Englebert

Sorry, couldn't read it. When the author resorts to immature name calling in the first paragraph, and compares the current administration to the film Home Alone after witnessing the previous administration's antics, it's glaringly obvious the author doesn't deserve the time of day for anything he has to say. I'll not waste my time on what will undeniably be more wing-nut Liberal dribble. westend1, can you please at a minimum link to a somewhat competent author that is not blinded by Liberal hate.

I'm assuming by posting your link under this thread that this is an attempt at some sort of equivalency...which is an epic fail. baddog's post is about a group's attempt at shutting down free speech. Your post is about Trump suggesting consequences for disseminating knowingly false and slanderous information, for which we have libel laws. Come on westend1. I know you are grasping for straws, but this is just flat out weak. You are venturing into the snowflake territory. And about your article. The author claims to garner critical information about Trump's mental state because Trump issued a few statements about how he felt. Well I gathered a few clues about the author, which I'm sure most other readers did also. The author is a flat out hypocrite showing his true biased and hate-filled Liberal colors. I doubt if you even read the article before posting because that little tidbit was glaringly obvious to anyone, so much so that posting this trash would be imprudent (to put it mildly). Your equivalency attempts are falling flat. Please keep trying though, these are entertaining if nothing else. Maybe with some more practice you'll find some better examples.

As long as he keeps rolling back Obama's policies, he can play golf all he wants. He's had more positive accomplishments in his first few weeks than Obama did in eight years. If he wants to celebrate with a round of golf, fine with me...as long as he keeps doing what he's doing. And if you want to criticize the anti-Liberals for staying silent on the subject, then you must also be outraged that the Liberals had no problem, through silence, with Obama playing golf. Actually, I didn't have a problem with Obama's many rounds of golf either. The less time he spent on the job the less ways he could muster strangling the country. (Although he did get a lot of job killing regulations enacted.) It's hard to imagine the shape of the country if Obama would have spent more time contemplating on how to destroy American manufacturing. If you think Trump is doing a bad job, you should encourage Trump to spend more time on the golf course.

None reached this level of foolishness.

Why did the article not report on the incidents of violence and looting?

The article was so childish in it's assertion I figured it had to be sarcasm. But if you want to discuss these asinine theories, pick any of them and we will debate. I'll try to keep from laughing when you point to any one of the points you think are examples of racism.

I love half of it, hate the other half. Love repeal, hate replace.

He is becoming more and more of a hero to me for just one reason...he's exposing the true colors of the Liberals for all the world to see. I really wanted Ted Cruz or Rand Paul, but Trump has exposed the wing-nut Liberals for what they really are. Cruz or Paul might have been able to accomplish this, I don't know, but I'm ready to sculpt a statue of Trump for this one feat.

Now this article is hilarious. All that time and research but not one example of racism. This is the epitome of "fake news", or better "fake, sophomoric, extreme and purposeful misinterpretation of facts". But the Liberals eat up this garbage like candy because it fits their pre-conceived narrative. The true colors of Liberals are on full display. Thanks westend1 for exposing more of the Liberal bigotry resulting from blinding hatred.

And if he did, what would you have to say about it? Answer that question, then answer, what if he said he loved Allah and how good of a Muslim his is? Would your answer be the same?

This is something many have already known before this skit was ever conducted.

I abhor it with a passion, just like every red-blooded American should. The only thing we agree on is the new plan is just a renamed version of the old plan, with slight modifications.

I'm sure his advisors have warned him about how the Liberal media will spin his words/actions. If he declassifies the intelligence information, you can bet every penny you have and will ever earn that the Liberal media will attack him for "putting lives in danger" by exposing this sensitive material. That is a no brainer, even for Trump. So your assertion that something is fishy because Trump hasn't declassified the information holds no water.

Yay!, We agree on something. Did the bowels of Earth just get extremely cold? LOL

And if he does, then the Left will accuse Trump of being careless with classified material and exposing to our enemies our secret surveillance techniques, putting all American lives in danger. It's a funny (and pathetic) little game they play.

Presidents don't shoot people, but you give Obama full credit for killing Bin Laden.

I have no idea what you are trying to ask or convey from this question/statement, but it doesn't seem to have anything to do with my post. Are you deflecting or just not understanding what I wrote?

And this attitude is why the Man-Made Global Warming fraud is able to live and breathe. Don't you feel proud.

The Man-Made Global Warming theory is based entirely on fraud and deceit. I've seen tons of photoshopped pictures all the way back to the 1990s, and there are probably plenty before that. I'm waiting for the alarmists to start using the "well both sides do it" argument.

This is why I'm still whole-heartedly for secession.

When watching Tucker Carlson Tonight earlier, Trace Gallagher (who I like) made one of the most comical statements imaginable. When reporting on the new Congressional House plan on healthcare, Trace said "We don't know how much it will cost because the Congressional Budget Office hasn't scored it yet". I had to laugh. Does anyone believe we will have one iota of better understanding of the cost once the CBO has scored it. This is the same office that said Obamacare would save the average family $2500.00, and would cut the deficit by $120 billion. This is almost equivocal to saying "we don't know how many weeks of winter we have left because the groundhog hasn't come out of his hole yet". But if I had to rely on one or the other's methodology, I'm going with the groundhog. I would rather flip a coin than rely on either. I'm just in total shock that anyone would even mention the CBO when suggesting the cost of any proposal. Maybe Trace was auditioning for "The Onion".

They can call it anything they want, and deny all they want, but to me this is still just Obamacare Lite. At least it gets rid of the mandates, but the taxpayer is still on the hook for a large sum of "subsidies" in the form of tax credits. Rand Paul has a much better plan, namely it get's the government out of healthcare for the majority of people. The really sick or very poor get placed into Medicaid. The majority of people who can't get healthcare through their employers get to join a consortium of sorts in which a representative can bargain just like large companies.

Actions speak louder than words.

So Hillary saying that she would give financial assistance to laid-off workers and Trump saying he would reduce regulatory burdens on the coal mining industry in order to save their jobs is somehow equivalent in your mind. That is astonishing and disheartening to know some cannot tell the difference. And if one cannot tell the difference, one sure cannot remotely fathom the consequences each has on our society. I'll give you a hint, one is beneficial and one is not.

Those people did not vote for Trump so he would "rescue" them. If they wanted to be rescued, they would have voted for Hillary, who promised them free money. They were actually insightful enough to realize the free money came with chains...chains that would relegate them to welfare and government dependency. They overwhelmingly voted for Trump to save their jobs, so they can be productive and not have to beg the government for money. Whether or not Trump reduces the regulations in order to make coal mining viable again is yet to be seen. At least there is still hope, unlike with the alternative candidate.