The American people had enough of far-left policies being shoved down their throats

I'm already paying way too much money towards other people's bills, and that's before Build Back Bankrupt passes, which I hope remains dead thanks to Manchin. How would it ever be "good for me" to have even more money taken away to pay even more bills for perfect strangers?

 

But never actually stated who planned it.

 

His opinion. Yes the protest to Congress was planned ahead, no doubt about that. Trump and his advisors should have known with that many people protesting that things could get out of hand and the National Guard should have been stationed there. But from what I read, the Mayor of DC asked for them and got them. But to go to the Capital and guard that, the Capital Police had to ask for them and they turned it down. Stupidity on both Trump and the Capital police.

• Mayor Muriel Bowser had warned of impending violence for weeks, and businesses had closed in anticipation. She requested National Guard help from the Pentagon on December 31, but the Capitol Police turned down the January 3 offer from the Defense Department, according to Kenneth Rapuano, assistant defence secretary for Homeland Security.

www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-08/us-capitol-police-rejected-offers-of-federal-help-to-quell-riot/13042600
US Capitol Police turned down help from the Pentagon and the ...

 

www.nbcnews.com › news › crime-courtsFBI, NYPD told Capitol Police about possibility of violence ...
Jan 10, 2021 · washington — the fbi and the new york city police department passed information to u.s. capitol police about the possibility of violence during the protests wednesday against the

Now if they both had information of possible violance there, why didn't they insist to the Capital Police to allow the Guard to be stationed on the steps of the building, or around it?

 

Seems to me he was never found guilty of much wrong doing his time as President. Accused of a lot, proved very little. The man did more in three years than Obama did in eight and could have done a lot more except the virus hitting us. Even then he spent millions on false charges that dragged on during much of his Presidency.

 

"Marine1, post: 1073155227, member: 55595"]Seems to me he was never found guilty of much wrong doing his time as President. Accused of a lot, proved very little. The man did more in three years than Obama did in eight and could have done a lot more except the virus hitting us. Even then he spent millions on false charges that dragged on during much of his Presidency. As for Nixon, he really did little wrong. He knew nothing of the break in till later and then tried to cover up him being told.

 

Don't worry mate .. they gonna find a way to spend the money .. one day or another.. Hopefully they manage to spend a little on infrastructure .. good on Manchin for pushing back against Biden's idiotic "Not in my back Yard - Dump it in the Ocean" environmental policy .. regardless of whether or not he has any clue what he is doing ... They will make a fix or two .. and spend that money.. just watch.

See smokin Joe passed 770Billion in DOD spending .. taking the total Military spend to near 1.3 Trillion per year .. roughly 1/3rd of Federal Income .. but hey ... might as well spend it on the troops right .. cept that very little of that cash will go to the troops.

That money gonna keep falling from the Tree .. Blue Milking the Pandemic for all its worth .. but to be fair .. Red would be doing the same ..although perhaps not as aggregiously authoritarian .. vax madates and all..

One way or the other mate .. you gonna be left with a big bill

 

Ike and Roosevelt should have scored higher. Roosevelt was elected what four times? Helped save Europe. Ike masterminded the war for the Allies, got a truce with N.Korea and built the nations highways.

 

Now I have another question. If both had information of possible violence, was Trump told of it?

 

I'll bet you even believe that Obama ran a scandal free administration...

 

Well I haven't heard you deny that is what they have said they want. Please tell me what of these things they are talking about do you go along with? I have yet to hear one Liberal on here say any of that stuff is crazy. Or they wouldn't want it to happen. You all just seem to go along with every nutty thing they come up with. Seems to me, they would like to over run this country with Criminals. Even Pelosi and a few others on CNN I heard stick up for MS-13 and the FBI rated them the worst gang in the country.

The Left is pushing things I would have never dreamed possible just a few years ago. They have called for more or less open borders, illegals, 16 year olds and mass murders voting. They have called for the cut in police funding, even the elimination of a police force. The doing away with ICE, giving sanctuary to illegal criminals. They have even gone as far as bailing out rioters as soon as they are caught. Cleaned out of prison thousands of convicts, some even sentenced to life.Children born without gender on their birth certificates till they decide themselves what they want to be. Transgenders in women's bathrooms, locker and sports. We are no longer to call them mothers, but birth persons. There should no longer address people as sir or mam. They are trying to pass a bill that would bring back to America all the illegal criminals we deported for crimes of less than 5 years in prison and pay their transportation back. They want to teach hate in school for Whites and their government. Their plan is to make Whites a minority race in the country through immigration, saying diversity is our strength. You can no longer fly the Confederate battle flag, but no law against flying Hitler's German flag The Democrats have completely gone nuts. I don't believe their is one sane one among their leadership and their flock goes right along with them. Are you guys afraid to speak your mind when it comes to them? Are you afraid if you say this or that is nuts you'll be bad Liberals?

 

Thank you for proving my point.

I bet you too believe Obama had a scandal free administration

 

Well gee, you didn't see much of reports on O Ad scandals in the press.. did you? So it must have been scandal free! Obama said so hisself!

 

"The presidency of Ronald Reagan in the United States was marked by numerous scandals, resulting in the investigation, indictment, or conviction of over 138 administration officials, the largest number for any president in American history."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_administration_scandals

"everyone" is not a weasel word. "Most people" would be an example of weasel words.

I never had an interest in a complete rebuttal with you. You likely will refuse to even read or examine a point of view which differs from your own. So, why should I waste time?

But let's test that out.

You mentioned recessions. Are recessions bad for everyone? Who are they good for?

 

Either you believe in law and order or you don't.

Crimes committed in the name of morals and/or higher authority, etc. is the same logic terrorists use.

See, if we fund them, then terrorists can claim we are no better than they are and they would be right.

The state of Nicaragua and US Foreign Policy in the region is more complex than republicans like to portray it.

In fact, it was the Boland Amendment that banned US Aid to the Contras (for insurgency purposes), and it was signed by Reagan himself, because the Contras were a destabilizing force the region.

You don't sign such a bill, only to violate it later without the consent of Congress and tell the world you are the good guy.

If we do such a thing, how can we, as a nation, claim to be the beacon of freedom, of law and order?

If we do such a thing, as we did via Iran Contra affair, then we become the terrorists, in the eyes of the world.

 

The Russian citizen was responsible for the fall of the USSR, and they weren't thinking about SDI, they had 'Glasnost' on their mind, front and center. Alas, it was Gorbachev's new policy, which allowed the Soviet citizens decades long yearning for an open society to achieve fruition. Without Gorbachev and 'Glasnost', the USSR would never have fallen. The best you claim for Reagan was that he ended détente (and whether that was good is debatable) via the Reagan Doctrine and increased tensions between the Kremlin and the US, and that might have inflamed the average Soviet Citizen even more such that when Glasnost came, the sense of relief was even a more heightened experience, but that is the extent of Reagan's contribution.

My point is republicans constantly harangue their detractors that 'Reagan brought down the Soviet Empire' and they NEVER mention Gorbachev, but the truth is that it's hyperbole. Reagan made a contribution in the sense of heightening the feeling of relief when Glasnost arrived, but without Gorbachev, it's fantasy to attribute the fall of the USSR to Reagan, and Reagan alone.

 

Simplistic transactional thinking.

A better society is in everyone's best interest, not the dog eat dog dystopian transactional vision of libertarianism.

 

We agree on that point.

 

I believe many of us feel that way regardless of which side we're on. I never would have believed my fellow Americans would put a person above our country and Constitution so we're all trying to process what feels like some kind of horror show meets Twilight Zone.

I'm not sure if this is completely accurate. Many people crossing our borders are sent back to wherever they came from. I think the reason it looks otherwise is because that is one of Trump's claims. However, when you look at the actual policies, Biden has reinstated some of Trump's policies. But, Trump tends to think in "us" versus "them" (and everybody in this subcategory is an undesirable, not just people crossing the border illegally).

As an aside, I have mixed feelings about the border situation. Ethically, I'm not okay with us ravaging other people's countries and leaving them in tatters. However, I'm not okay with us allowing everyone to rush in while we have our on own domestic issues, namely services for veterans, homelessness, food insecurity for a large percentage of families and other local issues we need to address for our own citizens. All of us that have ever traveled had heard a steward/stewardess say the pre-flight instructions in which we are told to put on our own oxygen mask before assisting others. I believe that concept applies here as well.

I am unfamiliar with whatever this refers to. Can you point to whatever information leads you to that conclusion?

In the meantime, I am not generally aware that anybody under the age of majority (18 in most states) can vote. I don't know the rules for all 50 states but, on the surface, albeit with a lack of other information of why you think this is a concern, I am not too concerned about 16 year olds voting.

I interned in a political office my first year in college and part of my job entailed going to speak in high schools to encourage kids that were 18 or would be 18 in the upcoming election to register to vote. Unless there has been some kind of mass hypnosis done to that subgroup since yesteryear, kids aren't interested in politics or voting.

And, I know that voting rules are set in each State's Election Board so some do have provisions for felons to vote but that's always been the case so I'm not sure how you're connecting this specific issue to the Biden Administration.

First, calling for something to happen does make it happen or even make it possible or probable. So they can call for whatever they want. It doesn't mean anything if they can't bring it to fruition.

Nevertheless, I can understand both sides of this argument. I am a former cop and I've been abused by cops. I have no issue with any group that advocates for more police oversight because, right now, they are pretty much untouchable and that creates a negative balance because the very people they have hurt are basically voiceless because there is nowhere to turn if a cop is the actual one committing a crime. That's like asking a rapist or murderer or drug dealer to investigate themselves. It's never going to be objective and if citizens can't trust or rely on their own police officers to actually serve and protect, they have a legitimate voice for speaking out against that type of police brutality. In fact, I would say they have a responsibility to do it.

I also would not be too concerned about this happening because of the few communities that have tried this, it wasn't a sustainable venture for various reasons. The reality is people don't want to get rid of the police (that is counterintuitive within a society as it would turn into the Wild, Wild West in three seconds after it was implemented), they want to get rid of *criminal* police officers.

Moving a notch back here...let's say that you went to the doctor and had to have some kind of surgery and that surgery didn't go well because the surgeon didn't do something by the book and that lead to acute anxiety because the mistake wasn't provable (how can it be if you're unconscious during surgery and nobody present is inclined to speak up because they want to keep their jobs). Yet, every time you called an attorney to find help to fight, you were told that you should call another doctor. And, every time you call another doctor, you are told that they won't help you because the surgeon is a colleague. Every door to righting this wrong is slammed in your fast and bolted shut.

1. Do you think that you would have the right to speak out about what happened with that surgeon?
2. Do you think that you would be interested in telling your story so other people that experienced that can support you?
3. Do you think that you would demand accountability within that industry that does not entail them investigating themselves?
4. Do you think you would seek to have the entire foundation of how complaints about bad doctors are reviewed?

Of course, we both know that there is a safety net relative to this which is why doctors have medical malpractice insurance.

However, there is no such thing as police brutality malpractice insurance. Why would anyone feel safe living in a community in which their local police department is complicit in covering up when some of their officers go rouge? We hear about cops shooting people but the average person isn't aware of how many times abusive cops get away with everything between verbal abuse and serious physical abuse or abuse of power because nobody died.

My ex called the cops on me every 3-4 weeks for 5 YEARS. I've never been arrested because the reasons behind the calls were a lie. But I have been beaten up in front of my children. I was physically harmed a few days after a major surgery that caused permanent damage and, as a result, I have to be on a medication for the rest of my life. I have been thrown to the ground, handcuffed and literally chased down a highway by 7 State troopers. They didn't initially flash their lights so I didn't know I was being surrounded. I pulled over immediately when one drove next to me and flashed his lights. All the other police vehicles surrounded me and I was dragged out thrown on the ground and taken to a psychiatric hospital. I had no idea what it was about but the psychiatrist evaluated me and told the cop I was free to leave. My ex had a mutual friend call me so the police could ping my phone and find my location and the ex made up some stuff that lead to the above.

Today, I get to live with the traumas of many police officers (local and state) violating my rights and I'm not a criminal or former criminal. So, if that can happen to a law-abiding citizen who f&cked up by marrying a psychopath, what do you think it might be like for people that have ever been arrested or incarcerated?

I called an attorney because the Chief of Police in my city didn't care that my ex was making those fake 911 calls and I was told there was nothing I could do because none of the injuries but me in the ICU or killed me. How well do you think I slept in my house after that call? LOL And, I know that to be true because my father beat the hell out of me for sport. He was a Chicago cop so even when a witness called 911 when he was beating me in public, they walked away. As a teen, he attacked my younger sister and me. He kicked her in the face and I tried to get him off her (he was 6'3", muscular, Army veteran) and he attacked me. I eventually got away, grabbed her hand and we ran to the police station. We both were pretty banged up and told the desk sergeant what happened. He recognized our last name and asked if Officer <last name> was related. We told him that he was our father and he kicked us out of the police station. He said "unless he puts one or both of you in the ICU or kills you, don't come back here."

Please understand. I have no anger or hatred toward any of the police officers, including my father, that hurt me. I still respect what they do and I'm still a law-abiding citizen, BUT, I can also empathize with those that do feel that way because I know what that feels like too. I'm sure that you want to know that your police officers are capable of helping you and/or your family when the need arises without the fear of what they would do without bringing more trauma into the situation. And what that boils down to is everybody wants that same feeling of security from their own local police.

I can't recall if I ever shared with you that I am a former cop. A large part of me resigning was based on my unwillingness to watch other police officers mistreat and abuse civilians and us being ordered to lie about it in our reports. Then, I became their target. I also had an acquaintance who was a paramedic. He was fired for the same reasons. He reported that his colleagues were "slow walking" minorities to the ER in the hope they would die in transit. In my experience, the people that believe racism and sexism no longer exists aren't willing to hear those hard truths. Both are still strong and the only argument I've seen is people demanding to see the written policy (legal sanctions) that calls for this type of discrimination. They don't put it in writing but it IS very strong indeed.

I read here from time to time. Flexyourrights.org

I'm going to pause here as it's already very long. More coming soon!

 

And yet, this crap. University of Michigan professor receives ‘anti-racism’ grant to study ‘algorithmic reparations.’

It's like a free money tree!

​

"Another awardee will study why Latinos are racist against black people."

"The University of Michigan’s Anti-Racism Collaborative at its National Center for Institutional Diversity announced $110,000 in grants for research projects."

"The grant money will support projects that “aim to inform anti-racist action.”"

But, no support for reparations on the Left, Ehhh?

 

All I'm going to tell you at this juncture, because I don't have the time to get into it, is your concerns are right wing hyperbole and a lot less truthful.

As for 'whites being a minority', that's inevitable.

There is no way to stop it and if you try and stop it, why are you trying to stop it for any other reason that racism?

 

Weasel words are words that go like 'everyone says' 'people are saying',
'most folks believe' 'most experts agree' that sort of thing. Weasel words imply, without proof, that all, or a majority or a large group of people, believe, act, think, etc,, a certain way.. OR they can be just generalized assumptions, i.e., it's hyping your argument with a generalization without substantiation, they, essentially, are vague rebuttals to specific questions or an argument that calls for specifics. "Tap dancing" the argument.

Where I wouldn't call them 'weasel' is where the argument under debate is a generalization to begin with. I rarely like such arguments, because it basically amounts to just one person's opinion over another.


As for the Reagan count, it's still a big number, so what, you want to nitpick on the number?

I'll get back to your other points, later.

 

I'm sure there were some.

 

You know that sounds all well and good, but when Reagan felt our national security is involved, you do what you have to to protect it. Your not suppose to speed, but if your wife is minutes away from giving birth, you do what you have to get her to the hospital on time. Your not suppose to jay walk, but if you see a kid in the street and a car coming down you cross it and grab the kid. Reagan saw a danger of the Soviets trying to set up shop on our back porch and did what he felt necessary to protect our country, which is the first job of a President. Every nation does what they think is in their best interest, the hell with what others think.

As for the hostages, they had already been held for 444 days and the money released to buy those weapons were frozen asset of Iran. I think Reagan felt those poor souls had suffered enough, to hell what anyone else thought. You do what you think is right. Your never going to please everyone.

 

So you are completely self-sufficient then.