coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 02:38 pm
The Anti American dream.
cicerone imposter
 
  4  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 04:03 pm
@coldjoint,
Quote:

The Anti-American Dream
That's an oxymoron. The American Dream is a national ethos of the United States, the set of ideals (democracy, rights, liberty, opportunity and equality) in which freedom includes the opportunity for prosperity and success, as well as an upward social mobility for the family and children, achieved through hard work in a society with few restrictions.
American Dream - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Dream
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 04:44 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
That's an oxymoron.

Did you listen to it? Challenge anything he said. You can't. It is a common sense argument so, of course. you don't get it.
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 07:07 pm
Democrats Try to Box In Trump With Plan to End Government Shutdown Without Wall Funding.


Published December 31, 2018
Quote:
WASHINGTON — House Democrats are putting forward a proposal to reopen the federal government by severing funding for the Department of Homeland Security and border security from other spending bills that enjoy bipartisan support — a gambit aimed at forcing President Trump to negotiate or to shoulder the blame for a protracted shutdown.

The Democrats’ plan, which will come up for a vote on Thursday when they take control of the House, consists of two bills. The first includes six bipartisan spending measures that would fully fund agencies like the Interior Department and the Internal Revenue Service through the end of the fiscal year in September.

The second would extend homeland security funding at current levels through Feb. 8, including $1.3 billion for fencing but no funding for Mr. Trump’s border wall — a provision that renders it dead on arrival in the Republican-controlled Senate.

By splitting off the homeland security bill, Democrats are opening the door to a month of negotiations. But they are also essentially daring Mr. Trump and Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, to keep a big chunk of the government shuttered over the president’s demand for the wall. Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, and Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, who is expected to be sworn in as speaker on Thursday, challenged Republicans in a joint statement on Monday.

“If Leader McConnell and Senate Republicans refuse to support the first bill, then they are complicit with President Trump in continuing the Trump shutdown and in holding the health and safety of the American people and workers’ paychecks hostage over the wall,” the statement said, adding that rejecting the bill would be “the height of irresponsibility and political cynicism.”

Mr. Trump continued to dig in on New Year’s Eve, venting his frustrations in tweets and in a Fox News interview as the shutdown stretched into its 10th day and as furloughed federal workers were about to miss their paychecks on Wednesday.

“I spent Christmas in the White House, I spent New Year’s Eve now in the White House,” Mr. Trump said on Fox News, according to excerpts released. “And you know, I’m here, I’m ready to go. It’s very important. A lot of people are looking to get their paycheck, so I’m ready to go whenever they want.”

The president made building a “big beautiful” wall along the southern border a central promise of his 2016 campaign, and he is concerned that if he gives in on wall funding, his political base will revolt.

“I campaigned on Border Security, which you cannot have without a strong and powerful Wall,” Mr. Trump wrote Monday morning on Twitter. “Our Southern Border has long been an ‘Open Wound,’ where drugs, criminals (including human traffickers) and illegals would pour into our Country.”

And Representative Mark Meadows, Republican of North Carolina and the chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, blasted the Democrats’ proposal. “Nancy Pelosi’s newest funding proposal doesn’t represent any serious attempt to secure our border or find a compromise,” Mr. Meadows wrote on Twitter. “A $1.3 billion Democrat wish list that includes zero money for a border barrier is a non-starter and will not be a legitimate answer to this impasse.”

The shutdown standoff will give Americans their first glimpse at how Washington will work in a new era of divided government. It will also be the first leadership test for Ms. Pelosi, who anticipated a string of celebrations as she reclaims the gavel as the nation’s first female speaker of the House. She has continued to insist that Democrats will not cave on wall funding.

“He’s not going to get a wall,” Ms. Pelosi said in a recent interview. “But he has to recognize, we are the first branch, Article 1, the legislative branch, and we’re here not as a rubber stamp to the executive branch but are coequal to him.”

The shutdown is affecting parts of nine cabinet-level departments, and as it drags on, anxieties are rising among the 800,000 federal employees who are either furloughed or working without pay. In one ominous sign, the federal Office of Personnel Management has posted a sample letter for mortgage companies and creditors on its website, giving guidance to federal employees on how to negotiate reduced payments.

Democrats say their proposed measures would create a month of breathing space for the president to negotiate with them. But Mr. Trump would lose much of his leverage in the border fight if he accepts their terms.

The Democrats’ two-pronged plan will also complicate life for Mr. McConnell, who has said he will not bring up any measure that does not have the president’s support. Once the bills pass the House, as expected, Mr. McConnell will have to decide whether to put one, both or neither on the Senate floor for votes.

His deputy chief of staff, Don Stewart, refused to tip his hand on Monday, saying only: “It’s simple. The Senate is not going to send something to the president that he won’t sign.”

By passing only a short-term funding extension for the Homeland Security Department, Democrats would effectively prolong the divisive debate over the wall — and potentially open a path for a broader immigration overhaul. That could expose divisions among Democrats.

But Democrats say they hope their plan will draw a sharp contrast between them and Mr. Trump by projecting an image of a responsible party trying to govern in a capital ruled by a president who thrives on unpredictability.

“I think it will suck some oxygen out of the room — that’s obviously what’s happening here,” Representative Tim Ryan, Democrat of Ohio, said in an interview on Monday. “We’ve got to really learn how to play jujitsu with the president and figure out how to take the wall issue and show the American people that we are the modern party who will actually secure the border and also be for a compassionate immigration system that recognizes the benefits of immigration and diversity.”

For newly elected Democrats, having the shutdown languish into the new year means that they will be able to vote and have a say in the renewed negotiations — a chance, some said, to open their tenure with a flourish.

“I’m proud that on our very first day, we are presenting solutions to the American people,” Representative-elect Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, Democrat of Florida, said in a statement. “I hope Republicans will support this funding measure so we can move forward and work on the issues the American people elected us to tackle.”

The 1,070-page legislative package, which was made public on Monday afternoon, includes six bills that are virtually identical to the legislation that passed the Senate Appropriations Committee in 2018, and in four cases passed the Senate, according to summaries prepared by Democrats on the committee. It also includes the stopgap measure for the Homeland Security Department.

The similarities, Democrats argued, bolster their argument that the package would pass the Senate, if granted a floor vote.

In several instances, the bills rebuff funding cuts proposed by the administration and instead pour more funds into programs Mr. Trump either suggested reducing or eliminating. One bill in the package includes more funding for the 2020 census and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s climate research.

The bill also provides $110 million for NASA’s efforts to teach science, technology, engineering and math — programs the president had proposed eliminating. Another bill would fully fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the food stamp program, into 2019. And while the bill does not reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, which protects victims of domestic violence and designates money for the prosecution of those who commit violent crimes against women, the package provides nearly $500 million in funds for programs under the act, which recently expired.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democrats-try-to-box-in-trump-with-plan-to-end-government-shutdown-without-wall-funding/ar-BBRExSP?ocid=UE13DHP
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 07:40 pm
It's worth a try.
Real Music
 
  1  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 07:59 pm
@edgarblythe,
Definitely.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 08:08 pm
I saw a meme that said Elizabeth Warren's positions regarding military are the same as H Clinton's. I hoped it was not so, for I will not be happy with a warmonger. I searched and found something by her that calls for ending the never ending wars. So back to watching to see how she will become once she is a full candidate.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 08:40 pm
@edgarblythe,
We need war to protect ourselves from enemies who would massacre us if they could.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  4  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 09:13 pm
@Real Music,
The only "box in Trump" that I'll be happy with is him in prison.
livinglava
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 09:43 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

The only "box in Trump" that I'll be happy with is him in prison.

You want to put him in prison along with everyone who doesn't tow the line of hate against him?
cicerone imposter
 
  5  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 11:54 pm
@livinglava,
Not really. Just Donald Trump would satisfy me. He killed the stock market, and our gain was the lowest in many years. From CNBC.COM: POLITICS
Trump loved celebrating the stock market surge in 2017, but he's been quiet about this year's declines
Real Music
 
  4  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2019 12:41 am
@cicerone imposter,
I've come to notice that Trump supporters cannot comprehend why everyone doesn't want to kiss Trump's ass.
Trump supporters are really confused and baffled over this.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  0  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2019 10:11 am
https://truthout.org/articles/third-way-democrats-are-trying-to-push-the-party-rightward/

A great primer for the DLC/Third Way fight against progressivism.

Stringer Bell had a problem. On HBO’s show “The Wire,” the rather learned kingpin was concerned that the drugs his gang sold on the streets of West Baltimore were too weak, which jeopardized their control of the streets. So, in a memorable scene, Bell, who was taking economics courses at a community college, asked his instructor, “What are the options if you have an inferior product in an aggressive marketplace?” The instructor offered him some prescient advice, mentioning how WorldCom (now MCI Inc.) once faced a similar problem.

“The company was linked to one of the largest fraud cases in history,” he said. “So, they decided to change the name.”

Bell adopted the strategy. West Baltimore was soon flooded with the same inferior product, but with a slew of flashy new names.

The world of politics and ideas is an especially aggressive marketplace. Here, so-called centrist “New Democrats” adopted a very similar approach. For many years, Democrats proudly associated themselves with the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), a powerful group founded in the 1980s that sought to build a Democratic Party “liberated”­ from labor and grounded in “support for free market and free trade economics … an end to the politics of ‘entitlement’ [and] a rejection of affirmative action.”

At the height of its power the DLC was the dominant force in the party, boasting President Bill Clinton and UK Prime Minister Tony Blair as its acolytes. But like Bell’s weak narcotics, the DLC, which supported the Iraq War and received money from the likes of the Koch Brothers, soon became a tainted brand. Long before 2011, when the organization dissolved, the DLC label hung around politicians like a scarlet letter. Even President Obama publicly distanced himself from the organization in 2004 as he ascended as a national figure.

So, eager to maintain power and influence, New Democrats did what Stringer Bell ended up doing. They changed the name.

“I don’t think the people who ran the DLC ever really left,” said Norman Solomon, a coordinator for RootsAction, in an interview with Truthout. “It is the same product, different name.” Indeed, the DLC agenda is carried out today by think tanks like the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) and Third Way, which push the same regressive agenda but under different labels, and with less public scrutiny. As the Boston Globe described in 2014, Third Way usually works “behind the scenes — in the White House, the corridors of Congress, and the office suites of lobbying firms in downtown Washington.”

Now, as Democrats face an existential crisis in the aftermath of the election of Donald Trump, these fundamentally conservative organizations, armed with millions in corporate donations, are working with a renewed aggressiveness in the public sphere. They are attempting to convince the party to shun its base and further embrace the so-called “vital center,” and the corporatism that has long defined these groups.

If Third Way succeeds, the Democrats will leave an opening for right-wing “populism” to thrive long after the Trump presidency. If this happens, Americans will increasingly (and correctly) see Democrats as a party run by the establishment, and serving the interests of its donors, rather than the working class. This is why progressive activists are fighting hard to rid the party of Democrats who embrace this agenda.

Wrong Lessons From 2016: Third Way’s Using Trump Election to Gain Influence

Sensing blood in the water since the election, the 13-year-old Third Way think tank, which was “never formally associated with DLC but self-consciously drawing on the same heritage,” as former DLC staffer Ed Kilgore once wrote, has been especially aggressive. It has thrown $20 million into its “New Blue Campaign.” The campaign, according to Third Way President Jonathan Cowen, aims to prevent Democrats from meeting “Donald Trump’s dangerous right-wing populism with a liberal populism of our own.” To put this in perspective, $20 million is enough to fund a fairly large nonprofit organization like 350.org or the Center for Constitutional Rights for about two years. However, it’s a relative drop in a bucket for an organization that by its own admission is backed almost entirely by Wall Street sources.

Additionally, the organization published a paper in late February called, “Why Demography Does Not Equal Destiny,” which has been covered by much of the dominant media and even been praised by numerous conservative outlets and think tanks. The basic premise: Democrats are wrong to appeal to growing demographics that lean liberal, such as Latinos and young people. Third Way claims that this thinking has led Democrats to “pursue a base-only strategy without worrying about persuading a broader swath of voters to support them.” Democrats are failing to acknowledge, it argues, that voters are increasingly registering as independents and do not identify as liberal. It declares that the party must move to the center.

Third Way’s argument rests on the flawed notion that the Democrats have already been guilty of running a “base-only” strategy. The party’s problems and electoral defeats, it argues, are because it is just too progressive for its own good.

However, the more persuasive argument is that the Democrats lost the election precisely because they are too much like what Third Way wants them to be: deferential, non-ideological and too close to Wall Street. “Secretary Clinton does represent the establishment,” Sen. Bernie Sanders explained during the primary.

Consider what occurred in 2016. The Democrats ran a candidate who spent most of her career as a figurehead for groups like Third Way and the DLC. Clinton was a prominent member of the New Democratic Caucus in the Senate and spoke at DLC conferences on multiple occasions as recently as 2008. She was also awash in corporate money, dominating every other candidate in donations from Wall Street, Big Pharma, Big Media and most other centers of private capital, while her primary opponent relied almost entirely on grassroots support. Meanwhile, she was given strategic support from the Democratic National Committee, which collaborated in efforts to discredit Bernie Sanders (which it vehemently denied before being exposed) and leaked debate questions to Clinton. The campaign, with the support of almost every powerful Democrat, went on to smear ideas that appeal to the base, such as Medicare for All and tuition-free higher education, saying they were unrealistic.

Working-class voters, especially in states hurt by the very same trade deals Hillary Clinton has defended and Third Way promoted vigorously, viewed her as part of “the establishment.” They were turned off by her relationship with Wall Street figures, who donated to her campaign in record numbers, and gave her grotesque sums of money to give speeches at Goldman Sachs (the contents of which were eventually leaked). Thus, Third Way got the candidate it wanted, she had the full support of the establishment, and she still lost. Third Way, however, continues to claim the party has been insufficiently establishment-oriented in recent years.

The Great Independent Voter Fallacy

Third Way’s rhetoric repeatedly conflates “independent” with “moderate.” This conflation is repeated frequently in the media as a truism. And while the specific politics of “independent voters” vary widely and change from election to election, pollsters agree that “it’s critical not to confuse ‘independents’ with ‘moderates,'” as 538 acknowledged in an article about Bernie Sanders’ success among independents.

The reality that “independent” does not equal “moderate” has been affirmed by many other pollsters and experts, including Tom Jensen at Public Policy Polling and even the DLC’s still surviving sister think tank, the Progressive Policy Institute, which acknowledged as much in 2010.

“One of the frustrating things about contemporary political analysis is the frequency with which key terms get used in a very sloppy manner that reflects highly biased or inaccurate assumptions,” the Progressive Policy Institute stated in a 2010 article on its website. “A perpetual example is the use of ‘independent’ and ‘moderate’ as interchangeable words for unaffiliated voters.”

Yet Third Way insists Democrats must govern to the right because “a near record high 38 percent of Americans now call themselves a political Independent…. And key groups in the Rising American Electorate have a high proportion of Independents, particularly Millennials and Asians.”

This interpretation of millennials’ politics runs contrary to the research: Polls show a majority of millennials “reject capitalism.” The rise of movements like Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter, populated largely by younger people, also indicates that the equation of “independent” with “moderate” does not sync, when it comes to millennials. Polls show many young people are admirers of Senator Sanders, who himself is a registered independent. During the primary, Gallup showed Sanders with an 82 percent approval rating among millennial Democrats and 55 percent overall (compared with 38 and 22 percent for Clinton and Trump respectively). In fact, a March 15 Fox News Poll shows him as the most popular politician in the country overall, regardless of age. Yet Third Way insists the Democrats can win over these anticapitalist millennials by cutting entitlements and compromising more with Republicans — and it is now attempting to rally grassroots support for these efforts.

Third Way’s Media Offensive Isn’t Working

The aggressiveness with which Third Way is promoting the New Blue campaign and this flawed paper is noteworthy. On their Twitter account, they have been promoting their demography paper with a fervor that is unusual for a group that, as the Boston Globe described, usually works “behind the scenes” in “the office suites of lobbying firms.” Not only is the paper pinned to the top of its official Twitter account (@ThirdWayTweet), but the group has been retweeting it frequently from both its main account and other Third Way accounts, such as Third Way Politics (@TWPolitics). Third Way has also been publishing articles on Medium and even made a video explaining the paper’s content on its own YouTube channel.

It is notable that despite these efforts, there is so little grassroots support for Third Way. As of March 21, the official Twitter account has just north of 10,000 followers, slightly less than Flat Earth Today and about 20 percent the amount of Our Revolution. The group’s national security Twitter account has about 2,500 followers, as does its economic account (@ThirdWayEcon). And the account for its prized new “New Blue Campaign,” has 287 followers, which is about 100 fewer than an account devoted to cats in favor of abolishing prisons (@Cats4Abolition). The video version of “Why Demography Does Not Equal Destiny” was been watched on YouTube 134 times at the time of this writing. Comments and upvotes are blocked, perhaps because its administrators are aware that there is virtually no grassroots support for a group whose mission is to make the Democrats even more establishment-driven.

The lack of public enthusiasm for Third Way is not surprising. As Truthout has previously reported, New Democrats have never really been about popular support. Their audiences are inside meeting rooms in DC, and their currency is not the will of the masses, or crowded town halls, but, well, actual currency. In fact, one of the purposes of the Third Way/DLC crowd is to allow Democrats to succeed without needing to worry about unionists or feminists or protesters spoiling their party.

In fact, the Third Way staff actually promotes its ability to oppose grassroots interests. For example, on Third Way’s website, the staff bio for Senior Fellow for Health and Fiscal Policy Dave Kendall states: “In the early 1990s, he worked with moderate Democrats on the Hill to change the traditional approach to Democratic health policy-making, known as single-payer health care.”

Of course, the Democratic Party has made no secret of its failure to push for single-payer for years. But for a so-called Democrat to brag openly about helping the party abandon the very concept of universal public health care shows how little concern the so-called New Democrats have for actual Democrats, 81 percent of whom support such a system.

Third Way has gotten by with this indifference to actual people in large part because its strategy of “splitting the difference” between the two parties already sells well to a Democratic Party establishment, which has long been compromised by corporate money.

“In this sense, the DLC has already won,” said Steve Maher, a social critic and Ph.D. student at York University, in an interview with Truthout. “The Democrats have moved away from organized labor, toward corporate power and are pursuing a neoliberal agenda.”

This is especially true in a post-Citizens United world where corporate money has become increasingly important, at the expense of the value of public sentiment. Likewise, this centrist/moderate mantra sells well in the media, which has long been structured in a way that favors elite interests. The same kinds of corporate entities that fund Third Way, and benefit from their pro-business agenda, literally own the mainstream media. And sure enough, the argument Third Way is advancing is being amplified by dominant media outlets, often by name, and by numerous other writers making their own argument for pushing the party to the right.

The Death of the DLC and Progressives’ Premature Victory Party

Third Way’s real audience is not the masses of people protesting the gross inequities of our political and economic system. Its real targets are power brokers working on K Street or Wall Street. While Third Way may fail when it attempts to court support from the public, it rises to the challenge when it comes to wielding influence among elite players in politics, finance and media. When the DLC died in 2011, many progressives were (understandably) elated and declared victory in the battle for the “soul of the Democratic Party.”

“Where is the grave so I can go dance on it!” boasted Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas, who fought several rounds with the DLC over the Howard Dean and Ned Lamont campaigns. “One of the things that is happening in Democratic politics is that progressives are winning the battle for the party,” said former Progressive Congress President Darcy Burner to Politico.

However, the victory dance was premature. The DLC was dead in name only. Even before it officially dissolved, its allies were laying the groundwork to continue its agenda. “I am a New Democrat,” Obama told the New Democrat Coalition in 2009, according to Politico. Obama’s unambiguous words of support to this faction of the party was notable, especially since for most of his career he has, as Politico noted, “largely avoided the Democratic Leadership Council.”

It is indeed telling that President Obama kept his distance from DLC, but still assured their people he was on their side. He knew the DLC name would hurt his carefully crafted image in the eyes of progressives, but in terms of general philosophy, Obama’s description of himself as a “New Democrat” was accurate. He embraced industry to a fault and kept his distance from the left. He relied solely on “market solutions” to health care, despite being a long-time supporter of single-payer.

He also hired DLC alumni often and in positions of importance, most notably appointing two White House chiefs of staff who were proud DLC allies: Rahm Emanuel and Bill Daley, the latter of which is a Third Way board member. “Visitor logs show that Third Way leaders have enjoyed excellent access to the Obama White House, with at least 50 visits since 2009,” reported the Boston Globe in 2014.

In this context, the White House’s decision to vigorously oppose Keith Ellison as chair of the Democratic National Committee, a move supported by New Democrats, makes plenty of sense.

“There will always be a class conflict, and the powerful will always try and use the Democratic Party as a vehicle to wage it,” Solomon said.

Indeed, the “battle” for the party’s soul is seemingly another endless war. After almost every election cycle, New Democrats either try to claim responsibility for the victory or use the defeat to advance their cause. In 2006, when Democrats took back Congress in large part due to opposition to President Bush’s war in Iraq, which the DLC supported, New Democrats said it was “a victory for the vital center.” When Democrats got crushed in 2010, Third Way was, as an American Prospect article described it, “salivating at the prospect of a Republican-controlled House” so it could “vigorously oppose the left.”

Now the self-styled “centrists” are at it again: Third Way is trying to convince Democrats to shun their base at a time when it has never been more educated, energized and ready for change.
edgarblythe
 
  0  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2019 10:20 am
The road to hell is paved with 3RD Way intentions.
0 Replies
 
livinglava
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2019 11:08 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Not really. Just Donald Trump would satisfy me. He killed the stock market, and our gain was the lowest in many years. From CNBC.COM: POLITICS
Trump loved celebrating the stock market surge in 2017, but he's been quiet about this year's declines

So you want to have an authoritarian society where people are judged according to how well they support the stock market, and those that don't are to be imprisoned or otherwise punished?
0 Replies
 
livinglava
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2019 11:19 am
@Lash,
Lash wrote:

Additionally, the organization published a paper in late February called, “Why Demography Does Not Equal Destiny,” which has been covered by much of the dominant media and even been praised by numerous conservative outlets and think tanks. The basic premise: Democrats are wrong to appeal to growing demographics that lean liberal, such as Latinos and young people. Third Way claims that this thinking has led Democrats to “pursue a base-only strategy without worrying about persuading a broader swath of voters to support them.” Democrats are failing to acknowledge, it argues, that voters are increasingly registering as independents and do not identify as liberal. It declares that the party must move to the center.

What they should do is stop using identity politics to try to connect with voters. People are increasingly aware they are being tricked in this way, and they don't want to be tricked into supporting their own exploitation by someone who basically just mocks them by making them feel like their identity is represented by a candidate.

It's like having a salesperson try to sell you something by convincing you that they are the same type of person as you are. It's like in the movie Beetlejuice when Michael Keaton tries to sell his services to Alec Baldwin by mimicking his clothes and calling him 'hermano.' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvT1wym97qo

Democrats should try to be honest instead of manipulating the public to get votes. If they present their policy ideas and ask for feedback on why people don't like them and/or how they would modify them, then they can rework them and try again. If they come up with something the public appreciates, they will get votes. If not, they won't.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2019 11:55 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
He killed the stock market,

People in the market are still ahead since Trump took office. They have lost nothing but the ability to tell the truth.
Quote:
The Dow closed at 19,827.25 on Inauguration Day, Jan. 20, 2017, which means it has about 3,700 points to go before the Trump rally gains are gone.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/23/heres-how-much-the-stock-market-is-still-up-since-donald-trump-took-office.html
The Dow just closed at 23,327.46. Stop lying.
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2019 12:08 pm
@Real Music,
I agree with an article I posted a few days ago which suggested democrats fund the wall in exchange for Dreamers and other immigration issues such as migrants and asylum issues. I agree, otherwise, this could go on and government workers suffer. Playing chicken with people's lives is pathetically small minded.
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2019 12:16 pm
@revelette1,
Quote:
Playing chicken with people's lives is pathetically small minded.

Those small minded people are the Leftists telling these people to risk their children's lives to break the laws of another country. Something they have no right to encourage but do with out regard for anyone's safety.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2019 12:32 pm
https://c2.legalinsurrection.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Goolag-600-LI.jpg
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/01/best-a-f-branco-legal-insurrection-cartoon-of-2018-reader-poll/
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 01/22/2022 at 11:41:50