President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[Jeff Lebowski]

That was a great column.

Yes indeed. Love the rip on Sean Hannity as well.

[Jeff Lebowski]

It is pretty ironic how a body slam joke gets the MSM up in arms about that Drumpf is obviously a violent person and not very presidential. At the same time the NYTimes refuses to pull their sponsorship of a play that has a depiction of Drumpf being assassinated. Where is the professionalism? Obviously it doesn't exist any more so maybe everyone just needs to get use to it and realize that Drumpf appeals to the common man, the people that elected him. And as long as the MSM keeps attacking him and he keeps body slamming them then he will most likely get re-elected by this same group of people.

On the other hand, members of the democratic party are upset with the image that the former president is giving. It doesn't matter if Obama is spending his "own" money (how did Obama become worth $40mil anyway?) or the pension money the people give him. The optics looks bad.

Like clockwork.

It would be hilarious if Uncle Ted's kids used this appeal-to-hypocrisy bullshit on him.

UT: "Hey you are in big trouble young man. We learned that you beat up the neighbor girl yesterday."
Kid: "So what? The neighbor girl was mean to her dog two years ago."
UT: "Really? OK. Never mind then.

[Northwestcoug]

I assume the "you liberals" was intended for third parties, not me, although you were responding to my earlier post. FTR, I have voted Republican in presidential elections all but twice since 1972. I tend to side with George Will and NR in my dislike for Trump.

And those cost-saving things you mentioned are good, but dubious. Many question the $1 Billion savings on Air Force One.




Is he covering the cost of Secret Service protection for his sons as they go around the world promoting the Trump brand? I honestly don't know, but it's evident that the spike in value of his personal holdings as a result of his presidency dwarfs superficially selfless measures like giving three-months of salary to the NPS.

The NR piece OG posted was good, esp. its rips on Sean Hannity, "the self-abasing monkey-butler of the Trump regime."

Do.not.get.in.a.link.war.with.UT. You will not win. He is unrelenting.

[Uncle Ted]

Like clockwork.

It would be hilarious if Uncle Ted's kids used this appeal-to-hypocrisy bullshit on him.

UT: "Hey you are in big trouble young man. We learned that you beat up the neighbor girl yesterday."
Kid: "So what? The neighbor girl was mean to her dog two years ago."
UT: "Really? OK. Never mind then.

Yeah, if the girl was mean to her dog then she most likely deserved it. #DogLivesMatter

[Uncle Ted]

I assume the "you liberals" was intended for third parties, not me, although you were responding to my earlier post. FTR, I have voted Republican in presidential elections all but twice since 1972. I tend to side with George Will and NR in my dislike for Trump.

Yes, "you liberals" was intended for liberals.

George Will and NR need to own up to their party's candidate or find a new party. Drumpf is theirs. And Crooked Hillary is the dems. Of course, it is debatable if democracy is alive and well in the DNC so it may actually be arguable about Hillary.

And those cost-saving things you mentioned are good, but dubious. Many question the $1 Billion savings on Air Force One.

Is he covering the cost of Secret Service protection for his sons as they go around the world promoting the Trump brand? I honestly don't know, but it's evident that the spike in value of his personal holdings as a result of his presidency dwarfs superficially selfless measures like giving three-months of salary to the NPS.

The NR piece OG posted was good, esp. its rips on Sean Hannity, "the self-abasing monkey-butler of the Trump regime."

I will have to question if Drumpf saved a billion on the new Air Force Ones that Obama ordered. And I suspect that Drumpf is covering the cost of secret service protection for his sons as much as Obama did for his daughters. Should the secret service not provide protection for the Drumpf children because he is white or something?

It doesn't matter if the Drumpf brand has increased in value as a result of his presidency. The Drumpf band may have actually been damaged due to all of this given the amount of protesting going on around his properties. It boils down to how it looks. Most folks, it seems, like seeing Drumpf signing over his salary check to the NPS, and keeping a campaign promise. CNN is right that Drumpf voters "are stupid as sh*t". Well, these "stupid as sh*t" voters may vote for him again (but stop watching CNN).

[Jeff Lebowski]

[QUOTE=Uncle Ted;1324216]
George Will and NR need to own up to their party's candidate or find a new party. Drumpf is theirs. /QUOTE]

Rock solid logic there, UT.

[PaloAltoCougar]

...Should the secret service not provide protection for the Drumpf children because he is white or something?

Yes, the SS should protect a President's children in their everyday activities, and should do so at taxpayer expense (interesting that you mention race, btw). Should that protection be extended without cost to adult children as they travel, at their personal choice, to Dubai, Scotland and other Trump resorts for the purpose of fattening their bottom lines?

P.S. I'll ask again if your candidate has been able to reach a conclusion as to whether entering WWII was a good idea. If given 70+ years to make a decision, I'm sure he would have been a great leader.

[Shaka]

Yes, the SS should protect a President's children in their everyday activities, and should do so at taxpayer expense (interesting that you mention race, btw). Should that protection be extended without cost to adult children as they travel, at their personal choice, to Dubai, Scotland and other Trump resorts for the purpose of fattening their bottom lines?

Absolutely. They are targets simply for being the offspring of a sitting president. They ought to be protected while they go out and earn their livings regardless of where they are. I've never understood the whining about SS protection.

[Topper]

Yes, the SS should protect a President's children in their everyday activities, and should do so at taxpayer expense (interesting that you mention race, btw). Should that protection be extended without cost to adult children as they travel, at their personal choice, to Dubai, Scotland and other Trump resorts for the purpose of fattening their bottom lines?

P.S. I'll ask again if your candidate has been able to reach a conclusion as to whether entering WWII was a good idea. If given 70+ years to make a decision, I'm sure he would have been a great leader.

I can imagine your reasons for this.

As a thought experiment, how tragic would it be if we didn't protect our elected officials and their families? I understand many would not like the result and I do not promote the idea but rather wonder if we place too much value in the protection of our elected officials.

I submit the markets would have a temporary negative reaction due to the potential for lack of stability, but if something horrible happened to the entire Congress. Would life continue for most citizens? Wouldn't we just replace them with some of the same ole same ole. I suppose the argument of losing experienced politicians would be considered a horrible loss by some, but we have plenty at the state level who would simply rise up to fill those positions. Aren't our federal officials virtually fungible? If so, shouldn't we treat them accordingly? It's not like we are protecting Michael Jordan or somebody talented and important.

The bottom line is we will pay to protect them so that they can't be used by opponents to leverage public policy.

[Maximus]

It seems people don't really care what Drumpf does with his own money... That just gives the image of a successful businessman. What they do care about is what he is doing with the people's money. For example:

Trump's Leaner White House Payroll Projected To Save Taxpayers $22 Million

Trump: An hour of negotiations saved more than $1 billion on Air Force One

Trump Donates First-Quarter Salary to National Park Service

On the other hand, members of the democratic party are upset with the image that the former president is giving. It doesn't matter if Obama is spending his "own" money (how did Obama become worth $40mil anyway?) or the pension money the people give him. The optics looks bad.

If liberals don't wake up this all could lead to their worst nightmare...


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...office-twitter

You liberals need to get your sh*t together! Start by reforming the DNC.

wow the bar keeps getting lower

[Maximus]

Yes, "you liberals" was intended for liberals.

George Will and NR need to own up to their party's candidate or find a new party. Drumpf is theirs. And Crooked Hillary is the dems. Of course, it is debatable if democracy is alive and well in the DNC so it may actually be arguable about Hillary.




I will have to question if Drumpf saved a billion on the new Air Force Ones that Obama ordered. And I suspect that Drumpf is covering the cost of secret service protection for his sons as much as Obama did for his daughters. Should the secret service not provide protection for the Drumpf children because he is white or something?

It doesn't matter if the Drumpf brand has increased in value as a result of his presidency. The Drumpf band may have actually been damaged due to all of this given the amount of protesting going on around his properties. It boils down to how it looks. Most folks, it seems, like seeing Drumpf signing over his salary check to the NPS, and keeping a campaign promise. CNN is right that Drumpf voters "are stupid as sh*t". Well, these "stupid as sh*t" voters may vote for him again (but stop watching CNN).

man your denial of your trump support is amazing

[PaloAltoCougar]

Gentlemen (Shaka and Topper), I'm not questioning the need for Secret Service protection for a President's children (and the threat is far greater for his/her family than for the family of a Congressman from Dubuque). I think such protection should have reasonable limits, and that the protection cost of weekly nonessential travel to vacation hotspots around the world for adult children shouldn't be borne by the taxpayers.

[Moliere]

Yes, the SS should protect a President's children in their everyday activities, and should do so at taxpayer expense (interesting that you mention race, btw). Should that protection be extended without cost to adult children as they travel, at their personal choice, to Dubai, Scotland and other Trump resorts for the purpose of fattening their bottom lines?

P.S. I'll ask again if your candidate has been able to reach a conclusion as to whether entering WWII was a good idea. If given 70+ years to make a decision, I'm sure he would have been a great leader.

Ha, salty PAC is a fun PAC


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Northwestcoug]

UT PAC

It's hilarious that in UT's world the crackpot libertarians don't get the same level of scrutiny that the saner political groups get

[frank ryan]

I'm surprised our vigilant Libertarian has expressed concern about Trump's voter fraud commission asking states for non-publicly available data, like ssns and voting history. Seems like federal overreach to me. https://www.wired.com/story/trump-wa...d-go-wrong/amp