Talk:Main Page/Archive index/151

American flag triggers leftie students

Looks like 2016 could be the last American flag-themed Democratic convention. By 2020, Hillary's bitter clingers will be gone and these people will be the party's up and comers: "College Snowflakes: The American Flag is ‘Triggering,’ Offensive – Take It Down!" All they need is a transgendered Muslim to nominate. PeterKa (talk) 22:52, 17 April 2017 (EDT)

Even though I am a millennial myself, I am genuinely scared of my generation. These idiot leftist Americans hate their own country, its allies, and everything it stands for, and they will be our next leaders. Only God and His Holy Spirit can save our nation. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:17, 17 April 2017 (EDT)

Given how unelectable most Democrat political candidates (particularly Hillary) were last November, the future generation of Democrats (based on their present behavior on college campuses and during their anti-Trump riots) have even less of a chance of getting into office. Northwest (talk) 01:15, 18 April 2017 (EDT)

Agreed. Trump is carrying on the Republican and Reagan legacy in that politics and elected office ought to be a second career after success in the real world, not something left to career politicians and ambitious opportunists. RobS^{CIA v Trump updated score:CIA 3, Trump 2} 17:26, 18 April 2017 (EDT)

Maybe now, when they are still in the minority, leftist millennials are having a hard time actually getting elected, but my fear is after the more conservative older generations die or become a minority, and when the young leftists instill their views onto the next generations. They may be a minority now among the wider population, but, at least, they comprise a sizable proportion of the millennial population. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:02, 18 April 2017 (EDT)

Why to vote for Marine Le Pen

This article gives a very strong and persuading case on why to vote for Marine Le Pen in the French presidential election coming up in less than a week. Hopefully, the people of France will say enough to the socialist and pro-EU elites who have ruined their country and accelerated the long decline of France which started in 1685.

I noticed that this article requires a subscription to view, but one can view it if they click on the Google link. The article is "A vote for Marine Le Pen is a vote to end rule of self-serving elites" by Adam Creighton of The Australian (4/17). --1990'sguy (talk) 23:27, 17 April 2017 (EDT)

Ralph Peters argues that Le Pen is a Russian asset and that the U.S. is better off with Macron: "The French vote was a win for the West — and a loss for Putin." Fillon is the French counterpart to a Cruz-style conservative or a British Thatcherite. Fillon has endorsed Macron and the polls suggest that Fillon's first round supporters will vote for Macron in the second round. As far as second round voting goes, Macron is 27 points ahead of Le Pen.[1] PeterKa (talk) 06:07, 25 April 2017 (EDT)

Don't expect to much of it, France (and the rest of the EU) isn't a democracy (anymore) so, the candidate of the elite, Macron will win anyway.--Gentenaar (talk) 06:35, 25 April 2017 (EDT)

Far from being an outsider, Macron is exactly the sort of person who is intended to rise to the top under the Napoleanic "rule by experts" system. See "French “Outsider” Emmanuel Macron–The Distilled Essence Of The French Ruling Class." When you're sick, you look for a doctor who's an expert. I guess we'll find out if the same approach works when it comes to picking a president. Giscard d'Estaing, president in the 1970s, was not only a highly pedigreed centerist economic technocrat, but also a multiple Charlemagne descendant. That didn't help him during 1973-1974 downturn. PeterKa (talk) 08:32, 25 April 2017 (EDT)

@PeterKa: Macron is the French equivalent of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. He is very liberal, particularly regarding the EU and immigration. He would be a disaster for France, just like the socialist president Hollande is right now (Macron served on the Socialist Party cabinet).

Now, regarding Fillon, I think the American media overexaggerates his conservatism. Sure he supports the economic policies of Margaret Thatcher (which I strongly approve) and reductions in immigration, but he strongly supports the European Union, which stands in opposition to at least half of his stated agenda, if not more. The EU supports and has implemented the elimination of national borders, the establishment of a unified currency, mass immigration, the extreme loss of national sovereignty, and left-wing social values. Fillon apparently supports all that. I should note, however, that he reluctantly endorsed Macron only to prevent Le Pen from winning, probably like how the many RINOs like Arnold Schwarzenegger endorsed Clinton to prevent Trump from winning. Fillon is not conservative.

Lastly, regarding Ralph Peters, I have nothing against him, but he is a foreign policy wonk, and he is not conservative, so his values and priorities are different from mine. --1990'sguy (talk) 09:16, 25 April 2017 (EDT)

You compare Le Pen to Trump, but it's not likely she can pull off an upset. It's not her fault that her father is such a well-known and repulsive figure, but she's stuck with that. The results in the first round were quite close to what the polls predicted. Thanks for linking to the Delingpole piece. He compares Marcon to Obama in that they both became establishment favorites at a young age and before they had any accomplishments to boast of. It's as if they were picked out by mysterious scouting committees. If both cases they were looking, not for a talented up and comer, but for an empty suit to serve as a front man. As far as his politics goes, Macron is more of a Bill Clinton-style liberal budget balencer and triangular. PeterKa (talk) 20:12, 25 April 2017 (EDT)

I think you're right regarding Macron. He does seem like a Bill Clinton-esque politician. I'm just glad a "North American Union" did not exist in Clinton's time (as well as today), because if the two really are similar, the U.S. would have significantly less sovereignty than now.

However, regarding Le Pen and her chances of victory, I think it could be an easier race than it seems. Macron is probably the perfect candidate for her to be against. He's an ardent globalist who wants additional European integration (as if it isn't integrated enough already -- but then again, many liberals want a U.S. of Europe, and eventually, of the world). If Le Pen faced a more conservative candidate like Fillon (very conservative by French standards), Fillon would be able to siphon off voters who are not happy with open borders and mass immigration. But at the same time, many left-wing voters (and the French left-wing is extreme-far-left by U.S. standards) are not enthusiastic about Macron. I think he will be like Clinton, who is too far-left and globalist to attract moderates and blue-collar workers but is not far-left enough to make leftists enthusiastic. In addition to all this, maybe pollsters will become overconfident in their techniques again, leading to them getting the election wrong. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:06, 25 April 2017 (EDT)

How the Dems can win

Hey, they didn't ask me. And they are not likely to take my advice. But here it is. Pew has just come out with a comprehensive survey of American attitudes toward the two political parties: "Public Dissatisfaction With Washington Weighs on the GOP." The results are clear: The American people prefer Democrats to Republicans on almost every issue except terrorism. If the Dems could get this one right, they'd be invincible. The vital thing is that the presidential candidate be someone who can sock it to the terrorists without getting mired in political correctness. He needs to sound like he can issue an order to kill Bin Laden in under nine months and without changing his mind three times. What kind of man wants credit for how hard it was for him to make a decision? IMO, Hillary lost the election when she let that crazy Pakistani lawyer speak at her convention. To the Dems, that was the shining moment of her campaign. Admitting it was a mistake won't be easy. PeterKa (talk) 06:48, 18 April 2017 (EDT)

The American public is schizophrenic when it comes to public policy. They want low taxes and big government. If I were a politician, I would give the American public a low score in terms of my personal favorability rating.

They are also fickle and parties generally don't win three presidential races in a row. Conservative (talk)

The questions are skewed from the gitgo. Americans are tired of these laundry list questionaires. There is one fundamental question: Who do you trust. While voters and poll respondents might think - and with good cause - the GOP are a bunch of incompetent idiots, they don't trust the Democrats because they know Democrats not only don't have the interests of Americans and American families at heart, their lives, safety, health, wellbeing, or future, they intend to do harm. RobS^{CIA v Trump updated score:CIA 3, Trump 2} 17:16, 18 April 2017 (EDT)

AGW and the environment was the focus of liberal passion for so many years. Then Obama created the Occupy movement and the focus shifted to income inequality. Lately, the focus seems to be Muslim immigration. I find it hard to believe that's a vote winner. PeterKa (talk) 23:11, 18 April 2017 (EDT)

It all has a common thread. AGW was an anti-capitalist movement to shut down the free-world's factories after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Occupy movement was imported from Argentinian branch of the global communist movement after 2007. Muslim immigration is aimed at lowering Western consumer driven economies by turning the West into a Third World hellhole and lowering its carbon footprint. It's all the same crap driven by the same ideological conspirators.

You know where the AGW movement started? Right here, at 12:30 min, with Norman Lear (of People for the American Way) script writers when Vietnam War protestors no longer had anything to protest. From there, if became the basis of the public school curriculum. But it has never been more than just crap filler in a sitcom. RobS^{The coup plotters are going down} 00:03, 19 April 2017 (EDT)

If a tree falls in the woods, is it global warming?

It was May 2016, at the end of an El Niño event. Why would it be warming? "Receding glacier causes immense Canadian river to vanish in four days." Today's journalists are trained to put the AGW propaganda right in the first graph: It was an "unsettling illustration of how global warming dramatically changes the world’s geography." This geological event was so earthshattering that nobody noticed it until now. Actual line from the article: "Geologists have previously found evidence of river piracy having taken place in the distant past." See, your muscle car is nothing compared to the SUV Neanderthal Man drove. PeterKa (talk) 21:23, 18 April 2017 (EDT)

Results in the Georgia special

In the race to replace Tom Price, Democrat Jon Ossoff got 48.1 while six Republicans got a combined total of 50 percent.[2] Ossoff will face Republican Karen Handel in a runoff on June 20. Trump carried this district by 1.5 percent.[3] In short, there has been no apparent shift in party sentiment since November. Ossoff lives outside the district and is described as a "documentary filmmaker" with "no work history" and "a background in government and national security." He interned for John Lewis when he was in high school. Handel is Georgia's former secretary of state, elected in 2006. PeterKa (talk) 17:44, 19 April 2017 (EDT)

Those numbers are not great for Republicans. Ossoff was expected to garner only 40 or 45%. Instead, he came very close to winning outright in a crowded field. Not all of the non-Handel Republican voters are likely to cast ballots for her in the runoff. It seems more likely that Ossoff will win. His weak credentials for this, while doing so well anyway, only underscores the shift away from the GOP.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 17:49, 19 April 2017 (EDT)

She's our best bet in trying to push the pro-Life message, especially when Dan Moody already blew it by failing to even MENTION his stance on the abortion issue, and considering a woman trying to push pro-life messages is rare in politics these days due to the lie of so-called "woman's choice", we need someone like her if our agenda of ending Roe v. Wade is to be a success. And we must make sure we push harder to make sure she wins. Pokeria1 (talk) 18:35, 19 April 2017 (EDT)

@Andy: Spicer (and Priebus) got an excellent point: $8.3 million dollars for a Congressional seat that won't even serve a full term is a lot of money. In 2012 the average cost of a seat was $1.6 million, and a Senate seat was $6.2 million (which every six years still puts the cost in the range of a Congressional seat). Demographic and regional variations produce wide swings, but a suburban district in Georgia is above the national mean average. The biggest factor in keeping the cost low is the high incumbancy rate. My crude guess in watching open seat and competitive districts is, a candidate can spend twice, or three time the national average. But $8.3 is more than five times the national average.

It's doubtful there is any real shift in sentiment. The national party thought they could buy a win by dumping loads of outside money into the district to give exposure to a "fresh, new, exciting" face in a crowded field. The GOP have yet to martial their forces. The Republican national party was not a player behind a single candidate in a district the GOP owns, whereas it's doubtful now the national Democrats will spend another dime on a loser, and the local Democrats don't have the people or resources for another contest.

Even if the DNC were to dump half that amount, say another $4 million bringing the total to $12 million, for a seat to serve 3/4 of a two year term, this would approach being in the record books as one of the costliest federal or state elections ever. It's just not that important a seat, and it's doubtful Democrats could hold it 2018. The only explanation for national Democrats pumping any more money into that race would be Tom Perez trying to demonstrate how stupid, wasteful, and incompetent he is. RobS^{The coup plotters are going down} 11:26, 20 April 2017 (EDT)

I have to agree with RobS on this. The Dems poured a record amount of money into this race, while the GOP candidate, Karen Handel had raised only $460,000 [4]. Not only did Hollywood stars endorse and campaign for the Dem, but the GOP field was so divided that probably only the Dem could really get his message through. Also, right now the Dems are more fired up than Republicans. Despite all these advantages, the Dem candidate did not get over 50%. Technically not a loss for the Dems, but it puts them at a real disadvantage because now the Republicans can unite around a single candidate and now the national party organization can put its money behind that candidate. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:38, 20 April 2017 (EDT)

Yes. Let's get down to brass tacks of what politics is all about. Suppose Tom Perez feels they've made an investment here and can't walk away. Suppose he throws in another $4 million, two and a half times the avg bring it to $12 million for a 3/4 term, the equivilent of $16 million for a Congressional seat. The equivilent of $32 million for a four year term - like Michael Huffington (ex-spouse of Arriana Huffington) spent to run and loose as Gov. of Calif.

Mind you now, (1) the RNC has not spent a dime yet, and Perez should know the RNC won't allow itself to be outspent in the upcoming election, and (2) any money spent there is less money for the two remaining upcoming special elections where he can try again with a clean slate. RobS^{The coup plotters are going down} 22:00, 20 April 2017 (EDT)

Remember the children?

Protecting our children from Trump's language was Hillary's big selling point. That was a long time ago: "Change is here: Dems go from prudish ads to selling 'sh*t' shirts." PeterKa (talk) 19:21, 19 April 2017 (EDT)

Yet another example of the Dem's hypocrisy. They criticize Trump for his language (and much of it is legitimate -- many of the Dem's criticisms are based only on ideology), and yet they use language just as bad, at least. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:02, 21 April 2017 (EDT)

Ben Shapiro weights in. DNC Chair Tom Perez seems to think uncalled-for language is called for when the target is a Republican. PeterKa (talk) 06:54, 22 April 2017 (EDT)

Why are Americans so racist? I blame the media

How did Hillary alienat the racists? Maybe they didn't appreciate it when she called them "deplorable". Check out WaPo`s latest take on 2016: "Racism motivated Trump voters more than authoritarianism." PeterKa (talk) 19:18, 20 April 2017 (EDT)

I should explain that by the article's definition, the vast majority of Republicans are racists, as well as nearly half the Democrats. PeterKa (talk) 22:32, 20 April 2017 (EDT)

So? What else is new? RobS^{The coup plotters are going down} 01:07, 21 April 2017 (EDT)

The longer it takes for the Supreme Court to restore the Muslim ban, the more Muslims will be exposed to all that racism and Allahphobia! PeterKa (talk) 20:58, 21 April 2017 (EDT)

Americans are no more racist than any other country. Why? Because it's the fallen nature of mankind. Everybody is racist to some degree or another. I would say America is the least racist nation of all. I would say Middle East nations are the most racist. Slavery is still alive and well. --Jpatt 21:27, 21 April 2017 (EDT)

Assange arrest news

I'm no fan of liberalism or the left, but I do think we really should arrest Assange. I mean, the guy's a Marxist-Leninist, as made clear in these articles:

• http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/09/cryptography-weapon-fight-empire-states-julian-assange%23start-of-comments

• http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/07/10/Assange-Snowden-Greenwald-Strangely-Silent-On-Ecuador-s-Sweeping-New-Media-Laws

And as far as I'm concerned, anyone who adheres to Marxism or any of its variations should either be dead or in jail, and that's not even getting into how he most likely leaked identities of soldiers to the enemy. So in that limited sense, I do agree with the Deep State, but for differing reasons. Freedom of Speech/Freedom of the Press doesn't mean deliberately endangering the lives of soldiers when they are trying to conduct espionage operations against the enemy. Pokeria1 (talk) 11:09, 21 April 2017 (EDT)

Ecuador feels it doesn't get its fair share of War on Drugs money compared to Columbia, Venezuala, Bolivia, Peru and other neighbors. So it takes money from the cartels to compensate, providing a safe haven from those countries and has no extradition treaty. This means they can be bought. Why Bush, Obama, or any of the Deep State's deep pocket clients and fronts have allowed this to fester for a decade further illustrates what a bunch of idiots they all are. RobS^{The coup plotters are going down} 13:37, 21 April 2017 (EDT)

What will arresting Assange accomplish exactly? He leaks info from anonymous sources. If that is the standard, time to arrest NYT journalists and MSNBC media personalities.--Jpatt 10:04, 23 April 2017 (EDT)

I can only speculate, but (1) Trump is either being blackmailed by the IC or he's trying to curry favor with them and gain bona fidas to get off his back in the Trump-Russia investigation. It's pretty obvious how powerful the IC is and its ability to manipulate msm and approval ratings. (2) Trump-Sessions have decided to go after journalists ala Holder's harassment and Obama's goons. RobS^{The coup plotters are going down} 14:04, 23 April 2017 (EDT)

What does O'Reilly do now?

Let's hope it isn't this: "Being on TV was like a drug to him and when it was taken away from him, he had to find a substitute drug...Planning and carrying out the executions of those people who had humiliated him." -- Bill O'Reilly, Those Who Trespass (1998).[5][6] PeterKa (talk) 23:43, 21 April 2017 (EDT)

Write a new book, Killing Media Personalities.--Jpatt 23:48, 21 April 2017 (EDT)

Appreciate your humor, Jpatt!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:02, 22 April 2017 (EDT)

Here is an account of how Media Matters took down O'Reilly by trolling advertisers. They used the same tactic against Glenn Beck and Limbaugh earlier. Check out this cartoon: [7] PeterKa (talk) 01:58, 22 April 2017 (EDT)

CNN, CBS, NBC and a bunch others would love to have O'Reilly-and a at a cheaper price now, too. Give 'em six months or two years, he'll be back. He might want to shake up the format somehow, do documentaries or something as part of repackaging. How many journalists are there, looking for work, who can say for openers, "I can land an interview with the President for my premier show." RobS^{The coup plotters are going down} 02:18, 22 April 2017 (EDT)

Only two months after CPAC and Milo is already hiking down comeback trail: "Milo Yiannopoulos Plots Comeback at UC Berkeley." PeterKa (talk) 06:06, 22 April 2017 (EDT)

Here is CNN's take on O'Reilly: "This is why Bill O'Reilly was fired." A highly publicized sexual harassment claim was made against O'Reilly in 2004. O'Reilly avoided dismissal at that time largely because he had the full backing of Fox Chairman Roger Ailes. That similar accusations could bring him down now is a tribute to the advance of feminism, according to CNN. I'd spin it a little differently. In 2004, protecting the Clintons was the media's top priority. What happened to O'Reilly looked suspiciously like a "phony scandal" of the sort that Bill Clinton had to deal with repeatedly. It's not coincidence that this issue returns soon after the Clintons exit political life.
Here's another fun fact I learned from the video: To liberals, Beck's most outrageous crime was to call Obama a racist. Do they forget Obama's relationship with anti-White pastor Jeremiah Wright or with Black Lives Matter? It certainly isn't about respect for the presidency. A day doesn't go by without an MSM commentator calling Trump a racist. PeterKa (talk) 21:05, 22 April 2017 (EDT)

It appears that sexual harassment has been weaponized against Republicans: "‘My Patience…Is OVER’, Hannity FIGHTS BACK Against Allegations Of Sexual Harassment." Need I add that this campaign is hypocritical? There are hours and of video showing Biden feeling up women, in public and on camera: "Body Language: Creepy Joe Biden." Watch how James Lankford, Oklahoma's manly U.S. senator, protects his womenfolk from Creepy Joe. PeterKa (talk) 06:43, 24 April 2017 (EDT)

O'Reilly's back already (for my money, I've always said O'Reilly's a typical East Coast conservative without the cahoonies to call himself a Republican). First Petraeus, then Aisles, then O'Reilly, now Hannity. How can these guys be so dumb to not know their opponents use kompromat? This is how the commie-libs opperate. They learned it from thier Uncle Joe Stalin. They ought to just move to Europe, convert to Islam, get a government check and housing if they want to sexually harass women. RobS^{The coup plotters are going down} 08:35, 24 April 2017 (EDT)

Do carbon emissions hurt sick children?

Humans are so are so irrational that we need to be lied to for our own good, according to Vox. A study of advertising found that the most effective climate PSA was one that told parents that their carbon emissions were making children sick. That this isn't true, or is at best unproven, doesn't phase the ecofreaks. Carbon dioxide is not an asthma trigger. But you know what is an asthma trigger? Cold. So if parents turned down the heat in response to this ad, they could be triggering asthma.[8] PeterKa (talk) 03:20, 22 April 2017 (EDT)

How ironic...

"United Nations Elects Saudi Arabia to Women’s Rights Commission" --1990'sguy (talk) 17:02, 23 April 2017 (EDT)

This is called leveling the playing field. Saudis get to boast women are breaking the glass ceiling and ISIS radical Salafis have more of a reason to overthrow the House of Saud. Ironically, maybe Saudis and Iranians can find common ground with this appointment. RobS^{The coup plotters are going down} 18:53, 23 April 2017 (EDT)