. The republic rests on the edge of a knife; we're not a gridlocked communist nation where the people have no voice. The people have a voice and that is a good thing, potentially, for the majority. It can also be a bad thing if the majority has ill intentions. There are some things we can do to reduce the ideological ills that are poisoning our republic, but you know the saying about the horse and the water. You can educate people on the evils of socialism and communism, you can expose the hypocrisy, you can blast propaganda that exposes the violence of the true extremists. But at the end of the day there are idealists who just will not make good choices no matter what. | ||
| Two_seasons |
REGULATIONS Make no mistake, large multi-national corporations in America favor them! Why? To make sure the little inventor with a better mousetrap can't interfere with their "progress" in their X industry. Ultimately, the small guy has no where to go when the EPA, for example, mandates they put in $5M scrubbers for their little paint room on-site. After a while, small business tires and starts doing the M&A offers to survive. Ultimately, they sell to a much bigger corporation and cash out. I would like to see the better mousetrap maker multiply and, with time, make America a manufacturing powerhouse again.  | ||
| Ratbuell |
And it sounds like P45 is aware of that, he's made numerous comments about keeping things viable for the "little guy" as well as for big Inc. I don't (honestly, I don't) think he's pro big-biz, or pro-little-guy...he's just pro-US-jobs. Regardless of who writes the checks - Dell, or the little corner store. Bring back the (LEGAL) American workforce, and make sure they have a good, solid American workPLACE in which to work. | ||
| Fb1 |
Yep, Centralia...I love that area and can't wait to move back home in a couple years. I was born in Morton, and my dad had a job for a short time in Chehalis when I was in junior high; I know that area well. You're active-duty military? Three generations of my family - my maternal grandfather (WWI), my father (WWII) and one of my older brothers (Vietnam) - are represented with displays at the Veterans Memorial Museum in Chehalis: http://www.veteransmuseum.org/ Thank you for your service. A wall is the answer for the southern border but obviously won't do much for the internal problems (it will do a little to slow the internal demographic shift). The internal problem is not just "The swamp", it's an ideology that resides in parts of the mass base of the populace. We'll never be able to eradicate ideologies like socialism, or living off the system, or silencing opposition, or violence against diversity. Just like we'll never be able to eradicate true Islam. The republic rests on the edge of a knife; we're not a gridlocked communist nation where the people have no voice. The people have a voice and that is a good thing, potentially, for the majority. It can also be a bad thing if the majority has ill intentions. There are some things we can do to reduce the ideological ills that are poisoning our republic, but you know the saying about the horse and the water. You can educate people on the evils of socialism and communism, you can expose the hypocrisy, you can blast propaganda that exposes the violence of the true extremists. But at the end of the day there are idealists who just will not make good choices no matter what. You and I are perfectly in synch in our political views, it appears; I agree with everything you say. Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom; we won a major battle with the election of President Trump, but the war never ends. | ||
| Fb1 |
President Trump's Weekly Address, February 25th, 2017: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42HH45leldI | ||
| Fb1 |
@realDonaldTrump's Twitter following is rapidly approaching 26,000,000:
^ Well done, Mr. President. This tweet from P45, in particular, made me giggle yesterday:
Ouch! | ||
| Ratbuell |
I was thinking about the wall comments above, regarding the urban centers. Logistically I think this would be a tough one...and realistically it would never happen...but imagine for a moment... Say the majority of a city - pick one, LA? SF? Detroit? DC? - both citizens and ruling class alike, decide officially that they want to be "Democrat". They hate Trump. He is the anti-Christ and they want nothing to do with his rules or decisions. They want gun bans, immigrant sanctuary, welfare class, crappy schools, all of it. OK. You have city limits already for tax purposes. Now...that is your "border". You have not seceded. You are not "foreign". Your companies and corporations are not treated as "foreign"; you don't have East/West Berlin-style checkpoints going in or out. At first look, it's business as usual. There are no "penalties" for this act. Politically and financially? You're on your own. Citizens still pay their taxes, but you have your own budget department to collect taxes from "your" citizens. You make your "Democratic" rules. Let in all the illegals you want. Ban all the guns you want. Give away all the cell phones you want. Charge 'em whatever you want for insurance. Feed 'em welfare. You've got your own budget. Your own LEO's. Your own detention centers. You can buy anything you want from outside of city limits - as long it is simple goods. Food. Water. Fuel. Raw materials. What you may NOT buy? Legal help. Military support. Law enforcement. Political influence. You are an island. You are contained by those city limit borders. Period. No-one from outside those limits shall be able to influence your way of life; you shall not influence the way of life outside those borders. You keep to yourself - "live and let live". You keep yours inside the city limits, and we'll keep ours outside. Let me know how things are going in four years. No doubt there will be some business departure from the cities. Crime will skyrocket. And...people will get hurt or killed. There will, per the agreement, be zero interference (i.e. law enforcement / first responder support / military help) when people start to die. It'll be tough. But, I think our nation at large needs a graphic example of what is going on...before it happens to the WHOLE COUNTRY. There will be no US Government support within city limits. There will be no US military support. You understand this at the time you sign the paperwork starting this whole process. You are not allowed to be militarily or strategically offensive to the USA and vice versa. Any such act shall constitute an act of war, the end of this agreement, and the (Republican) USA shall resume control of your city, and you shall follow the same rules as the rest of the USA. And EVERYONE in the United States of America shall be made aware of this agreement, and every point within the agreement, the instant the process begins. If you live down the street from me, in the "sticks", and want to be part of it...you can move. If people who live within the city don't want to be part of it? They can move. As far as citizen (key word there - "CITIZEN", if you're an illegal...you stay in the city!) relocation? Open borders. But the politics of said citizens stay on their side of those city limit borders. Question is...which liberal population center would like to volunteer? | ||
| Two_seasons |
ALL entities of our Republic...state, county, local gov't, are in for what they can get from UNCLE SAM. This is the current state of affairs within the USA. Our federal gov't, with exceptions of national security and military, have no other enumerated powers over the states or the people. To claim "we'll cut sanctuaries of illegals off" further justifies FEDERAL money apportioned for control of a group we don't agree with. If there wasn't federal monies available to run the governments of these corrupt entities in the first place, wouldn't that have the same effect as borders? Make no mistake, if you mess with the National Security of the United States, whether territory, state, county, or local, that entity will have the full force of the United States enumerated FEDERAL power exercised to the fullest. Isn't it a perverse notion that MOST of the monies spent on state, county, local gov't projects MUST come from DC! Until WE THE PEOPLE start demanding spending reforms, we will continue to be beholden to DC for our "projects". Meanwhile, the Constitution is shredded over and over. We will never restore the rights of OUR 50 incubators until we demand limited gov't from DC. (Message edited by two_seasons on February 26, 2017) |
