Open Thread

Our liberals are going nuts over Trump sending troops to the border…apparently working under the weird assumption that our army isn’t supposed to protect our borders. I guess that concept has gotten lost after 70 years of sending our troops into foreign shooting galleries under strict orders not to win.

President Trump is asking for $341,559.50 in legal fees from Team Stormy. No, I don’t know why they didn’t just round it up.

Its a small and very, very weird world:

In a really strange turn of events, it has been discovered that bombing suspect Cesar Sayoc worked at Ultra Gentleman’s Club in West Palm Beach, FL, the same strip club that Stormy Daniels performed at back in April, WPTV reported.

Jair Bolsonaro won the Presidency of Brazil with 56% of the vote and this is being described as a major blow against Democracy…because the people voted the wrong way, you see? The global elite is deathly afraid of that. Now, plenty of people on the right in the USA did laud the victory…but I’d hold off. Let’s see if he’s really the Tropical Trump he’s called, or if he’s a nut before we embrace him.

Victor Davis Hanson has an excellent article on the paradoxes of the immigrants – specifically, the caravan. Mostly centering around the oddity that they want to come here, but they don’t seem to particularly want to be American. I liken it to the barbarians outside Rome in the 5th century…they very much wanted to enjoy the good things of Rome, but they weren’t at all interested in preserving the social structures which produced the good things of Rome. The collapse of Western civilization (which was quite epic) from the 5th to the 10th centuries was simply because of this – and had the barbarians come in and humbly asked to be taught, it would have been a lot different. I’ve come around to the view that all immigration to the United States must cease for a period of at least 20 years. We need to kick out those who won’t assimilate and assimilate those who are willing. And only after that is accomplished can we afford to open the door again.

I didn’t know this – Don Surber notes that in order to get a poll response pool of 737 people, a total of 38,000 calls had to be made. That is a 1.94% response rate. Now, the pollsters tell you this doesn’t matter because those who hang up likely have the same overall opinions as those who don’t. Really? Seriously? I just can’t hold that to be credible – you might be missing some major trends out there. You know, like PA, MI and WI all breaking for Trump…

UPDATE: Trump secures Amazona’s vote for 2020:

President Donald Trump said in an interview that he plans to sign an executive order ending “birthright citizenship” for the children of non-American citizens who are born on U.S. soil, a move that would likely be challenged immediately in the courts over its constitutionality.

The first thing you think is that Democrats will challenge this in court…but, if they do, they have no assurance that the Supreme Court will back them. All they may end up doing is cementing Trump Administration policy. Also: my bet is that most Americans didn’t realize until just now that you can get citizenship merely by being born in the United States, even if of illegal immigrant parents. Democrats should be wary of fighting on this hill.

They won’t be, of course. Because they’re stupid.

60 thoughts on “Open Thread

  1. Frank Lee (@trumpcowboy) October 30, 2018 / 12:34 am

    My Brazilian friends tell me that Bolsonaro really is a tropical Trump. Very down to Earth and no nonsense. They love him. They actually think he won by a much bigger margin but a lot of the voting machines were rigged in areas the leftists controlled. (Sound familiar?) They also say the socialists were so corrupt, when they were in power they almost destroyed the country to the point of no return. (Sound familiar?) And that the leftist controlled press in Brazil has been pulling his quotes out of context to try to make him look more extreme than he really is. (Sound familiar?)

    Anyhow, they are very hopeful and at least know that the alternative leftist candidate was definitely worse. (Sound familiar?)

    • M. Noonan October 30, 2018 / 11:41 am

      I’m cautiously optimistic – essentially, ever since a clique of army officers overthrew Brazil’s fairly decent monarchy in the 19th century, Brazil has suffered one set of crooks after another plundering the nation. We’ll see if the new guy can change that trajectory.

  2. Retired Spook October 30, 2018 / 1:06 pm

    I’m not sure at what point in our history our lawmakers decided to ignore the part of the 14th Amendment that says “and subject to the Jurisdiction thereof,” but it looks like we finally have a president with the cajones to say, “enough of that sh*t.” An executive order ending birthright citizenship ought to be the final straw that causes the Left to implode.

    • Retired Spook October 30, 2018 / 1:09 pm

      I jumped the gun. Rush is saying that We started ignoring the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” clause back in the 1960’s. Color me shocked.

      • Cluster October 30, 2018 / 1:34 pm

        According to MSNBC, Trump is unilaterally changing the Constitution (they never tire of emotionally charged hyperbole)

        And do you think that maybe two prized Democrat constructs; DACA and “anchor babies” serve as a magnet for illegal immigration? Do you think there is any connection?

      • M. Noonan October 30, 2018 / 3:44 pm

        They are stupidly absurd these days, aren’t they?

      • fieldingclaymore October 30, 2018 / 2:16 pm

        Also, though I’m no legal scholar, “and subject to the Jurisdiction thereof,” applies to children of diplomats and the like born in America.

      • M. Noonan October 30, 2018 / 3:38 pm

        Intentional or not, it was Ted Kennedy’s immigration reform in 1965 which lead us here. Now, whether or not President Trump can really just interpret the law to say, “no birthright citizenship for illegals” is something that will be hashed out in the Courts…and hashed out fairly rapidly because you know our liberals will find a federal judge who will issue a nationwide injunction against Trump. But, to me, the most crucial aspect of this is that Trump has shifted the debate away from “when will be have amnesty?” to “are children of illegals citizens?”. He’s done this in less than two years…

      • Amazona October 31, 2018 / 1:15 am

        Fielding erroneously states: “and subject to the Jurisdiction thereof,” applies to children of diplomats and the like born in America. In fact, children of diplomats “and the like” are specifically mentioned as categories of people NOT given citizenship because they are born in this country.

        Trump is right to clarify.

        This is a brilliant move, as it is what has been needed for a long time now to get this matter out in the open and to formally abide by the Supreme Court ruling in Elk v Wilkins. This has been addressed, and ruled on, in the Supreme Court. Trump is not making law from the Oval Office, but merely saying existing law, as written in the 14th Amendment and clarified by the Supreme Court, must be followed.

        The 14th Amendment says All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States The key word is AND. If the amendment intended to convey citizenship to anyone born in the nation, period, there would not have been a need for the qualification of also being under the jurisdiction of the United States. It would simply have said “All persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States”. There is a reason for the qualification of also (“AND”) being under the jurisdiction of the United States,

        “Under the jurisdiction” is a phrase that can be spun, as it has been by the Left, to mean that people physically present in the United States are under the jurisdiction of the United States because they are under the jurisdiction of the law of the United States. But when they have a problem, they go to the embassies or consulates of their own nations. Their passports have to be issued by those nations. THAT is what is meant by “under the jurisdiction”. If merely being physically present in the United States were to equal being under the jurisdiction of the United States, then the US could issue passports to people who are citizens of other nations. As long as they are citizens of another nation they are under the jurisdiction of that nation.

        When I am in the UK I am under the jurisdiction of the laws of the UK. That is, I have to drive on the left side of the road, and I can’t carry a gun. But if I lose my passport, I go to the US Embassy to get a new one, because my CITIZENSHIP is under the jurisdiction of the United States. If I have a legal problem, because I am under the jurisdiction of the United States, it is the United States that helps me.

        Slaves, freed slaves and the children of slaves were not under the jurisdiction of any other nation. They were people without a nation. They were the intended beneficiaries of the 14th Amendment, because there was no conflict with any other country, regarding authority over them by any other country or allegiance to any other country.

        Senator Jacob Howard worked with President Lincoln to draft the wording of the 13th and 14th Amendments, and he clarified the 14th Amendment. When in doubt about the intent of a law, it is best to go to the explanations of those who wrote it.

        “Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.”

        Contemporaneously, Senator Edward Cowan explained:
        “[A foreigner in the United States] has a right to the protection of the laws; but he is not a citizen in the ordinary acceptance of the word…”


        There is a Supreme Court ruling on birthright citizenship:

        Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884),[1] was a United States Supreme Court case respecting the citizenship status of Indians.

        John Elk, a Winnebago Indian, was born on an Indian reservation and later resided with whites on the non-reservation US territory in Omaha, Nebraska, where he renounced his former tribal allegiance and claimed citizenship by virtue of the Citizenship Clause.[2] The case came about after Elk tried to register to vote on April 5, 1880 and was denied by Charles Wilkins, the named defendant, who was registrar of voters of the Fifth ward of the City of Omaha.

        The court decided that even though Elk was born in the United States, he was not a citizen because he owed allegiance to his tribe when he was born rather than to the U.S. and therefore was not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States when he was born.

        The United States Congress later enacted The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 which established citizenship for Indians previously excluded by the US Constitution; however no subsequent Supreme Court case has reversed the majority opinion offered on Elk v. Wilkins including the detailed definitions of the terms of the 14th Amendment as written by Justice Gray. The Elk v. Wilkins opinion remains valid for interpretation of future citizenship issues regarding the 14th Amendment, but has been rendered moot for its application to native Indians due to the Act of Congress.

      • M. Noonan October 31, 2018 / 1:42 pm

        This is key:

        Slaves, freed slaves and the children of slaves were not under the jurisdiction of any other nation. They were people without a nation.

        People forget that the Dred Scott decision held that black people, as such, were not citizens of the United States – indeed, were not fully human. From the decision:

        A free negro of the African race, whose ancestors were brought to this country and sold as slaves, is not a “citizen” within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States.

        When the Constitution was adopted, they were not regarded in any of the States as members of the community which constituted the State, and were not numbered among its “people or citizens.”

        The 14th Amendment was designed specifically to correct this – and correct it whether or not the Court had ruled according to the Constitution. The Court had ruled that people of African descent weren’t citizens or even people. It was thought, correctly, that in a post-Emancipation America, various States might enact laws placing African-Americans on a social status akin to slavery, even though not technically owned by another person. This Amendment was designed to prevent just that – to make it plain as plain that African-Americans were citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they resided. It, unfortunately, didn’t address properly other legal mechanisms which could be used to disenfranchise voting blocs…but I suspect that no one thought at the time that anyone would be rat bastard enough to enact the Jim Crow laws.

        The bottom line is that an Amendment designed to overturn Dred Scott cannot in any rational way be considered a license to grant citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants. To think it does is to be just silly.

      • fieldingclaymore October 31, 2018 / 9:39 am

        United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898),

        This is midterm bullshit and he won’t do it. Like the wall, like the tax cut when congress it out of session…

      • Amazona November 3, 2018 / 11:18 am

        You Lefties always bring up Wong Kim Ark, and you always misstate the ruling. We last ran into it when a Liberal passionately tried to argue it regarding the term Natural Born Citizen.

        It is a muddled ruling. On one hand, it specifically refers to the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which was passed by the same Congress that passed the 14th Amendment. The Court seemed to feel that the latter could not reasonably contradict the former. And then it proceeded to do that very thing. The Court reasoned that “the opening sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment is throughout affirmative and declaratory, intended to allay doubts and to settle controversies which had arisen, and not to impose any new restrictions upon citizenship.”

        Yet the wording in the Civil Rights Act stipulated ”.. citizenship for “all persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed.”
        The dissenting opinion in the case referenced this: … the dissent argued that the “and not subject to any foreign power” provision in the Civil Rights Act of 1866 showed that Congress intended to exclude children of foreign citizens from the Fourteenth Amendment, as they would be subjects of the same foreign power as their parents. “

        There are two important things to consider in the Kim case. One is that the Court exceeded its delegated powers by going outside the Constitution itself and the contemporaneous writings of the authors of the amendment to make its decision. They went to a 1608 British case, “Calvin’s Case” and ”… referenced a series of commentaries and cases in both English and U.S. common law that showed subsequent decisions since Calvin’s Case have been consistent with this principle” That’s all fine and good, UNLESS your job description is to determine whether a lower court ruling is consistent with THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. That is, a Constitution built on the overt rejection of much prior law and the creation of a new form of government with its own laws.

        The second is that Wong Kim Ark was about the offspring of people here permanently, and legally, having established permanent homes and doing business here. They were not lawbreakers, here illegally. The ruling of the Court was that citizenship as prescribed in the Fourteenth Amendment extends to U.S.-born children of foreign subjects or citizens who, at the time of the child’s birth, are permanent residents and are carrying on business in the United States.

        This ruling would exclude children born to tourists, or to parents here illegally. And these are the classes of people which concern us.

    • fieldingclaymore October 30, 2018 / 2:05 pm

      I am old enough to remember when governing by executive order was frowned upon. LOL

      • Cluster October 30, 2018 / 4:47 pm

        This isn’t governing Fielding …. this is a signing statement, clarifying intent. The 14th was written to resolve the issue of the newly freed slaves, and to bestow citizenship upon them without question. It is now used against this nation purely for political reasons. Trump is right to clarify.

      • Cluster October 30, 2018 / 4:58 pm
      • fieldingclaymore October 30, 2018 / 5:03 pm

        Wrong, he is trying to deny the original intent and language of the 14th amendment. Also, this is a bullshit base play for the midterm to stir up his voters.

      • Amazona November 3, 2018 / 11:28 am

        Fielding, we understand that your panties are in a twist about this. We get it.

        But just repeating something that is false will not make it true.

        The language of the amendment is confusing to us only because language usage changes over the centuries. When this happens, we have to go to the writings of the people who actually wrote the amendment to see how they explained it. We have to look at the context of the amendment to see what it was intended to address.

        The context was to override and correct the Dred Scott ruling and to establish citizenship for people born here without any hereditary allegiance to any other nation. It was passed by the same Congress that passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866, stipulating citizenship for all persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed .

    • M. Noonan October 30, 2018 / 3:40 pm

      The deficit needs to be reigned in. I wish Trump would go to work on that – but I knew in 2016 that he wasn’t a debt hawk. We’ll eventually be forced to deal with it…but if there’s a Democrat in office when that day comes, it’ll be worse than if any GOPer is in office.

      • fieldingclaymore October 30, 2018 / 3:41 pm

        A truism on the right. The deficit only matters when a Democrat is POTUS..

      • M. Noonan October 30, 2018 / 3:46 pm

        Nope: matters all the time. But Trump’s a guy who has lived by leverage his whole life. Deficit and debt just doesn’t hold his mind. To a certain extent, at long as the economy booms, he’s ok…next downturn, it’ll be a problem. But I’m not going to blame him for working in the system liberal Democrats set up. Big government and deficit spending is a liberal idea, not Conservative. Liberals made this – and they lack any ability to fix it.

      • Amazona November 3, 2018 / 11:31 am

        Awwww, looky there……a Lib managed to use the term FAKE NEWS.

        Used it wrongly, of course, but still, they are so freaked out by it they are trying to own it and, in true Lefty fashion, change it.

        But the comment is not “fake”, It is true. Big government and deficit spending is a liberal idea, not Conservative.

    • Cluster October 30, 2018 / 4:43 pm

      That’s Swamp spending ….. shit that we are still trying to take care

    • Ryan Murphy October 31, 2018 / 6:06 am

      Problem is the budget passed by Congress. Not as you no,doubt wish to try to insinuate, the tax cuts. Revenue is up, not down.

      • Retired Spook October 31, 2018 / 11:17 am

        Federal tax revenue took a serious hit from 2006 to 2009 but has gone up every year since, and the estimate for FY 2019 is for the increase to continue. The increases are slowing down, which is why the economy is doing so well. More money is being left in the private sector. Consequently, federal tax revenue increased pretty significantly from 2009 to 2015 which is one of the reasons the economy did so poorly.

  3. Cluster October 31, 2018 / 10:56 am

    Everyone needs to read this ….. particularly Fielding:

    Judge Richard Posner of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals is America’s most-cited federal judge — and, by the way, no friend to conservatives. In 2003, he wrote a concurrence simply in order to demand that Congress pass a law to stop “awarding citizenship to everyone born in the United States.”

    The purpose of the 14th Amendment, he said, was “to grant citizenship to the recently freed slaves,” adding that “Congress would not be flouting the Constitution” if it passed a law “to put an end to the nonsense.”

      • Cluster October 31, 2018 / 5:19 pm

        Let’s put it to a vote …….. I guarantee you the majority of Americans share my interpretation, while only the global elite shares your interpretation.

      • fieldingclaymore October 31, 2018 / 5:35 pm

        That doesn’t matter if the popular vote wants to get rid of it. I bet the popular vote wants to get rd of the electoral college too but that isn’t happening either. It needs to amended properly not by EO.

      • Amazona November 3, 2018 / 10:27 am

        It doesn’t need to be amended. It says what it says, and a Supreme Court ruling already addressed that and said that simply being born in this country does not convey citizenship, not if the parent have allegiance to another nation. That ruling has never been challenged.

        It has just been ignored.

        The EO is merely the chief executive of the country following his oath of office and upholding and enforcing the law. Law as set forth in the Constitution. Law as affirmed by the Supreme Court.

      • Cluster October 31, 2018 / 6:14 pm

        Only an electoral vote – no popular vote

        It wouldn’t matter, same result

      • Retired Spook October 31, 2018 / 10:56 pm

        It needs to amended properly not by EO.

        What exactly would you amend? The existing amendment is pretty clear; it just hasn’t been followed. When you don’t enforce a law, you don’t need a new law. I agree that an EO is probably not the way to do it, but it’s probably the fastest way to get the issue before the courts. If it was left to Congress, they’d never agree on language anyway.

        Another way to solve the issue would be to have all newborns of non-citizens become wards of the state. Then they WOULD be under the jurisdiction of the United States. Just a thought.

      • M. Noonan November 1, 2018 / 1:43 pm

        We’ve never really had the debate – we’ve just been told that it is a settled matter. But, thing is, outside of religious dogma, nothing is ever settled. God’s word is immutable…everything else is very much mutable. One guy reads the 14th and says it means that children of illegals are Americans. Another guy reads it and says it doesn’t provide citizenship for the children of illegals. In a sane society, we debate and via votes and court cases, make a decision…in an insane society, we’re not even allowed to debate it. I prefer we become a sane society.

    • Retired Spook November 1, 2018 / 10:05 am

      The Left is so used to Conservatives just turning the other cheek they don’t quite know what to do now that we’re fighting back.

      • Cluster November 1, 2018 / 10:39 am

        I think they are fooling themselves again too re: this election. The public relations firm of the Democrats, ie; MSNBC was showing this morning that Kirsten Sinema had the lead in AZ which is just delusional. There is no way Sinema wins AZ …… none, nada, zip

      • M. Noonan November 1, 2018 / 1:41 pm

        If the polling models are right, the GOP gets wiped out on Tuesday…if they’re wrong, the Democrats get wiped out. I guess we’ll find out. Maybe we’re the people missing something…but, OTOH, voter registration shifts still favor the GOP in most places; early voting seems to be going pretty well for the GOP; the economy is in great shape; there’s no overseas quagmire to drag us down; other than Mueller’s BS (and do note how Democrats are silent about it), there’s no scandal brewing…in other words, outside of polls, there isn’t a single metric you can point to which indicates a good night coming for the Democrats. But, hey, maybe the Experts are right this time…

      • Cluster November 1, 2018 / 5:43 pm

        Just stop and think for a moment about the intellectual heft a Democrat majority will bring, people like Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi, John Conyers, Adam Schiff

        If that doesn’t scare the hell out of you, nothing will. I would be embarrassed to be a Democrat these days and that’s coming from someone who voted for Bill Clinton ….. twice.

  4. Cluster November 1, 2018 / 5:50 pm

    I present Mika Brezinski:

    The transcript is below but the video in the link is much better because you can hear the concern she has for all of us in her inflections and tone. She really does have our best interests at heart and more importantly, Trump does not. He’s mean.


    “The rhetoric of this racist, heartless, soulless man will lead to more violence. Yes, I said that. And a lot of Americans believe it, too. They see what is happening to our country. This is a so-called leader with no shame. He doesn’t care. He’s got no sense of decency, no sense of duty, and no limits.

    And this is important for everyone to understand. No limits of what he’s capable of doing to stave off any humiliation for himself. The humiliation that his desperate actions suggest is that he knows what’s coming next Tuesday. It could be bad for him. There could be subpoena power. There could be impeachment. He knows he is on the line and he will do anything to save himself.

    The question is what are we going to do? What are Democrats and Republicans going to do? Because if they want a check on this man, if you want a slight check on this man and his unrelenting race to the finish here to make sure he can continue destroying this country, you might want to vote all ‘D,’ even if it’s not your party this time around. It might be worth it.”

  5. jdge1 November 1, 2018 / 7:47 pm

    How do you spell delusion?

    • Retired Spook November 1, 2018 / 10:35 pm

      Excellent and hilarious montage.

  6. Cluster November 2, 2018 / 8:08 am

    So MSNBC would like us to forgo our best personal interests in terms of the economy and independence and voter against Trump because …….. they are afraid.

    The New York Times editorial board member Mara Gay picked up where Glaude left off: “I’m not willing to let white voters off the hook. I think that they, like the rest of us, should be treated as adults, and I think that there are a large number…a majority of white Americans in this country who are not just Democrats but who are people of conscience, who are good Americans.”

    She urged these “people of conscience” to ignore the fact that “the economy is doing okay” and “put country over party” by voting against a “white nationalist President who is a threat to American democracy”

    Who is on board? Oh and incidentally, Mara Gay and Eddie Glaude are disappointed in us “white people”

  7. Cluster November 2, 2018 / 8:48 am

    All of you are missing comedy gold this morning on MSNBC – Joe Scarborough is holding up Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace as two “rock solid Republican conservatives” who OPPOSE this President and now he has some “scholar” on saying that Trump is “unaware of his whiteness” and how his “nationalist dog whistles” frightens minorities …….

    No kidding, That just happened.

    • Retired Spook November 2, 2018 / 10:54 am

      Well, I’m glad you’re able and willing to wade through the sh*t and report on what’s going on at PMSNBC. Saves me from having to watch that drivel.

  8. Retired Spook November 2, 2018 / 10:57 am

    Project Veritas strikes again.

    Well done, Project Veritas. They’ve captured another Democratic campaign seemingly conspiring to illegally spend funds to help the illegal alien caravan approaching the U.S. border. It’s Rep. Beto O’Rourke’s Texas Senate campaign; the Texas Democrat is expected to lose next Tuesday. Video footage captures staffers from the campaign plotting to illegally spend the money, hide the expenditures, and even pay for methods of transportation to help these illegal aliens:

    • Cluster November 2, 2018 / 2:35 pm

      Wow …… God forbid these people ever get power again

  9. Retired Spook November 2, 2018 / 2:47 pm

    In his first hour today Rush posited a theory that the same globalist forces who were behind the Muslim immigrant invasion of Europe are behind the caravan, and they thought Trump’s reaction would be the same as Angela Merkel’s, thus enraging Trump’s base as thousands of Central Americans flooded across the southern border, keeping many Republicans home on election day or convincing them to vote Democrat. Talk about divorced from reality.

    Why would anyone with an ounce of brain matter believe Trump’s response would be the same as Merkel’s?

  10. Cluster November 3, 2018 / 8:50 am

    So once again I am watching the children on progressive tv emote and worry about everything …. this mornings topic was how Trump was going to start shooting immigrants. they then brought up a little known incident from about 10 years ago when an immigrant was shot by a border guard and the host David Gura said – “I think this sad incident is on everyones mind today”

    Uh no it’s not David …… what is on peoples minds is the sad murder of border guard Brian Terry who was shot and killed by illegal immigrants.

    It’s always amazed me that progressive Democrats care so much more about people of other countries than they do the very people they govern, ie: the kids in Chicago who arguably have a worse life than some of these immigrants. You see David, we care about Americans. You? Not so much.

  11. Cluster November 4, 2018 / 12:57 pm

    God help us all if Dems win the House on Tuesday. I just saw an interview with Maxine “we need to nationalize the oil industry” Waters who has vowed to “take care of the American people” with housing, healthcare, etc. if the Dems win the majority.

    I can’t imagine a worse fate then “being taken care of” by Maxine.

    • Retired Spook November 4, 2018 / 1:17 pm

      A good portion of the Dem’s base is motivated by rhetoric like that, but I can’t imagine that very many of the Independents who are going to decide this election are. There are also a couple groups that no one is really talking about. To what extent will Democrats and left-leaning Independents who have benefited from the good economy participate in the election? How many will say, “I can’t bring myself to vote for a Republican, but I also don’t want to vote against my own economic self interests.” How many of those people will just stay home. The other group is the never-Trumpers. Will their hatred of Trump outweigh their approval of all that he and the GOP Congress have accomplished? How many of them will stay home? At least we’re finally getting close to the moment of truth. In about 54 hours we should have a pretty clear picture as to what direction we’re heading.

      • Cluster November 4, 2018 / 2:01 pm

        I absolutely shudder at the thought of people like Pelosi and Waters governing this country. They are two of the most incompetent, unintelligent, dishonest people ever ……

  12. jdge1 November 4, 2018 / 2:00 pm

    Caravan Riders File Class Action Lawsuit Against the U.S. For Violating Their Constitutional Rights

    Illegal immigrants want to use the laws of the country they intend to invade while ignoring the laws of that very same country by invading it. There’s liberal logic for you. Sure seems like leftist activists / politicians finger prints are all over this as they scramble to find anything to push back against Trump / Conservatives, while at the same time proving why people in their right mind will not vote for them.

  13. Cluster November 5, 2018 / 8:51 am

    This mornings topic on MSNBC:

    “Policing White Nationalism and the Far Right”

    Scary stuff kids. YCMTSU LOL

    • Amazona November 5, 2018 / 9:20 am

      It’s just another example of the success of Leftist propaganda and semantic manipulation. They have been scarily successful in linking nationalism, which used to be called patriotism, with racism by always using the term modified by the term “white”, thereby implying that patriotism is by definition tied to white supremacist beliefs.

      We just sit back and let them get away with it. I have not heard one single public criticism of this from any Republican or pundit or commentator.

      • Cluster November 5, 2018 / 9:29 am

        The ONLY one fighting back is Trump …. and the many “deplorables” across the country like myself, but you are right, the “conservative” punditry is hiding.

        Meanwhile in Georgia, the Black Panthers held a march for Abrams complete with automatic weapons but this is not covered in the media:

        Nor is the call to violence from Hollywood should the Democrats lose covered anywhere in the media:

        NOPE. The problem this country faces is white men.

      • Retired Spook November 5, 2018 / 11:14 am

        Nor is the call to violence from Hollywood should the Democrats lose covered anywhere in the media:

        I think all the hyper-violent movies they’ve made in which Conservative Republicans are more often than not painted as either outright bad guys or complicit with the actual bad guys have clouded their judgement. I don’t think the vast majority of Leftists have the slightest clue what a violent revolution in this country would be like. I also don’t think that there are very many on the Left who have the means or the courage to start such a revolution, and it’s pretty clear that middle America, which owns several hundred million firearms and trillions of rounds of ammunition are not going to fire the first shot. If it starts, it will be useful idiots used as cannon fodder, just as it was in Russia in 1917, except the outcome will be completely different.

    • Amazona November 5, 2018 / 9:24 am

      And if “the Right” is the political philosophy committed to governing according to the Constitution, what then is “Far Right”? Being really REALLY REALLY committed to governing according to the Constitution?

      This is just another example of how we meekly sit by and watch the Left control the language and then wonder how they manage to control so many minds.

      We let the Left invent terms like “Far Right” and then define them, in this case ascribing all sorts of non-Right characteristics to this invented but scurrilous identity.

  14. Retired Spook November 5, 2018 / 4:02 pm

    Has anyone else noticed things that you DON’T SEE and HEAR on the Left? You don’t hear chants of USA, USA, USA at Democrat rallies. You don’t hear the words “life,” liberty” and “prosperity” in Democrat political ads or Democrat speeches. You don’t see Lee Greenwood at Democrat rallies singing Proud to be an American. You don’t hear God Bless America sung at Democrat rallies. In fact you don’t hear any mention of God WRT anything Democrat. These are just a few off the top of my head. I imagine there are lots of other examples.

Comments are closed.