Jump to content

Trump's Tax Return


PhatMack19

Recommended Posts

I initially didn't like Trump for two reasons: I was highly skeptical about his Republican leanings and I hated his childish name-calling. Since he was elected he has appointed very Conservative appointees, so that has eased my mind somewhat...although he still seems to hold the idea that government is the answer to problems. But the thing I hated the most has shockingly turned out to be his best asset. Liberals have gotten away with unscrupulous personal attacks against the Right for the last 20 years or so, and the Right has refused to respond it kind...i.e. taking the high road. This cost Romney the election. Many GOP politicians have bowed to Liberal ideology in an effort to prevent being branded by Liberals. Finally, we now have a politician that doesn't take that crap, and if fact, employs the same tactics. Liberals have disgusted me for many years, but I always thought the best way to handle such childishness was to take the high road. Trump has turned that on it's ear and has the Liberals showing their true colors. Taking the high road would have never accomplished this feat. I therefore salute, and even employ myself, the low road when dealing with Liberals. Maybe the Democrats will rid themselves of the scum and take back their party before long, and then we can go back to civil disagreements. Until then, I gladly join Trump in his unsavory strategy of fighting Liberals in their own disgusting manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, texanabroad said:

This is the hidden content, please

Wow! How unconstitutional can this be? And they wonder why America has turned against them. 

That's convenient.  I guess Trump is the only one that has to follow the laws they create.  Kinda reminds me of that health insurance deal the last president passed then opted out of.

 

"New Jersey Assembly Republican Leader Jon Bramnick sought on the floor to amend the bill to require state lawmakers to also disclose their taxes but was blocked by Democrats"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,977
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined



  • Posts

    • We'll see. I don't trust us. 
    • Starting pitching has been shaky the last few weeks due to some injuries outside of Hagen Smith.  He goes tomorrow, so y’all should be fine 
    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
    • MODS please remove that ISD twitter link! I had no idea it would copy the whole posting. I only highlighted the portion about the venue change. Sorry about that!
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...